Author Topic: SSPXer vs. Progressivist Rome vs Sedevacantes (Read 913 times)

nadieimportante · « **on:** June 04, 2012, 08:35:16 PM »

All this talk about SSPXers either joining Rome or else declaring themselves sedevacantes, brings to mind an obvious question:

Does an SSPXer have more in common with a sedevacantes or Pope Benedict XVI?

Looking at it objectively, the only difference between a Sedevacantes and an SSPXer, is the belief in whether the Vatican II popes are valid popes and that Vatican II is a valid council. Whereas, the difference between Progressivist Rome / Pope Benedict XVI, and the SSPXers is legion. I dare say, that there is nothing in common, for no one knows for certain if what Benedict XVI really believes on the points that he sounds like he is in agreement with an SSPXer.

Can the SSPX accordistas please state exactly in what points they are in agreement with Benedict XVI? (NOTE: I say Benedict XVI, instead of Progressivist Rome, so that no one can say that Pope Benedict XVI is not part of Progressivist Rome, and hold him somehow different, or blameless.)

nadieimportante · « **Reply #1 on:** June 05, 2012, 05:48:10 PM »

All this talk about SSPXers either joining Rome or else declaring themselves sedevacantes, brings to mind an obvious question:

Does an SSPXer have more in common with a sedevacantes or Pope Benedict XVI?

Looking at it objectively, the only difference between a Sedevacantes and an SSPXer, is the belief in whether the Vatican II popes are valid popes and that Vatican II is a valid council. Whereas, the difference between Progressivist Rome / Pope Benedict XVI, and the SSPXers is legion. I dare say, that there is nothing in common, for no one knows for certain what Benedict XVI really believes on the points that he sounds like he is in agreement with an SSPXer.

Can the SSPX accordistas please state exactly in what points they are in agreement with Benedict XVI? (NOTE: I say Benedict XVI, instead of Progressivist Rome, so that no one can say that Pope Benedict XVI is not part of Progressivist Rome, and hold him somehow different, or blameless.)

Raphaela · « **Reply #2 on:** June 05, 2012, 06:32:31 PM »

Quote from: nadieimportante

All this talk about SSPXers either joining Rome or else declaring themselves sedevacantes, brings to mind an obvious question

Another obvious question this brings to mind is what will happen to the SSPXers who don't join Conciliar Rome or become sedevacantes? They, after all, are the true SSPXers, carrying on the work of Archbishop Lefebvre.

Group 1: Conciliar Compromisers - will probably merge with other Ecclesia Dei groups, get increasingly watered down and become "Latin liturgy for conservative Novus Ordoites".

Group 2: Sedevacantists - although loud and vocal, they have the seeds of their own destruction within them: arguments, splits, a "drying up" of the spiritual life.

Group 3: True SSPXers - will be attacked by both sides using the same arguments. Bishop Fellay talks very like a sedevacantist now, just drawing the opposite conclusions. But, we have Archbishop Lefebvre on our side and, I hope and pray, the Three Bishops. And as Bishop Williamson has said, Liberalism and Sedevacantism are two sides of the same coin. So if any SSPXers are wavering, here is a useful article:

http://www.sspx.ca/Communicantes/Dec2004/Is_That_Chair_Vacant.htm

Or even simpler than reading the article, Our Lord's words about the Consecration of Russia: "He (the Pope) will do it, but it will be late." I very much doubt He is referring to a sedevacantist "pope" with nine followers. In fact, one of them did try it, at Assisi, I think, a few years ago, and nothing happened. And people still supported him after that. Odd!

Guga · « **Reply #3 on:** June 05, 2012, 07:31:12 PM »

Quote from: Raphaela

Quote from: nadieimportante

Or even simpler than reading the article, Our Lord's words about the Consecration of Russia: "He (the Pope) will do it, but it will be late."

Where can I find the source for that?

That was ones of my thoughts those last days. Our Lady gave to the Pope a date to the Consecration and, if so, isn't it quiet late to it now?
Does anyone can speculate what would happen if the Pope make this happen in those disturbing times? + Felley and his blind folowers would jump upon us!
How can we have a slightest doubt on Pope that did what Our Lady asked for?
Because she asked the Consacretion to avoid the errors from Russia to be spread around the world, but what about if those error has already been spread?

MConstantine · « **Reply #4 on:** June 05, 2012, 07:57:14 PM »

What the heck is sedevacantes?

And no, SSPX'ers have far more in common with Sedes than with BXVI - the John Vennari "Pope is a prisoner in the Vatican being forced to say and do all these bad things" fantasy notwithstanding.

And no offence to Mr. Vennari: I happen to like a lot of his work. But even the suggestion that BenXVI is being forced to act against his will is fantastic and has no basis in reality; it is pure denial (or wishful thinking at best).