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

Author Topic: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all  (Read 34097 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TKGS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5768
  • Reputation: +4622/-480
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
« Reply #30 on: May 20, 2017, 07:30:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • There's no such thing as Nadoism, right Roscoe?
    You forgot the  :fryingpan:.


    Offline congaudeant

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 49
    • Reputation: +19/-2
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #31 on: May 20, 2017, 07:32:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I am not a sedevacantist, but would like to know what the informed opinion is on whether someone can attend a Mass and receive Holy Communion in a sedevacantist chapel.

    Congaudeant Catholici


    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31200
    • Reputation: +27117/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #32 on: May 20, 2017, 07:33:19 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Matthew, I think you are in denial. You really need to face the reality of some posts, and respond seriously and patiently. Nobody is rushing you.
    I might have serious discussions, but at my semi-mature age I learned long ago who to discuss with, and who to ignore. You fit into the latter category.

    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41908
    • Reputation: +23946/-4345
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #33 on: May 20, 2017, 07:46:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I am not a sedevacantist, but would like to know what the informed opinion is on whether someone can attend a Mass and receive Holy Communion in a sedevacantist chapel.

    One might offer a different answer depending on WHICH sv chapel you're talking about.  I personally have a more difficult time going to the dogmatic SV chapels.  Something of their attitude strongly savors of schism.  But I would have little problems receiving Communion at a more moderate SV chapel (provided valid orders, etc. ... as some are dubious).

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41908
    • Reputation: +23946/-4345
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #34 on: May 20, 2017, 07:48:34 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Let me know when you consider yourself "mature". It should have been easily 10 years ago. If you have a biological handicap, I will certainly comply.

    Everyone should note that it was precisely for this kind of thing that Nado was banned in the first place, and not for sedevacantism.  Just for the record ... lest people think that Matthew bans sedevacantists for that reason alone.


    Offline Matto

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6882
    • Reputation: +3849/-406
    • Gender: Male
    • Love God and Play, Do Good Work and Pray
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #35 on: May 20, 2017, 07:50:56 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • Everyone should note that it was precisely for this kind of thing that Nado was banned in the first place, and not for sedevacantism.  Just for the record ... lest people think that Matthew bans sedevacantists for that reason alone.
    TKGS has been here for years and he has not been banned.
    R.I.P.
    Please pray for the repose of my soul.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41908
    • Reputation: +23946/-4345
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #36 on: May 20, 2017, 07:53:04 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • For starters:  No doubts on the validity of the priest, hence, no doubts about the most Blessed Sacrament being present.

    That's not categorically true.  There are a number of sedevacantist bishops and priests that derive from the (by most accounts) dubious Duarte-Costa lineage or various Old Catholic lineages.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41908
    • Reputation: +23946/-4345
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #37 on: May 20, 2017, 07:54:51 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • I can picture you 5 years from now, sitting in your old-man rocking chair, at every rock forward, uttering, "Nado..."
    Sounds pretty sick to me.

    You're an extreme narcissist if you believe that I think about you for even 5 seconds outside of the moments when I happen to run across one of your inane posts on Cathinfo.


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41908
    • Reputation: +23946/-4345
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #38 on: May 20, 2017, 08:00:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I know. Specifically, the Thuc line bishops.
    That is why I mentioned "valid order are non-negotiable". Folks have to do their homework. But it doesn't take long to find out if a priest was validly ordained via valid succession.

    Some people dispute the Thuc line.  I personally believe that most of that line is valid.  Some of them veer off into weirdness, but the main des Lauriers and Carmona/Zamora lines seem pretty solid.  In fact, there's no doubt at all regarding the Palmar de Toya line either ... unless you argue that Dominguez was insane.  Yet most people don't know that +Thuc consecrated two others.  And these were done in public with competent priests as witnesses and participating in the ceremony (so that the SSPV criticism fails there).  One of the consecrations +Thuc did was of a priest ordained prior to Vatican II.  So no doubts whatsoever.


    Offline saintbosco13

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 647
    • Reputation: +201/-311
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #39 on: May 20, 2017, 10:10:31 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • You act as if it's a given that "trad-cuмenism" is a bad thing.

    Are you willing to first define "trad-cuмenism", and then explain to us why "trad-cuмenism" is as bad as the false ecuмenism of the Conciliar Church?
     
    We know that ecuмenism refers to the belief that one religion is as good as another. With "trad-cuмenism", the belief seems to be that one view on traditional Catholicism is as good as another view.
     
    My point is that if one view believes the pope is true and valid, and another view believes the pope is false and an imposter (the opposite), then how can both views be true at the same time? Catholicism is ONE Church with ONE doctrine.
     

    Offline happenby

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2768
    • Reputation: +1077/-1637
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #40 on: May 20, 2017, 11:30:31 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Catechism of the Council of Trent page 399 and 400.  (30)  The Apostle also teaches that they are entitled to obedience: “Obey our prelates, and be subject to them; for they watch as being to render an account of your souls.” (31) Nay more, Christ himself commands obedience even to wicked pastors: ” Upon the chair of Moses have sitten the Scribes and Pharisees: all things, therefore, whatsoever they shall say to you, observe ye and do ye: but according to their works do ye not, for they say and do not.” (32)
    The Passion of Our Lord completely obliterates modern sedevacantism because Jesus Himself recognized wicked Church authority and subjected both His Humanity and Divinity to it.  Jesus willingly subjected Himself to some of the most despicable and heretical church authorities in history.  Our Lord did not demand that Caiaphas resign before allowing him to manhandle Him. Some will respond: “wickedness isn’t heresy”.  That is a ridiculous notion because heresy IS wickedness.  No one can prove the rulers of Christ's day weren’t heretics.  Our Lord didn't usurp Annas’ authority because of the man’s corruption, or deviancy from the truth, or heresy. Rather, Our Lord Jesus Christ went as a Lamb to the slaughter. Some say, 'that was Jesus', 'he was God, it doesn’t count'. Sorry, that won’t do because Jesus also never admonished Mary for her silence in the face of heretics run amok.  Jesus never said, “do not recognize their authority, Woman. They do not officially hold office or power over us, let us wait for a true leader with the Faith.” Rather, Our Lord even takes special care to explain to the world that Pilate’s authority (over Him) came from God above. In order to honor His Father, Jesus submitted to a variety of authorities, both religious and secular, not just in day to day matters, but even unto death.  And Mary imitated Her Son.  As our premiere role models, Jesus and Mary show by example that all Catholics should do as they did, knowing Our Lord and Our Lady were properly obedient without committing a single sin. 


    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6293
    • Reputation: +3327/-1937
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #41 on: May 21, 2017, 02:29:49 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • I might have serious discussions, but at my semi-mature age I learned long ago who to discuss with, and who to ignore. You fit into the latter category.
    By debating with someone online we empower them, acknowledge them. Unfortunately, we can't see them, so it takes a while to get to know them and during that time that we respond to them out of charity to them and others, they  get puffed up.  "I'm important, Matthew and Ladislaus responds to me."
    It is best not to respond to these faceless people online once you realize who they are.  If you had met them in person, you would not have responded to them. 
    The Vatican II church - Assisting Souls to Hell Since 1962

    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Mat 24:24

    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6293
    • Reputation: +3327/-1937
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #42 on: May 21, 2017, 02:36:43 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Some people dispute the Thuc line.  I personally believe that most of that line is valid.  Some of them veer off into weirdness, but the main des Lauriers and Carmona/Zamora lines seem pretty solid.  In fact, there's no doubt at all regarding the Palmar de Toya line either ... unless you argue that Dominguez was insane.  Yet most people don't know that +Thuc consecrated two others.  And these were done in public with competent priests as witnesses and participating in the ceremony (so that the SSPV criticism fails there).  One of the consecrations +Thuc did was of a priest ordained prior to Vatican II.  So no doubts whatsoever.
    That is good to hear, doubts about sede clergy validity is the #1 reason why I would not attend those chapels. I would still have doubts about the truth about whether the priest really was ordained as he claims, but I'll deal with that the day I move away from where I live. 
    The Vatican II church - Assisting Souls to Hell Since 1962

    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Mat 24:24

    Offline BumphreyHogart

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 689
    • Reputation: +226/-662
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #43 on: May 21, 2017, 03:06:20 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!4
  • Catechism of the Council of Trent page 399 and 400.  (30)  The Apostle also teaches that they are entitled to obedience: “Obey our prelates, and be subject to them; for they watch as being to render an account of your souls.” (31) Nay more, Christ himself commands obedience even to wicked pastors: ” Upon the chair of Moses have sitten the Scribes and Pharisees: all things, therefore, whatsoever they shall say to you, observe ye and do ye: but according to their works do ye not, for they say and do not.” (32)
    The Passion of Our Lord completely obliterates modern sedevacantism because Jesus Himself recognized wicked Church authority and subjected both His Humanity and Divinity to it.  Jesus willingly subjected Himself to some of the most despicable and heretical church authorities in history.  Our Lord did not demand that Caiaphas resign before allowing him to manhandle Him. Some will respond: “wickedness isn’t heresy”.  That is a ridiculous notion because heresy IS wickedness.  No one can prove the rulers of Christ's day weren’t heretics.  Our Lord didn't usurp Annas’ authority because of the man’s corruption, or deviancy from the truth, or heresy. Rather, Our Lord Jesus Christ went as a Lamb to the slaughter. Some say, 'that was Jesus', 'he was God, it doesn’t count'. Sorry, that won’t do because Jesus also never admonished Mary for her silence in the face of heretics run amok.  Jesus never said, “do not recognize their authority, Woman. They do not officially hold office or power over us, let us wait for a true leader with the Faith.” Rather, Our Lord even takes special care to explain to the world that Pilate’s authority (over Him) came from God above. In order to honor His Father, Jesus submitted to a variety of authorities, both religious and secular, not just in day to day matters, but even unto death.  And Mary imitated Her Son.  As our premiere role models, Jesus and Mary show by example that all Catholics should do as they did, knowing Our Lord and Our Lady were properly obedient without committing a single sin.


    Don't go off into a fantasy world of your own making. Do you accept the quote I cited from St. Francis de Sales or not?  I am giving you a chance to really read it, if you have not.

    The Hebrew religion was the true religion, but it wasn't the Mystical Body of Christ. The is a substantial difference between the Old Law before the Redemption, and the New Law of Grace. That is why you should read the quote I gave and accept it what it teaches.


    "there can be no holiness where there is disagreement with the pope" - Pope St. Pius X

    Today, only Catholics holding the sedevacantist position are free from the anguish entailed by this truth.

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10312
    • Reputation: +6220/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #44 on: May 21, 2017, 11:19:11 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    Quote
    Can someone please explain to me what PRACTICAL changes in my life I have to make to become a sedevacantist?  If I decide to become one tomorrow, what would change?  I'm already a trad, I don't go the novus ordo, or the indult.  Don't bother mentioning the 'una cuм' issue; i'll never go along with that.  What else do I have to do to avoid damnation?  I honestly don't know.


    Matthew said:
    I asked this same question to a sedevacantist nicknamed "gladius_veritatis" about 9 years ago. He basically answered, "nothing, really..."

    In my post/question, I elaborated on a few details of what it means to be Trad, for example: daily rosary, no meat on Fridays, practice fasting/abstinence on Ember days, practice Advent during Advent, ladies wear skirts/dresses, and so forth.
    I agree that there is no practical change for an existing trad to make, if he were to become a sede overnight.  I just wanted to see what the actual sedes on this site thought.  Judging from the lack of responses, I guess the answer is the same as you received "nothing, really...".