Cathinfo is now a place for sedevacantists and other solipsists to congregate and pump each other up.

Are you a moderator seanjohnson?

I disagree with your view on the forum. It is still a place for the SSPX and resistance. In fact I am getting to know people associated with the Resistance in my country through this forum in real life. Because someone on this forum invited me, I have begun going to the SSPX. I however am a sedevacantist, and honestly I think that more and more recognise and resist people are changing their mind about Francis 1. Fr Kramer seems to have changed his mind and now is a SV too. Its just the way this pope(?) is motivating Traditionalists to act. Dont blame traditionalists, blame Francis if you think SV is a problem. It is his fault. If he was not such an outrageous heretic I would think he was a pope, because I still think the conciliar church must be fought for, but the way things are going, I dont think it is likely that I will be able to say that there is a pope I can look up to, not within my lifetime anyway, and I am 28.

The "Resistance" is "degenerating" into sedevacantism because it's the only logical conclusion to the Modernist Crisis. Bergoglio, in the end, just might be a gift sent from God to finally wake up the fence-sitters.

Revolution consumes itself.

While the SSPX is busy dissolving itself into the Conciliar Church, the Resistance is degenerating into sedevacantism.

First, we were told we sinned by attending Mass at an SSPX chapel, and must sit in our basements on Sundays until Fr. Pfeiffer rolled around.

Now we are told we must make common cause with sedevacantists, which after all "is not a doctrinal position, but merely a subjective determination of fact regarding the man claiming to be Pope."

Yet, for the life of me, I can't find it in any of the manuals where it says a Catholic if free to accept or reject communion with the man universally recognized as Pope, and still consider himself Catholic.

The idea that individual Catholics may contemplate and judge who is a pope, and who is not, is so bizarre as to scarcely have provoked the ecclesiologists to sell out the necessity of rendering assent (or pre-empting revolt),

Yet, apparently the sedes would have us believe this is purely optional.

And therefore, one might very easily recognize Pope Michael (or Pope Pius XIII) as the true Pope, without any consequence to his status as Catholic.

After all, "it is the faith that unites us!" right?

Sean...

I'm not even claiming the first one, but let's say I was. I would be stupid, because everyone has their role to play in this thing.

If no one left the SSPX chapels, then they would think they had license to do whatever they wanted, and an agreement would already have been made. If no one had made a peep about their doctrinal declaration and the general chapter statement, they would have just railroaded right through.

Some people (up here, anyway) are a part of the resistance, but they still go to DePere for Mass at the (hijacked) independent Church here where the SSPX is.  I don't do that, but I don't say that they shouldn't do that, because if everyone that opposed it left, there wouldn't be anyone being a thorn in their sides.

My family's role in this entire thing is one of no compromise, as we were taught. We were lied to, and marginalized. And Father Rostand posed the question to me, "If you don't trust us, why receive the sacraments from us?" Well that's a great question, so we stay away. (Other reasons I've already enumerated a bunch of times are contained in other posts, but I think this suffices for now, for the sake of argument.)

Fr. Themann had the audacity, before Benedict even abdicated, to call me a "closet sedevacantist" to my face, yet he goes on and on about "IF YOU COULD ONLY SEE INTO MY HEAD!" I've said over and over on this forum many times before that my position is I DO NOT KNOW who the pope actually is. Since there is LEGITIMATE doubt about who the pope really is right now, it's a LEGITIMATE opinion. I don't hear ANYONE from the resistance saying that everyone should be a sede, and all you have to do is read Father Pfeiffer's defense (which I disagree with) of Casual Frank (AKA Franny the Fraud.) God is not going to hold us to account for something that obviously stinks to high heaven, if we hold a different opinion to what actually is so (if by some oddity, I would be mistaken and that I obviously should KNOW what I believe to be the unknowable.)

I don't know anyone in the resistance who says that "Pius XIII" or "Pope Michael" are true popes.   :stare: I think you're contriving something that's not even there, Sean. WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE?

My interest is with keeping the Catholic Faith, uncompromised, and inviolate. I don't care about the personalities attached to all this here. I care about the Faith. If the resistance moves away from the Faith, then that's when I walk again.

I'll leave you with this.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/embed/159PG19Et60?feature=player_detailpage[/youtube]

Quote from: SeanJohnson

Revolution consumes itself.

While the SSPX is busy dissolving itself into the Conciliar Church, the Resistance is degenerating into sedevacantism.

First, we were told we sinned by attending Mass at an SSPX chapel, and must sit in our basements on Sundays until Fr. Pfeiffer rolled around.

Now we are told we must make common cause with sedevacantists, which after all "is not a doctrinal position, but merely a subjective determination of fact regarding the man claiming to be Pope."

Yet, for the life of me, I can't find it in any of the manuals where it says a Catholic if free to accept or reject communion with the man universally recognized as Pope, and still consider himself Catholic.

The idea that individual Catholics may contemplate and judge who is a pope, and who is not, is so bizarre as to scarcely have provoked the ecclesiologists to sell out the necessity of rendering assent (or pre-empting revolt),

Yet, apparently the sedes would have us believe this is purely optional.

And therefore, one might very easily recognize Pope Michael (or Pope Pius XIII) as the true Pope, without any consequence to his status as Catholic.

After all, "it is the faith that unites us!" right?

Sean...

I'm not even claiming the first one, but let's say I was. I would be stupid, because everyone has their role to play in this thing.

If no one left the SSPX chapels, then they would think they had license to do whatever they wanted, and an agreement would already have been made. If no one had made a peep about their doctrinal declaration and the general chapter statement, they would have just railroaded right through.

Some people (up here, anyway) are a part of the resistance, but they still go to DePere for Mass at the (hijacked) independent Church here where the SSPX is.  I don't do that, but I don't say that they shouldn't do that, because if everyone that opposed it left, there wouldn't be anyone being a thorn in their sides.

My family's role in this entire thing is one of no compromise, as we were taught. We were lied to, and marginalized. And Father Rostand posed the question to me, "If you don't trust us, why receive the sacraments from us?" Well that's a great question, so we stay away. (Other reasons I've already enumerated a bunch of times are contained in other posts, but I think this suffices for now, for the sake of argument.)

Fr. Themann had the audacity, before Benedict even abdicated, to call me a "closet sedevacantist" to my face, yet he goes on and on about "IF YOU COULD ONLY SEE INTO MY HEAD!" I've said over and over on this forum many times before that my position is I DO NOT KNOW who the pope actually is. Since there is LEGITIMATE doubt about who the pope really is right now, it's a LEGITIMATE opinion. I don't hear ANYONE from the resistance saying that everyone should be a sede, and all you have to do is read Father Pfeiffer's defense (which I disagree with) of Casual Frank (AKA Franny the Fraud.) God is not going to hold us to account for something that obviously stinks to high heaven, if we hold a different opinion to what actually is so (if by some oddity, I would be mistaken and that I obviously should KNOW what I believe to be the unknowable.)

I don't know anyone in the resistance who says that "Pius XIII" or "Pope Michael" are true popes.   :stare: I think you're contriving something that's not even there, Sean. WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE?

My interest is with keeping the Catholic Faith, uncompromised, and inviolate. I don't care about the personalities attached to all this here. I care about the Faith. If the resistance moves away from the Faith, then that's when I walk again.

I'll leave you with this.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/embed/159PG19Et60?feature=player_detailpage[/youtube]

Disagree:

If there had been massive uprisings in each of the SSPX chapels, our voices would have been heard.

But certain factions of the resistance told us we couldn't go to the SSPX anymore.

Consequently, there was not much internal opposition left, so things rolled on.

Bishop Fellay outsmarted everyone.

He will lead the lemmings into Rome, while those who have left the cozy enclaves are being impelled towards sedevacantism (or minimally, the acceptance of sedevacantism).

As a friend here in St. Paul frequently asked me, "Would you rather become a modernist or a sedevacantist."

My reply was, "Would you rather be eaten by a lion or a tiger?"

Either way lies death.

I see a checkmate.

I see the end times quickly approaching now.

And I believe Bishop Fellay will have a heavy account to render for failing to hold the course, and changing the precondition for a canonical regularization, give the degree of scandal it has caused, and the appeal of sedevacantism it has caused.

Nevertheless, sedevacantism is not the answer.

… the Resistance is degenerating into sedevacantism.…

There's actually argument about this? Will there next be a demand to defend the thesis that there are Jєωs in Hollywood or that the SPLC doesn't always tell the truth?

[to SeanJohnson]… it seems that your posts are increasingly bitter.

Interesting; perhaps they are. Since I myself have been living on a diet of wormwood and hydrochloric acid lately, I can't say that I've really noticed anything of the sort. Whatever disagreements I have with SJ, he is definitely Mr. Easygoing compared with the roll-your-own-religion mob.

Quote from: parentsfortruth

Quote from: SeanJohnson

Revolution consumes itself.

While the SSPX is busy dissolving itself into the Conciliar Church, the Resistance is degenerating into sedevacantism.

First, we were told we sinned by attending Mass at an SSPX chapel, and must sit in our basements on Sundays until Fr. Pfeiffer rolled around.

Now we are told we must make common cause with sedevacantists, which after all "is not a doctrinal position, but merely a subjective determination of fact regarding the man claiming to be Pope."

Yet, for the life of me, I can't find it in any of the manuals where it says a Catholic if free to accept or reject communion with the man universally recognized as Pope, and still consider himself Catholic.

The idea that individual Catholics may contemplate and judge who is a pope, and who is not, is so bizarre as to scarcely have provoked the ecclesiologists to sell out the necessity of rendering assent (or pre-empting revolt),

Yet, apparently the sedes would have us believe this is purely optional.

And therefore, one might very easily recognize Pope Michael (or Pope Pius XIII) as the true Pope, without any consequence to his status as Catholic.

After all, "it is the faith that unites us!" right?

Sean...

I'm not even claiming the first one, but let's say I was. I would be stupid, because everyone has their role to play in this thing.

If no one left the SSPX chapels, then they would think they had license to do whatever they wanted, and an agreement would already have been made. If no one had made a peep about their doctrinal declaration and the general chapter statement, they would have just railroaded right through.

Some people (up here, anyway) are a part of the resistance, but they still go to DePere for Mass at the (hijacked) independent Church here where the SSPX is.  I don't do that, but I don't say that they shouldn't do that, because if everyone that opposed it left, there wouldn't be anyone being a thorn in their sides.

My family's role in this entire thing is one of no compromise, as we were taught. We were lied to, and marginalized. And Father Rostand posed the question to me, "If you don't trust us, why receive the sacraments from us?" Well that's a great question, so we stay away. (Other reasons I've already enumerated a bunch of times are contained in other posts, but I think this suffices for now, for the sake of argument.)

Fr. Themann had the audacity, before Benedict even abdicated, to call me a "closet sedevacantist" to my face, yet he goes on and on about "IF YOU COULD ONLY SEE INTO MY HEAD!" I've said over and over on this forum many times before that my position is I DO NOT KNOW who the pope actually is. Since there is LEGITIMATE doubt about who the pope really is right now, it's a LEGITIMATE opinion. I don't hear ANYONE from the resistance saying that everyone should be a sede, and all you have to do is read Father Pfeiffer's defense (which I disagree with) of Casual Frank (AKA Franny the Fraud.) God is not going to hold us to account for something that obviously stinks to high heaven, if we hold a different opinion to what actually is so (if by some oddity, I would be mistaken and that I obviously should KNOW what I believe to be the unknowable.)

I don't know anyone in the resistance who says that "Pius XIII" or "Pope Michael" are true popes.   :stare: I think you're contriving something that's not even there, Sean. WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE?

My interest is with keeping the Catholic Faith, uncompromised, and inviolate. I don't care about the personalities attached to all this here. I care about the Faith. If the resistance moves away from the Faith, then that's when I walk again.

I'll leave you with this.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/embed/159PG19Et60?feature=player_detailpage[/youtube]

Disagree:

If there had been massive uprisings in each of the SSPX chapels, our voices would have been heard.

But certain factions of the resistance told us we couldn't go to the SSPX anymore.

Consequently, there was not much internal opposition left, so things rolled on.

Bishop Fellay outsmarted everyone.

He will lead the lemmings into Rome, while those who have left the cozy enclaves are being impelled towards sedevacantism (or minimally, the acceptance of sedevacantism).

As a friend here in St. Paul frequently asked me, "Would you rather become a modernist or a sedevacantist."

My reply was, "Would you rather be eaten by a lion or a tiger?"

Either way lies death.

I see a checkmate.

I see the end times quickly approaching now.

And I believe Bishop Fellay will have a heavy account to render for failing to hold the course, and changing the precondition for a canonical regularization, give the degree of scandal it has caused, and the appeal of sedevacantism it has caused.

Nevertheless, sedevacantism is not the answer.

Okay, Sean. Okay. You say that if people of the resistance had stayed, that things would have been different. I BEG to differ.

Over here, (and we're not even a SSPX chapel, thank God, not YET anyway, but they're really trying hard,) PEOPLE DID NOT WANT TO KNOW about the AFD or the GCS. They did not CARE to know, they WANTED to "just be grateful that we have our Mass and a priest."

 :stare:

I don't know how old you are, Sean. I can't remember, but MY MOTHER remembers, because she had a vocation in 1962, that she LEFT because her order was the first one to discard their habit and go secular. That was NOT what she signed up for, and she recognized it before I even TALKED to her about this whole mess with the SSPX. We were on the same page, and you know what she said?

"I'm not going through Vatican II again."

She recognizes the tactics of the modernists, and pretty much everyone in the resistance does too. It's called "GRADUALISM."

We're the frogs in the pot, Sean. The people operating the heat are the modernists. They're only turning the heat up a couple of degrees at a time, hoping that we won't notice before we are COOKED.

The resistance are the ones that JUMPED OUT OF THE POT. The rest of everyone else is going to be cooked if they keep burying their heads in the sand. Just like the old people in the Novus Ordo. All those old ladies in pants that were oblivious while their faith was utterly obliterated, one Sunday at a time. Do you think those ladies that diligently go to the Novus Ordo every Sunday, want to hear about how terrible things are, and how they're following a false religion?

It's a fun exercise. Try it sometime. Go to a Novus Ordo Church and try to pull aside one of these old ladies and see if you can convince them, or if they'll even give you two minutes of their time. They DO NOT CARE.

Their apathy is entirely comparable to the apathy in the SSPX (and sadly, Fr. Bolduc's old church.)

Over here, (and we're not even a SSPX chapel, thank God, not YET anyway, but they're really trying hard,) PEOPLE DID NOT WANT TO KNOW about the AFD or the GCS. They did not CARE to know, they WANTED to "just be grateful that we have our Mass and a priest."

You could be writing about your average SSPX chapel also. People do not want to know and as Neil Obstat stated many seem happy to be taken for a ride and come back for more.

As far as I am concerned, Fr Morgan and other SSPX priests abandoned souls in an hour of need.Hence the reluctant parting of company. Now, it is necessary to part to keep the faith.

"just be grateful that we have our Mass and a priest."

Sounds like Fr N Pfluger.