Sedevacantism and PIUS IX

[Catholic_Dude]

I am told by sedevacantists that if a pope becomes a public heretic then he loses the papal office. My question is why don’t sedevacantists throw Pius IX and his successors off the throne of Peter. Pius IX publically proclaimed heresy in 1854 when he speculated that invincibly ignorant could be saved. So why do sedevacantists profess that Pius IX and his successors are true popes when they are heretics for contradicting Pope Eugene IV?

The problem is L’Osservatore Romano didnt exist until 1861.

 

[SemperFidelis]

How do you know?

I have an article for you to read that should explain things for you. It was written by Fr. Harrison and is backed up the relevant canons from the 1983 code of canon law. This article supports what I wrote.

Of course, you could always reject this article and the relevant canon law, just as you did the quote I provided from a doctor of the Church since it disagrees with you. We’ll find out soon enough.

You ought to read the entire article.

catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0103fea1.asp

Thanks for posting this article, Pax. I gotta say, I love me some Fr. Harrison. I’m sure you’ve probably already seen this, but just in case you haven’t, check out the Roman Theological Forum run by the Oblates of Wisdom:

rtforum.org/lt/index.html

It’s got some great articles by Fr. Harrison and the rest of the Oblates.

 

[SFD]

VARC’s original post on this thread:

I am told by sedevacantists that if a pope becomes a public heretic then he loses the papal office. My question is why don’t sedevacantists throw Pius IX and his successors off the throne of Peter. Pius IX publically proclaimed heresy in 1854 when he speculated that invincibly ignorant could be saved. So why do sedevacantists profess that Pius IX and his successors are true popes when they are heretics for contradicting Pope Eugene IV?

Gentlemen:

Let’s go back to the original post here (quoted above):

If any Catholic becomes a public heretic he is no longer a member of the Church. That is simply because a public heretic is by definition outside the Church.

After that, this post goes south rather quickly.

Pope Pius IX is one of the great heroes of our Traditional resistance, an inveterate and uncompromising enemy of all liberalism.

VARC tells us he is leaving the Catholic Church for the Schismatic and Heretical Orthodox church. If VARC actually joins the Orthodox, then you can no longer call him a heretic nor schismatic…but a member of the Church in “imperfect communion”. He will hold erroneous and heretical doctrines as an Orthodox…that he did not hold as a Traditional Catholic.

You all might want to stop for a few moments and have a think on this one.

SFD

 

[pnewton]

F
He does come under false pretenses. He is not a Catholic, not at least any one that we would recognize. Maybe he was ordained by one of those Apostate bishops.

By the same token, he does not recognize that we and the rest of what is commonly called the Catholic Church is the true Church. We follow an apostate Pope they consider a heretic, celebrate a Mass, which is no longer Mass as they see it. They set a billion Catholics aside as a split from the real Church as the are the true Catholics. The “wacky world of Sedevacantism” indeed.

 

[SFD]

How do you know?

I have an article for you to read that should explain things for you. It was written by Fr. Harrison and is backed up the relevant canons from the 1983 code of canon law. This article supports what I wrote.

Of course, you could always reject this article and the relevant canon law, just as you did the quote I provided from a doctor of the Church since it disagrees with you. We’ll find out soon enough.

You ought to read the entire article.

catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0103fea1.asp

Pax et Caritas,

Fr. Harrison is wrong here. I am surprised you would use him here at all…he’s got it wrong and I can show you where…others have already.

SFD

 

[mgrfin]

mgrfin,

You have not shown him to be a non-Catholic…and I thought you fellows were against laymen making any judgments anyway.

Btw, you admit above that there is a type of Catholic that you wouldn’t recognise; “any one that we would recognize”. These are words that a schismatic might use…are you one who breaks communion with other Catholics? That’s a definition of schism…if you didn’t know.

Why don’t you fellows stop accusing others of “you’re not a Catholic” and get to the real arguments.

SFD

The real arguments? And what are they?

And who is 'you fellows"?

 

[mgrfin]

http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0103fea1.asp

Yeah, I read the entire article.

Brian Harrison throws out that old lie about Cardinal Bugnini who was in charge of the Liturgical commission, and responsibile for the liturgical changes after Vatican 2.

Harrison repeats the lie that Bugnini was a Freemason, and that was the reason that Latin was removed from the Roman rite Mass.

Of course, this charge was never proven, and the Cardinal denied throughout his whole life that he was ever a Freemason.

Harrison has no respect for the dead, opening old wounds. The vacant seat crowd sees plots and connivances everywhere: heretical popes, masonic cardinals.

I always valued the contributions that the good Cardinal made to the sacred Liturgy, vernacular and all. Requiescat in pace.

peace

 

[SemperFidelis]

Brian Harrison throws out that old lie about Cardinal Bugnini who was in charge of the Liturgical commission, and responsibile for the liturgical changes after Vatican 2.

Bugnini was an Archbishop, not a Cardinal. The fact that he wasn’t chosen to be a Cardinal was a sore point between him and the Vatican later on.

Harrison repeats the lie that Bugnini was a Freemason, and that was the reason that Latin was removed from the Roman rite Mass.

So what? This has no bearing on the content of the article. Fr. Harrison is an extremely intelligent priest and has written many scholarly articles that have been published by many Catholic magazines including This Rock by Catholic Answers, Latin Mass Magazine, the Wanderer, and the Remnant. He has a Doctorate in Sacred Theology, summa cum laude, and has done much to help fight the modernist trend in Catholicism today, and for that, everybody should be grateful. Bugnini has been accused by many within the Church of being a freemason, NOT just Fr. Harrison. Whether he was accused by Fr. Harrison or not is in no way relevant to the thread and the article. Clearly Mr. Karl Keating was able to get past this in that he allowed this article, among many others by Fr. Harrison, to be printed in his magazine and posted on his website.

Of course, this charge was never proven, and the Cardinal denied throughout his whole life that he was ever a Freemason.

Well of course he denied it.

The vacant seat crowd sees plots and connivances everywhere: heretical popes, masonic cardinals.

Uh, Fr. Harrison is NOT a sedevacantist. He actually devotes some of his time to fighting it. There’s got to be some reason for the crisis in the Church today. That some in the hierarchy might be/have been freemasons is a definite possibility. This is not just done by sedevacantists. It helps provide somewhat of an explanation for the current crisis by those, both within, and outside the Church. End of story.

I always valued the contributions that the good Cardinal made to the sacred Liturgy, vernacular and all. Requiescat in pace

Well, that’s your opinion, and not everybody sees Bugnini through such rose colored glasses.

 

[Four_Marks]

Four_Marks;3202993:

Now THAT is an emotional rant!

Shame on you 4mks!

No, that was a mild excoriation of a person who appears to be rather incorrigible.

Shame on you? Coming from mgrfin the ranter par excellance? That is rich!

 

[Four_Marks]

Four_Marks;3202976:

The real Code is 1983, which you apparently refuse to recognize.
The 1917 Code no longer exists. I assume you understand what ‘abrogated’ means.

Personal attacks like these could get you tossed!

Charity, my friend, charity.

Now apologize to us all, and move it along.

peace

You are exposing yurself for what you really are. To write “Charity, my friend, charity.” is to be writing in a mocking manner. You appear to be more interested in faking you have charity than real charity.

 

[Four_Marks]

Four_Marks;3202976:

The real Code is 1983, which you apparently refuse to recognize.
The 1917 Code no longer exists. I assume you understand what ‘abrogated’ means.

Personal attacks like these could get you tossed!

Charity, my friend, charity.

Now apologize to us all, and move it along.

peace

You are exposing yurself for what you really are. To write “Charity, my friend, charity.” is to be writing in a mocking manner. You appear to be more interested in faking you have charity than real charity.

 

[Four_Marks]

Four_Marks;3202976:

The real Code is 1983, which you apparently refuse to recognize.
The 1917 Code no longer exists. I assume you understand what ‘abrogated’ means.

Personal attacks like these could get you tossed!

Charity, my friend, charity.

Now apologize to us all, and move it along.

peace

You are exposing yurself for what you really are. To write “Charity, my friend, charity.” is to be writing in a mocking manner. You appear to be more interested in faking you have charity than real charity.

 

[Four_Marks]

Four_Marks;3202976:

The real Code is 1983, which you apparently refuse to recognize.
The 1917 Code no longer exists. I assume you understand what ‘abrogated’ means.

Personal attacks like these could get you tossed!

Charity, my friend, charity.

Now apologize to us all, and move it along.

peace

You are exposing yourself for what you really are. To write “Charity, my friend, charity.” is to be writing in a mocking manner. You appear to be more interested in faking you have charity than real charity.

 

[Four_Marks]

Four Marks claims to be a Catholic. Maybe he is a seminarian in one of those apostate outposts.

He does come under false pretenses. He is not a Catholic, not at least any one that we would recognize. Maybe he was ordained by one of those Apostate bishops.

Who knows? He does seem to be a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Now, he has revealed himself to us.

peace

Maybe you are someone who rashly speculates? Is that a sin?

Funnily enough, I don’t recognize much Catholicity in you. What I do recognize is a miffed little boy who is now on a mission to defame my character. Is that a sin? It’s a pity that you’ve acted in such a shameful manner, stating I’m not a Catholic, suggesting that I’m an apostate, a wolf in sheep’s clothing. You’ve done this with no proof. Is that a sin? Just who were you actually describing? When you sit at your computer I take it a mirror is handy?

quote mgrfin “Personal attacks like these could get you tossed!”

Really? Well, on that basis just why are YOU still here?

Yes, you’ve exposed yourself for all the world to see.

 

[pnewton]

No, that was a mild excoriation of a person who appears to be rather incorrigible.

Which definition are you angling for:

incapable of being corrected or amended: as a (1): not reformable : depraved (2): delinquent b**:** not manageable : unruly c**:** unalterable inveterate

If by corrected, I am always open to correction or alteration by legitimate authority, just not by anonymous posters. In matters of the faith, I follow our Holy Father, for example. In matters of the forum rules, the moderators. In no matters do I follow sedevacantists or any cultish group. I think you will find none here that do. The only sense in which I might be incorrigible is that I do so admire a good (or corny) witticism. I can’t help but go for the ROTFL if I see an opening. Sorry, but I’ve been doing that here since 2004.

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

Yeah, I read the entire article.

Brian Harrison throws out that old lie about Cardinal Bugnini who was in charge of the Liturgical commission, and responsibile for the liturgical changes after Vatican 2.

Harrison repeats the lie that Bugnini was a Freemason, and that was the reason that Latin was removed from the Roman rite Mass.

Of course, this charge was never proven, and the Cardinal denied throughout his whole life that he was ever a Freemason.

mgrfin,

What would you say if I produced a quote from Bugnini’s own autobiography in which he (Bignini himself) admits that he was removed from his position by the Paul VI because he (Paul VI) was give a dosier that “proved” that Annibali Bugnini was a Freemason?

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

Pax et Caritas,

Fr. Harrison is wrong here. I am surprised you would use him here at all…he’s got it wrong and I can show you where…others have already.

SFD

If there are any errors on the article, please point them out. But keep in mind that I was only using the article to show that an occult (secret) heretic does not cease to be a member of the body of the Church, nor does he lose jurisdiction, which is a point that even Sedevacantists readily admit.

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

Harrison repeats the lie that Bugnini was a Freemason, and that was the reason that Latin was removed from the Roman rite Mass.

Here’s the quote I was referring to. It comes from page 91 of Bugnini’s own Autobiography. The following is him writing about himself in the third person…

Annibali Bugnini: "What were the reasons that led the Pope to such a drastic decision, which no one expected and which lay so heavily on the Church? I said in the preface to this book that I myself never knew any of these reasons for sure, even though, understandably in the distress of the moment, I knocked on many doors at all levels . . . There were those who ascribed the change to the “authoritarian,” “almost dictatorial” way in which the secretary of the congregation supposedly managed the agency, not allowing freedom of movement to his own co-workers and limiting the role even of the cardinal prefects. But when all is said and done, all this seems to be the stuff of ordinary administrative life. **There must have been something more earthshaking. Toward the end of the summer a cardinal who was usually no enthusiast for the liturgical reform told me of the existence of a “dossier” which he had seen on (or brought to?) the Pope’s desk and which proved that Archbishop Bugnini was a Freemason. [Bugnini, p. 91.]

Fr. Harrison wrote this:

Fr. Harrison: "On the other hand, I know that there are high-ranking Vatican officials, including at least one former Cardinal Prefect of a Roman Congregation, who believe that there have been and are Freemasons in high Vatican positions. I confess my own amazement when I came to realise that such ideas (whether true or false) do not originate solely amongst “crackpot” conspiracy-theorists. Indeed it is quite widely held in Rome that the Masons themselves were responsible for circulating the absurdly long list of alleged Vatican Lodge members in 1976, precisely in order to make the whole idea look ridiculous, thereby protecting the few prelates who really were Masons. An internationally known churchman of unimpeachable integrity has also told me that he heard the account of the discovery of the evidence against Bugnini directly from the Roman priest who found it in a briefcase which Bugnini had inadvertently left in a Vatican conference room after a meeting".**

 

[mgrfin]

mgrfin,

What would you say if I produced a quote from Bugnini’s own autobiography in which he (Bignini himself) admits that he was removed from his position by the Paul VI because he (Paul VI) was give a dosier that “proved” that Annibali Bugnini was a Freemason?

I don’t have a copy of Bugnini’s biography. I was incorrect. He was never a Cardinal. He’s dead for over 25 years, and I just forgot.

It is a strange form of biography where you write about yourself in the third person.

I don’t believe that Bugnini says in his biography that his problems were as a result of proof against him that he was a Freemason.

When you are dealing with Italians, they just love that talk of ‘crisis’, and crackpot conspirators high up in Government, whether civil or ecclesiatical.

peace

 

[mgrfin]

How do you know?

I have an article for you to read that should explain things for you. It was written by Fr. Harrison and is backed up the relevant canons from the 1983 code of canon law. This article supports what I wrote.

Of course, you could always reject this article and the relevant canon law, just as you did the quote I provided from a doctor of the Church since it disagrees with you. We’ll find out soon enough.

I wonder about Fr. Harrison. Maybe he hasn’t taken the step towards apostacy yet. I haven’t read enough. He’s definitely is one of those extreme conservatives, and somewhere he attests that some hearsay statement of some highly reliable Cardinal says that there were problems with Bugnini.

Saying such in writing, I would call Harrison out. He has defamed a great man with hearsay.

I don’t know where you guys don’t have a copy of the 1983 Code. It seems to be the ‘mark of Cain’. If they haven’t the Code, they seem to back up apostate Vacant Chair theology.

Harrison quotes canons 2263 - there isn’t a 2263 in the Code of Canon Law.

Maybe he is not an apostate, degree and all, but he sure is an ultra right-wing conservative.

peace