How will sedevacantists "know" when a "real" Pope is elected?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kwitz
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Queen of Sheeba and Joe Omlor,

I have been following this theme in many threads. I started with the “Would I be welcome here” thead. All of the people that support sedevacantism on these threads seem to be well read in Vat I and Vat II documents. You bring up many quotes to support your claim. Here is the bottom line to me on this subject. I can see your sincerety and frustration with this but I think you are missing the major point of this whole issue. Christ established the Church to be ran in the fashion it has been for over 2000 years. We can trace the succession of the Popes (even considering all of the false popes) through that same time period. I’m sure that you would agree that there have been major disagreements with councils and Popes over this period of time. The point is as I read all of your arguments, I can’t help but think of protestantism. Your responses to questions such as “how will you know when the right Pope is in place,” is “we all will know” or “God will do it.” This sounds like God has changed the plan. He has allowed the chair to go vacant for the last 2 or 3 Popes and also allowed corrupt Bishops to fill the councils. We no longer have the conventional means to elect the new “Correct Pope.” All Catholics will now have to wait for a revelation from God (hopefully everyone at once) in order to choose the new Pope. At least for a time, we will have no need for the college of Cardinals to perform this function. At some point, we will have to find a way to universally elect new Bishops to restart the process so that we can get back on track. This does not sound like what Jesus promised about protecting the Church. In actuality, it is very much like how protestants think this very day - individual interpretation. This is where, to me, your philosophy breaks down.
 
Queen of Sheeba:
RICHARD.

EXAMPLE No 1.

VAT.11
“This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, continues to exist (subsists) in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the bishops in communion with him. Nevertheless, many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside its visible confines.” Lumen Gentium.
PREVIOUS TEACHING
A) "We must mention another fruitful cause of evil by which the Church is afflicted at present , namely: Indifferentism, that vicious “vice-filled”] manner of thinking which holds that eternal salvation can be obtained by the profession of any faith, provided that a man’s morals are good and decent. Seriously consider the testimony of the Savior that some are against Christ because they are not with Christ, that they scatter who do not gather with Him, and therefore without doubt they will perish in eternity unless they hold to the Catholic faith and observe it WHOLE and INVIOLATE."
Pope Gregory XVI
B) “If anyone says that the condition of the faithful and that of those who have not yet come to the true faith is equal: let him be anathema.” I Vatican Council

C) “Neither the true faith nor eternal salvation is to be found outside the Holy Catholic Church. Neither salvation nor salvation can be found outside the Catholic Church. It is a SIN to believe that there is salvation outside the Castholic Church.”
Ven. Pope Pius IX
D) “All graces given to those outside the Church are given them for the purpose of bringing them inside the Church.” St. Augustine

I don’t see the contradiction here either. Perhaps a development, but not a contradiction.

Blessings.
Click to expand...
 
Well, maybe if we just keep reading it over and over, we will find the contradiction…

mmmm…nope, still haven’t found it… :cool:
 
40.png
Ham1:
Well, maybe if we just keep reading it over and over, we will find the contradiction…

mmmm…nope, still haven’t found it… :cool:
Click to expand...
Obviously then we must be unenlightened, ignorant slaves to JPII and the current apostasy known as the church of Rome. The one with the empty chair where the Pope should be. Otherwise the contradictions would be blatantly obvious. :rolleyes: :banghead:

However, there might also be another explanation… :whacky:
 
Other sedevacantist groups have taken similar routes: an initial disaffection by one or more priests; the gathering of a small following; a period of time during which the followers come to identify themselves as the remaining true Church; a decision to elect a new pope; the election of one of the founders.

Sometimes the election is by ballot, sometimes by divine intervention: The presumptive pope declares that God has revealed to him that he is now the successor of Peter. The methodology is not important. What counts is the result: Our guy has been chosen, which means we followers have a special place.

I have yet to hear of one group of sedevacantists accepting the pope that was chosen by another group.
 
The same way we knew when a non-catholic took possession of the Chair of Peter, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck do you suppose it might be a duck.

Don’t mind my humor, my point is we trust in God that those who persist in doing His Will, by Keeping the Faith will know. “By their fruits you will know them.”

BTW… my question is, why is it that this topic keeps getting closed, yet it seems so popular???
 
40.png
Ham1:
Hmmm…no answer yet…I’ll keep waiting this one will be enlightening!
Click to expand...
Maybe the reason you will not find an answer might be because a True Catholic knows they can not judge the soul of another person. The same rules apply for all, if a person is in the state of Sanctifying grace at the moment of their death their soul is saved, otherwise they are not saved.

God Knows, not you nor I.
 
Archbishop 10-K:
Here is a scenario which I want sedevacantists to answer (no sarcasm):

If I were elected Pope, I would push for a “universal indult” for the Traditional Latin Mass. I would allow the Novus Ordo to continue to exist, however I would be “zero-tolerance” when it comes to breaking from the rubrics. I would not take back Vatican II since although it is not dogmatic it’s still there. But, I would be much less ecumenical and teach more Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus (not to mention getting the faithful to learn their Latin.) I would also accept a papal cornonation.

This is what I would really do if I were Pope. Would I be a valid Pope in your eyes?
Click to expand...
I still have not gotten a reply from the sedevacantists.
 
In my orginally intended reply to this, I hit the submit button by accident --sorry about the wasted block!

Karl,
As Joe and Queen Sheeba have pointed out, sedevacantists are not in union with any conclavists who elect their own false popes. The “conclavists” are seperate small groups of extremists which we have no communion with.
However, the new church of Vatican II has as it’s family, an entire hodge podge of radically errant groups: Charismatics, Taize Community, Baysiders, Medjugourie-ans (among other false apparitionist groups), ultra-leftist groups pushing for priestly marriage, priestesses, birth control, homosexual unions, etc., just to name a few. None of these groups has been excommunicated as far as I know. They are all “in union with new Rome.”
 
40.png
myrna:
Maybe the reason you will not find an answer might be because a True Catholic knows they can not judge the soul of another person. The same rules apply for all, if a person is in the state of Sanctifying grace at the moment of their death their soul is saved, otherwise they are not saved.

God Knows, not you nor I.
Click to expand...
Amen, Myrna.
 
To Lamb and Ham,

I find it truly amazing that you cannot see contradiction in that example. however I will take it further and expand in the hope that you can.

In Unitatis Redintergratio (UR) #3, this thinking marches on to its obvious and logical conclusions:
Moreover, some, even very many, of the most significant elements and endowments which together go to build up and give life to the Church itself, can exist outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church: the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements. All of these, which come from Christ and lead back to him, belong by right to the one Church of Christ.
The brethren divided from us also carry out many liturgical actions of the Christian religion. In ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or community, these liturgical actions most certainly can truly engender a life of grace, and, one must say, can aptly give access to the communion of salvation.
It follows that the separated Churches and communities as such, though we believe they suffer from the defects already mentioned, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church. (UR#3)

Based on the above, however, it is impossible to understand how “the life of grace” and the three theological virtues (faith, hope, and charity) could have been conserved in heretical and schismatic communities-rebels against the authority of the one legitimate Church of Christ-since here they are referred to as “communities,” that is, foreign organisms opposed to the one Church of Christ, and not as individuals. Moreover, one would like to know what possibilities for “sanctification” and what “truths” are contained in the doctrines and manner of life of the heretical and schismatic communities who oppose the Roman Pontiff and all that is Catholic. Even the idea of “sanctification” is denied in many of these “communities” and some even defend a completely subjective idea of truth, including revealed truth. This view was NOT acceptable in the pre Vat11 church as the examples above clearly indicate.
You asked for one example of Vat 11 docs contradicting Traditional teaching. This one was chosen at random. If you need more just let me know. I will be happy to supply them.
 
40.png
Trevelyan:
We can’t decide what is and isn’t reconciled with Tradition.

Catholic Tradition is not what one thinks it ought to be, or what one is accustomed to, but it is what the Church tells us it is. Those who object to Vatican II in the name of Catholic Tradition, contradict Tradition by taking it upon themselves to judge what is and what is not Catholic Tradition.

Thus wrote Pope Leo XIII:

“There can be no doubt that the decisions of the Holy See or those of General Councils … are by themselves and by their very nature obligatory on all the faithful.”

and Pope Pius IX:

“…the Ecumenical Council is governed by the Holy Spirit … it is solely by the impulse of this Divine Spirit that the Council defines and proposes what must be believed…”

and Cardinal Newman:

“[what a] General Council speaks is the word of God.”

Anything to the contrary is simply private interpretation of Tradition, like private interpretation of Scripture.
Click to expand...
 
Originally Posted by ralphinal
Would a sedevacantist agree that all Native Americans who lived between the time of Christ and the colonization of the western hemishpere is now in hell?
Don’t be ridiculous.
We are not flipping Feenyites!
As Catholics we believe in Baptism of desire.
***As the gospel had not been preached there OF COURSE such people would not be held responsible. ***
 
“Obviously then we must be unenlightened, ignorant slaves to JPII and the current apostasy known as the church of Rome. The one with the empty chair where the Pope should be. Otherwise the contradictions would be blatantly obvious.”

YOU SAID IT!

“However, there might also be another explanation”…(kooky face)

PLEASE KEEP THIS UP, IT ACTUALLY HELPS OUR CAUSE, MANY N.O’ers WHO ARE MORE CHARITABLE THAN YOU CAN AT LEAST SEE THAT WE ARE SINCERE AND HAVE GENUINE REASONS FOR OUR BELIEFS!
 
“A little knowledge is a dangerous thing…”

I suppose it would be considered snotty, but I always want to ask those who think that Vatican II is so heretical, “Where did you get your degree in Theology?”.

Most seem to be self-taught in theology, although much of what they appear to have learned looks a lot more like religion than theology…

Given that the sedevacantists have pretty much set their own criteria as to determining that the See is vacant, they are going to set their own criteria that it is later filled. And a moderate won’t do, let alone a liberal. In fact, most conservatives won’t do; only someone who is radically conservative. There is a term in psychology that they could give a bad definition to; let it suffice to say that, among other characteristics of the ones I have met, Phariseeical (sp?) definitely fits. :eek:
 
Trevelyan,
I’m a plebe – today’s my first viewing of the website and this is my first posting. After reading all the comments relating to the subject under discussion, I must agree with your statement of Tradition and those revered persons whom you quoted. The Catholic Church in Rome today is there because of the guidance and loving presence of the Holy Spirit. The men leading the Church since its birth have not all been perfect nor always holy; however, the Church IS The Body of Christ, and it IS perfect and holy. Popes come and go, and Vatican councils happen. What Popes do in the name of the Church is binding and the Church continues on. Anyone who disagrees and drops away from this One True Church that Christ instituted on the Rock of Peter over 2000 years ago is schismatic, as defined in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, as well as Webster’s Dictionary. Blessed be our Holy Catholic Church.

=============
In Christ’s Peace
 
EXACTLY!
Take a good look at what is coming out of Rome today.
I have done that and I can see that it is definitely NOT CATHOLIC. SV’s believe that Rome has in fact defected from the faith.

Don’t worry, we probably won’t be here to bother you all much longer. This thread will soon be closed. Seems this forum can’t handle the meaty stuff!
 
So how will the “real” Pope be elected if there are no valid Cardinals to do so?

God Bless,
Doug
 
Queen of Sheeba said:
“Obviously then we must be unenlightened, ignorant slaves to JPII and the current apostasy known as the church of Rome. The one with the empty chair where the Pope should be. Otherwise the contradictions would be blatantly obvious.”

YOU SAID IT!

“However, there might also be another explanation”…(kooky face)

PLEASE KEEP THIS UP, IT ACTUALLY HELPS OUR CAUSE, MANY N.O’ers WHO ARE MORE CHARITABLE THAN YOU CAN AT LEAST SEE THAT WE ARE SINCERE AND HAVE GENUINE REASONS FOR OUR BELIEFS!
Click to expand...

So did the reformers.

Please excuse my lack of charity but I guess I can’t figure out why sedevacantists go through this exercise on the Catholic Answers forum. You certainly have a right to your opinion, however, I think you shouldn’t be surprised if those opinions raise some ire. Obviously you are not going to get a lot of sympathy here given your opinions. I guess you just like a good, futile argument.
 
Queen of Sheeba:
Originally Posted by ralphinal
Would a sedevacantist agree that all Native Americans who lived between the time of Christ and the colonization of the western hemishpere is now in hell?
Don’t be ridiculous.
We are not flipping Feenyites!
As Catholics we believe in Baptism of desire.
***As the gospel had not been preached there OF COURSE such people would not be held responsible. ***
Click to expand...
So there can be salvation for those outside the Catholic Church…Heresy or fuller understanding of the Truth?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top