Author Topic: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all  (Read 18463 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MyrnaM

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5862
  • Reputation: +3433/-291
  • Gender: Female
    • Myforever.blog/blog
Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
« Reply #615 on: June 19, 2017, 05:29:31 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Who, then, is representative of sedevacantism?  
    Post 662 indicated you alluded to perhaps Ibranyi was representative of the sede position, perhaps I was wrong on my assumption.  
    Remember the sedevacantist position is a term to distinguish Catholics who believe a head of a non-Catholic church cannot simultaneously be head of the Catholic Church.  Otherwise, we are just souls who want to live and die united to the Catholic Church. 
    By Representative do you mean by definition as the Vicar of Christ is the representative of Jesus Christ?  Now let me ask you who today would that be?

    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8605
    • Reputation: +3328/-687
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #616 on: June 20, 2017, 04:43:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Post 662 indicated you alluded to perhaps Ibranyi was representative of the sede position, perhaps I was wrong on my assumption.  
    Remember the sedevacantist position is a term to distinguish Catholics who believe a head of a non-Catholic church cannot simultaneously be head of the Catholic Church.  Otherwise, we are just souls who want to live and die united to the Catholic Church.
    By Representative do you mean by definition as the Vicar of Christ is the representative of Jesus Christ?  Now let me ask you who today would that be?
    ^^^^There's another one of those moving/changing targets.

    By representative, Meg meant what she asked, if not Ibranyi, then who is representative of the sedevacantist position?


    All sedevacantists have different ideas about sedevacantism which vary from time to time and person to person - it seems to be only the underlying principle which all sedevacantists agree on, that principle being, the ability/necessity for his subjects to decide whether or not the pope is the pope.

    I can't imagine Meg ever getting an answer so for me, I'd guess that Ibranyi is representative of those who hold the most extreme sedevacantist position, +Sanborn is at the opposite end of the scale, and the others are somewhere in the middle. 

    I say that it is licit to resist the Roman Pontiff by not doing what he orders and by impeding the execution of his will; it is not licit, however, to judge, punish or depose him, since these are acts proper to a superior." St. Robert Bellarmine


    Offline MyrnaM

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5862
    • Reputation: +3433/-291
    • Gender: Female
      • Myforever.blog/blog
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #617 on: June 20, 2017, 07:58:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • ^^^^There's another one of those moving/changing targets.

    By representative, Meg meant what she asked, if not Ibranyi, then who is representative of the sedevacantist position?


    All sedevacantists have different ideas about sedevacantism which vary from time to time and person to person - it seems to be only the underlying principle which all sedevacantists agree on, that principle being, the ability/necessity for his subjects to decide whether or not the pope is the pope.

    I can't imagine Meg ever getting an answer so for me, I'd guess that Ibranyi is representative of those who hold the most extreme sedevacantist position, +Sanborn is at the opposite end of the scale, and the others are somewhere in the middle.
    Since sedevacantists are Catholics; their head is Christ in Heaven, that is what the Church teaches, His representative His Vicar.  The point being His Vicar is not Francis, we all agree on that point, which is the only point of the sedevacantist position worthy of discussion.  Any other point is opinion and a consequence of having no pope for unity with dogmatic issues such as i.e. BOD or groups like (Holy Family et al).  
    Ibranyi is your hero, not ours, he is a Judas who wants his 30 pieces of silver in the form of a self-proclaimed prophet.  Your the one who makes over him and watches his every move uses him as the devil makes use of Francis.  
     
    If there was a group with different ideas it is the conciliarist the only point they agree on is the sedevacantist are very small, not big enough for a threat but they certainly feel threatened and rightly so.   Since Traditional Catholic in the true sense of the word; those who want nothing to do with the Modernists.  
    Just open a phone directory or check the Internet you will find a so-called "catholic" Conciliarist church for every type of Francis follower there is, from any type of gender confused catholic to divorced remarried, divorced again, and so, on.  Face the truth Stubborn your accusation against those who remain steadfast is a description of any Francis follower out there.  
    You, on the other hand, want your cake and eat it too, as the saying goes.  You have no absolutes, just as the conciliarists have no absolutes.    

    Offline Meg

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2427
    • Reputation: +1128/-1777
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #618 on: June 20, 2017, 09:54:04 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • ^^^^There's another one of those moving/changing targets.

    By representative, Meg meant what she asked, if not Ibranyi, then who is representative of the sedevacantist position?


    All sedevacantists have different ideas about sedevacantism which vary from time to time and person to person - it seems to be only the underlying principle which all sedevacantists agree on, that principle being, the ability/necessity for his subjects to decide whether or not the pope is the pope.

    I can't imagine Meg ever getting an answer so for me, I'd guess that Ibranyi is representative of those who hold the most extreme sedevacantist position, +Sanborn is at the opposite end of the scale, and the others are somewhere in the middle.

    You understand exactly what I meant, though I think that I wasn't being clear.

    I was indeed asking who, then, is representative of sedevacantism, if not Ibranyi. It was a serious question, but I had a feeling that there really wasn't going to be an answer, and there wasn't one from the sedevacantists as to who their representative is (or representatives). 

    The sedevacantist doctrine, it seems, cannot be agreed upon by its adherents; therefore it seems that there can be no one who can be said to be representative, since, as you mention,  sedevacantists have different ideas about sedevacantism which vary from time to time and person to person. 

    Offline MyrnaM

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5862
    • Reputation: +3433/-291
    • Gender: Female
      • Myforever.blog/blog
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #619 on: June 20, 2017, 10:27:19 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • So Meg, who is your representative?  I never got an answer from anyone and...  why?   Because you all are ashamed to say it is Francis, your pope.   ::)


    Offline Meg

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2427
    • Reputation: +1128/-1777
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #620 on: June 20, 2017, 10:30:17 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • So Meg, who is your representative?  I never got an answer from anyone and...  why?   Because you all are ashamed to say it is Francis, your pope.   ::)

    Sorry, I missed your question previously.

    That's an easy one to answer. My representative would be Archbishop Lefebvre, the stalwart defender of Our Lord and His Church.

    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8605
    • Reputation: +3328/-687
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #621 on: June 20, 2017, 10:41:02 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Since sedevacantists are Catholics; their head is Christ in Heaven, that is what the Church teaches, His representative His Vicar.  The point being His Vicar is not Francis, we all agree on that point, which is the only point of the sedevacantist position worthy of discussion.  Any other point is opinion and a consequence of having no pope for unity with dogmatic issues such as i.e. BOD or groups like (Holy Family et al).  
    Ibranyi is your hero, not ours, he is a Judas who wants his 30 pieces of silver in the form of a self-proclaimed prophet.  Your the one who makes over him and watches his every move uses him as the devil makes use of Francis.  
     
    If there was a group with different ideas it is the conciliarist the only point they agree on is the sedevacantist are very small, not big enough for a threat but they certainly feel threatened and rightly so.   Since Traditional Catholic in the true sense of the word; those who want nothing to do with the Modernists.  
    Just open a phone directory or check the Internet you will find a so-called "catholic" Conciliarist church for every type of Francis follower there is, from any type of gender confused catholic to divorced remarried, divorced again, and so, on.  Face the truth Stubborn your accusation against those who remain steadfast is a description of any Francis follower out there.  
    You, on the other hand, want your cake and eat it too, as the saying goes.  You have no absolutes, just as the conciliarists have no absolutes.    
    Amazing.
    I say that it is licit to resist the Roman Pontiff by not doing what he orders and by impeding the execution of his will; it is not licit, however, to judge, punish or depose him, since these are acts proper to a superior." St. Robert Bellarmine

    Offline Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8605
    • Reputation: +3328/-687
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #622 on: June 20, 2017, 10:42:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Sorry, I missed your question previously.

    That's an easy one to answer. My representative would be Archbishop Lefebvre, the stalwart defender of Our Lord and His Church.
    He declared sedevacantism to be a "false idea".
    I say that it is licit to resist the Roman Pontiff by not doing what he orders and by impeding the execution of his will; it is not licit, however, to judge, punish or depose him, since these are acts proper to a superior." St. Robert Bellarmine


    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3251
    • Reputation: +3939/-187
    • Gender: Male
      • The Trad Forum
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #623 on: June 20, 2017, 10:42:44 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Bishop Fellay would say that's his representative too.  Point is that we're not talking about who a person looks to as a way of informing their own response to the crisis.  We're talking about in the course of intellectual debate, meeting opposing positions-- not meeting isolated caricatures of them.
    .
    Look, there are hosts of authors who've published material on how the sedevacantist thesis works.  John Lane, John Daly, Fr. Cekada et al., Patrick Omlor, Hutton Gibson, Fr. Saenz y Arriga, and more.  And even ceding variances in some formulations of the thesis between these authors, sedeplenist interlocutors would come across as far more credible by even elevating ONE of these authors and pretending that they univocally represent sedevacantism (and even that wouldn't be true, but it'd at least be far closer to the truth than what they're doing with Ibranyi or the Dimond boys).
    .
    More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com

    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3251
    • Reputation: +3939/-187
    • Gender: Male
      • The Trad Forum
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #624 on: June 20, 2017, 10:47:42 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The problem is that the Church has never defined the infallibility requirements for the magisterium, therefore we are left with what is the basis for our Faith - scripture and Tradition.  Now, if the Church tells us that the Church Fathers are only infallible and only teach 'of the faith' when they agree with each other, then such an approach is also reliable when dealing with a council where the clear, legalistic writing style is lacking.  Since V2 does not agree with Tradition, therefore it CANNOT be 'of the faith', therefore it's not infallible.
    Switching gears here, but when, your view, did the pope lose his office?
    She never defined them because no one ever questioned it (until now, unfortunately, when we find ourself with no pope and a ravaged Church).
    .
    The pope and the magisterium are the proximate rule of faith.  Not scripture or tradition.  They are the remote rules. 
    .
    I don't think Francis or Benedict were ever pope to begin with.  With them, it's a question of never gaining office rather than losing it.  With Wojtyla, I think he probably was never pope but certainly wasn't pope by the time he published the 1983 code.  With Montini, I also think he was probably never pope, but certainly wasn't by the time Vatican II ended.  John Paul I was probably pope.  I'm uncertain about John XXIII.  He strikes me more as a bad pope than a non-pope, but I'm in the minority there (among sedevacantists).
    More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com

    Offline Meg

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2427
    • Reputation: +1128/-1777
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #625 on: June 20, 2017, 11:00:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Bishop Fellay would say that's his representative too.  Point is that we're not talking about who a person looks to as a way of informing their own response to the crisis.  We're talking about in the course of intellectual debate, meeting opposing positions-- not meeting isolated caricatures of them.
    .
    Look, there are hosts of authors who've published material on how the sedevacantist thesis works.  John Lane, John Daly, Fr. Cekada et al., Patrick Omlor, Hutton Gibson, Fr. Saenz y Arriga, and more.  And even ceding variances in some formulations of the thesis between these authors, sedeplenist interlocutors would come across as far more credible by even elevating ONE of these authors and pretending that they univocally represent sedevacantism (and even that wouldn't be true, but it'd at least be far closer to the truth than what they're doing with Ibranyi or the Dimond boys).
    .

    Well, yes, Bishop Fellay would likely say that Archbishop Lefebvre is his representative. There isn't anything I can do about that. I can't force others to see the situation my way. I can only try to state my case as clearly as possible.

    You wrote previously that Ibranyi doesn't represent sedevacantism, yet it's obvious that no one particular person represents it for the sedevacantists here. 

    Ibranyi or the Dimond Bros. may represent the fringes of sedevacantism, but surely there are moderates whom you would take to be your representative. But it seems not to be the case. Is there no one, Mithrandylan, who represents sedevacantism for you? Or is sedevacantism just a personal subjective belief system, based only on the view that there is currently no pope? This seems to be the only thing that sedevacantists can completely agree on. 



    Offline Meg

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2427
    • Reputation: +1128/-1777
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #626 on: June 20, 2017, 11:01:45 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • He declared sedevacantism to be a "false idea".

    Exactly!

    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3251
    • Reputation: +3939/-187
    • Gender: Male
      • The Trad Forum
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #627 on: June 20, 2017, 11:23:40 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, yes, Bishop Fellay would likely say that Archbishop Lefebvre is his representative. There isn't anything I can do about that. I can't force others to see the situation my way. I can only try to state my case as clearly as possible.

    You wrote previously that Ibranyi doesn't represent sedevacantism, yet it's obvious that no one particular person represents it for the sedevacantists here.

    Ibranyi or the Dimond Bros. may represent the fringes of sedevacantism, but surely there are moderates whom you would take to be your representative. But it seems not to be the case. Is there no one, Mithrandylan, who represents sedevacantism for you? Or is sedevacantism just a personal subjective belief system, based only on the view that there is currently no pope? This seems to be the only thing that sedevacantists can completely agree on.
    .
    But Meg, you're talking about a completely different thing now.  I'm a Roman Catholic, so my rule of faith is the pope and my bishop.  If they're not around, then I do the best I can with approved teachers of the Catholic faith-- the popes, saints, doctors, and theologians who've gone before.  Scripture and Tradition.  No sedevacantist author falls into that category.  No sedeplenist author falls into that category either.  They're all without jurisdiction, so they have no teaching or ruling authority*.  No approval.  No mission.  Their utility and import is one of academic impact, as contributors to an ongoing discussion (what happened to the Church in the 1960s?). 
    .
    *That doesn't mean they can't be right about one thing or another, it just means that we cannot look at/to them the way that Catholics would ordinarily submit to their bishop or the pope.
    More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com

    Offline Meg

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2427
    • Reputation: +1128/-1777
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #628 on: June 20, 2017, 11:38:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .
    But Meg, you're talking about a completely different thing now.  I'm a Roman Catholic, so my rule of faith is the pope and my bishop.  If they're not around, then I do the best I can with approved teachers of the Catholic faith-- the popes, saints, doctors, and theologians who've gone before.  Scripture and Tradition.  No sedevacantist author falls into that category.  No sedeplenist author falls into that category either.  They're all without jurisdiction, so they have no teaching or ruling authority*.  No approval.  No mission.  Their utility and import is one of academic impact, as contributors to an ongoing discussion (what happened to the Church in the 1960s?).  
    .
    *That doesn't mean they can't be right about one thing or another, it just means that we cannot look at/to them the way that Catholics would ordinarily submit to their bishop or the pope.

    Okay, I think I understand that the best you can do, as a sedevacantist, is to make do with approved teachers of the Catholic faith - popes, saints, doctors, scripture, tradtion, etc. But isn't this necessarily flawed, in that it then becomes subjective, in that you are forced to view the faith and crisis only of your own volition? 

    Catholicism is naturally and necessarily hierarchical. It's how Our Lord set it up. That we are in a severe crisis doesn't change that. Those of us who still try to follow a hierarchy or semblance of one isn't a bad thing.  It is a Catholic thing to do. It is completely natural for a Catholic to look up to and follow superiors where they can find them. 

    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3251
    • Reputation: +3939/-187
    • Gender: Male
      • The Trad Forum
    Re: Yes, I'm going to judge Sedevacantism here like I'm above it all
    « Reply #629 on: June 20, 2017, 11:56:32 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Okay, I think I understand that the best you can do, as a sedevacantist, is to make do with approved teachers of the Catholic faith - popes, saints, doctors, scripture, tradtion, etc. But isn't this necessarily flawed, in that it then becomes subjective, in that you are forced to view the faith and crisis only of your own volition?
    .
    No, that is my duty as a Catholic.  It's all of ours-- to submit, in rule and teaching, to the proximate rule of faith-- the pope and the bishops, and in their absence, the remote rules of faith: scripture and Tradition.
    .
    I don't have any duties as a sedevacantist.  To say "I am a sedevacantist" is simply shorthand for saying "I don't think these men are popes."  There's no duty implied or contained in such a thought, except inasmuch as that which is morally certain privately binds the conscience to behave in some way or another in response.  But all that means in this instance is that I don't treat those men as popes, and I'm hardly unique there, am I?
    .
    Quote
    Catholicism is naturally and necessarily hierarchical. It's how Our Lord set it up. That we are in a severe crisis doesn't change that. Those of us who still try to follow a hierarchy or semblance of one isn't a bad thing.  It is a Catholic thing to do. It is completely natural for a Catholic to look up to and follow superiors where they can find them.
    .
    Precisely.
    More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16