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

Author Topic: Eleison Comments - Against Sedevacantism (no. 911)  (Read 16706 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: Eleison Comments - Against Sedevacantism (no. 911)
« Reply #5 on: December 28, 2024, 10:13:04 AM »
Quote from: Meg on December 28, 2024, 09:59:38 AM
If the laity has the ability to know 100% what Truth is, then why would a Pope even be necessary?
Agreed. I like the way Fr. Wathen considers it....

"...So, what is so burdensome about all this (pope's duties)? Who, it might be asked, has an easier assignment? Everything has been instituted with incomparable wisdom. After almost two thousand years, the Church has developed into an organization of excellent structure. The doctrine is certain; the moral code is incontrovertible in the main; the divine liturgy has been (had been) refined to a perfection; the code of laws worked. In a word, the spiritual doctrine, the tradition, the authority, the experience, the customs, the supernatural objectives all have been established. With a little prudence and a little caution on the part of the pope, Holy Church will practically run itself..."
Logged

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: Eleison Comments - Against Sedevacantism (no. 911)
« Reply #6 on: December 28, 2024, 10:17:50 AM »
Quote from: Johannes on December 28, 2024, 09:52:06 AM
Exactly! "People" can err, the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium of the Catholic Church cannot err - it is infallible. So that is what makes Bishop Williamson's assertion above problematic - to say the least.
Not problematic at all if you actually believe "the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium of the Catholic Church cannot err."

"If these two Doctrines (infallibility and indefectibility) be true, then whatever the popes have said or done, whatever  they ever say or do, will not be a violation of the Church's attribute of infallibility. And no matter what anyone does, whether from within or without, he will not succeed in destroying the Church. The enemies of Christ's Church do not believe this, which explains why they will  never cease to try."
Logged

Offline Incredulous

Re: Eleison Comments - Against Sedevacantism (no. 911)
« Reply #7 on: December 28, 2024, 12:21:18 PM »
“Sede-vacantism” is a magical, talismanic word not unlike “anti-semitism”.

For you see, the deadliest modern sin is to believe the Church was infiltrated & hijacked by ʝʊdɛօ-masons who implemented an internal schism against Roman Catholicism.

This is why the SSPX’s duplicitous philosophy of “Recognize & Resist” has de-masculinated a good portion of remnant Catholics.

And if you pay close attention to the “funded” trad Marrano media, you’ll understand that they are also attacking the sedes.

Why?  Because ultimately, discounting the post 1958 fake popes and refusing to dialogue with the schism is “end game” for them.

“Them” is the controlled opposition, just another tentacle of the Revolution.



Logged

Offline Oldyank

Re: Eleison Comments - Against Sedevacantism (no. 911)
« Reply #8 on: December 28, 2024, 12:55:46 PM »
I am neither for or against the Sede position,  I kinda ignore the man.  The Lord said" If you love me, Keep my commandments". I think that is most important in the time we live.

If we were to right a story about the church, Wouldn't it be more dramatic if the actual pope is the one crucifying the church instead of some imposter?  Like the high priest killing Christ.  Isn't this the worst punishment God can send us?
And well deserved.  

can anyone confirm this? Padre Pio said " In a short while, The pope will be in complete control of the devil and he will rule a false church.  I thought I read this somewhere.

Logged

Online Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: Eleison Comments - Against Sedevacantism (no. 911)
« Reply #9 on: December 28, 2024, 02:06:55 PM »
I’m not even sure if Ratzinger was a valid pope, except in name only. 

But I’m 100% sure that “Benedict” resigned in the way he did, to sow discord and confusion, like the heretic Modernist that he is.  

So was Benedict the pope until his death?  Or is Francis the pope now?  Who cares, because they are both Modernist. 

Whether we have a temporal-only, Modernist pope or no pope at all - practically speaking, it makes no difference, because either way, the Church is without a true Shepherd.  Bad pope or no pope - the end result is chaos, either way.  
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
« previous next »