Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8

Author Topic: Vigano Interview with Phil Lawler  (Read 6614 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: Vigano Interview with Phil Lawler
« Reply #5 on: June 27, 2020, 10:13:36 AM »

Quote
An clear endorsement of the R&R position:

The question of the pope does not arise when the council taught error, because it was a pastoral council in which the popes deliberately withheld infallibility.
It’s an R&R perspective JUST for the specific question of V2.  That doesn’t mean that J23, Paul VI, etc were necessarily popes, except materially speaking (ie they were elected).  I wish the sede-privationist position could unify the R&R vs Sede camps.  I think they’re both right, in a sense.   
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Vigano Interview with Phil Lawler
« Reply #6 on: June 27, 2020, 11:12:11 AM »
Quote from: Pax Vobis on June 27, 2020, 10:13:36 AM
It’s an R&R perspective JUST for the specific question of V2.  That doesn’t mean that J23, Paul VI, etc were necessarily popes, except materially speaking (ie they were elected).  I wish the sede-privationist position could unify the R&R vs Sede camps.  I think they’re both right, in a sense.  

Same.  But it's not going to happen.  90% of them are just far too stubborn and proud to be able to work it out.  Father Chazal's position should be entirely palatable to any but the most dogmatic sedevacantists, and yet they're still launching attacks on one another and repudiating the other camp.  This polarization is ridiculous and childish.

Many R&R like Meg or SeanJohnson immediately begin foaming at the mouth at the mere mention of any SV or SP principles and are incapable of entering into a meaningful discussion of the issue.  Dogmatics sedevacantists like +Sanborn or the Dimonds assert that their positions is de fide[/] and cannot be questioned.  With this dynamic at the extreme poles rending things apart, it's never going to happen.  Moderate SVs (like the SSPV) and a thinking R&R/SP proponent like Father Chazal should be able to find some common ground.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Vigano Interview with Phil Lawler
« Reply #7 on: June 27, 2020, 11:17:47 AM »
Quote from: SeanJohnson on June 27, 2020, 10:02:12 AM
An clear endorsement of the R&R position:

The question of the pope does not arise when the council taught error, because it was a pastoral council in which the popes deliberately withheld infallibility.

While yes, he does, disappointingly, seem to be gravitating toward the barely-Catholic (if at all) R&R position, the second sentence here is incorrect.  That's not what Vigano was saying.

Classical R&R is non-Catholic garbage.  Father Chazal's position, on the other hand, is perfectly acceptable ... and also quite probably true.
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Vigano Interview with Phil Lawler
« Reply #8 on: June 27, 2020, 11:22:57 AM »
Of course we also have different nuances of the R&R position.

1) +Schneider is clearly in the R&R camp, but he remains within the Conciliar Church materially.
2) +Vigano has a stronger version of R&R.
3) neo-SSPX is also R&R and are not currently fully in the Conciliar Church materially but are moving in that direction.
4) Resistance R&R feel that they must stay outside the Conciliar Church materially.
5) Father Chazal's R&R justfies material separation from the Conciliar Church due to their loss of formal authority.

So I ask the R&Rers, are all the above R&R?
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Vigano Interview with Phil Lawler
« Reply #9 on: June 27, 2020, 11:26:01 AM »
Quote from: donkath on June 26, 2020, 09:31:23 PM
Archbishop Vigano: The solution, in my opinion, lies above all in an act of humility that all of us, beginning with the Hierarchy and the Pope, must carry out: recognizing the infiltration of the enemy into the heart of the Church, the systematic occupation of key posts in the Roman Curia, seminaries, and ecclesiastical schools, the conspiracy of a group of rebels—including, in the front line, the deviated Society of Jesus—which has succeeded in giving the appearance of legitimacy and legality to a subversive and revolutionary act.

And yet +Vigano fails to consider whether or not the "infiltration of the enemy into the heart of the Church, the systematic occupation of key posts" might not also entail an infiltration of the Papacy itself.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8
« previous next »