Author Topic: Theological argument why Francis is the pope? (Read 14959 times)

Emitte Lucem Tuam · « **Reply #30 on:** November 23, 2013, 07:17:52 PM »

Quote from: Emitte Lucem Tuam

The best argument that I have heard on this subject comes from Bishop Sanborn. Here's a You Tube link to one of his best sermons on the Post Vatican II papal occupants. Listen closely from between 8:00 and 9:15 & between 10:30 and 11:30.

The best part starts at 20:10 which touches SV as an "opinion".

Stubborn · « **Reply #31 on:** November 23, 2013, 07:41:22 PM »

Quote from: Charlemagne

Quote from: Stubborn
Quote from: Charlemagne
Quote from: Stubborn
Quote from: Charlemagne
Quote from: Stubborn
In Fr. Wathen's words:
".......This Sedevacantism is your opinion. But the Mass not yours, and I know you do not have the right to change a word of it. I have heard you say the same thing about those who brought in the New Mass. And now this is what you have done!......."

For all of Father Wathen's claims that sedevacantists have no right to declare the VII "popes" as illegitimate, he certainly had no qualms about using his own private judgment to declare the "Mass" that they promulgated and enforced upon the Faithful as being "The Great Sacrilege." Pure hypocrisy.

Fr. Wathen was using the Law, not an opinion - which is all SVism is.

As for your ridiculous comment about his "private judgement" on the Mass, would you like to rethink what you just foolishly said?

I retract not one word of what I typed.

Well good - you're entitled to you own opinion. Whatever you do, don't present any teaching to back it up - who would need that in this day and age - hey?

You know, Stubborn, your user name is a misnomer. "Obstinate" would be far more appropriate. Do I really need to go into some long dissertation as to why no one on earth has the right to declare a rite of the Church as promulgated by someone he believes to be a true Pope as being a sacrilege, and that by doing so he is engaging in private judgment? As for your little parting shot - "hey?" - how old are you, ten?

Well of course not - you already have accepted your own opinion as law that a pope cannot do what popes have done, so feel free to use your authority and proclaim the Chair is empty so you can claim victory! Right or wrong means nothing to you - victory is all you've demonstrated that you care about.

There is no sense in debating you because you already know it all - and we all know ya can't teach anything to someone who already knows it all. Hey?

Stubborn · « **Reply #32 on:** November 23, 2013, 07:46:31 PM »

Quote from: Emitte Lucem Tuam

The best argument that I have heard on this subject comes from Bishop Sanborn. Here's a You Tube link to one of his best sermons on the Post Vatican II papal occupants. Listen closely from between 8:00 and 9:15 & between 10:30 and 11:30.

I was serving mass for Fr. Sanborn before he was SV and when Charlemagne was still in diapers. He merged his way into SV over a period of about 10 years based on his own emotions from the travesties that were going on at that time - he was not convinced of SV from Church teachings, that much is for certain.

Stubborn · « **Reply #33 on:** November 23, 2013, 07:57:19 PM »

Quote from: 2Vermont

Quote from: Mithrandylan

Ex Quo has literally nothing to do with any of this. Ex Quo matters when there's a pope, which is exactly what's up for debate. To pray for the pope assumes there is a pope to pray for.

This was my initial reaction as well. Thank you for not allowing me to get sucked in.

If the Dalai Lama was named pope in NewChurch, would we still need to pray for him Stubborn?

Quote from: 2Vermont

You know what, I'll give it to you. Let's go with nothing should be removed/changed from the Mass. The fact that SV's (and I'm not even sure whether this is true of all SV's) remove the name from the prayer doesn't in and of itself confirm the SV position incorrect (which in its simplest form is: the current papal claimant is not a valid pope). They may be wrong to remove the name, but that doesn't mean the SV;s are wrong in general.

This from a compromiser who would pray for the pope at Mass, then declare the Chair is vacant - R&R by day, SV by night?

Yes, by all means, don't get sucked in.

Charlemagne · « **Reply #34 on:** November 23, 2013, 09:11:52 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: Emitte Lucem Tuam
The best argument that I have heard on this subject comes from Bishop Sanborn. Here's a You Tube link to one of his best sermons on the Post Vatican II papal occupants. Listen closely from between 8:00 and 9:15 & between 10:30 and 11:30.

I was serving mass for Fr. Sanborn before he was SV and when Charlemagne was still in diapers. He merged his way into SV over a period of about 10 years based on his own emotions from the travesties that were going on at that time - he was not convinced of SV from Church teachings, that much is for certain.

Oh, wow! All hail the elder statesman of the forum! Stubborn's opinion will from this point forward carry more weight than others' because he's, well, old! And he knows the mind of Bishop Sanborn because he served Mass for him long ago. What's the point of engaging this luminous mind in any type of discourse? Stubborn locuta est. Causa finita est.