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 5 ... 14

Author Topic: Letter of +Thomas Aquinas to ++Vigano  (Read 5368 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SeanJohnson

Re: Letter of +Thomas Aquinas to ++Vigano
« Reply #10 on: June 23, 2020, 10:00:01 AM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on June 23, 2020, 08:47:39 AM
That quote from +Lefebvre sounds more like an articulation of sedeprivationism, that they materially occupy the positions of their predecessors but do not have the same faith.

If they do not have the faith, they are not Catholic.  If they are not Catholic, they do not legitimately hold authority in the Church.
Yes, yes: If we can’t make Lefebvre a sedevacantist, we will make him a closet sedevacantist (sedeprivationist).
Logged

Offline SeanJohnson

Re: Letter of +Thomas Aquinas to ++Vigano
« Reply #11 on: June 23, 2020, 10:01:35 AM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on June 23, 2020, 08:58:23 AM
I am OK with calling him a Pope out of acknowledgement of the reality that he materially occupies the See.  Vigano of course constantly referred to him simply as Bergoglio.  But to keep claiming that these men don't have the faith but then have legitimate authority in the Church, it's total desperation, an emotional reaction against sedevacantism ... but it's totally bankrupt.
Unless Cajetan, JST, Billuart, Billot, Bellarmine, Torquemada, Vitoria, et al are right!
Logged

Offline SeanJohnson

Re: Letter of +Thomas Aquinas to ++Vigano
« Reply #12 on: June 23, 2020, 10:24:23 AM »
Quote from: Mithrandylan on June 23, 2020, 09:29:13 AM
.
Ideally, if Vigano responded, he would point out exactly what you have here: that the Archbishop was no committed enemy of sedevacantism.

Isn’t it a little absurd to expect Vigano to presume to correct SSPXers and Resistance clergy and bishops on Lefebvre’s position on sedevacantism?

Should Vigano need to look any further than the official policy in place for the last 40 years, which precludes sedevacantism ad infra?

In any case, we may know soon enough, since I emailed Vigano Bishop Thomas Aquinas’s letter.
Logged

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: Letter of +Thomas Aquinas to ++Vigano
« Reply #13 on: June 23, 2020, 10:39:13 AM »
Quote
Ideally, if Vigano responded, he would point out exactly what you have here: that the Archbishop was no committed enemy of sedevacantism. 
Ideally, if Vigano is serious about waking up the billions of novus ordo sheeple, the last thing on his agenda would be to spend time on the petty arguments of traditionalists and on what +ABL did or didn't mean.  What matters is the hear and now.  If Vigano comes out tomorrow and says that Francis isn't the pope, this has nothing to do with +ABL's comments, because he was dead before Francis was even elected.  So the debate will rage on, endlessly.  There's so many bigger fish to fry.
Logged

Offline 2Vermont

Re: Letter of +Thomas Aquinas to ++Vigano
« Reply #14 on: June 23, 2020, 11:26:05 AM »
Any predictions on how many pages this thread will go?   :laugh1:
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 14
« previous next »