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

Author Topic: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?  (Read 41442 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MiracleOfTheSun

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 817
  • Reputation: +352/-142
  • Gender: Male
Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
« Reply #570 on: June 10, 2023, 04:16:22 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • ...I’m sick and tired of sedes using 3rd-grade logic to argue that laity and simple priests can kick someone out of office for heresy.  It’s causing untold division in Tradition and it’s irrationality leads to more and more chaos as the years go by. 

    So sedevacantists are the reason for the 'untold division'??  Funny stuff.  I thought the Resistance development was due to the SSPX meltdown in 2012 and the Fraternity of St. Peter (if that's Tradition) was created because of bishops being consecrated in the SSPX.  Good to know sedes are responsible for all of that bedlam. 

    At least it's a Catholic argument to say Apostates can not be pontiff and the Church is without error in her laws and disciplines.  What one does with that, of course, is up to them.  Sedes work to preserve not demolish.

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12480
    • Reputation: +7933/-2450
    • Gender: Male
    Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
    « Reply #571 on: June 10, 2023, 06:14:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    We don't kick them out, The Holy Ghost does, we just recognize that fact.  
    That's not how it works.  I've never seen the Holy Ghost tell someone to pack up their bags and leave an building.  :laugh1:  And that's not in canon law either.

    Quote
    It would be like if we saw some guy blatantly stealing from a store and running out without paying, the store clerks upset that the guy didn't pay for it and saying such, and then being like "nope, we need to wait for the police to catch him and the judge to sentence him for theft before we can recognize that he stole something."
    Yes, we can recognize that "it appears" the guy stole something illegally.  But...we don't know if he stole something because he was a former employee and the owner didn't pay him his final paycheck.  We don't know if the guy stole an apple because he was starving.  We don't know if he stole because the owner sold him a crappy car and won't give him his $ back. 


    We don't know anything about the case.  We can only judge based on appearances (which is a waste of time), which is superficial and contrary to all civilized legal proceedings and against the virtue of justice.  It's the police/legal system which is responsible for investigating and finding fault.


    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12480
    • Reputation: +7933/-2450
    • Gender: Male
    Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
    « Reply #572 on: June 10, 2023, 06:22:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    So the PUBLIC SIN of heresy can be judged only by the Church?  If this is what you are saying, then prove it.  Show me where the Church teaches that only she can judge the PUBLIC SIN of heresy.  And don't show me evidence from Canon Law.  This is an issue regarding moral theology.
    You can do whatever you want as a layman but you have no authority to judge any cleric.  Canon law is for "canons" (i.e. churchmen).  It is law for the church; and laymen are not part of the church (in the same sense as are religious persons).


    The second reason your "judgement" means nothing is you have no authority over any other catholic, except your family.  Your opinion, however educated and investigated it is, means zilch.  You can't subject anyone to your opinion, because no other catholic has to pay attention to you, at all.  It would be similar to a some new zealand citizen who files an appeal with the US Supreme Court...it means nothing.  A non-citizen, non-lawyer, who files some proceeding with a foreign court....it goes directly into the garbage can.  That person has no standing, no rights and no legal cause for the court (nor anyone else) to listen to anything they say.

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12480
    • Reputation: +7933/-2450
    • Gender: Male
    Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
    « Reply #573 on: June 10, 2023, 06:24:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    So sedevacantists are the reason for the 'untold division'??  Funny stuff.  I thought the Resistance development was due to the SSPX meltdown in 2012 and the Fraternity of St. Peter (if that's Tradition) was created because of bishops being consecrated in the SSPX.  Good to know sedes are responsible for all of that bedlam. 
    Sedes are responsible for their fair share of division.  I never said all.  In the grand scheme of things, the new-sspx keeps going left and many sedes keep going right.  Extremism on either end is bad.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46926
    • Reputation: +27798/-5167
    • Gender: Male
    Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
    « Reply #574 on: June 10, 2023, 06:49:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • You can do whatever you want as a layman but you have no authority to judge any cleric. 

    You have no authority to judge that Vatican II taught heresy or that the Novus Ordo Mass isn't Catholic and pleasing to God.  This contradiction for some reason constantly escapes people.

    In any case, however, there's no question of judging a cleric.  If Bergoglio is a heretic, he's outside the Church.  That's why Bellarmine teaches that it's possible to "judge" a Pope.  As per usual, though, you're confusing juridical judgment / sentence with making a judgment.  I judge that Bergoglio is an enemy of Tradition.  That's a judgment.  But it obviously is no juridical judgment.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46926
    • Reputation: +27798/-5167
    • Gender: Male
    Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
    « Reply #575 on: June 10, 2023, 06:51:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That’s my point.  The only people who can figure this out are those in the Church.  I’m sick and tired of sedes using 3rd-grade logic to argue that laity and simple priests can kick someone out of office for heresy.  It’s causing untold division in Tradition and it’s irrationality leads to more and more chaos as the years go by. 

    Then you have absolutely NO business judging that Vatican II has taught heresy and that the New Mass is not Catholic, but displeases God and harms souls.  None.  Zilch.  Zero.

    If, however, you have judged these things to be true, then the men who promulgated them cannot be Popes, since it's absolutely impossible for legitimate Popes to teach grave error in an Ecuмenical Council or promulgate a bad Mass.

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4750
    • Reputation: +2897/-667
    • Gender: Male
    Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
    « Reply #576 on: June 10, 2023, 07:32:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Then you have absolutely NO business judging that Vatican II has taught heresy and that the New Mass is not Catholic, but displeases God and harms souls.  None.  Zilch.  Zero.

    If, however, you have judged these things to be true, then the men who promulgated them cannot be Popes, since it's absolutely impossible for legitimate Popes to teach grave error in an Ecuмenical Council or promulgate a bad Mass.

    bravo!!!
    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 Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12480
    • Reputation: +7933/-2450
    • Gender: Male
    Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
    « Reply #577 on: June 10, 2023, 07:58:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    You have no authority to judge that Vatican II taught heresy or that the Novus Ordo Mass isn't Catholic and pleasing to God.  This contradiction for some reason constantly escapes people.
    :facepalm:

    Quote
    In any case, however, there's no question of judging a cleric.  If Bergoglio is a heretic, he's outside the Church. 
    Yes, spiritually speaking.  But arguably he retains his govt office.



    Quote
    That's why Bellarmine teaches that it's possible to "judge" a Pope.  As per usual, though, you're confusing juridical judgment / sentence with making a judgment. 
    No, i'm the one pointing out the difference between judging error vs judging according to canon law.  :confused:  



    Quote
    I judge that Bergoglio is an enemy of Tradition.  That's a judgment.  But it obviously is no juridical judgment.
    This is EXACTLY what i've been saying.


    To "kick someone out of office" is a legal process.  Because it has to do with their human/govt office.  Which is a canon law process.  God has already judged them (spiritually) if they are guilty of heresy.  But no layman can kick anyone out of office; this is the Church's job, because it's a human office/process.


    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12480
    • Reputation: +7933/-2450
    • Gender: Male
    Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
    « Reply #578 on: June 10, 2023, 08:00:34 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    Then you have absolutely NO business judging that Vatican II has taught heresy and that the New Mass is not Catholic, but displeases God and harms souls.  None.  Zilch.  Zero.

    If, however, you have judged these things to be true, then the men who promulgated them cannot be Popes, since it's absolutely impossible for legitimate Popes to teach grave error in an Ecuмenical Council or promulgate a bad Mass.
    :confused:  Saying someone retains their human/govt office, even when they've committed/espoused heresy is not a contradiction.  It's the basis for sedeprivationism/Fr Chazalism...which you say you agree with.

    Offline EWPJ

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 558
    • Reputation: +368/-52
    • Gender: Male
    Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
    « Reply #579 on: June 11, 2023, 06:45:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That's not how it works.  I've never seen the Holy Ghost tell someone to pack up their bags and leave an building.  :laugh1:  And that's not in canon law either.
    Yes, we can recognize that "it appears" the guy stole something illegally.  But...we don't know if he stole something because he was a former employee and the owner didn't pay him his final paycheck.  We don't know if the guy stole an apple because he was starving.  We don't know if he stole because the owner sold him a crappy car and won't give him his $ back. 


    We don't know anything about the case.  We can only judge based on appearances (which is a waste of time), which is superficial and contrary to all civilized legal proceedings and against the virtue of justice.  It's the police/legal system which is responsible for investigating and finding fault.

    Do you consider Nancy Peℓσѕι and Joe Biden to be Catholics in good standing?  Why or why not?
    If Rome decided after Bergoglio's death that the next Pope was going to be a woman, would you recognize her as "pope?"  Why or why not?

    The main point of my analogy is that the guy stole something and it was recognized as such, you even admitted it during your analogy extrapolating on the issue.  Your analogy only serves to get more details but it doesn't change what's already occurred.  


    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12480
    • Reputation: +7933/-2450
    • Gender: Male
    Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
    « Reply #580 on: June 11, 2023, 08:48:25 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • The analogy is spot on.  We laymen can recognize that stealing/heresy has taken place.  But we cannot sentence anyone to any kind of punishment, because we don’t have all the details.  That’s up to those in authority.  


    Offline Catholic Knight

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 802
    • Reputation: +238/-82
    • Gender: Male
    Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
    « Reply #581 on: June 25, 2023, 03:27:49 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Archbishop Lefebvre was not a trained theologian by any stretch.....

    Really?  The SSPX claims he completed his doctorate in philosophy and theology.

    https://sspx.org/en/short-biography-archbishop-marcel-lefebvre


    Offline Catholic Knight

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 802
    • Reputation: +238/-82
    • Gender: Male
    Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
    « Reply #582 on: June 25, 2023, 03:37:39 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • You can do whatever you want as a layman but you have no authority to judge any cleric.  Canon law is for "canons" (i.e. churchmen).  It is law for the church; and laymen are not part of the church (in the same sense as are religious persons).


    The second reason your "judgement" means nothing is you have no authority over any other catholic, except your family.  Your opinion, however educated and investigated it is, means zilch.  You can't subject anyone to your opinion, because no other catholic has to pay attention to you, at all.  It would be similar to a some new zealand citizen who files an appeal with the US Supreme Court...it means nothing.  A non-citizen, non-lawyer, who files some proceeding with a foreign court....it goes directly into the garbage can.  That person has no standing, no rights and no legal cause for the court (nor anyone else) to listen to anything they say.

    Where is your evidence, as I requested, from Church teaching that only she can judge the PUBLIC SIN of heresy?  Once again you brought up Canon Law which I specifically told me is not the question here.  I am speaking about the SIN of heresy and not the CRIME of heresy.  If you cannot prove you assertion, then please retract it rather than rambling on with off topic comments. 

    Offline Catholic Knight

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 802
    • Reputation: +238/-82
    • Gender: Male
    Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
    « Reply #583 on: June 25, 2023, 03:41:06 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • You have no authority to judge that Vatican II taught heresy or that the Novus Ordo Mass isn't Catholic and pleasing to God.  This contradiction for some reason constantly escapes people.

    That's right.  They make a judgement and in the next breath tell others that they can't make a judgement.

    Offline Catholic Knight

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 802
    • Reputation: +238/-82
    • Gender: Male
    Re: R&R -- why don't you get behind Father Chazal's sede-impoundism?
    « Reply #584 on: June 25, 2023, 03:50:46 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • To "kick someone out of office" is a legal process.  Because it has to do with their human/govt office.  Which is a canon law process.  God has already judged them (spiritually) if they are guilty of heresy.  But no layman can kick anyone out of office; this is the Church's job, because it's a human office/process.

    Judging that another has committed the public sin of manifest formal heresy is not to say that the one making the judgement has the authority to enforce his judgement by kicking the heretic out of office.  The enforcement is under the direction of the competent Church authorities.  However, the one making the judgement simply refuses to recognize the heretic as still retaining office.

    The question is:  do you hold that Jorge Bergoglio has committed the public sin of manifest formal heresy?

    If your answer is "yes", then you must refuse him as pope because the public sin of manifest formal heresy per se separates the heretic from the Church.