* 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? (Defined as "Those trying to oppose error and keep the Faith during this crisis")

I think we must first define what a Catholic is:  One who is baptized, believes and professes the Faith, and remains in communion and submission to the pope and the bishops in union with him.

Those in the Novus Ordo who have kept the Faith, are Catholic, there can be no disputing this.  They cannot lose their membership in the Church by erroneously adhering to an antipope who they think is a pope.  They may even lack any guilt for holding erroneous positions, due to a lack comprehension of the Church's teaching.

Those in the Novus Ordo, who profess heretical ideas, while understanding the conflict between their ideas and the teaching of the Church, are heretics and have lost their membership in the Church.

Those who remain in the Novus Ordo and are Catholic are in a gravely dangerous predicament, as they have invalid sacraments, and are surrounded by heresy, error and impiety.  

The traditional Catholics, are in a much better situation, as they have identified the Conciliar Church for what it truly is.  The more accurate the identification of the Conciliar church the safer a Catholic becomes to remain immunized from it.  

The danger that traditional Catholics must face, in my opinion, is to resist schism and usurpation of authority.  Traditional Catholics must not in any way create a parallel church, or allow themselves to form a sectarian group that exercises an illegal authority over the flock.  

Until lawful authority is present again through the pope and the hierarchy, we, the sheep, must remain leaderless and humble.  Any leader that steps forward among traditionalists must only be regarded as a natural leader, not as one who has authority over Catholics.

To be honest, I really don't see the crisis in the Church as all that complicated.  You are either a heretic or you are not (there is no such thing as a "sort of heretic" or a heretic with a lot of "quotes" around them). Period.  End of story.  You are a heretic or you are not.

A heretic can be anyone from a Pope down to a layman.  A Pope (or a bishop, priest or layman) ceases to be Catholic when he embraces heresy, preaches heresy and teaches heresy.  Simple enough and easy to understand.

If you cease to be a Catholic, you automatically (ipso facto) lose your office (clergy) within the Church along with your jurisdiction and your immortal soul to Satan if you go unrepentant.  No council, court or judge (other than God) is needed for this to happen.  Simple and easy enough to comprehend and understand plus this is quoted by numerous Saints and Doctors of the Church.

Those clergy who do not adhere to heresy and have been ordained according to the Rites of the Holy Roman Church still retain their jurisdiction (bishops & priests).  Simple, easy to understand.  No problem there.

The last pope who was not publicly a heretic and who died, has now caused the Church to become "sedevacante".  Most authorities who consider the Church currently "sedevacante", claim Pius XII to be the last Pope.  Simple, easy to understand and embrace if you compare him to the conciliar "popes".  Pius XII, the last Catholic Pope is dead - thus the Church is currently (and still) sedevacante.

The Church's material wealth and public face, i.e. the churches, cathedrals, the Vatican, etc. has been stolen by heretics.  There is plenty of precedent for this to  happen - look at the English Reformation and the Arian crisis.  English churches, cathedrals, monetary wealth, land, etc. were stolen by heretics yet they claim to be Catholic (even today they still claim to be "Catholic").  What true Roman Catholic today would go to an Anglican "clergyman" for the Sacraments and help toward their salvation?  None (I hope).  They are heretics.  No different from the heretics occupying the Vatican all the way down to your parish church.

I just don't see the complication in the current crisis in the Church.  It is as black and white as it gets.  As to when a new pope will be elected or the current heretics are thrown out of Holy Church's possessions, only God knows and I'll leave that in God's hands.  As for now, I seek out true Catholic priests and bishops -  and they are the Catholic Church VISIBLE today.    

To be honest, I really don't see the crisis in the Church as all that complicated.  You are either a heretic or you are not (there is no such thing as a "sort of heretic" or a heretic with a lot of "quotes" around them). Period.  End of story.  You are a heretic or you are not.

A heretic can be anyone from a Pope down to a layman.  A Pope (or a bishop, priest or layman) ceases to be Catholic when he embraces heresy, preaches heresy and teaches heresy.  Simple enough and easy to understand.

If you cease to be a Catholic, you automatically (ipso facto) lose your office (clergy) within the Church along with your jurisdiction and your immortal soul to Satan if you go unrepentant.  No council, court or judge (other than God) is needed for this to happen.  Simple and easy enough to comprehend and understand plus this is quoted by numerous Saints and Doctors of the Church.

Those clergy who do not adhere to heresy and have been ordained according to the Rites of the Holy Roman Church still retain their jurisdiction (bishops & priests).  Simple, easy to understand.  No problem there.

The last pope who was not publicly a heretic and who died, has now caused the Church to become "sedevacante".  Most authorities who consider the Church currently "sedevacante", claim Pius XII to be the last Pope.  Simple, easy to understand and embrace if you compare him to the conciliar "popes".  Pius XII, the last Catholic Pope is dead - thus the Church is currently (and still) sedevacante.

The Church's material wealth and public face, i.e. the churches, cathedrals, the Vatican, etc. has been stolen by heretics.  There is plenty of precedent for this to  happen - look at the English Reformation and the Arian crisis.  English churches, cathedrals, monetary wealth, land, etc. were stolen by heretics yet they claim to be Catholic (even today they still claim to be "Catholic").  What true Roman Catholic today would go to an Anglican "clergyman" for the Sacraments and help toward their salvation?  None (I hope).  They are heretics.  No different from the heretics occupying the Vatican all the way down to your parish church.

I just don't see the complication in the current crisis in the Church.  It is as black and white as it gets.  As to when a new pope will be elected or the current heretics are thrown out of Holy Church's possessions, only God knows and I'll leave that in God's hands.  As for now, I seek out true Catholic priests and bishops -  and they are the Catholic Church VISIBLE today.    

 :applause: Sounds simple to me too........but not for some people, unfortunately.

Sedevacantism is simple and complex at the same time.  

Indeed.

I think the complexity is mainly highlighted by it's opponents.

It's very, very basic Catholicism that a heretic is not a member of the Church.  It's basic logic that one cannot be a head of what one is not a member of.  Sedeoccupantists objections generally arise from the common implications that follow along with the sedevacantist position; what does that say about the indefectability of the Church, papal infallibility, the gates of Hell not prevailing, perpetual succession, the visibility of the Church, &c.  The confusion and complexity is found (though, in my experience, this confusion and complexity is exaggerated and need not be as confusing or as complex as it often seems in discussion) among these implications and understanding how the position deals with them more than there is confusion on how one uses simple logic and facts of the faith to arrive at the bare bones conclusion that a given conciliar pope could not possibly be a Catholic pope.

I am new to this forum, but think it is probably the most important thread on CI.  Thank you especially to TKGS (for your original post in 2010) and to Ambrose for your detailed explanations.  Your writings exhibit a very high level of charity toward all of us trying to remain Catholic in these times.

I have been Catholic since birth, attended Masses of the SSPX in my youth (confirmed by Archbishop Lefebvre), followed the independent (ordained pre Vat II) priests until they mostly died off, been home alone for a stint for lack of a priest, and presently adhere to the sedevacantist theory.  When I travel, I seek out the CMRI for Mass.  Unfortunately living in northern IL, I am not very near to a Catholic parish that recognizes the sede theory as valid.

Does anyone have a suggestion for Mass in the Chicago area?  Also, if you don't mind the question Ambrose, are you a priest?  And, TKGS, did you intend your original post to coincide with the feastday of St. Pius X (Sept 3rd) when you made it, or was that just a coincidence?

I plan to refer everyone I know who still wants to be Catholic to this information.

Hi Archangel,

Welcome to the forum.

I do know that if you contact CMRI and let them know your situation, they may  try to set up a mass center in your area if there are enough people to support it.  

I am not a priest.  

* 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, A) 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? B) How do you reconcile violating an integral part of Catholicism (Charity) in favor of a much lesser "doctrine" (what you consider the "fact" of Sedevacantism)?

As I wrote previously, sedevacantism does not bind Catholics by authority.  A Pope has to declare Paul VI and his successors as heretics and antipopes.  Until that happens Catholics are not bound to by authority to believe this.  

I am not harsh with "non-sede" Catholics.  Such attitudes demonstrate either ignorance or a lack of spiritual maturity, or both.

Regarding sedevacantists that I do not agree agree with, I oppose any that are usurpers, and seek to bind Catholics to on where they must go to Mass, or not go at all, or those to whom they must associate with, etc.  The only authority in the Church are the hierarchy, no one can take their place.

Most sedevacantists that I know do not do such things.  I know that the CMRI does not behave in such a way.  Any Catholic, sedevacantist or not, that behaves as a usurper of the power of the hierarchy should be rebuked and if he does not amend his ways, he should be shunned and reported to the Church authorities when it reforms.

Sede-privationist is what I should say.