Mithrandylan you pose some interesting arguments, and your expertise surpasses mine on this subject. But I do not think that now, in the great confusion of the church, that believing one way or another about a papal claimant will hamper our salvation.
In and of itself, no-- but there are implications that result from either decision, and those are really what are at stake. Have you seen the CMRI, SSPV or the Institute of Our Mother of Good Counsel courting the new-Roman heretics? Have you seen these groups equivocating over what canon law to follow, or what saints to recognize or not? For whatever problem each group has, none of them have the categorical danger of being absorbed by the Conciliar religion.
I support the Resistance because they've got that part right, but so long as it remains decidedly sedeplenist, it will always carry with it the inherent danger of being drawn toward the Conciliar religion. If it "takes off" (define that how you want, I'd define it as being able to establish permanent mass centers where we can count on the sacraments at least bi-weekly), twenty or thirty years down the road it will face some of the same problems the SSPX is facing now; and that's if it takes off. My observation is that the hardline "R&R" position of Frs. Pfeiffer, Hewko, Chazal et al. is not a position that most traditionalists are very interested in. You said it yourself, you expressed the quintessential R&R position on the "de facto Resistance headquarters" forum and were met with a flurry of thumbs down.
It would be profitable to read the works of the saints first.
Absolutely. Trust in the approved, venerated and renowned teachers of the Catholic faith before you trust anyone else, present traditional clergy (of ALL groups) included.
We know francis is an apostate and a formal heretic. When he says "I believe in God, I dont believe in a Catholic God, there is no Catholic God", he says that the church teaches X but he teaches Y, and he pronounces formal heresy. Is he the pope? The SSPX seems to say that we cant base our judgement on his off the cuff remarks. We can only conclude that he is not if he solemnly proclaims formal heresy.
Well, read the saints and theologians and see how many of them teach that a pope can express "off the cuff" formal and public heresy.
With Francis / Pope Francis, one need only wait for a while. He will cause many in the SSPX to take the Sedevacantist position, but until then I will go along with the rest of the people in my church, and when or if they change their mind about him, and if the priests and bishops do, then I will do what the majority of traditional Catholics do on this issue.
Which is your prerogative, of course. People who insistent against sedevacantism pretty much always do it because they think that in order to accept it, they have to accept some sort of denial of an essential mark of the Church; and of course sedevacantists say the exact opposite, that their position keeps the faith intact and it is the sedeplenist approach which threatens the Church. Point being, take the approach to the crisis which best preserves your faith; but always approach the subject with the highest regard for truth since the Church only holds and expresses that which is true, you cannot go wrong if truth is your primary motive.
Topic: I retract my opinions (Read 5949 times)