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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 134

Author Topic: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?  (Read 54919 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Clemens Maria

Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #25 on: September 23, 2022, 12:34:21 PM »
Quote from: 2Vermont on September 23, 2022, 09:37:59 AM
I know this wasn't directed at me/my position, but what is the difference between Fr Chazal's position and the CassiciacuŠ¼ Thesis?  And if there really isn't one, why doesn't he just take on the CT position?

You should know!  You coined the "Anything but sedevacantism" phrase.  Pat317 didn't say that exactly but he hinted at it by defining the trad world into two groups - sedes vs non-sedes.  They basically define themselves as non-sedes.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #26 on: September 23, 2022, 12:37:56 PM »
Quote from: Meg on September 23, 2022, 12:05:07 PM
Well, 'Derelectionism' probably sounded like a fascinating new form of sedevacantism to Lad.


::)

I have no idea what it is ...  but, unlike some of you here ... I keep an open mind.  It was with an open mind that I listened to Father Chazal's position on a lengthy video, and I found his case to be rather compelling.
Logged

Offline 2Vermont

Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #27 on: September 23, 2022, 12:38:10 PM »
Quote from: Clemens Maria on September 23, 2022, 12:34:21 PM
You should know!  You coined the "Anything but sedevacantism" phrase.  Pat317 didn't say that exactly but he hinted at it by defining the trad world into two groups - sedes vs non-sedes.  They basically define themselves as non-sedes.
I was actually thinking that the CT would be more palatable to the non-sedes because it isn't "straight" sedevacantism.  
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #28 on: September 23, 2022, 12:40:39 PM »
Quote from: Clemens Maria on September 23, 2022, 12:34:21 PM
You should know!  You coined the "Anything but sedevacantism" phrase.  Pat317 didn't say that exactly but he hinted at it by defining the trad world into two groups - sedes vs non-sedes.  They basically define themselves as non-sedes.

Right, and that's the problem, this binary between the two.  That's why I had hoped that Father Chazal's position could be a bridge between the two sides.  But, alas, this thought of "does this make you, gasp!, a sedevacantist?" has continued to work its poison.  So Father Chazal had to back away from assertions that his position was nearly identical to sedeprivationism ... as the latter had become "associated" with sedevacantism, and we can't have that.  It's really quite puerile.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #29 on: September 23, 2022, 12:45:40 PM »
Quote from: Stubborn on September 23, 2022, 09:58:19 AM
No, the status of the pope does not matter, not to me and not to you ...

:facepalm:  Cf. quote from Archbishop Lefebvre and also Catholic dogma (with which you should be well acquainted) that there can be no salvation without subjection to the Holy Father.

In a sense, it's correct that the final disposition of Bergoglio does't matter, but what does matter is this wretched non-Catholic ecclesiology you've developed  Are you adhering to actual Roman Catholicism or are you basically an Old Catholic?  So it SHOULD matter to you, because since your eternal salvation is on the line as you clearly veer into the latter category.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 134
« previous next »