Author Topic: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism? (Read 56520 times)

Meg · « **Reply #410 on:** May 31, 2023, 10:16:30 AM »

Quote from: SeanJohnson on May 31, 2023, 10:08:26 AM

Yeah, it was a mistake to ban whomever it was.

Ladislaus excommunicates more CI members in a single day, than this guy did in his entire brief tenure.

But supposing it was S/S, why should the fact that they condemn the Resistance make their arguments against sedevacantism or Kramer false??

Good question that you ask above: why should their condemnation of the Resistance (which some sedevacantists, like Ladislaus, do all the time here) make their argument against sedevacantism or Fr. Kramer false? It would be nice to see this properly addressed.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #411 on:** May 31, 2023, 10:20:59 AM »

Quote from: Meg on May 31, 2023, 10:16:30 AM

Good question that you asked above: why should their condemnation of the Resistance (which some sedevacantists, like Ladislaus, do all the time here) make their argument against sedevacantism or Fr. Kramer false? It would be nice to see this properly addressed.

Yes, its like they are saying, "Hey, you shouldn't cite SS against us, because they condemn you too."

But that ignores the fact that SS condemn the Resistance with different arguments than they condemn the sedevacantists with, so that line or reasoning does not follow.

And we all know that if SS were here condemning the Resistance, many of the sedes (including Lad) would be backing them 100%.

trad123 · « **Reply #412 on:** May 31, 2023, 10:23:49 AM »

Quote from: SeanJohnson on May 31, 2023, 09:54:32 AM

Why are you posting this???

Fine, lets bring LaCosaNostra back.

It's only a matter of time before what you objected I posted gets pushed on here.

Get your popcorn ready, LaCosaNostra will be calling you, Meg, and Matthew, and all of us on this forum, as heretics and schismatics.

Meg · « **Reply #413 on:** May 31, 2023, 10:27:34 AM »

Quote from: trad123 on May 31, 2023, 10:23:49 AM

Get your popcorn ready, LaCosaNostra will be calling you, Meg, and Matthew, and all of us on this forum, as heretics and schismatics.

How is that any different from some sedevacantists here calling the Resistance adherents schismatics and heretics? And isn't for basically the same reason?

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #414 on:** May 31, 2023, 10:28:28 AM »

Quote from: trad123 on May 31, 2023, 10:23:49 AM

Fine, lets bring LaCosaNostra back.

It's only a matter of time before what you objected I posted gets pushed on here.

Get your popcorn ready, LaCosaNostra will be calling you, Meg, and Matthew, all of us on this forum, as heretics and schismatics.

Nothing worse than what I hear from Lad every day, is it?

He believes Matthew and Lefebvre are Old Catholics, liberals (BOD), have an heretical ecclesiology, etc. etc.

I say bring LCN back, and when he turns against the Resistance, Lad will be supporting him 100% (and it will not be a persuasive argument for me to say, "But Lad, he condemns the sedes too, so you should not be backing him against the Resistance." He will say the same thing I;m saying here: "SS are wrong about the Resistance, but right about the sedes.").

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism? (Read 56520 times)

Meg

Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?

SeanJohnson

Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?

trad123

Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?

Meg

Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?

SeanJohnson

Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?