Converts from sedevacantism to full communion with Holy father

  • Thread starter Thread starter Quintus55
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Q

Quintus55

Guest
Hello, In the past I had a traditional mentality. I did not want to attend the Mass of st. Paul VI ONLY extraordinary form. Step by step I came to the conclusion that traditionalist are like protestants. I came to conlusion that I make myself a pope. My conscience was not Ok at that time, so that I left all thinks pertains to traditional mentality. Today I am looking forward for baptism in 2 months in fully communion with pope Francis. Did somebody from you come trought traditional phase and left it?
 
Last edited:
I’m a traditional Catholic. I prefer the EF to the OF. I don’t view myself as the Pope. I hold Pope Francis to be the valid Pope of the Catholic Church. When I go to an EF Mass, I exclusively attend churches that are in full communion with Rome and hold Pope Francis to be Pope (FSSP, ICKSP, etc.). I’m not a Protestant, not in mentality nor action. Not all of us view ourselves as Popes nor think Pope Francis is not the Pope.
 
Last edited:
The masses I attended. There were a lot of people that considered Francis heretic.
 
Welcome! As you well know, the more you focus on Christ, and Him dwelling in your heart, the less you focus on the externals.

However, if you were baptized in the trinitarian formula, Catholic or otherwise (even by SSPX) it would be considered a valid baptism. Please speak with Father about this!
 
And those people are wrong nor are representative of the entire traditionalist movement.
 
The traditional Catholics are not Protestants. Far far from it. To call traditional Catholics Protestant is to call all Catholics prior to this century or even the past 60 years Protestant.
 
People can and should hold church leaders to the traditions of the faith (including the pope). People do not always have to love or agree with everything a pope says or does. There is a great book out by historian Roberto De Mattei that’s regarding filial corrections of the popes throughout history.
 
Quintus55 said:
Today I am looking forward for baptism in 2 months in fully communion with pope Francis
Click to expand...
Out of communion is not “traditional catholic”, but “sedevacantist”. I’m adjusting the title accordingly.
 
Still, it’s strange that the OP wasn’t baptized, sedevacantist community or not.
 
This is a very oddly worded and muddled post.I find it difficult to believe that anyone can spend much time among sedevacantists without having been baptized
 
My story
I was raised protestant and since 2012 I have been searching for truth. I love the tridentine mass, but I do not attend it , because there are always people who hold sedesvacantis befief, albeit priest sometimes not. I attended services in my parish(non sedesvacantist). Around 2014 I had been watching Brother Peter Dimonds channel that influenced me much. A year ago I had to by baptised by a priest, that hold sedesvacantist beleif. But in the end I changed my mind. Because I found out that there are plenty of differences among traditionalist.
 
Thank you for explaining. If you were raised Protestant, probably you were baptised? If so that baptism is valid and you cannot be baptised again.

Regarding differences between Traditionalists, I hope the following helps:

All traditionalists agree on the meaning of the Mass, Catholic doctrine and moral teaching up to the Second Vatican Council.

The majority accept the new Mass as valid but defective. The overwhelming majority accept Pope Francis as Pope, though disagreeing with many things he has said.

Only a tiny minority of traditionalists are sedevacantists. It is true their numbers have increased lately - from negligible to tiny minority. They do not, for example, include the SSPX which has a portrait of Pope Francis in every vestry.

As it is very hard to find sedevacantist priests, you often do find sedevacantists among the laity at a traditional Mass. But it would be wrong to conclude that this is somehow a normal feature of traditionalism.
 
Last edited:
If you were baptized by them then your baptism is valid. You would not need to be re-baptized.
 
It is a big mistake to think that all Catholics faithful to Tradition are sedevacantists and unfair to accuse us like that without a serious reason.
 
I would consider myself a traditional Catholic, but to clarify, I’ve been much further down the rabbit hole than I am now. I too had a phase, where I bought into the narrative of the new Mass being bad, and where I’d only go to the TLM. I’d still go to the TLM 99 times out of 100 if I had the choice.
But I was never in sedevacantist territory - in that, even though I believed Pope Francis to be a terrible pope, I still considered him as the 100% authentic pope.
All this just to say: I understand what the Church is talking about when it talks about “full communion” or when the SSPX talk about the disadvantages of the Missal of St. Paul VI, but on the balance, today I hold all that the Magisterium says to be true…
In the SSPX that I frequented, I often met people who thought they might be holier than the Pope. And people who thought there was no pope. But never once did I talk to anyone who took themselves to be pope… But I think it’s true that sedevacantism as a movement is more liable to fall into that category…
po18guy said:
if you were baptized in the trinitarian formula, Catholic or otherwise (even by SSPX) it would be considered a valid baptism.
Click to expand...
Of course it would. A LOT of protestant baptisms are considered valid by the Church.
The SSPX is a bad example here, because they are notoriously scrupulous about the form and intentions of their baptisms. An SSPX adherent would be very unlikely to be invalidly baptised.
But I guess your point might have been that sedevacantist groups also have valid sacraments - in which case I should just clarify that the SSPX are not sedevacantist. 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top