Author Topic: The SSPX - Resistance is superior to sedevacantism (Read 26211 times)

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #45 on:** July 13, 2016, 08:05:22 AM »

Quote from: Croixalist

Quote from: TKGS
Quote from: Croixalist
Though, when I first started going to an SSPX chapel, I was amazed at how many SVs didn't actually go to Mass but hung out in the basement and get into arguments with anyone who would listen.

I find it incredibly hard to believe that sedevacantists drove to your SSPX chapel in order to NOT go to Mass.

Our chapel, when it was filled beyond capacity every Sunday, used to have a fairly large meet-ups downstairs after Mass. My guess is that some of these guys turned sede at some point during their time there but didn't want to leave behind the Church's community. I never really got to know them that well anyway.

TLM has a higher percentage of attracting shall we say "intense" personalities. Some of these people aren't the most stable you've ever met. Just last year, I saw a man sitting on a bench across the street from the Church and he was visibly shaking like he was physically ill. I asked him if he was alright and he asked me if our priest had been validly ordained. I said yes, but he just sat there and didn't come in.

I'm only stating the facts, I can't answer for them!

This side notes do not argue for or against the SV finding. It merely does a "guilt by association thing". If some SVs are strange then SV must be wrong.

Many unstable persons believe the truth about some things. The truth does not become untrue just because they believe it.

Croixalist · « **Reply #46 on:** July 13, 2016, 08:19:19 AM »

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Quote from: Croixalist
Quote from: TKGS
Quote from: Croixalist
Though, when I first started going to an SSPX chapel, I was amazed at how many SVs didn't actually go to Mass but hung out in the basement and get into arguments with anyone who would listen.

I find it incredibly hard to believe that sedevacantists drove to your SSPX chapel in order to NOT go to Mass.

Our chapel, when it was filled beyond capacity every Sunday, used to have a fairly large meet-ups downstairs after Mass. My guess is that some of these guys turned sede at some point during their time there but didn't want to leave behind the Church's community. I never really got to know them that well anyway.

TLM has a higher percentage of attracting shall we say "intense" personalities. Some of these people aren't the most stable you've ever met. Just last year, I saw a man sitting on a bench across the street from the Church and he was visibly shaking like he was physically ill. I asked him if he was alright and he asked me if our priest had been validly ordained. I said yes, but he just sat there and didn't come in.

I'm only stating the facts, I can't answer for them!

This side notes do not argue for or against the SV finding. It merely does a "guilt by association thing". If some SVs are strange then SV must be wrong.

Many unstable persons believe the truth about some things. The truth does not become untrue just because they believe it.

I thought I was pretty clear that I was referring to a particular kind of sede, not each and every sede. However, I still don't quite understand how you guys can go to these non-sede Masses said in union with a recognized Antipope. What branch of SV do you associate with? I suppose we can strike off the Sanborn/Cekada option.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #47 on:** July 13, 2016, 08:33:31 AM »

Quote from: Croixalist

Quote from: Lover of Truth
Quote from: Croixalist
Quote from: TKGS
Quote from: Croixalist
Though, when I first started going to an SSPX chapel, I was amazed at how many SVs didn't actually go to Mass but hung out in the basement and get into arguments with anyone who would listen.

I find it incredibly hard to believe that sedevacantists drove to your SSPX chapel in order to NOT go to Mass.

Our chapel, when it was filled beyond capacity every Sunday, used to have a fairly large meet-ups downstairs after Mass. My guess is that some of these guys turned sede at some point during their time there but didn't want to leave behind the Church's community. I never really got to know them that well anyway.

TLM has a higher percentage of attracting shall we say "intense" personalities. Some of these people aren't the most stable you've ever met. Just last year, I saw a man sitting on a bench across the street from the Church and he was visibly shaking like he was physically ill. I asked him if he was alright and he asked me if our priest had been validly ordained. I said yes, but he just sat there and didn't come in.

I'm only stating the facts, I can't answer for them!

This side notes do not argue for or against the SV finding. It merely does a "guilt by association thing". If some SVs are strange then SV must be wrong.

Many unstable persons believe the truth about some things. The truth does not become untrue just because they believe it.

I thought I was pretty clear that I was referring to a particular kind of sede, not each and every sede. However, I still don't quite understand how you guys can go to these non-sede Masses said in union with a recognized Antipope. What branch of SV do you associate with? I suppose we can strike off the Sanborn/Cekada option.

I'll explain again. Most SVs believe they can go to a valid an una cuм in good conscience, at least when that is the only one available because the Priest offering the Mass does not reject the papacy as the Orthodox do, but merely is mistaken on who holds the office. This is not the sin of schism.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #48 on:** July 13, 2016, 08:58:26 AM »

I personally would not go to one as time passed. This was partly because the sermons sometimes where "we must believe what the pope teaches except when we shouldn't, and we must submit to the pope except when we shouldn't" variety. This from a man who was very sound theologically in other areas. Very sober, logical not emotional or flying by the seat of his pants. I believe such sermons are a danger to my wife and children.

I also don't wan anything to do with the Novus Ordo Church which is our enemy. And going to a Mass that acknowledges the head of the Novus Ordo Church as our Pope keeps us attached to that Church at least in a small way IMO.

This is kind of feeding the monster that is trying to kill us IMO. Quite acknowledging him I say. But these are confusing times. One must do what one must do which is to follow his properly informed conscience or one formed to the best of one's ability.

Croixalist · « **Reply #49 on:** July 13, 2016, 09:02:30 AM »

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Quote from: Croixalist

I thought I was pretty clear that I was referring to a particular kind of sede, not each and every sede. However, I still don't quite understand how you guys can go to these non-sede Masses said in union with a recognized Antipope. What branch of SV do you associate with? I suppose we can strike off the Sanborn/Cekada option.

I'll explain again. Most SVs believe they can go to a valid an una cuм in good conscience, at least when that is the only one available because the Priest offering the Mass does not reject the papacy as the Orthodox do, but merely is mistaken on who holds the office. This is not the sin of schism.

Okay, I had to catch up a little on which group is what... so you're coming from the CMRI and you're saying that most sedes are from that branch and do not subscribe to the Sanborn/Cekada position on the Una cuм (among others), right? Can you list the various branches of SV that accept the Una cuм issue?