I have no problem with them canonising JP2.

Just so long as they excommunicate all of the 'saints" before him who from what we know of their teachings and writings would have violent disagreed with his ecuмenism, syncretism and hetrodoxy.

I HONESTLY can't rationalise that JP2 and Pope St. Pius X can both be saints, sitting next to each other in Heaven who have led "lives of heroic virtue", given what they each taught and believed during those lives.

Their respective views about faith and morals were night compared to day.  One can only accept this dualism if one deliberate ignores reality.  That is an emotional decision and indistinguishable from how a cult member would justify the unjustifiable.

If God can accept both these men as "saints" based on some entirely hypothetical 'deathbed confession', then I have lost the will to remain Catholic or in any kind of union even a psuedo-union with the silly Church of Rome .  That is not what I signed up to.

Abandonning my rational thought process to remain emotionally comfortable (it would be far easier for me to ignore it), seems like the first step into a rabbit-hole.

In short, if the Church is what I was taught it was and indefectability is worth more than a pile of sand, then I would expect an omnipotent God to be able to put a stop to the Canonisation and allow the Church to retain its credibility.

Even Father Z admits this has nothing to do with canonising JP2 but rather Vatican 2

The Dominicans of Avrille have rejected the validity of Conciliar canonizations for a long time because of radical changes in procedure.

I do not understand how it is that people are repeating like parrots that the R and R camps will either "have to accept JP2 as a saint" or "have to accept a sede vacante".

I, myself, consider the sede to be vacante, however having spent 30 years in the R and R camp and still attending Mass with them I would like to make an observation about this "either/or" thinking that is a classic error applied often to other more important, critical issues of the Church:

1.) the SSPX has never accepted the canonizations of people like Jose Maria Escrivás

2.) as stated in reference to the Domincans of Avrille, they all claim that there was a invalidating change in the procedure which allows us to accept Saints like Maximilian Kolbe and not Mother Teresa (?) (difficult to have to decide I know, it is a sort of general acceptance, for instance I chose Maximilian Kolbe as my confirmation name and this was accepted by the SSPX, Jose Maria Escrivás would not have been) I have no opinion about this whether I agree or disagree. I still consider Macimilian Kolbe a saint.

.3) The SSPX, resistance and independants will most certainly continue to ignore the new canonizations and if they still pray for Bergoglio in the Mass (some do not and have not declared a sede vacante) then they will most probably continue to do so in the liturgy and Litany of All Saints. This "canonization" will not change or determine anything.

It is my opinion that the Synod of 2015, when the false church will allow adulterers to receive the Communion, that many will fall off into undeclared sede vacantism. Of course, I am hoping that they will begin to see that R and R was never intended to be a permanent position. The Church was either going to be saved by a great saint or miracle that would not only perserve Tradition in small pockets but expell modernism from the the churches(buildings, clergy; modernists are outside the Church) and Rome or that the crisis would escalate to such a degree that the Church would be completely eclipsed by a false church with dubious priests and sacraments. The latter, of course, has ocurred and it is much overdue in denouncing the false institution that occupies the Catholic churches and call for all still believing Catholics to come put of and away from any contact with the Novus Ordo sect.

What an interesting time to live in, where Novus Ordites and Dogmatic Sedevacantists wait with anticipatory glee for one and the same event...

I agree. I am not a dogmatic sedevacantist or even sure if I am a sede vacantist, but knowing that Bergoglio is not a Catholic and was not at the time of his election.

The only thing about the "canonization" that would be a good development in my opinion is that it would initiate the undoing of the eclipse. I am of the opinion that if the true Church is in eclipse than the crisis will end effectively when what is blocking the true Church is moved away completely. A complete separation of the two entities. The true Church will finally declare the heretic impostors a fake church and ignore the Novus Ordo sect completely. This is just my opinion. There has to be a complete identity separation. Right now many traditionalist believe that the Novus Ordo is the mainstream Church. This has got to pass. If the "canonization" of JP2 helps to bring that about quicker than that would be a good thing to happen from something bad. I can see where sedevacantists are hopeful. Unite the true Church already Bergoglio because there is little doubt that he will convert and even if he did there would still have to be a legitimate conclave.

Quote from: Centroamerica

Quote from: BTNYC

What an interesting time to live in, where Novus Ordites and Dogmatic Sedevacantists wait with anticipatory glee for one and the same event...

I agree. I am not a dogmatic sedevacantist or even sure if I am a sede vacantist, but knowing that Bergoglio is not a Catholic and was not at the time of his election.

The only thing about the "canonization" that would be a good development in my opinion is that it would initiate the undoing of the eclipse. I am of the opinion that if the true Church is in eclipse than the crisis will end effectively when what is blocking the true Church is moved away completely. A complete separation of the two entities. The true Church will finally declare the heretic impostors a fake church and ignore the Novus Ordo sect completely. This is just my opinion. There has to be a complete identity separation. Right now many traditionalist believe that the Novus Ordo is the mainstream Church. This has got to pass. If the "canonization" of JP2 helps to bring that about quicker than that would be a good thing to happen from something bad. I can see where sedevacantists are hopeful. Unite the true Church already Bergoglio because there is little doubt that he will convert and even if he did there would still have to be a legitimate conclave.

Bp. Sanborn once said that someone asked him, jokingly, what he thought of women's ordination. He replied, "I'm all for it!" His questioner was shocked and asked him why. He said, "Because that would prove, beyond all remaning doubt, that the structure in Rome is not the Church." Bergoglio is the best thing to happen to the Church.

Problem is, it would still not be clear enough for the "non-dogmatic" R&R camp.  They would simply write it off as invalid and continue to recognize Bergoglio as Christ's Vicar  :sad:

I don't Nishant, that there is "only" around 15 bishops true bishops left doesn't seem to me to be the best argument against sedevacantism.  What about all the other rites in the Catholic Church? In theory, couldn't the Roman rite completely defect we would still have many other eastern rites in the Church with completely valid orders.  I don't know enough about the particulars of each of the eastern rites, but my understanding of them as a whole is that they have only partially (and lately) enacted the changes of post Vatican II.  Some of the more conservative rites could very well be carrying on with no changes from before the council.

Luke

Quote from: bowler

To my knowledge, if JPII is canonized all it means is that he is infallible in Heaven, and that's it! The sedes can argue that the Church has erred....

You don't seem to understand the sedevacantist thesis.  Sedevacantists do not argue that the Church has erred for the acts of the Conciliar sect are not acts of the Church.

Quote from: Ferdinand

It is not a matter of procedure, it is a matter of the infallibility of the Vicar of Christ and the Indefectibility of the Church.

And this is the crux of the issue, not just the issue of the canonizations, but the entire Conciliar anti-Church.  In order to continue to believe that the Conciliar sect is the Catholic Church, one is forced to abandon the doctrines of the indefectibility of the Church and the infallibility of the ordinary and universal magisterium.  Moreover, one is forced to do so while denying that one is doing so and boil most acts of the Conciliar sect down to procedure and legalisms.

--The canonization process changed so canonizations are no longer infallible.

--The Novus Ordo wasn't properly promulgated so it is not really the official worship or, at least, isn't really mandatory.

--The Council of 1962-1965 didn't define any doctrine and is merely "pastoral", so nothing it actually teaches is really Church teaching.

Etc., etc., etc.  Never mind that the Conciliar sect clearly behaves as if they have established a brand new Church with its own saints, its own doctrines, its own free-wheeling rites and that this new Church has replaced the Catholic Church.

Quote from: BTNYC

What an interesting time to live in, where Novus Ordites and Dogmatic Sedevacantists wait with anticipatory glee for one and the same event...

While I don't know about "Dogmatic Sedevacantists" because I don't really know any, I don't know any sedevacantists who "wait with anticipatory glee" for this canonization.  We are hopeful, but not optimistic, that it will open they eyes of the faithful who are stuck in the muck and mire of Conciliarism.

Well stated TKGS...  offering incense to the Conciliar Sect is not an option, save for the ignorant and the feeble minded.  St. Joseph - Ora Pro Nobis.

The Catholic Church cannot cease to have formal successors of the Apostles, and only those who are appointed by the Pope are such. The Petrine succession and the Apostolic succession are inextricably intertwined and the modern heterodox notion that a sede vacante can be indefinitely extended is directly contrary to the defined dogma that Peter must have perpetual successors. If a sede vacante can be indefinitely extended, then there is no need for Peter to have perpetual successors.

How do account for those bishops who were consecrated during papal interegnums?  I'm not talking about those since V2, I'm talking about those that were appointed during long interegnums prior to V2.