Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: The temptation of sedevacantism - Dominicans Avrille  (Read 10214 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: The temptation of sedevacantism - Dominicans Avrille
« Reply #40 on: December 22, 2025, 02:37:50 PM »
Well ... that's because the grace of God was acting in you, and you were corresponding with it, but this kind of garbage, these fallacies that average people are unable to dispel since they're not educated, it and have a confusing impact on people and inculcate attitudes of Old Catholicism in people.

Sadly, because of people like this, a significant percentage of today's R&R are very thinly-veiled smells-and-bells Old Catholics, many of whom may not even have the Catholic faith at this time, since they are rejecting the papacy as being the proximate rule of faith except for regarding the extremely rare solemn dogmatic definition.

So they still need to be exposed for who they are.

My dad had a boyhood friend who always said, "There's a Catholic way to do everything."  And canonizing heretics / apostates just doesn't seem like that Catholic way.  Go figure. 

The thing about using Honorius as an example is that the anathema shows exactly what the Church thinks about even the whiff of heresy.  Honorius and his failings are a spit wad compared to the nuclear h0Ɩ0cαųst detonated daily by the 'canonized popes' of late.  There is no comparison or, it could be said, just a really, really crappy one.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: The temptation of sedevacantism - Dominicans Avrille
« Reply #41 on: December 22, 2025, 05:35:52 PM »

We know full well that sedevacantism (the dogmatic kind) will be judged harshly by history.

Mainly because of it's fruits.
:facepalm:  Dogmatic sedeism should be rejected, just like the 'dogmatic R&Rism' of the Arville Dominicans.

Both R&R is a theory and so is Sedeism.  That is the conclusion.  That is the truth. 

Any side which wavers from theory to dogmatism, is wrong.  The current crisis has. no. concrete. solution.  Why is this so difficult for Trad clerics to grasp?

Every flavor of Tradism, if it is valid, and if it rejects V2/new mass = acceptable to God.

Outside of this, and God is not pleased.  It's that simple.  


Re: The temptation of sedevacantism - Dominicans Avrille
« Reply #42 on: December 23, 2025, 06:15:14 AM »
Unfortunately and since at least 2013, many traditional priests and bishops who are no longer part of the NeoSSPX have fallen into error and now a false mentality of “whatever nourishes your faith” which means the New Mass is not absolutely rejected in all cases.



I know not one single priest or Bishop in the resistance who thinks that. Bishop Williamson only said it passing one time. And did not promote it.


We do however have a problem with indifference relating to SSPX Mass attendance. Maybe you're talking about that?


Re: The temptation of sedevacantism - Dominicans Avrille
« Reply #43 on: December 23, 2025, 06:17:47 AM »
:facepalm:  Dogmatic sedeism should be rejected, just like the 'dogmatic R&Rism' of the Arville Dominicans.

Both R&R is a theory and so is Sedeism.  That is the conclusion.  That is the truth. 

Any side which wavers from theory to dogmatism, is wrong.  The current crisis has. no. concrete. solution.  Why is this so difficult for Trad clerics to grasp?

Every flavor of Tradism, if it is valid, and if it rejects V2/new mass = acceptable to God.

Outside of this, and God is not pleased.  It's that simple. 

400 Thuc line Bishops. Numerous Popes. 

Compare that to three SSPX Bishops who went under Rome, but now we have seven who are faithful successors to Bishop Williamson.

It's clear to honest, non sperging, individuals where the remnant is.


Re: The temptation of sedevacantism - Dominicans Avrille
« Reply #44 on: December 23, 2025, 09:11:25 AM »
400 Thuc line Bishops. Numerous Popes.

Is it really that many! Did you count them? It's a sign of the times. The confusion and deceptions run wide. Thuc did a few consecrations himself and hoped they would bring forth good fruit. He was deceived into the consecrations. The fault is with the deceivers.


Quote from: TomGubbinsKimmage
Compare that to three SSPX Bishops who went under Rome, but now we have seven who are faithful successors to Bishop Williamson.

Is schism good to have with faithful successors of "recognize pope & ignore him" schismatic thinking?


Quote from: TomGubbinsKimmage
It's clear to honest, non sperging, individuals where the remnant is.

The good-standing lines are good-standing in themselves. It has nothing to do with lines that went bad.