Author Topic: Sedevacantism vs. the Catholic Faith (Read 17152 times)

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #20 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.

Caminus · « **Reply #21 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.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #22 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!

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #23 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.

Caminus · « **Reply #24 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.