Author Topic: So You Decided To Become A Sedevacantist (Read 47679 times)

Alexandria · « **Reply #75 on:** September 03, 2010, 11:54:53 AM »

TKGS

I wish I had clarity of thought like you. God reward you for what you have taken the time to write. It has been a great help to me.

God bless you, dear man!

Alexandria · « **Reply #76 on:** September 03, 2010, 12:22:44 PM »

Quote from: Belloc

"The biggest problem is that there is no forum I know of that one can truly debate the issue of sedevacantism. Ultimately, the discussion breaks down with one side or the other making ad hominem arguments rather than addressing the issue. "

ok, true statement-which begs yet again, why do not SV's put up their own forum????? why come here-or FE, AQ,etc,etc that are clearly NOT run by SV's, for SV's, by SV's and then complain????

perhaps a SV site is just too much work to do and easier to complain on others forums.....coplaining is easier then productive action, like getting a site, setting it up,etc...

TKGS has done obviously a lot of soul searching and took a lot of thought and time putting up his posts, but as CI is NOT run, owned, operated by SV, then complaining about being attacked here,etc is rather unproductive.

Belloc, maybe you had a bad week.

Where do you see him complaining? This is the kindest and most charitable piece I have ever read. It will come as no surprise to many here (right, Matthew? :wink:) if I say that I could never have done as well.

Lighthouse · « **Reply #77 on:** September 04, 2010, 08:32:22 PM »

I'm thinking that due to its length, it would make more sense to just call it: that TKGS post. If you quote the whole thing again every time you refer to it, a lot of us are going to have to replace our scroll wheelie.

:whistleblower:

TKGS · « **Reply #78 on:** September 06, 2010, 03:34:23 PM »

Quote from: Belloc

"The biggest problem is that there is no forum I know of that one can truly debate the issue of sedevacantism. Ultimately, the discussion breaks down with one side or the other making ad hominem arguments rather than addressing the issue. "

ok, true statement-which begs yet again, why do not SV's put up their own forum????? why come here-or FE, AQ,etc,etc that are clearly NOT run by SV's, for SV's, by SV's and then complain????

perhaps a SV site is just too much work to do and easier to complain on others forums.....coplaining is easier then productive action, like getting a site, setting it up,etc...

TKGS has done obviously a lot of soul searching and took a lot of thought and time putting up his posts, but as CI is NOT run, owned, operated by SV, then complaining about being attacked here,etc is rather unproductive.

Who's complaining?

The fact is that I'm not interested in a forum where everyone thinks exactly the same. You (and others) keep telling me I'm wrong, but if I only read and post in a purely sedevacantist forum, I cannot be corrected--if I'm, in fact, wrong. Putting people in ghettos tends to perpetuate error among the various ghettos.

Amazingly, the largest error-ridden ghetto is the Conciliar Church. I am simply amazed when I talk to a Novus Ordo Catholic who has, as most of them do, no concept of the Catholic Faith or realization that there is any crisis in the Church.

As for why sedevacantists don't seem to have the technical expertise and time and money to run a sedevacantist forum, I'll leave those speculations to you. I'm sure they won't be pretty.

Alexandria · « **Reply #79 on:** September 06, 2010, 03:47:38 PM »

Quote

Amazingly, the largest error-ridden ghetto is the Conciliar Church. I am simply amazed when I talk to a Novus Ordo Catholic who has, as most of them do, no concept of the Catholic Faith or realization that there is any crisis in the Church.

Unfortunately, this is 100% accurate.

Sometimes I envy them....

Matthew · « **Reply #80 on:** March 12, 2011, 10:51:48 PM »

Quote from: TKGS

Quote from: Belloc
"The biggest problem is that there is no forum I know of that one can truly debate the issue of sedevacantism. Ultimately, the discussion breaks down with one side or the other making ad hominem arguments rather than addressing the issue. "

ok, true statement-which begs yet again, why do not SV's put up their own forum????? why come here-or FE, AQ,etc,etc that are clearly NOT run by SV's, for SV's, by SV's and then complain????

perhaps a SV site is just too much work to do and easier to complain on others forums.....coplaining is easier then productive action, like getting a site, setting it up,etc...

TKGS has done obviously a lot of soul searching and took a lot of thought and time putting up his posts, but as CI is NOT run, owned, operated by SV, then complaining about being attacked here,etc is rather unproductive.

Who's complaining?

The fact is that I'm not interested in a forum where everyone thinks exactly the same. You (and others) keep telling me I'm wrong, but if I only read and post in a purely sedevacantist forum, I cannot be corrected--if I'm, in fact, wrong. Putting people in ghettos tends to perpetuate error among the various ghettos.

Amazingly, the largest error-ridden ghetto is the Conciliar Church. I am simply amazed when I talk to a Novus Ordo Catholic who has, as most of them do, no concept of the Catholic Faith or realization that there is any crisis in the Church.

As for why sedevacantists don't seem to have the technical expertise and time and money to run a sedevacantist forum, I'll leave those speculations to you. I'm sure they won't be pretty.

Yes, there are indeed many good reasons to have a forum populated by Catholics of all opinions regarding how to deal with the Crisis.

Matthew

Penitent · « **Reply #81 on:** March 13, 2011, 05:02:14 PM »

TKGS,

I don't usually read lengthy message board posts. But this one ... I read every word.

Bravo.

Arborman · « **Reply #82 on:** March 13, 2011, 10:15:16 PM »

This what I think:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedeprivationism

I attend the Diocesan Latin Mass, but I am seriously thinking about going to the SSPX for good, that is where my heart is. But I also listen to traditional Catholic sermons on the internet from the CMRI.
Who is right? I don't really care because they all have their strong points.

stevusmagnus · « **Reply #83 on:** March 17, 2011, 12:09:38 AM »

If the OP doesn't show how this position is absurd I don't know what does.

I'd disagree on one point though. The belief that a future Council can judge the Pope is the error of Conciliarism. Luther often appealed to future Councils against the Pope.

PartyIsOver221 · « **Reply #84 on:** March 17, 2011, 04:04:16 AM »

Quote from: stevusmagnus

If the OP doesn't show how this position is absurd I don't know what does.

I'd disagree on one point though. The belief that a future Council can judge the Pope is the error of Conciliarism. Luther often appealed to future Councils against the Pope.

Still running ad hominems and shoveling in emotional-fuel to the Crisis debate fire, stevus?

What is absurd about the traditional Catholic position, which is what sedevacantism is actually? NAME IT! What is?? You'll attempt and try to but in the end there's no escaping the hard-to-swallow truth. Pride consumes all.

Exilenomore · « **Reply #85 on:** March 17, 2011, 07:08:10 AM »

Quote from: PartyIsOver221

Quote from: stevusmagnus
If the OP doesn't show how this position is absurd I don't know what does.

I'd disagree on one point though. The belief that a future Council can judge the Pope is the error of Conciliarism. Luther often appealed to future Councils against the Pope.

Still running ad hominems and shoveling in emotional-fuel to the Crisis debate fire, stevus?

What is absurd about the traditional Catholic position, which is what sedevacantism is actually? NAME IT! What is?? You'll attempt and try to but in the end there's no escaping the hard-to-swallow truth. Pride consumes all.

This is one of the things that helped me embrace the SV position. No one ever manages to 'refute' it other than by hurling ad hominems and saying that we are nutcases. Never are the teachings of the fathers and the popes used, only novel sophistries and calumny (for example, associating the position with the absurd 'conclavism', while it has nothing to do with that).

The whole anti-SV movement is based upon a psychological game, trying to make people feel as if they are mad when they even think about accepting it as truth.

stevusmagnus · « **Reply #86 on:** March 17, 2011, 07:08:50 AM »

What is ad hominem in that quote?

What is absurd? The notion God abandoned His visible Church for almost half a century and counting.

Exilenomore · « **Reply #87 on:** March 17, 2011, 07:34:03 AM »

Quote from: stevusmagnus

What is ad hominem in that quote?

What is absurd? The notion God abandoned His visible Church for almost half a century and counting.

"Even if the amount of catholics faithful to tradition is reduced to a remnant; they are the true Church of Christ." - St. Athanasius

God did not abandon His Church, neither do we say that He did. There are still valid bishops and priests, offering the spotless Sacrifice in the world. As long as this is the case, the Church has not defected, which she cannot. There will come a valid Pontiff again, who will restore all things.

The visibility of the Church means that the Church is not some invisible pneumatic entity, but consists of tangible and visible human beings who believe the same doctrines of the same faith.

Modernism is 'absurd' and 'crazy', not the belief that the throne of Peter is vacant at present.

Exilenomore · « **Reply #88 on:** March 17, 2011, 07:41:03 AM »

Neque enim mystica Christi Sponsa, saeculorum decursu, contaminata est unquam, neo contaminari aliquando potest, teste Cypriano: « Adulterari non potest Sponsa Christi: incorrupta est et pudica. Unam domum novit, unius cubiculi sanctitatem casto pudore custodit ». - Mortalium Animos (Pius XI)

During the lapse of centuries, the mystical Spouse of Christ has never been contaminated, nor can she ever in the future be contaminated, as Cyprian bears witness: "The Bride of Christ cannot be made false to her Spouse: she is incorrupt and modest. She knows but one dwelling, she guards the sanctity of the nuptial chamber chastely and modestly." - Mortalium Animos (Pius XI)

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #89 on:** March 17, 2011, 08:37:25 AM »

Quote from: stevusmagnus

What is absurd? The notion God abandoned His visible Church for almost half a century and counting.

His "abiding" with in 'her' in these days does not seem to have done much good, has it? 'She' is the laughing stock of the entire world; a babbling, disgraced harlot whose roof protects heretics and perverts of all sorts. No one, not even her own 'loyal' children, listens to her.