Author Topic: Sedevacantism discussion  (Read 9534 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Charlemagne

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1413
  • Reputation: +2086/-18
  • Gender: Male
Sedevacantism discussion
« on: November 27, 2013, 12:10:44 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: LaramieHirsch
    Catholics in this country are dreading this nation's further race to Hell, while sedevacantists are probably glad about it because they hate the capital of Christianity anyway.


    Matthew, I've done in the past what you've asked all of us to do when garbage like the above is posted, namely, send you a PM. To date, you've never replied to me. Far be it from me to accuse you of indifference to such a matter, but your lack of a response can only lead me to believe that you tolerate such foolishness simply because you don't hold the sedevacantist point of view. Please answer this question for the forum to see: Is dogmatic sedeplenism to be tolerated or not? No, the above is not an example of dogmatic sedeplenism, but anyone who knows LH's posting history knows that he consistently accuses sedevacantists of not only not being Catholic, but of actually hating the Church. WHY DO YOU CONTINUE TO ALLOW THIS? If you refuse to put a stop to this nonsense, I (and I suppose many others) will just assume that the following blurb from the forum rules is nothing but window dressing:

    "You need not agree with everyone (or even most people) here, and you are free to disagree with the moderator. However, you have to consider CathInfo members your 'fellow Catholics' -- you may strongly disagree with some of them, but you have to have enough humility to 'live and let live' and 'agree to disagree.'



     
    "Kindness is for fools! They [modernists] want to be treated with oil, soap, and caresses, but they ought to be beaten with fists. In a duel, you don't count or measure the blows, you strike as you can. War is not made with charity. It is a struggle, a duel." -- Pope St. Pius X

    Online poche

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 13678
    • Reputation: +485/-1041
    • Gender: Male
    Sedevacantism discussion
    « Reply #1 on: November 27, 2013, 12:16:56 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I don't agree with sedevacantism but I don't call them bad names.


    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 21418
    • Reputation: +18948/-81
    • Gender: Male
    Sedevacantism discussion
    « Reply #2 on: November 27, 2013, 12:19:57 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I don't think he considers all sedevacantists to be non-Catholic.

    He probably just gets frustrated with them, and their position, from time to time.
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline LaramieHirsch

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2486
    • Reputation: +840/-71
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Sedevacantism discussion
    « Reply #3 on: November 27, 2013, 12:51:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: poche
    I don't agree with sedevacantism but I don't call them bad names.


    I haven't called any sedevacantists names.  I have said that sedevacantists are schismatic.  Over and over.  I have not--to my immediate knowledge--pointed anyone out in particular.  Or, at least, I have not focused on a single person from one thread to another.  

    I am actually not out to make enemies.  But I will voice my opinion.  Because this is a forum, consisting of voices.  Besides, I don't post as often as I used to on here.  It's not like I have over 11,000 posts of this same stuff.  

    Furthermore, when discussing the nature of sedevacantism, I've used the Crisis subforum.  This is per the rules.  I don't post as much about my opinion on sedevacantism because I don't have the time, and I've said about as much as I'm going to say on it for the time being.

    Quote from: Charlemagne
    Quote from: LaramieHirsch
    Catholics in this country are dreading this nation's further race to Hell, while sedevacantists are probably glad about it because they hate the capital of Christianity anyway.


    Matthew, I've done in the past what you've asked all of us to do when garbage like the above is posted


    I did not post about sedevacantism here.  We were all asked what we think about how the Obama administration is closing the Vatican embassy.  I've stated what I think the reaction of Catholics and sedevacantists will be.  I stated this because people on Cathinfo are either Catholics in full communion with the Church, or they are sedevacantists.  

    Quote from: Charlemagne
    "You need not agree with everyone (or even most people) here, and you are free to disagree with the moderator. However, you have to consider CathInfo members your 'fellow Catholics' -- you may strongly disagree with some of them, but you have to have enough humility to 'live and let live' and 'agree to disagree.'
     


    I am able to live and let live.  But are sedevacantists here able to live and let me live?  

    Nope.  They do not wish to tolerate me.  They do not wish to tolerate my conclusion that sedevacantism is schismatic.  Instead, they wish to eradicate me from the forum.  

    I naievely thought that I could come to this recent conclusion about sedevacantists, state it, then people would know where I stood and my participation on this forum would be as usual.

    Before now, my likers were actually double my haters.  Now, it's quite the reverse.  

    But oh well.  This is my opinion for now.  And the reactions to it are very demonstrative of people's character.  I think that it is these reactions that are the biggest lesson I've taken away from all of this.

    I can accept participating on a forum full of sedevacantists.  But the forum full of sedevacantists cannot accept my participation.  

    Quote from: Matthew
    I don't think he considers all sedevacantists to be non-Catholic.

    He probably just gets frustrated with them, and their position, from time to time.


    All sedevacantists being non-Catholic?  You're right, I'm not sure I consider all of them as such.  

    But most often, if I am talking about sedevacantism, I'm talking about sedevacantism--the idea.  The movement.  The concept.  I am not out to get anybody on this.  

    Occassionally, I try to be friendly again.  But then I'm met with some pretty nasty language anyway.  Why reach out a hand when you'll just cut it off?

    And yes, I get frustrated with sedevacantists.  Mith, for example.  When fellows like him call the Church a whore, I take great offense.  Any Catholic should, because the Church is the Bride of Christ, and it was started by Jesus Christ.  To hate the Church is to hate Jesus.  To be an enemy of the Church is to be an enemy of Jesus.  

    - - - - -

    What do I hope to gain from telling people here my opinion on sedevacantism?  

    I hope that it will spur/facilitate strong and technical dialogue between sedevacantists and those opposed to it.  Because whichever side is the strongest ought to win.  I want to see these conversations take place.  Sedevacantism is a strong temptation to many of us Traditional Catholics.  But if it is right, let it prove itself right.  

    The big rush to push critics away demonstrates an unwillingness towards confrontation.  

    For years, I've enjoyed reading people's thoughts on Catholic matters here.  But lately it's "I hate the pope because of this" or "I hate the pope because of that."  This place is distilling itself into a complete sedevacantist clubhouse.  

    I'm sorry that some of us cannot agree to disagree.  It actually pains me that Mith is so nasty towards me, because we were actually posting on Fisheaters at the same time four years ago.  

    I think that sedevacantism being confronted can spur interesting conversation.  Is that not what an internet forum is for?  Is that not why we all share this hobby...of logging onto the internet and speaking to one another?  
    .........................

    Before some audiences not even the possession of the exactest knowledge will make it easy for what we say to produce conviction. For argument based on knowledge implies instruction, and there are people whom one cannot instruct.  - Aristotle

    Online poche

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 13678
    • Reputation: +485/-1041
    • Gender: Male
    Sedevacantism discussion
    « Reply #4 on: November 27, 2013, 02:47:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: LaramieHirsch
    Quote from: poche
    I don't agree with sedevacantism but I don't call them bad names.


    I haven't called any sedevacantists names.  I have said that sedevacantists are schismatic.  Over and over.  I have not--to my immediate knowledge--pointed anyone out in particular.  Or, at least, I have not focused on a single person from one thread to another.  



    I haven't accused you of calling anybody bad names.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 14616
    • Reputation: +7671/-2383
    • Gender: Male
    Sedevacantism discussion
    « Reply #5 on: November 27, 2013, 05:31:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • In calling sedevacantists schismatic (=non-Catholic) LH is in clear violation of forum rules.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 14616
    • Reputation: +7671/-2383
    • Gender: Male
    Sedevacantism discussion
    « Reply #6 on: November 27, 2013, 05:32:37 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • LH, a much stronger case can be made that you yourself are a schismatic.

    Offline LaramieHirsch

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2486
    • Reputation: +840/-71
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Sedevacantism discussion
    « Reply #7 on: November 27, 2013, 06:02:24 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    LH, a much stronger case can be made that you yourself are a schismatic.


    Why?  For belonging to a Mystical Body that claims primacy above all cults of the people of Earth?  A Mystical Body that possesses the authority to drive demons out of possessed people?  


    - - - -

    Anyway, I smell a pile-on coming.   :rolleyes:
    .........................

    Before some audiences not even the possession of the exactest knowledge will make it easy for what we say to produce conviction. For argument based on knowledge implies instruction, and there are people whom one cannot instruct.  - Aristotle


    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4067
    • Reputation: +1863/-170
    • Gender: Female
    Sedevacantism discussion
    « Reply #8 on: November 27, 2013, 07:36:37 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • To be fair, he's not the only one.  They aren't as "in your face" about it and couch their words carefully, but it's quite clear that dogmatic sedeplenists are allowed here while dogmatic sedevacantists are not.

    Why?
    If any one saith, that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs, which the Catholic Church makes use of in the celebration of masses, are incentives to impiety, rather than offices of piety; let him be anathema. - Council of Trent

    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3273
    • Reputation: +3951/-198
    • Gender: Male
      • The Trad Forum
    Sedevacantism discussion
    « Reply #9 on: November 27, 2013, 07:39:52 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Matthew
    I don't think he considers all sedevacantists to be non-Catholic.

    He probably just gets frustrated with them, and their position, from time to time.


    Oh, he definitely considers them to be non-Catholic.  

    Is a schismatic who left our Lord on the cross and who desires the Catholic Church to fail -- is this kind of person a Catholic?
    More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com

    Offline soulguard

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1698
    • Reputation: +3/-7
    • Gender: Male
    Sedevacantism discussion
    « Reply #10 on: November 27, 2013, 08:47:31 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: LaramieHirsch
    Quote from: Ladislaus
    LH, a much stronger case can be made that you yourself are a schismatic.


    Why?  For belonging to a Mystical Body that claims primacy above all cults of the people of Earth?  A Mystical Body that possesses the authority to drive demons out of possessed people?  


    - - - -

    Anyway, I smell a pile-on coming.   :rolleyes:


    You have made it your trademark to ridicule the intelligence of sedevacantists on your blog and on this forum.

    You started a thread called "sedevacantism is schismatic"

    You think people who don't believe in Francis get some sort of buzz about the dreadful state of the church? You think there is profit in it?
    You lie to yourself. At least the Sedevacantists admit the reality that the Vatican is steeped in heresy and apostasy, but you think it is otherwise, you think they have a right to redefine Catholic religion to suit the present day and age. You also said at least once that you go to novus ordo mass.
    If so, then you are addicted to the "springtime" of Vatican 2, and are not a traditional Catholic. So what I have to say along with the others is that you should not come on here presuming you have a right to insult my faith.
    You have no clue what I suffered for the faith. I am SV and proud of it. I would give my life for this faith. The true faith, not your Vatican 2 apostate REPLACEMENT.

    Maybe you should stop what you do, and if you have so little time on your hands, maybe go elsewhere to catholic answers or something.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 14616
    • Reputation: +7671/-2383
    • Gender: Male
    Sedevacantism discussion
    « Reply #11 on: November 27, 2013, 08:50:52 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    LH, a much stronger case can be made that you yourself are a schismatic.


    Because you're in chronic disobedience to the man you believe without question to be the Pope.  That's the very definition of schism.  Paying lip service and putting up a picture of the pope doesn't put you in submission to him.

    At least the sedevacantists pin their lack of submission on the assertion that these are non-popes.

    If they're wrong, then they're in material (but not formal) schism.  If you're right that Francis is a legitimate pope, then you're in formal schism.

    Contrary to popular belief, schism isn't the principled denial of the prerogatives of the Pope; that would be heresy.

    Offline Pelele

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 185
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    Sedevacantism discussion
    « Reply #12 on: November 27, 2013, 09:29:17 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Ladislaus
    Because you're in chronic disobedience to the man you believe without question to be the Pope.  That's the very definition of schism.  Paying lip service and putting up a picture of the pope doesn't put you in submission to him.


    Hmm...isn't that the precise position of the SSPX, of all non-sedevacantist "traditionalists", of the moderator here himself, and yours?

    Offline Croix de Fer

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3219
    • Reputation: +2106/-2189
    • Gender: Male
    Sedevacantism discussion
    « Reply #13 on: November 27, 2013, 10:27:30 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: LaramieHirsch

      A Mystical Body [conciliar church] that possesses the authority to drive demons out of possessed people?  


    Haven't there been quite a few unsuccessful exorcisms since Vatican II Council, or am I mistaken?
    Blessed be the Lord my God, who teacheth my hands to fight, and my fingers to war. ~ Psalms 143:1 (Douay-Rheims)

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8480
    • Reputation: +1089/-822
    • Gender: Male
    Sedevacantism discussion
    « Reply #14 on: November 27, 2013, 10:37:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Their head exorcist (Father Amorth - 86 years old) said their new Rite of Exorcism in ineffective.  
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16