Author Topic: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith (Read 17146 times)

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #5 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?

Caminus · « **Reply #6 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.

Caminus · « **Reply #7 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.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #8 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.

SJB · « **Reply #9 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? :)