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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 26

Author Topic: Are there any anti una cuм people on cathinfo?  (Read 27351 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DecemRationis

  • Supporter
Re: Are there any anti una cuм people on cathinfo?
« Reply #40 on: May 03, 2021, 12:27:55 PM »
Quote from: SeanJohnson on May 03, 2021, 12:07:18 PM
QVD-

Nope.

There are today 5,600 bishops exercising jurisdiction in the Church.

Not a single one of them rejects the legitimacy of Francis’s pontificate.

That’s pretty damn peaceful AND universal.

That a few schismatic sede bishops (?) reject that peaceful and universal assent is no more relevant that Lutheran or Old Catholic bishops doing so.

Peaceful means they accept his legitimacy.

Universal means a moral unanimity (and in this case, even mathematical unanimity).

It seems that to get out of the trap, you would seek to redefine “peaceful,” and make it analogous to “no crisis.”  But in that case,  you would also have to depose all the popes during the Arian and Protestant crises.

This should indicate to you that you have misunderstood (that’s me being charitable😀) the term.

Yeah, if "crisis" is the determiner of whether a pope was universally and peacefully accepted we might have more "doubtful" popes than "non-doubtful." Not a slippery slope there but more like a butter slide.

I'd be curious to know the number of Old Catholics, and how they'd compare percentage wise to Sedes and "doubters." I know that's probably impossible, but would be nice to know. 
Logged

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: Are there any anti una cuм people on cathinfo?
« Reply #41 on: May 03, 2021, 01:41:54 PM »
Nothing but ad hominems and puerile taunts and attempting to change the subject by Johnson.

Archbishop Lefebvre did not consider the legitimacy of the V2 papal claimants to be beyond doubt, i.e. a dogmatic fact, so if Johnson wants to argue about Universal Acceptance, he should have taken it to +Lefebvre.  I'm not going to argue about UA.  I'm simply making the point that +Lefebvre did not consider their legitimacy to be dogmatic fact.

I asked Xavier this same question, BTW, since he was promoting the same notion, and Xavier responded that Archbishop Lefebvre suffered from an ignorance of fact that absolved him from heresy (or something like that ... so Xavier please correct me if I got your argument wrong).
Logged

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: Are there any anti una cuм people on cathinfo?
« Reply #42 on: May 03, 2021, 01:55:07 PM »

Quote
Doubt is the dogmatic position of Lad, who says it was also +ABL's, or almost +ABL's .

Stubborn, you of all people should know that there is a difference between a theological discussion (i.e. theory) and a belief (i.e. way of life).  +ABL most certainly entertained sedeism (in many forms), as a theological idea.  So did +Bellarmine, Cajetan, and all the other theologians who studied this question.
.
Ladislaus is no different from 99% of the people on this forum...he has an opinion/theory.  But it's not a BELIEF/fact.
.

Quote
You are right, sedeism is all about dividing the faithful and always has been, that is the only reason for it as it serves absolutely no other purpose.

No, that's not true.  Sedeism as a THEORY, has been around in the Church for centuries.  It's not new. 
.
What is divisive, what satan has used against the Trad movement, is applying a theory as a BELIEF/fact.  Satan has tricked a large # of Trads into 2 errors:  1) That any of the theories on the papal question can be figured out 100%.  2) That this or that opinion is important enough to draw lines in the sand and to stop associating with your fellow Trads.
.
The theory is not the problem, for it can teach catholics on the limits of papal authority and show that God will not leave us destitute in this time of crisis, but that many saints in the past have experienced similar problems and yet, the Church survived.  The problem is one of action - taking extreme measures on one theory or another.
Logged

Offline SeanJohnson

Re: Are there any anti una cuм people on cathinfo?
« Reply #43 on: May 03, 2021, 02:06:59 PM »
Quote from: Pax Vobis on May 03, 2021, 01:55:07 PM
Stubborn, you of all people should know that there is a difference between a theological discussion (i.e. theory) and a belief (i.e. way of life).  +ABL most certainly entertained sedeism (in many forms), as a theological idea.  So did +Bellarmine, Cajetan, and all the other theologians who studied this question.
.
Ladislaus is no different from 99% of the people on this forum...he has an opinion/theory.  But it's not a BELIEF/fact.
.

No, that's not true.  Sedeism as a THEORY, has been around in the Church for centuries.  It's not new.  
.
What is divisive, what satan has used against the Trad movement, is applying a theory as a BELIEF/fact.  Satan has tricked a large # of Trads into 2 errors:  1) That any of the theories on the papal question can be figured out 100%.  2) That this or that opinion is important enough to draw lines in the sand and to stop associating with your fellow Trads.
.
The theory is not the problem, for it can teach catholics on the limits of papal authority and show that God will not leave us destitute in this time of crisis, but that many saints in the past have experienced similar problems and yet, the Church survived.  The problem is one of action - taking extreme measures on one theory or another.
Ahem, Bellarmine thought such a thing could never come to pass, but laid out the argument as purely academic.
Contrast this with Lad/sedes, who take Bellarmine’s theoretical speculation and thrust it into concrete reality.
Shameful.
Logged

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: Are there any anti una cuм people on cathinfo?
« Reply #44 on: May 03, 2021, 02:19:21 PM »

Quote
Ahem, Bellarmine thought such a thing could never come to pass, but laid out the argument as purely academic.

The entire discussion should be academic/theory.
.

Quote
Contrast this with Lad/sedes, who take Bellarmine’s theoretical speculation and thrust it into concrete reality.

Ladislaus has never said that people who disagree with him are in sin.  Sedes have.  So has the sspx (post +ABL).
.
The sspx has told its members not to go to sede chapels and sedes say the same thing.  The devil divided Tradition when "the nine" left.  That was the beginning of the 2 fighting clans.  Can't really blame +ABL, but +Fellay's adminstration ramped up the fight, just as +Dolan and +Sanborn did too.
.
Shame on the Trad clerics of our day.  They've created a mini-V2 crisis, on top of the one coming from new-rome.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 26
« previous next »