Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3]

Author Topic: Recognizing legitimacy to Bergoglio has only one final beneficiary: Bergoglio  (Read 9709 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Quo vadis Domine

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 4750
  • Reputation: +2897/-667
  • Gender: Male
Re: Recognizing legitimacy to Bergoglio has only one final beneficiary: Bergoglio
« Reply #30 on: September 01, 2024, 07:59:05 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Stubborn on September 01, 2024, 05:40:54 AM
    The whole UPA or UA or whatever is not only ridiculous, it's useless. The presumption is validity, not invalidity. All the cardinals who voted in the conclave accepted his election and we must also. Period.

    And no, the pope is *not* the rule of faith, I can't believe this is even an idea, particularly among sedes.
    That whole idea was trashed during about (iirc) 170 pages in this thread, wherein all of Lad's posts were deleted because he was pushing the ridiculous idea the whole time, which left standing only about 1/2 the original thread.

    You have a radical and unorthodox view of the papacy, if not outright heretical. Frankly, I don’t know how a priest can give you the sacraments in good conscience. 
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2897/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Recognizing legitimacy to Bergoglio has only one final beneficiary: Bergoglio
    « Reply #31 on: September 01, 2024, 08:04:17 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: 2Vermont on September 01, 2024, 07:50:48 AM
    My only concern is that he's gone anti-Archbishop Thuc (unless that was his position, but I don't recall).

    I concur!
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline Catholic Knight

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 802
    • Reputation: +238/-82
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Recognizing legitimacy to Bergoglio has only one final beneficiary: Bergoglio
    « Reply #32 on: September 01, 2024, 08:06:30 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on September 01, 2024, 08:04:17 AM
    I concur!

    How has he gone anti-Archbishop Thuc when the SSPV does not accept the Thuc line?
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2897/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Recognizing legitimacy to Bergoglio has only one final beneficiary: Bergoglio
    « Reply #33 on: September 01, 2024, 08:16:38 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Catholic Knight on September 01, 2024, 08:06:30 AM
    How has he gone anti-Archbishop Thuc when the SSPV does not accept the Thuc line?

    I don’t think that it has been established that he is anti Thuc.
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11528
    • Reputation: +6474/-1195
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Recognizing legitimacy to Bergoglio has only one final beneficiary: Bergoglio
    « Reply #34 on: September 01, 2024, 10:48:16 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Catholic Knight on September 01, 2024, 08:06:30 AM
    How has he gone anti-Archbishop Thuc when the SSPV does not accept the Thuc line?
    Huh? Isn't anti-Thuc the same thing as anti-Thuc line?  Maybe I wasn't clear, but that is exactly what I'm referring to here.

    This is not always the case for all who assist at SSPV, but if he's chosen to go to SSPV and the SSPV does not accept the Thuc line, then that would mean that there is a good chance he also does not accept the Thuc line (ie. anti-Thuc).
    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14769
    • Reputation: +6101/-912
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Recognizing legitimacy to Bergoglio has only one final beneficiary: Bergoglio
    « Reply #35 on: September 01, 2024, 10:57:11 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on September 01, 2024, 07:59:05 AM
    You have a radical and unorthodox view of the papacy, if not outright heretical. Frankly, I don’t know how a priest can give you the sacraments in good conscience.
    Huh? I'm not the one without a rule of faith for the last 60 years, but I'm the one with a radical and unorthodox view of the papacy? I think the above link says what needed to be said on the subject.
    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Catholic Knight

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 802
    • Reputation: +238/-82
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Recognizing legitimacy to Bergoglio has only one final beneficiary: Bergoglio
    « Reply #36 on: September 02, 2024, 08:41:17 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: 2Vermont on September 01, 2024, 10:48:16 AM
    Huh? Isn't anti-Thuc the same thing as anti-Thuc line?  Maybe I wasn't clear, but that is exactly what I'm referring to here.

    This is not always the case for all who assist at SSPV, but if he's chosen to go to SSPV and the SSPV does not accept the Thuc line, then that would mean that there is a good chance he also does not accept the Thuc line (ie. anti-Thuc).

    Oops.  I read the opposite in what you actually wrote.  Sorry.
    Logged

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11528
    • Reputation: +6474/-1195
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Recognizing legitimacy to Bergoglio has only one final beneficiary: Bergoglio
    « Reply #37 on: September 02, 2024, 09:52:32 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Catholic Knight on September 02, 2024, 08:41:17 AM
    Oops.  I read the opposite in what you actually wrote.  Sorry.
    No problem CK.  I'm sure we've all done that at least once or twice.  ;)
    Logged
    Pages: 1 2 [3]
    « previous next »