Author Topic: Question to Sedevacantists... (Read 7052 times)

InfiniteFaith · « **on:** January 16, 2012, 08:31:58 PM »

Would you accept Father Zlatko Sudac of Croatia as a legitimate Pope?

He received the full stigmata including the Sign of the Cross on his forehead. I'm not sure if this has ever happened before...

InfiniteFaith · « **Reply #1 on:** January 16, 2012, 08:47:20 PM »

Quote from: Cupertino

Without watching it, I would say....let see him be elected. If he officially approves of Vatican II and lives, then he is not a true pope. However, if he is materially mistaken about his adherence to Vatican II, thus having the divine virtue of Faith, God would see to it that he would die shortly after his election to prevent him approving of Vatican II as a true pope. (This may have been the case with John Paul I, who lived for only a month after his election).

If He accepted Vatican II....the fact that He has the Full Stigmata would bear no weight in your decision to not accept Him? That wouldn't make you question whether or not you are right about Vatican II?

Raoul76 · « **Reply #2 on:** January 16, 2012, 08:53:07 PM »

Stigmata can be faked, is this news to you?

Roman Catholic · « **Reply #3 on:** January 16, 2012, 09:18:10 PM »

Quote from: Raoul76

Stigmata can be faked, is this news to you?

And HAS been faked.

Roman Catholic · « **Reply #4 on:** January 16, 2012, 09:19:38 PM »

Quote from: InfiniteFaith

Quote from: Cupertino
Without watching it, I would say....let see him be elected. If he officially approves of Vatican II and lives, then he is not a true pope. However, if he is materially mistaken about his adherence to Vatican II, thus having the divine virtue of Faith, God would see to it that he would die shortly after his election to prevent him approving of Vatican II as a true pope. (This may have been the case with John Paul I, who lived for only a month after his election).

If He accepted Vatican II....the fact that He has the Full Stigmata would bear no weight in your decision to not accept Him? That wouldn't make you question whether or not you are right about Vatican II?

Do you think our Faith should be based on signs and wonders?

InfiniteFaith · « **Reply #5 on:** January 16, 2012, 10:43:36 PM »

Quote from: Roman Catholic

Quote from: InfiniteFaith
Quote from: Cupertino
Without watching it, I would say....let see him be elected. If he officially approves of Vatican II and lives, then he is not a true pope. However, if he is materially mistaken about his adherence to Vatican II, thus having the divine virtue of Faith, God would see to it that he would die shortly after his election to prevent him approving of Vatican II as a true pope. (This may have been the case with John Paul I, who lived for only a month after his election).

If He accepted Vatican II....the fact that He has the Full Stigmata would bear no weight in your decision to not accept Him? That wouldn't make you question whether or not you are right about Vatican II?

Do you think our Faith should be based on signs and wonders?

No. Do you believe that their are legitimate cases of the Stigmata?

InfiniteFaith · « **Reply #6 on:** January 16, 2012, 10:44:53 PM »

Quote from: Raoul76

Stigmata can be faked, is this news to you?

Do you know of a method that we can tell whether or not a Stigmata is real?

InfiniteFaith · « **Reply #7 on:** January 16, 2012, 10:46:24 PM »

Have there been any cases at all where a member of the SSPX or sedevacantism legitimately received the Stigmata?

InfiniteFaith · « **Reply #8 on:** January 16, 2012, 10:51:22 PM »

How would you ever prove that Fr. Sudac's "Stigmata" was real or fake?

Roman Catholic · « **Reply #9 on:** January 16, 2012, 10:56:33 PM »

Quote from: InfiniteFaith

Quote from: Roman Catholic
Quote from: InfiniteFaith
Quote from: Cupertino
Without watching it, I would say....let see him be elected. If he officially approves of Vatican II and lives, then he is not a true pope. However, if he is materially mistaken about his adherence to Vatican II, thus having the divine virtue of Faith, God would see to it that he would die shortly after his election to prevent him approving of Vatican II as a true pope. (This may have been the case with John Paul I, who lived for only a month after his election).

If He accepted Vatican II....the fact that He has the Full Stigmata would bear no weight in your decision to not accept Him? That wouldn't make you question whether or not you are right about Vatican II?

Do you think our Faith should be based on signs and wonders?

No. Do you believe that their are legitimate cases of the Stigmata?

Yes, of course I believe there are genuine cases, that have been duly investigated and then approved by the Church.

In addition to the feast of Francis of Assisi on Oct 4, a secondary feast is observed to honor the stigmata St Francis received. This day is celebrated on September 17 and is known as “The Impression of the Stigmata of St Francis, Confessor”.

Roman Catholic · « **Reply #10 on:** January 16, 2012, 10:58:42 PM »

Quote from: Roman Catholic

Quote from: InfiniteFaith
Quote from: Cupertino
Without watching it, I would say....let see him be elected. If he officially approves of Vatican II and lives, then he is not a true pope. However, if he is materially mistaken about his adherence to Vatican II, thus having the divine virtue of Faith, God would see to it that he would die shortly after his election to prevent him approving of Vatican II as a true pope. (This may have been the case with John Paul I, who lived for only a month after his election).

If He accepted Vatican II....the fact that He has the Full Stigmata would bear no weight in your decision to not accept Him? That wouldn't make you question whether or not you are right about Vatican II?

Do you think our Faith should be based on signs and wonders?

I answered you, and the answer to two subsequent questions you posed are even contained in my answer.

So before you go on with more questions ad nauseum, please reply to the above.

InfiniteFaith · « **Reply #11 on:** January 16, 2012, 11:02:37 PM »

Quote from: Roman Catholic

Quote from: Roman Catholic
Quote from: InfiniteFaith
Quote from: Cupertino
Without watching it, I would say....let see him be elected. If he officially approves of Vatican II and lives, then he is not a true pope. However, if he is materially mistaken about his adherence to Vatican II, thus having the divine virtue of Faith, God would see to it that he would die shortly after his election to prevent him approving of Vatican II as a true pope. (This may have been the case with John Paul I, who lived for only a month after his election).

If He accepted Vatican II....the fact that He has the Full Stigmata would bear no weight in your decision to not accept Him? That wouldn't make you question whether or not you are right about Vatican II?

Do you think our Faith should be based on signs and wonders?

I answered you, so before you go on with more questions ad nauseum, please reply to the above.

I think that Signs and Wonders are apart of our Faith. I do think it is possible that someone could fake, in this case, the Stigmata. Knowing this, I do no write off something as fake until I have reason to believe it is. And in the Case of Father Sudac....I don't believe there is any reason to believe that His Stigmata is fake. Therefore, I am not going to question it.

You on the other hand are probably questioning it only because He may represent Vatican II. I think for you to deem something as fake because someone represents Vatican II is not right. You need to have more than one premise to have an argument. Your gonna have to show much more than something being wrong because He support Vatican II.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #12 on:** January 16, 2012, 11:05:13 PM »

InfiniteFaith said:

Quote

How would you ever prove that Fr. Sudac's "Stigmata" was real or fake?

I am not called upon to determine if someone has the real stigmata, but I am called upon to know the faith, which VII doesn't possess.

First of all, there is a good chance he's not even a priest. The New Rite of Consecration is a fake, so we'd have to find out who ordained him.

Secondly, he would have to be investigated by the Church. Vatican II is not that. So basically he can do what he wants without fear of being checked into, if he is a charlatan.

So I will leave the question alone until the real Church can make a proper investigation. Until then it just doesn't concern me much.

InfiniteFaith · « **Reply #13 on:** January 16, 2012, 11:08:20 PM »

Quote from: Raoul76

InfiniteFaith said:
Quote
How would you ever prove that Fr. Sudac's "Stigmata" was real or fake?

I am not called upon to determine if someone has the real stigmata, but I am called upon to know the faith, which VII doesn't possess.

First of all, there is a good chance he's not even a priest. The New Rite of Consecration is a fake, so we'd have to find out who ordained him.

Secondly, he would have to be investigated by the Church. Vatican II is not that. So basically he can do what he wants without fear of being checked into, if he is a charlatan.

In order to have a legitimate argument you have to have more than one premise. I am assuming the conclusion in your argument would be "His stigmata is fake" based on 1 premise that "He supports Vatican II". You need more than just 1 premise in your argument to come to a logical conclusion.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #14 on:** January 16, 2012, 11:08:51 PM »

That's not what I said, Mr. Smokescreen. Read it again.