Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: Caminus on October 02, 2009, 12:44:56 AM

Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 02, 2009, 12:44:56 AM
Reason #46 why dogmatic sedevacantism is a terrible mistake.

Sedevacantism necessarily involves a judgment or series of judgments regarding concrete particular and contingent facts.  Those who demand that only true catholics must become sedevacantists posits the notion that one accepts this opinion either on authority or that the simple faithful take up the texts of Vatican II, study them and come to the same conclusion.  Furthmore, they demand that the simple faithful take these conclusions and apply them to persons.  

Since no sedevacantist claims any real authority, the conclusion must be that they posit a moral duty to study the conciliar texts and come up with the same series of opinions.  This position amounts to forcing simple faithful into the moral obligation of becoming theologians, or at very least, of trying to become theologians, in addition to forcing them to accept all of the other particular judgments that sedevacantists make regarding persons.  But no catholic is under any such moral obligation and consequently to burden the faithful with such requirements is evil.  No room is left for the simple faithful.  For the study of the texts of Vatican II becomes a prerequisite for determining the where the Church is and what is necessary for salvation.  This position is akin to sola scriptura and the protestant notion that everyone is morally obligated to read the bible and draw from it his own opinions that coincide with a peculiar sect.

To gather under the banner and unifying principle of an opinion that falls outside of the content of revelation is the sure sign of error and schism.  The dogmatic sedevacantist essentially adds to the content of revelation.  No room is left in the Church for the simple faithful.    
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 04, 2009, 11:10:26 AM
No response?
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Ecclesia Militans on October 04, 2009, 11:39:24 AM
Can you direct me to the full list of reasons?
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 04, 2009, 12:09:28 PM
The number was tongue in cheek, though I think it would be a good idea to make a list.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 04, 2009, 12:36:54 PM
Another question:

Why is dogmatic sedeplentism NOT a terrible mistake?
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: gladius_veritatis on October 04, 2009, 12:46:15 PM
Does not 'Recognize and Resist' require some knowledge beyond the norm and some kind of judgment?  Otherwise, why don't we all just go back to our local NOM?
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 04, 2009, 01:06:11 PM
Quote from: SJB
Another question:

Why is dogmatic sedeplentism NOT a terrible mistake?


We're not on equal epistemological grounds.  The burden of proof rests upon the one making the accusation.  Additionally, even if the sedevacantist story line is correct, it would not affect our salvation one iota.  Making such juridical determinations does not advance one in in grace and charity in the slightest degree.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 04, 2009, 01:14:03 PM
Quote from: gladius_veritatis
Does not 'Recognize and Resist' require some knowledge beyond the norm and some kind of judgment?  Otherwise, why don't we all just go back to our local NOM?


Recognition of the popes is a mere legal acceptation.  We accept this fact at face value.  But traditional catholicism does involve a judgment, that is where the faith is preserved in all its splendor and implications.  This is a positive judgment of which we are all bound to make.  The "resistance" that follows is accidental for in actuality, it is the bishops who are the rebels, not us.  

The negative judgment of sedevacantism goes beyond this and requires one to engage in a series of extra-juridical judgments and opinions about the theological grades of propositions and their contrary.  It involves judgments about persons and the precise meaning of the texts of Vatican II themselves.  A meaning which demands that one censure it as heretical, otherwise one would not be a sedevacantist now would they?  If anyone desires to become a sedevacantist, it is a prerequisite that they read and study the texts of the Council, determine their precise heretical import and then take this judgment and assert that men have lost their office.  This all falls outside of the traditional catholic faith.

This is why sedevacantists gather under this opinion and this alone, which is a mark of error, as history has shown time and time again.  
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: gladius_veritatis on October 04, 2009, 01:18:12 PM
Quote from: Caminus
We're not on equal epistemological grounds.


Ah, but you are claiming, in effect, that "dogmatic sede plenism" is the way to go.  Therefore, he has every right to ask the question he did.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 04, 2009, 01:19:37 PM
Quote from: Caminus
Quote from: SJB
Another question:

Why is dogmatic sedeplentism NOT a terrible mistake?


We're not on equal epistemological grounds.  The burden of proof rests upon the one making the accusation.  Additionally, even if the sedevacantist story line is correct, it would not affect our salvation one iota.  Making such juridical determinations does not advance one in in grace and charity in the slightest degree.


They why doesn't the burden of proof for your theological musing squarely rest on you? You don't say.

It's not a juridicial determination. And I suppose you are advancing yourself and others in grace and charity by doing whatever it is that you're doing here?

Did your mother ever tell you you had an answer for everything? :)
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: gladius_veritatis on October 04, 2009, 01:20:36 PM
Quote from: Caminus
But traditional catholicism does involve a judgment, that is where the faith is preserved in all its splendor and implications.  This is a positive judgment of which we are all bound to make.  The "resistance" that follows is accidental for in actuality, it is the bishops who are the rebels, not us...


Who has told you that the bishops are the rebels?  How is the average man in the pew to know he is "bound to make" such a judgment?  It is at variance with everything his parents and the nuns taught him, when there were nuns to teach.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Lover of Truth on October 06, 2009, 08:03:39 PM
I am not sure SV is doctrinal.

Coming to the SV conclusion is indeed applying what has been taught by the Church in times past but the Church has not taught on the subject today, because it can't, there is no Pope to do so.  

SV is a practical application of Church teachings but I do not believe that one who does not accept this is a heretic (formal or material).  He simply does not know.  

It will take until we get a valid Pope to settle the question which will then be mute.  

But again if a legitimate Pope can do, say and teach with the conciliar "Popes" have done and be valid then there is no reason to have a Pope.  

The legitimate reason for a Pope is to have a unifying head, these guys divide by contracting in their words, writings and actions the perrenial teachings of the Church over and over again.  If a legitimate Pope can do these things there is no reason to have a Pope.

Anyone get my drift?

He also is to have the final say.  But he doesn't.  The SSPX tells us whether he is right or not.  Such would not be necessary where there a Catholic (the only possible kind) Pope ruling God's Church right now.

Get it?  I hope so.  I'm not sure how it can be more clear for those with eyes to see.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: CM on October 06, 2009, 09:48:24 PM
*moot
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Lover of Truth on October 06, 2009, 09:56:18 PM
Quote from: Catholic Martyr
*moot


No comprende
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: CM on October 06, 2009, 11:37:07 PM
Quote from: Lover of Truth
It will take until we get a valid Pope to settle the question which will then be mute.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Matthew on October 07, 2009, 12:10:52 AM
Quote from: Caminus
The number was tongue in cheek, though I think it would be a good idea to make a list.


Well, this post of mine might get you started:

The list covers the various opinions, or "what things you have to pick a position on", to illustrate how complicated Sedevacantism actually is.

(Sedevacantism is defined here as "believing that the man commonly known as Pope Benedict XVI is not the pope")

The Crisis in the Church is not a simple matter.

These are all honest questions that any Sedevacantist (or would-be Sedevacantist) should ask himself/herself:

(NOTE: These are all points of contention in the Sedevacantist world. That is to say, each of these is a crossroads for each given Sedevacantist.)

* Does the Catholic Church have a pope right now?
* For how long has the commonly-held pope (in Rome) not been the real pope?
* If we have a Pope, who is he (name and place of residence)?
* Is the Catholic Church currently visible or invisible?
* Is there any priest/bishop/pope you would currently trust now, or follow in matters of faith without judging his every move?
* How do you reconcile the fact that the world is VERY dangerous as an influence, and that we need Mass and the sacraments (and to a lesser degree, the moral support of fellow Catholics) to save our souls?
* How do you reconcile the fact that only a future council can judge the Pope? Do you have any evidence that the Church makes it possible for laymen to depose, or deny the papacy of, a given pope?
* Do you believe it's possible to have a less-than-saintly pope on Peter's throne? How about a man who has committed, or who commits, sin? How about a man who personally holds some errors? Have you read much Church history?
* How do you reconcile the notion that, in your estimation, the Catholic Church hasn't provided us laymen with any means of dealing with this crisis? No Epikeia, no ability to disobey a lawful pope, no supplied jurisdiction, etc.
* What do you think of SSPX masses?
* What do you think of Archbishop Lefebvre?
* What do you think of Rome-approved 1962 Masses? (FSSP, ICK, Indult, etc.)
* How many true priests/bishops/cardinals exist? A handful? Dozens? Hundreds? Thousands? Hundreds of thousands? Millions?
* What kind of priest is needed to say the Mass you would attend? One from CMRI? SSPV? Indpendent? One ordained before 1962? Are there no priests left?
* Do you realize that it is easy for independent priests to be  actual frauds (with no priestly orders) and that this has happened in the past several times?
* Do you realize that some independent priests are simply weak in the virtue of obedience? That is, while professing to be "fighting for the truth" and all, they merely couldn't follow orders in the SSPX, SSPV, FSSP, etc. and left so they could "be their own boss".
* Should you attend some Traditional Latin Mass, or just stay at home?
* If you advocate "staying at home", is that for fundamental/dogmatic reasons, or would you like to move closer to an independent (sede) chapel someday if you could?
* If you advocate "staying at home", how do you plan to teach the Faith to your children?
* Can the crisis/lack of pope situation be resolved ever? How will you know a new legitimate Pope is elected?
* Is there anything a person (priest, religious, or layman) can do to help end or ameliorate this Crisis? If so, what?
* Should a new pope be elected by "the remnant"? Should you help elect a pope (or become pope yourself? cf. Pope Michael of Kansas)
* What do you think of the average (novus ordo attending) Catholic? Will any of them save their soul? Is it possible for some to be of good will?
* What do you think of other traditional Catholics? (Those trying to oppose error and keep the Faith during this crisis)
* Do you think those who don't support your preferred sedevacantist group can save their souls? How about those who don't attend your chapel? Should they be formally denounced? In writing?
* Should some, many, or all non-sedevacantist Catholics be declared, or treated as, Vitandi (persons to be avoided) like those who are excommunicated? How about other sedevacantists whom you don't agree with?
* If you advocate being harsh with non sede-Catholics, how do you reconcile the fact that normally it is a praiseworthy thing for Catholics to love and pray for the pope? How about the fact that this crisis is not normal, and is, in fact, unprecedented?
* Are you aware of the actions of past popes throughout Church history? The Great Schism? The fact that St. Vincent Ferrer was on "the wrong side" in that crisis?
* What do you think of the various priests/bishops who seem to be fearless in their defense of the Faith, though they are not sedevacantist? For example: Bishop Williamson, and many SSPX priests (though there are countless others!)
* Should we actually hate the pope? The modernist (or all) cardinals? Bishops? Catholics who are not sedevacantist?
* Can married men be deacons? Priests? (Don't laugh; I know an independent priest who had himself consecrated bishop, and ordained one married man a deacon. He also wants to ordain at least one married man a priest!)
* What do you think of Fatima? Padre Pio? Baptism of Desire? "Natural Family Planning"? Separation of Church and State? St. Thomas Aquinas? Limbo?
* Do you believe that Vatican II taught anything binding on Catholics?
* Especially if you deny the validity of 1962 masses, you have to ask yourself "Why would God abandon His people and His Church for 40 years, with no means of salvation available to the vast majority of people?"
* Do you have a family? Do you honestly believe that staying at home (or attending a small chapel of 10 people) will be more beneficial to your children than attending, say, an SSPX chapel?
After all, it's not like the Novus Ordo is said in the latter, and aside from mentioning the Pope's name during the canon (quietly), nothing else goes on that a Sede could complain about. Do you honestly think mentioning the Pope's name during Mass will destroy your child's faith?

Those last two points are important ones. I know personally that attending an SSPX Mass center takes some effort -- usually an hour drive (or more) and many live too far away to attend weekly Mass. How much worse would it be if you couldn't attend any TLM except that offered by an independent sedevacantist priest? You'd pretty much be a "home-aloner" -- one who reads their missal at home on Sunday. With my knowledge of the world (and having attended an independent chapel for 24 years), I know how dangerous this is for the children especially. Usually they give up the Faith -- it seems too much like a cult. Just for starters, they end up marrying non-Catholics, with all the problems that causes.

Matthew
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: CM on October 07, 2009, 12:59:48 AM
Quote from: Matthew
* Is there anything a person (priest, religious, or layman) can do to help end or ameliorate this Crisis? If so, what?


Hold the true Faith whole and inviolate.  Pray, fast, sacrifice.  There is no greater vocation than one of fervent and dedicated spirituality, no better way to intercede for the well being of the world.

Quote from: Matthew
* If you advocate "staying at home", how do you plan to teach the Faith to your children?


How is that even a problem?  You make it happen.  All things are possible with God, especially this.

Quote from: Matthew
* Can the crisis/lack of pope situation be resolved ever? How will you know a new legitimate Pope is elected?

* Should a new pope be elected by "the remnant"? Should you help elect a pope (or become pope yourself? cf. Pope Michael of Kansas)


If the Catholic (read: sede) clergy in Rome hold a conclave, then my eyes and ears will perk up with avid interest.

Quote from: Matthew
* Are you aware of the actions of past popes throughout Church history? The Great Schism? The fact that St. Vincent Ferrer was on "the wrong side" in that crisis?


No heresy involved, you're in a completely different ballpark.

Quote from: Matthew
* Especially if you deny the validity of 1962 masses, you have to ask yourself "Why would God abandon His people and His Church for 40 years, with no means of salvation available to the vast majority of people?"


The means are there for sure!  Just as the means were there for about 100 years while Noe built his ark.  Anybody could have stowed aboard, I'm sure, if they were good willed.

Unless you want to argue that salvation is impossible without priests and the mass.  If so, start another thread, but I doubt you would make such a blunder.

Quote from: Matthew
* Do you have a family? Do you honestly believe that staying at home (or attending a small chapel of 10 people) will be more beneficial to your children than attending, say, an SSPX chapel?


When you propose a choice between Christ and Belial, it is foolish to choose Belial.  And communion with and subjection to heretics is not communion with and subjection to Christ.

Quote from: Matthew
After all, it's not like the Novus Ordo is said in the latter, and aside from mentioning the Pope's name during the canon (quietly), nothing else goes on that a Sede could complain about. Do you honestly think mentioning the Pope's name during Mass will destroy your child's faith?


Nope.  But if he is an apostate antipope, leader of a new religion, it will put you in schism from the Faith.

I'd like to field some of the other questions, because not one of them proposes anything that can invalidate dogmatic sedevacantism, but I don't have time right now.

Good night.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: stevusmagnus on October 07, 2009, 01:08:57 AM
Great questions Matthew!
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 07, 2009, 06:03:32 AM
Quote from: gladius_veritatis
Quote from: Caminus
But traditional catholicism does involve a judgment, that is where the faith is preserved in all its splendor and implications.  This is a positive judgment of which we are all bound to make.  The "resistance" that follows is accidental for in actuality, it is the bishops who are the rebels, not us...


Who has told you that the bishops are the rebels?  How is the average man in the pew to know he is "bound to make" such a judgment?  It is at variance with everything his parents and the nuns taught him, when there were nuns to teach.


Because we all make personal judgments based on the externals. Yes, we are to refrain from make rash judgments, but we must and we do make these types of judgments EVERY DAY.

Who is Caminus to make a judgment on a Catholic Bishop? Is he making a legal declaration? May he avoid these Bishops based on that non-binding opinion?





Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: gladius_veritatis on October 07, 2009, 07:55:18 AM
With little effort, I hammered large holes in a few of your questions on the list you presented a while back, Matthew.  Is this the same one?  Have you modified it at all?  If not, I will just cut and paste my response from that thread.

stevus, your comments about Assisi (within the Dolan thread) were truly stupefying in their naivete.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Lover of Truth on October 07, 2009, 07:57:13 AM
Quote from: Catholic Martyr
Quote from: Lover of Truth
It will take until we get a valid Pope to settle the question which will then be mute.


Gottcha.  
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 07, 2009, 12:05:43 PM
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: gladius_veritatis
Quote from: Caminus
But traditional catholicism does involve a judgment, that is where the faith is preserved in all its splendor and implications.  This is a positive judgment of which we are all bound to make.  The "resistance" that follows is accidental for in actuality, it is the bishops who are the rebels, not us...


Who has told you that the bishops are the rebels?  How is the average man in the pew to know he is "bound to make" such a judgment?  It is at variance with everything his parents and the nuns taught him, when there were nuns to teach.


Because we all make personal judgments based on the externals. Yes, we are to refrain from make rash judgments, but we must and we do make these types of judgments EVERY DAY.

Who is Caminus to make a judgment on a Catholic Bishop? Is he making a legal declaration? May he avoid these Bishops based on that non-binding opinion?







The short answer is that I make no definitive judgments regarding persons and you should do likewise lest you fall into error.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: gladius_veritatis on October 07, 2009, 12:12:42 PM
Quote from: Caminus
The short answer is that I make no definitive judgments regarding persons and you should do likewise lest you fall into error.


So, the bishops you have called "rebels" may, in fact, be heroes?  I don't quite follow how your assessment of them as rebels is not related to "persons", etc.  It sounds rather like you want to have your cake and...have mine, too!
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: gladius_veritatis on October 07, 2009, 12:17:12 PM
Quote
It will take until we get a valid Pope to settle the question which will then be mute.


I believe the poster means "moot point", not mute (i.e., lacking, or not making use of, the power of speech).

moot point (plural moot points)

1. An issue that is subject to, or open for discussion or debate; originally, one to be definitively determined by an assembly of the people.
* 2009, Barney Hoskyns, Lowside of the Road: A Life of Tom Waits, Faber & Faber 2009, p. 155:

Exactly which of the songs on Small Change originated in London is a moot point.

2. (US) An issue regarded as potentially debatable, but no longer practically applicable. Although the idea may still be worth debating and exploring academically, and such discussion may be useful for addressing similar issues in the future, the idea has been rendered irrelevant for the present issue.

Until we rebuild downtown, whether we build more parking spaces is a moot point.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 07, 2009, 12:27:08 PM
Quote from: gladius_veritatis
Quote from: Caminus
The short answer is that I make no definitive judgments regarding persons and you should do likewise lest you fall into error.


So, the bishops you have called "rebels" may, in fact, be heroes?  I don't quite follow how your assessment of them as rebels is not related to "persons", etc.  It sounds rather like you want to have your cake and...have mine, too!


It's a general description since this is a crisis primarily of bishops in one way or another.  
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: gladius_veritatis on October 07, 2009, 12:31:15 PM
Quote from: Caminus
It's a general description since this is a crisis primarily of bishops in one way or another.  


Which, of necessity, must have some kind of specific, practical application - or it is so much horse pucky.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 07, 2009, 12:42:19 PM
Quote from: Caminus
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: gladius_veritatis
Quote from: Caminus
But traditional catholicism does involve a judgment, that is where the faith is preserved in all its splendor and implications.  This is a positive judgment of which we are all bound to make.  The "resistance" that follows is accidental for in actuality, it is the bishops who are the rebels, not us...


Who has told you that the bishops are the rebels?  How is the average man in the pew to know he is "bound to make" such a judgment?  It is at variance with everything his parents and the nuns taught him, when there were nuns to teach.


Because we all make personal judgments based on the externals. Yes, we are to refrain from make rash judgments, but we must and we do make these types of judgments EVERY DAY.

Who is Caminus to make a judgment on a Catholic Bishop? Is he making a legal declaration? May he avoid these Bishops based on that non-binding opinion?



The short answer is that I make no definitive judgments regarding persons and you should do likewise lest you fall into error.


Then you have no business avoiding these people.

Anyway, Caminus, YOU judge people almost every day...based purely on externals...and without making any legal declarations.

Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 07, 2009, 12:53:12 PM
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Caminus
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: gladius_veritatis
Quote from: Caminus
But traditional catholicism does involve a judgment, that is where the faith is preserved in all its splendor and implications.  This is a positive judgment of which we are all bound to make.  The "resistance" that follows is accidental for in actuality, it is the bishops who are the rebels, not us...


Who has told you that the bishops are the rebels?  How is the average man in the pew to know he is "bound to make" such a judgment?  It is at variance with everything his parents and the nuns taught him, when there were nuns to teach.


Because we all make personal judgments based on the externals. Yes, we are to refrain from make rash judgments, but we must and we do make these types of judgments EVERY DAY.

Who is Caminus to make a judgment on a Catholic Bishop? Is he making a legal declaration? May he avoid these Bishops based on that non-binding opinion?



The short answer is that I make no definitive judgments regarding persons and you should do likewise lest you fall into error.


Then you have no business avoiding these people.

Anyway, Caminus, YOU judge people almost every day...based purely on externals...and without making any legal declarations.



Ah, we can't avoid evil, or determine where catholic tradition is without making illicit judgments or rendering our opinions binding on others.  I'll be waiting for an "authority" on that one.  Look, if you can provide compelling and sound evidence for your position, I would accept it as legitimate.  Furthmore, I have always admitted the possibility of holding a certain form of this opinion privately and merely as less probable.  The thing that I take issue with is what I refer to as "dogmatic sedevacantism."  This is clearly outside certain boundaries, moral, theological and canonical.  Labor not to establish how this opinion is the only "true catholic opinion."  Work on your own interior life, work to restore this tradition, and the conversion of our catholic neighbors who find themselves in some kind of error.  The entire perspective of the dogmatic SV is simply not proportionate, nor is it spiritually healthy.  No one is spared in this trial and you are liable to error just like anyone else.  
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 07, 2009, 12:55:42 PM
You have never addressed my observation that to unite under this opinion is an error as it is outside of the Catholic faith.  Never has anyone addressed this problem.  
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: gladius_veritatis on October 07, 2009, 01:16:44 PM
Quote from: Caminus
Ah, we can't avoid evil, or determine where catholic tradition is without making illicit judgments or rendering our opinions binding on others.


Are you trying to bind others to your opinion about the nature of the judgments we are making? JK :wink:
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: gladius_veritatis on October 07, 2009, 01:19:40 PM
Quote from: Caminus
Furthmore, I have always admitted the possibility of holding a certain form of this opinion privately and merely as less probable.


St Robert Bellarmine seems to think that, given certain conditions, it is much more than "less probable."
 
Quote
The thing that I take issue with is what I refer to as "dogmatic sedevacantism."


So do the vast majority of SVs.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 07, 2009, 01:34:15 PM
Bellarmine is the wrong man to go to since he held that God wouldn't allow the theoretical possibility (the probable opinion he was addressing) to become a practical reality.  
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: gladius_veritatis on October 07, 2009, 01:36:39 PM
Nice attempt to turn the tables, but he did, all the same, write at length about how he saw it shaking out, IF God were to allow such.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 07, 2009, 01:43:47 PM
Quote from: Caminus
Ah, we can't avoid evil, or determine where catholic tradition is without making illicit judgments or rendering our opinions binding on others.  I'll be waiting for an "authority" on that one.


You can and must avoid heretics. See St. Paul on this one.

As far as I can tell, you shouldn't be avoiding other Catholics because of doctrinal matters less than heresy. You do not shun excommunicants unless they are excommunicated by name and "to be avoided".

Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: CM on October 07, 2009, 02:26:32 PM
Quote from: Caminus
You have never addressed my observation that to unite under this opinion is an error as it is outside of the Catholic faith.  Never has anyone addressed this problem.  


It does not add to revelation.  It is simply observing the situation and acting in accordance with revelation that causes people to unite as sedevacantists.

You are unwilling to acknowledge this.

Quote from: SJB
You can and must avoid heretics. See St. Paul on this one.

As far as I can tell, you shouldn't be avoiding other Catholics because of doctrinal matters less than heresy.


At which point they are not Catholics.

Quote from: SJB
You do not shun excommunicants unless they are excommunicated by name and "to be avoided".


Or unless it is clear they have incurred a sentence of excommunication (including [/i]latae sententiae[/i] with such notoriety that it is not concealed and cannot be excused in law.  (Pope Eugene IV, ex cathedra)

Hence dogmatic sedevacantism.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 07, 2009, 02:51:43 PM
Quote
Or unless it is clear they have incurred a sentence of excommunication (including latae sententiae with such notoriety that it is not concealed and cannot be excused in law.  (Pope Eugene IV, ex cathedra)


This is wrong, I believe. Excommunication deprives one of the spiritual goods of the Church...it does not necessarily cause a loss of membership in the Church.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: CM on October 07, 2009, 02:54:25 PM
Excuse me, but I quote the same words that were ratified by Pope Eugene IV, and they are wrong?  Get real.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 07, 2009, 04:04:08 PM
Quote from: gladius_veritatis
Quote from: Caminus
It's a general description since this is a crisis primarily of bishops in one way or another.  


Which, of necessity, must have some kind of specific, practical application - or it is so much horse pucky.


SSPX (http://www.sspx.org/)
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 07, 2009, 04:08:51 PM
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Caminus
Ah, we can't avoid evil, or determine where catholic tradition is without making illicit judgments or rendering our opinions binding on others.  I'll be waiting for an "authority" on that one.


You can and must avoid heretics. See St. Paul on this one.

As far as I can tell, you shouldn't be avoiding other Catholics because of doctrinal matters less than heresy. You do not shun excommunicants unless they are excommunicated by name and "to be avoided".



Heresy is part of the equation here because certain notions are in fact proximate to heresy and lead to heresy, as well as other factors that have destroyed our supernatural religion.  Some certain doctrinal matters may not be heresy strictly speaking, but do have effects which destroy nonetheless and consequently should be avoided.  Add to this a certain materialism and worldiness that isn't limited to a certain person or group of people and we have a terrible problem.  As was said before, our material separation from the normal structure of the Church is accidental and beside our formal intention of adhering to tradition.  This is, I believe, the proper attitude to have.  
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 07, 2009, 04:10:45 PM
Quote from: Catholic Martyr
Excuse me, but I quote the same words that were ratified by Pope Eugene IV, and they are wrong?  Get real.


I have never seen anyone so affected by such a malignant spiritual pride.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: CM on October 07, 2009, 10:37:14 PM
Caminus your meaningless barb might have some truth to it if I were quoting MY OWN words, but I quote, almost verbatim, a pope, and am told that my words are wrong.  You think that it is pride to say "No, a pope said it so you have to obey,"?

GET REAL.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 08, 2009, 01:33:10 AM
Right, you're nothing more than the pure oracle of God.  I forgot, sorry.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: CM on October 08, 2009, 02:05:11 AM
So anybody who quotes a pope is claiming to be an oracle?

:clown:
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: CM on October 08, 2009, 02:11:20 AM
If someone who claims to be Catholic said to me:

"I think that since God is everywhere, everything around us is God"

And I were to reply:

"Actually this is wrong, the substance of God and that of the universe are two different substances entirely, and what you believe is heresy"

Am I claiming to be an oracle?
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: CM on October 08, 2009, 02:12:00 AM
Or am I prideful for saying it?
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 08, 2009, 05:40:47 AM
Quote from: Caminus
Quote from: Catholic Martyr
Excuse me, but I quote the same words that were ratified by Pope Eugene IV, and they are wrong?  Get real.


I have never seen anyone so affected by such a malignant spiritual pride.


There a reason why you see that so clearly. :)
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 08, 2009, 05:48:42 AM
Quote from: Caminus
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Caminus
Ah, we can't avoid evil, or determine where catholic tradition is without making illicit judgments or rendering our opinions binding on others.  I'll be waiting for an "authority" on that one.


You can and must avoid heretics. See St. Paul on this one.

As far as I can tell, you shouldn't be avoiding other Catholics because of doctrinal matters less than heresy. You do not shun excommunicants unless they are excommunicated by name and "to be avoided".



Heresy is part of the equation here because certain notions are in fact proximate to heresy and lead to heresy, as well as other factors that have destroyed our supernatural religion.  Some certain doctrinal matters may not be heresy strictly speaking, but do have effects which destroy nonetheless and consequently should be avoided.  Add to this a certain materialism and worldiness that isn't limited to a certain person or group of people and we have a terrible problem.  As was said before, our material separation from the normal structure of the Church is accidental and beside our formal intention of adhering to tradition.  This is, I believe, the proper attitude to have.  


Materialism and worldliness have always been there. Heresy and error has always been there.

Material separation from the normal structure of the Church?

Here's a definition of the Church Militant:

Quote from: St. Robert Bellarmine
"The assembly of men bound together by the profession of the Christian faith, and by the communion of the same Sacraments, under the government of their legitimate shepherds, and especially that of the one Vicar of Christ on earth, the Roman Pontiff."

(De Ecclesia militante [On the Church Militant], bk. 3, ch. 2, par. 9) (Pragae, 1721, II, p. 65a)


Do you see the problem, Caminus?
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 08, 2009, 03:43:22 PM
I see.  With what guile and deviousness you engage an opponent.  Who is your master?  Is it Cekada?  
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: CM on October 08, 2009, 04:17:35 PM
Quote from: SJB
Quote
Or unless it is clear they have incurred a sentence of excommunication (including latae sententiae with such notoriety that it is not concealed and cannot be excused in law.  (Pope Eugene IV, ex cathedra)


This is wrong, I believe. Excommunication deprives one of the spiritual goods of the Church...it does not necessarily cause a loss of membership in the Church.


Minor excommunication is what you are thinking of, not that which is called latae sententiae, that is excommunication promulgated by the law for the profession of heresy or any false religion.

Go to this thread about it where Caminus called me an idiot (http://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?a=topic&t=8986#p3).
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 08, 2009, 04:18:09 PM
Quote from: Caminus
I see.  With what guile and deviousness you engage an opponent.  Who is your master?  Is it Cekada?  


Why don't you point out this "guile and deviousness"? All I did was quote St. Robert Bellarmine.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 09, 2009, 07:00:03 AM
Quote from: Catholic Martyr
Quote from: SJB
Quote
Or unless it is clear they have incurred a sentence of excommunication (including latae sententiae with such notoriety that it is not concealed and cannot be excused in law.  (Pope Eugene IV, ex cathedra)


This is wrong, I believe. Excommunication deprives one of the spiritual goods of the Church...it does not necessarily cause a loss of membership in the Church.


Minor excommunication is what you are thinking of, not that which is called latae sententiae, that is excommunication promulgated by the law for the profession of heresy or any false religion.

Go to this thread about it where Caminus called me an idiot (http://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?a=topic&t=8986#p3).


There are many latae sententiae excommunications. Profession of heresy is only one of them.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 09, 2009, 12:20:52 PM
Quote
Materialism and worldliness have always been there. Heresy and error has always been there.


All of which differ in degree, kind and extent.  Or are you trying to argue that we are morally obligated to abandon traditional catholicism?

Quote
Material separation from the normal structure of the Church?


Yes.  Do you understand the notion that an accidental effect can fall outside of one's formal intention?

Quote
Do you see the problem, Caminus?


For the novus ordo bishops, yes.  For us?  No.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 09, 2009, 01:33:46 PM
Can you not see the difference first of all between the worldiness of today, that is consorting with neo-paganism and the worldiness of a bishop at another time in history?  The flavor is certainly of a different kind.  Can you not see the difference between a worldly bishop in itself, contained as it were to his own person, and the worldly and material interpretation and attitude given to the faith and religion itself?  And this, not by one or two, but by entire conferences of bishops who approach the Church, not as something supernatural, holy and set apart, but rather merely a political organization?  This one vice, this rapproachment with the world, is so abhorrent, so offensive, so devastating to the Church that it alone could account for the most of the damage done since Vatican II.  The recovery of the notion of sacredness and reverence and fear will go along way in "re-orienting" the strange policies of this pernicious council.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 09, 2009, 02:33:20 PM
Quote from: Caminus
Can you not see the difference first of all between the worldiness of today, that is consorting with neo-paganism and the worldiness of a bishop at another time in history?


Ah, but "consorting with neo-paganism" is NOT worldliness.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Matthew on October 09, 2009, 02:36:31 PM
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Catholic Martyr
Quote from: SJB
Quote
Or unless it is clear they have incurred a sentence of excommunication (including latae sententiae with such notoriety that it is not concealed and cannot be excused in law.  (Pope Eugene IV, ex cathedra)


This is wrong, I believe. Excommunication deprives one of the spiritual goods of the Church...it does not necessarily cause a loss of membership in the Church.


Minor excommunication is what you are thinking of, not that which is called latae sententiae, that is excommunication promulgated by the law for the profession of heresy or any false religion.

Go to this thread about it where Caminus called me an idiot (http://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?a=topic&t=8986#p3).


There are many latae sententiae excommunications. Profession of heresy is only one of them.


 :heretic:

If we can just assume various people are excommunicated, and treat them accordingly, what is the point of having Church authorities at all? We're all our own Vatican.

A common criticism of sedevacantism -- every man becomes his own pope. I don't see any problem with that criticism at the moment.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 09, 2009, 02:37:30 PM
Quote
The recovery of the notion of sacredness and reverence and fear will go along way in "re-orienting" the strange policies of this pernicious council.


This is strange in itself, Caminus. A pernicious council teaching strange doctrines or "policies" as you put it, needing to be "re-oriented'?

Is this Catholic?
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 09, 2009, 05:43:03 PM
Quote from: ChantCd
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Catholic Martyr
Quote from: SJB
Quote
Or unless it is clear they have incurred a sentence of excommunication (including latae sententiae with such notoriety that it is not concealed and cannot be excused in law.  (Pope Eugene IV, ex cathedra)


This is wrong, I believe. Excommunication deprives one of the spiritual goods of the Church...it does not necessarily cause a loss of membership in the Church.


Minor excommunication is what you are thinking of, not that which is called latae sententiae, that is excommunication promulgated by the law for the profession of heresy or any false religion.

Go to this thread about it where Caminus called me an idiot (http://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?a=topic&t=8986#p3).


There are many latae sententiae excommunications. Profession of heresy is only one of them.


 :heretic:

If we can just assume various people are excommunicated, and treat them accordingly, what is the point of having Church authorities at all? We're all our own Vatican.

A common criticism of sedevacantism -- every man becomes his own pope. I don't see any problem with that criticism at the moment.


I don't think you understand the context of this conversation.

If you go back and read it I think you'll see why I said what I said.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 09, 2009, 06:54:25 PM
Quote from: SJB
Quote
The recovery of the notion of sacredness and reverence and fear will go along way in "re-orienting" the strange policies of this pernicious council.


This is strange in itself, Caminus. A pernicious council teaching strange doctrines or "policies" as you put it, needing to be "re-oriented'?

Is this Catholic?


No, but it is equally true that Catholics can do and say un-Catholic things whilst still remaining Catholics.  This is a hard truth.  Now put these people in positions of authority and behold the kind of damage they can do.  If John Paul was a simple parish priest and attempted to conduct Assisi-like meetings, the evil would be restrained to his diocese or parish and in normal times he would have been censured.  But place him in the Papacy and look what happens.    
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 09, 2009, 06:59:54 PM
Quote from: Caminus
Quote from: SJB
Quote
The recovery of the notion of sacredness and reverence and fear will go along way in "re-orienting" the strange policies of this pernicious council.


This is strange in itself, Caminus. A pernicious council teaching strange doctrines or "policies" as you put it, needing to be "re-oriented'?

Is this Catholic?


No, but it is equally true that Catholics can do and say un-Catholic things whilst still remaining Catholics.  This is a hard truth.


It's an easy truth, Caminus. You just like to pretend that I don't understand this.

Quote
Now put these people in positions of authority and behold the kind of damage they can do.  If John Paul was a simple parish priest and attempted to conduct Assisi-like meetings, the evil would be restrained to his diocese or parish and in normal times he would have been censured.  But place him in the Papacy and look what happens.


Except the pope, who CONFIRMS his brethren in the FAITH...has the protection of the charism of INFALLIBILITY in Faith and Morals.

An individual Bishop does not have this special charism...and the Pope is the only one who can remove him from his position.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 09, 2009, 08:29:08 PM
The Pope is infallible only under very strict conditions.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 09, 2009, 10:53:15 PM
Quote from: Caminus
The Pope is infallible only under very strict conditions.


Are those YOUR "strict conditions"...or can you provide a source that explains this in some detail?
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: CM on October 10, 2009, 12:01:27 AM
 :wave: I know the answer!
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: CM on October 10, 2009, 12:03:10 AM
Quote
We don't like "Feeneyites" around these parts.  You take infallible statements too literally... as though they were... true... or somethin'


 :heretic:

Quote
Get more wood!
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 10, 2009, 01:41:47 PM
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Caminus
The Pope is infallible only under very strict conditions.


Are those YOUR "strict conditions"...or can you provide a source that explains this in some detail?


Vatican I (http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum20.htm)
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: CM on October 10, 2009, 07:27:55 PM
Ha!  Conditions you reject Caminus.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 10, 2009, 07:59:51 PM
Yes, yes of course.  
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 11, 2009, 11:21:22 AM
Quote from: Caminus
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Caminus
The Pope is infallible only under very strict conditions.


Are those YOUR "strict conditions"...or can you provide a source that explains this in some detail?


Vatican I (http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum20.htm)


So, Caminus, is it your interpretation of the Decrees of Vatican I (exactly what you despise in catholikMartyr)...or would you accept Bp. Gasser's Relatio...or some approved theologian's intrepretations?



Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 12, 2009, 01:24:29 AM
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Caminus
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Caminus
The Pope is infallible only under very strict conditions.


Are those YOUR "strict conditions"...or can you provide a source that explains this in some detail?


Vatican I (http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum20.htm)


So, Caminus, is it your interpretation of the Decrees of Vatican I (exactly what you despise in catholikMartyr)...or would you accept Bp. Gasser's Relatio...or some approved theologian's intrepretations?





They are what they are.  Where have I even remotely contested their obvious meaning and import?
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 12, 2009, 10:51:52 AM
Quote from: Caminus
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Caminus
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Caminus
The Pope is infallible only under very strict conditions.


Are those YOUR "strict conditions"...or can you provide a source that explains this in some detail?


Vatican I (http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum20.htm)


So, Caminus, is it your interpretation of the Decrees of Vatican I (exactly what you despise in catholikMartyr)...or would you accept Bp. Gasser's Relatio...or some approved theologian's intrepretations?





They are what they are.  Where have I even remotely contested their obvious meaning and import?


Just like the "obvious meaning" of the things quoted by catholikMartyr? :)

Would you accept Bp. Gasser's Relatio...or some approved theologian's intrepretations?
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 12, 2009, 12:14:20 PM
What is precisely your point?  From whence do you draw this line of questioning?  Where have I even mentioned these conditions, let alone taken them in anyway contradictory to other catholic doctrine?  
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 12, 2009, 12:39:01 PM
Quote from: Caminus
What is precisely your point?  From whence do you draw this line of questioning?  Where have I even mentioned these conditions, let alone taken them in anyway contradictory to other catholic doctrine?  


From whence?

Again, would you accept Bp. Gasser's Relatio (relator of the faith at V1)...or some approved theologian's intrepretations?
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 12, 2009, 03:19:31 PM
So it's true you hate golf and like to eat pie on Sunday's.  What are you talking about man?
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 12, 2009, 03:40:44 PM
Quote from: Caminus
So it's true you hate golf and like to eat pie on Sunday's.  What are you talking about man?


Are you playing stupid, dude?
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Belloc on October 12, 2009, 03:43:18 PM
Quote from: stevusmagnus
Great questions Matthew!


I gotta  :applause:
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 12, 2009, 03:45:54 PM
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Caminus
So it's true you hate golf and like to eat pie on Sunday's.  What are you talking about man?


Are you playing stupid, dude?


Listen, dude, I don't know what the hell you're talking about.  Why don't you explain your freakin' point, k?  
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Belloc on October 12, 2009, 03:46:02 PM
Quote from: Catholic Martyr
...conclave.


Conclilliarism?

what were to happen if al lSV and clergy came to ROme to do just that? Clsuter and a big one......look how they have splintered and launced a multi-level civil war on each other....

a Conclave, yup that would be neat and clean.... :heretic:
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 12, 2009, 04:20:53 PM
Quote from: Caminus
Quote from: SJB
Quote from: Caminus
So it's true you hate golf and like to eat pie on Sunday's.  What are you talking about man?


Are you playing stupid, dude?


Listen, dude, I don't know what the hell you're talking about.  Why don't you explain your freakin' point, k?  


Are you upset?
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 12, 2009, 04:25:19 PM
Wow.  You're insightful.  I haven't the slightest idea where you are coming from, nor where you are going.  You came out of left field with my alleged "interpretation" of the conditions of infallibility and a bishops relatio on the matter, as it was NOWHERE on the radar.  What are you flippin' talking about?  So, kindly explain why you started in on this so I can respond accordingly or drop it.  I don't think I can state it any more clearly.
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 12, 2009, 04:58:01 PM
Quote from: Caminus
Wow.  You're insightful.  I haven't the slightest idea where you are coming from, nor where you are going.  You came out of left field with my alleged "interpretation" of the conditions of infallibility and a bishops relatio on the matter, as it was NOWHERE on the radar.  What are you flippin' talking about?  So, kindly explain why you started in on this so I can respond accordingly or drop it.  I don't think I can state it any more clearly.


I'm just asking if you accept sources other than your own reading of Vatican I.

Quote from: SJB
Just like the "obvious meaning" of the things quoted by catholikMartyr? :)

Would you accept Bp. Gasser's Relatio...or some approved theologian's intrepretations?


I was comparing you to CM...as he always claims the meaning is so obvious and he is infallible in his understanding.

Do you get it now?
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 13, 2009, 02:15:28 AM
Ok, you're apparently not getting this.  I'll ask one more time: Why did you ask me about this in the first place?  
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: Caminus on October 13, 2009, 02:21:17 AM
And CM claims his pure interpretation in contradiction to other magisterial teaching as well as the Fathers.  Merely asserting that we take the words in their plain sense isn't doing what CM does.  Not even remotely.  You'll have to find another way to insult me.  
Title: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith
Post by: SJB on October 13, 2009, 08:48:20 AM
Quote from: Caminus
Ok, you're apparently not getting this.  I'll ask one more time: Why did you ask me about this in the first place?  


I'm just asking if you accept sources other than your own reading of Vatican I.

It a really simple question.