Poll for Sedevacantist's, which Popes are valid?

[alih]

at the mass i attend, there are those who are avowed sedavacantists and those that are not. my reply to those who are is “he’s the guy that signs the paychecks. of course he is the pope.” on the other hand, as quoted in the adoremus bulletin, pope benedict stated that vat. ii did one thing that never had happened before. “they (vat. ii) changed the definition of the liturgy.” i may not like the way some of the novus ordo’s conduct their services, but then again, it is my humble opinion, there is more politics and theories behind “et unum sunt” than meets the eye. we should be charitable to each and hope that each of our positions is correct, " just in case." neither i, nor anyone else are not interested in committing suicide. this whole business is for the salvation of souls, no matter what side on which you care to drop. controversey weakens us all. have a good year. (ali)

 

[Catholic29]

I was a religious between the years 1969 and 1980.
To point out how deceptive these groups are I wish to point out several lies in this site.
This group was founded in 1967 by Francis K. Schukardt…try to find his name anywhere on that site!
He went down in “a ball of homosexual flames” and was virtually kicked out of community…darn…just when he was positioning himself to become pope.

When I was a sister there Mother Supirior …Sister Teresa…was caught in the Novitiate hootchying with a Frater (a younge man in the seminary) …try to find her name (Janet Strauss) oops…they don’t have a record of her either???
Hmmm
This site is NOT FOR THE FAINT OF HEART!
KNOW YOUR FAITH before walking into the dragons den.

Yes, I am aware of the whole Francis Schuckardt story. Nothing very saintly about him I must say…

The CMRI is a cult which makes themselves out to be traditional Catholics. I feel bad for the sisters who are brainwashed or trapped in this community, and I thank our Lord you were able to break free. As sad as their circumstances are, I have to say I admire their blue habits.

But never fear, I’m not dumb enough to be taken in by them.

 

[Catholic29]

Im diggin the blue habits!

Me too! If only they were in communion with Rome…

 

[Kevin42]

I don’t expect schism or heresy to never occur.

But when schismatics claim they are “Catholic”, our Pope in effect “Protestant”, and refer to the Masses celebrated in 95 percent of parishes around the world as a “service”, it can get to be rather disheartening…

It seems like schismatics have the Protestant mind of thinking that we’ll just pick and choose what doctrine we like. Schismatics don’t necessarily choose doctrine though, they just pick the Popes they like. That’s what it seems like to me at least.

 

[GordonBOPS]

Is it not the better road to view things in the way of, rather than Heresies, but that they are matters of “discipline” - which, arguably have led to subsequent problems, but that the Church, for better or worse has that absolute authority to do change disciplines? I don’t recall reading which teaching(s) amounted to Heresey- but I imagine it derives primarily from Vatican II issues? I can see the concerns Sed’s have - and am sympathetic with the fact you can see the fruit of the (what I would describe as) discipline problems in the Church, and I think we all agree that it needs to be fixed. However, I can still see God’s hand at work in allowing this crisis (certainly not the first crisis for the True Church).

 

[RobedWithLight]

Is it not the better road to view things in the way of, rather than Heresies, but that they are matters of “discipline” - which, arguably have led to subsequent problems, but that the Church, for better or worse has that absolute authority to do change disciplines? I don’t recall reading which teaching(s) amounted to Heresey- but I imagine it derives primarily from Vatican II issues? I can see the concerns Sed’s have - and am sympathetic with the fact you can see the fruit of the (what I would describe as) discipline problems in the Church, and I think we all agree that it needs to be fixed. However, I can still see God’s hand at work in allowing this crisis (certainly not the first crisis for the True Church).

Without doubt disciplines can be changed. But once we confuse discipline with dogma, either by design or ignorance, as schismatics often do, then all legitimate attempts to modify existing discipline are invariably detested and denounced as heresy, and from hereon begins the downward slide towards schism.

It is all too easy and convenient for armchair critics to blame today’s disciplinary problems on an Ecumenical Council and the four postconciliar Popes, without even considering the possibility that the external secular Culture of Death, and the ubiquitous, corrupting propaganda of a determinedly non-Catholic, non-Christian and agnostic “Enlightenment” which the minds of the ordinary Catholic have been bombarded with day after day, decade after decade, without respite in our schools and offices, and abetted by today’s lightning-fast electronic media. This pervasive, “non-coercive brainwashing” from the outside exerts a far more corrosive and corrupting influence on the faith and morals of the average Catholic than any supposed modernist, “masonic” infiltration of the Church.

Therefore, while it may be true that “by their fruits ye shall know them” (a favorite “traditionalist” battlecry), yet they likewise ignore the fact that rotten apples cannot necessarily be blamed on the apple tree, because the rottenness of these apples might have been caused by external forces beyond the tree’s control, like the presence of parasites, and not because of any defect in the apple tree itself.

 

[Catholic29]

Without doubt disciplines can be changed. But once we confuse discipline with dogma, either by design or ignorance, as schismatics often do, then all legitimate attempts to modify existing discipline are invariably detested and denounced as heresy, and from hereon begins the downward slide towards schism.

It is all too easy and convenient for armchair critics to blame today’s disciplinary problems on an Ecumenical Council and the four postconciliar Popes, without even considering the possibility that the external secular Culture of Death, and the ubiquitous, corrupting propaganda of a determinedly non-Catholic, non-Christian and agnostic “Enlightenment” which the minds of the ordinary Catholic have been bombarded with day after day, decade after decade, without respite in our schools and offices, and abetted by today’s lightning-fast electronic media. This pervasive, “non-coercive brainwashing” from the outside exerts a far more corrosive and corrupting influence on the faith and morals of the average Catholic than any supposed modernist, “masonic” infiltration of the Church.

Therefore, while it may be true that “by their fruits ye shall know them” (a favorite “traditionalist” battlecry), yet they likewise ignore the fact that rotten apples cannot necessarily be blamed on the apple tree, because the rottenness of these apples might have been caused by external forces beyond the tree’s control, like the presence of parasites, and not because of any defect in the apple tree itself.

That was probably the most eloquent and inspired post I have read on this forum to date, bar none!

 

[GordonBOPS]

Without doubt disciplines can be changed. But once we confuse discipline with dogma, either by design or ignorance, as schismatics often do, then all legitimate attempts to modify existing discipline are invariably detested and denounced as heresy, and from hereon begins the downward slide towards schism.

It is all too easy and convenient for armchair critics to blame today’s disciplinary problems on an Ecumenical Council and the four postconciliar Popes, without even considering the possibility that the external secular Culture of Death, and the ubiquitous, corrupting propaganda of a determinedly non-Catholic, non-Christian and agnostic “Enlightenment” which the minds of the ordinary Catholic have been bombarded with day after day, decade after decade, without respite in our schools and offices, and abetted by today’s lightning-fast electronic media. This pervasive, “non-coercive brainwashing” from the outside exerts a far more corrosive and corrupting influence on the faith and morals of the average Catholic than any supposed modernist, “masonic” infiltration of the Church.

Therefore, while it may be true that “by their fruits ye shall know them” (a favorite “traditionalist” battlecry), yet they likewise ignore the fact that rotten apples cannot necessarily be blamed on the apple tree, because the rottenness of these apples might have been caused by external forces beyond the tree’s control, like the presence of parasites, and not because of any defect in the apple tree itself.

I don’t disagree at all with this – I do think some of the liturgical decay could have been prevented, and certain other problems as well — BUT – that said —
The CULTURE of today is NOT a result of VATICAN II, rather it is part of a rapid decay of Western Culture. I can only imagine how INEFFECTIVE the Church would have appeared in battling these things without Vatican II – if the Church w/ Latin and Tridintine Masses was trying to convince a sinful world that what it was doing was wrong, I can imagine how many folks would have just dismissed Her leadership as being a dinosaur, etc…, but, thanks to the Holy Spirit, there were changes in Discipline which (although, again not perfectly executed) have allowed the Church to have a more relevant appearance to the WORLD

[Disclaimer: Not that the Church is or ever could be irrelevant, I’m just speaking of the PERCEPTIONS of those outside the Church]

 

[devotus]

Without doubt disciplines can be changed. But once we confuse discipline with dogma, either by design or ignorance, as schismatics often do, then all legitimate attempts to modify existing discipline are invariably detested and denounced as heresy, and from hereon begins the downward slide towards schism.

It is all too easy and convenient for armchair critics to blame today’s disciplinary problems on an Ecumenical Council and the four postconciliar Popes, without even considering the possibility that the external secular Culture of Death, and the ubiquitous, corrupting propaganda of a determinedly non-Catholic, non-Christian and agnostic “Enlightenment” which the minds of the ordinary Catholic have been bombarded with day after day, decade after decade, without respite in our schools and offices, and abetted by today’s lightning-fast electronic media. This pervasive, “non-coercive brainwashing” from the outside exerts a far more corrosive and corrupting influence on the faith and morals of the average Catholic than any supposed modernist, “masonic” infiltration of the Church.

Therefore, while it may be true that “by their fruits ye shall know them” (a favorite “traditionalist” battlecry), yet they likewise ignore the fact that rotten apples cannot necessarily be blamed on the apple tree, because the rottenness of these apples might have been caused by external forces beyond the tree’s control, like the presence of parasites, and not because of any defect in the apple tree itself.

Then why Did the Church Grow during truely anti-christian times ( like in Pagan Rome)??

Yes … there are multiple reasons why the church is in this mess but they all must be addressed…

 

[MTD]

But when schismatics claim they are “Catholic”, our Pope in effect “Protestant”, and refer to the Masses celebrated in 95 percent of parishes around the world as a “service”, it can get to be rather disheartening…

In all charity I ask: why did you make a thread that would only make you more disheartened? You know, there is such a thing as avoiding the near occasion of sin. If sedevacantist discussions/debates/arguments weaken your faith, stay out of them!

I think too many people forget the power of prayer and sacrifice. They think that logical arguments exposing the truth will win anyone with a reasonable mind. Not so. We can present the truth, but that truth will not be accepted without the grace of God. But this grace is not normally given without prayer and/or sacrifice on the part of someone else.

My point is: if you don’t feel qualified to argue in sedevacantist debates or if you get discouraged in the process, give up the argument and go pray and sacrifice. You’ve already done the best you can in terms of presenting the truth, however inadequately; now you must leave the rest to God’s grace, which is, nevertheless, largely dependent on your prayer and sacrifice.

Maria

 

[Catholic29]

In all charity I ask: why did you make a thread that would only make you more disheartened? You know, there is such a thing as avoiding the near occasion of sin. If sedevacantist discussions/debates/arguments weaken your faith, stay out of them!

I think too many people forget the power of prayer and sacrifice. They think that logical arguments exposing the truth will win anyone with a reasonable mind. Not so. We can present the truth, but that truth will not be accepted without the grace of God. But this grace is not normally given without prayer and/or sacrifice on the part of someone else.

My point is: if you don’t feel qualified to argue in sedevacantist debates or if you get discouraged in the process, give up the argument and go pray and sacrifice. You’ve already done the best you can in terms of presenting the truth, however inadequately; now you must leave the rest to God’s grace, which is, nevertheless, largely dependent on your prayer and sacrifice.

Maria

Your points are well taken.

I began this thread to expose any disunity sedevactists may of had in which popes they recognized as true. As the voting indicates, most have gone with Pius XII, rendering my attempt there pointless.

Knowing schism and disunity are real should be enough to make any sincere Christian disheartened or discouraged, and even make one question whether his/her own beliefs are true.
Although I understand one should not through the baby out with the bathwater in the absence of solid contradictory evidence for your own beliefs.

Someone with truth as far as they understand it should present it, though I’m certain my own efforts have beared little fruit. Which is disheartening unto itself. Though I will keep plugging away for the sake of the kingdom.

 

[gorman64]

Though I may not be what you consider a well read and educated Catholic, I do know why they question God’s Ordinances. I was a sister in the sedevacantist group known as CMRI (a virulently schismatic group) for ten years…trust me…I’ve heard it all!

If what I wrote came across as arrogant…I have been called worse by a lot of sedevacantist.
I was not being arrogant only absolutely positive that I have the truth…sorry if it appears to be arrogant.

Nevertheless…you are in my prayers…I know well the agony…yes…I know the agony!

Dear Mary:

In attempting to understand your post, I must ask what you mean by “why they question God’s ordinances”? What ordinances? How are they questioned?

Do not repeat some scandal to me, please…if that is what you are hinting at. Scandal, be it Novus Ordo…SSPX…CMRI…or whatever… proves nothing…history is full of it.

I don’t deny that you may have heard it all…but I question whether you understood it at all…I don’t know for sure, but it appears that you may not have. What I called “arrogant” was what you said…which was “Christ stands outside your soul knocking”. If you don’t see the problem here then I nor anyone else cannot help you.

I have been personally attacked many times and my internal disposition has been judged by so many that I now expect it. Here’s a sampling:

“you might need to pray for some serious discernment”

“under the carefully constructed arguments you’ve been posting, there is error, a terrible error that has taken root in your soul. Namely, that Christ lied about the indefectibility of His visible Church”

”my heart breaks for you if you have fallen for the errors of those who engage in a whispering campaign against the current living Magisterium”

“I see you as an obviously intelligent man who has been duped, whose wonderful gifts are being used against His Holy Mother Church without his realization”

“God cannot save those who do not repent, and those who put themselves at odds with Christ’s Vicar and bishops are outside the Body of Christ.”

They have by their refusal to submit to the lawful authority established by Christ on Peter and his successors placed themselves outside of the Church, outside of which there is no salvation.

“It saddens me to see you going in that direction, and terrifies me that you may already be there”

“you deserve to be warned of the danger in which you’ve placed yourself”

The fact that you were once a CMRI Sister does not really add credence to anything you have said here…it really is nothing other than an irrelevant fact.

And btw, I am not in agony…but I can use your prayers…and you can be assured of mine.

God Bless You,

Gorman

 

[Malcolm_McLean]

I am curious as to which Popes most Sedevacantist’s consider valid, and which they reject. It would nice to read some rationals as to why a certain Pope forfeited the Papacy.

Keep responses charitable and to the topic at hand, as I don’t desire to have this thread closed.

When I was a little boy John Paul died, and I asked my mother how this could have happened.

She replied that God probably wanted his stories to become famous, but didn’t want him to be Pope.

So I guess he’s ruled out.

 

[gorman64]

Does anyone see a problem with the 3 sedevacantists that think that Benedict XVI is a valid pope?

 

[Mary_Henley]

Dear Mary:

In attempting to understand your post, I must ask what you mean by “why they question God’s ordinances”? What ordinances? How are they questioned?

Do not repeat some scandal to me, please…if that is what you are hinting at. Scandal, be it Novus Ordo…SSPX…CMRI…or whatever… proves nothing…history is full of it.

I don’t deny that you may have heard it all…but I question whether you understood it at all…I don’t know for sure, but it appears that you may not have. What I called “arrogant” was what you said…which was “Christ stands outside your soul knocking”. If you don’t see the problem here then I nor anyone else cannot help you.

I have been personally attacked many times and my internal disposition has been judged by so many that I now expect it. Here’s a sampling:

The fact that you were once a CMRI Sister does not really add credence to anything you have said here…it really is nothing other than an irrelevant fact.

And btw, I am not in agony…but I can use your prayers…and you can be assured of mine.

God Bless You,

Gorman

All I can say is touchy, touchy, touchy

I honestly believe that all those *Awful judgemental comments *are a fulfilment of the spiritual works of mercy!
I will refrain from choosing which ones…as you will most likely take offence at my choices.

As what my past has to do or not do with it…well it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that one out!
What ordinance

1. an authoritative rule or law; a decree or command.
2. a public injunction or regulation: a city ordinance against excessive horn blowing.
3. something believed to have been ordained, as by a deity or destiny.
4. Ecclesiastical. a. an established rite or ceremony.
   b. a sacrament.
   c. the communion.

Uh…try thou art Peter for one!

As long as someone does not agree with your stand on seadevacantism they are atomatically accused of judging you.
go figure
You are wrong.
The sky is blue.
Water is wet.
Heresy is heresy.
Thank you for your prayers

I pray that they may be one as You Father in Me and I in You!

 

[Catholic29]

Does anyone see a problem with the 3 sedevacantists that think that Benedict XVI is a valid pope?

I guess those sedevacantists are posting from the future…:whacky:

 

[gorman64]

Dear Mary:

Goodbye and God Bless You.

Yours,

Gorman

 

[MTD]

Does anyone see a problem with the 3 sedevacantists that think that Benedict XVI is a valid pope?

Yes, they’re not true sedevacantists; in other words, they don’t regard the seat as vacant!

Maria

 

[RobedWithLight]

Those three people who voted for Benedict XVI as a valid Pope may not be true sedevacantists at all, because a real sedevacantist would, without hesitating, reply that it is only Pius XII and those that preceded him in the Chair of Peter are the only real, legitimate Popes. Besides, the poll does not and cannot distinguish between sede and non-sede respondents.