Arguing with the sedevacantists.

[excubitor]

That of course goes without saying. But I’m talking you average Seddie, not whoever Mr. Matatics is (who is he, by the way? Don’t worry, I won’t read his books - I’ve almost slipped myself, once, and I know it is an ecclesial frying-pan.).

Gerry Matatics is only an example. You should avoid all the MHFM stuff from the Dimonds and all the other Sede material, videos, books, pamphlets, web sites etc.

Gerry Matatics was a Presbyterian minister and theologian who along with Scott Hahn converted to the catholic church. He used to work here as part of the Catholic Answers Apologetics team beffore becoming a sedevacantist. He has also promoted MHFM material in the past. In typical Sede style they are now arch rivals with MHFM themselves putting Gerry on their list of heretics.

The arguments of the Sedes are strong because they correctly point out how stuffed the Catholic church is, however the church has been in almost complete crisis many times in history, such as the Arian crisis and yet it has never failed. Jesus promised to preserve the Church to the end of the age. And he promised that he would do so through the office of the Pope the successor of Peter, he did not promise to do so through Youtube videos from MHFM or CD’s and tapes from Gerry Matatics.

In times of crisis we must stick closer to the Shepherd, not distance ourselves from him or reject him. I even heard Gerry say such things on a tape before he became a sede. But he forgot his own teachings and has basically rejected the Pope.

MHFM and Gerry Matatics will pass away and be forgotten but there will still be a Pope, and it will be this current Pope or a future Pope who will lead the church into renewal, not MHFM or GM.

 

[ForeverGrace]

Greetings to all.

Honestly folks, I’m a protestant, but even I find Matatics to be nothing short of lunatic. On some other threads here, peope have accused him of still being a protestant at heart. I actually believe that. But the real problem with him is not if he is a Catholic or a Protestant, it’s that he has serious difficulty accepting authority in almost any form.

He is quite accomplished at quoting scripture (out of context) and speaking faster than an auctioneer without even drawing a single breath. When he says he’ll just take a second to explain something, that ‘second’ turns into 10 minutes of utter nonsense.

The truth is, he does not know what he believes. You cannot be a Protestant and accept Papal authority, but neither can you be a Catholic if you don’t accept the authority. He has cornered himself. He does seem to believe that somehow God promised Peter that he would build his church upon the rock and that the gates of hell would not prevail against it, while simultaneously believing that God has been on a coffee break for the last 50 years if He didn’t protect the church with that very authority.

He claims to be running from church to church or from debate to debate, but I just don’t think much of it is true any longer.

Bottom line, no matter what he calls himself (I believe that he doesn’t embrace the sedes definition any longer, but prefers his own label of “Consistent Christianity”) he possesses a rebellious nature.

For me personally, if I was on a mission to convert Catholics to my position, I’d be tempted to use his agruments. But I know he is just wrong and extremely talented at manipulation.

All anyone can do is pray for him. He needs to submit to the authority of Christ.

I’d not be surprised if he decides that he is Quaker or a Buddhist in the not too distant future.

 

[Apollos]

For me personally, if I was on a mission to convert Catholics to my position, I’d be tempted to use his agruments. But I know he is just wrong and extremely talented at manipulation.

See if you can use his arguments anyway, if they are good arguments.