Author Topic: Why can't trads get along?  (Read 56381 times)

Offline RobertJS

  • It prays to poofread!
  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1432
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #120 on: August 21, 2014, 11:13:35 AM »
tradical, it is fine if you want to say as soon as a man is elected pope, then it is a dogmatic fact he is the pope. But that dogmatic fact can go away. It is not permanent. Here are the 4 ways:

Involuntarily:

1. Death
2. Insanity
Voluntarily:
3. Resignation
4. Choosing heresy


The Church says that if number 4 is the case, the man automatically ceases to be pope. The bishops' continued recognition doesn't make him a pope against divine law that he ceased. Determined recognition only makes them go with him into heresy.

St. Bernard believed the final Antichrist would be a false pope suckering most of the world of Catholics. The bishop's recognition won't make him the pope, it only makes them fall into apostasy.

This is rock solid. Please don't ignore it.
ideo mittit illis Deus operationem erroris ut credant mendacio
 

Offline tradical

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1022
  • Thanked: 189 times
    • Tradicat
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #121 on: August 21, 2014, 11:27:54 AM »
tradical, it is fine if you want to say as soon as a man is elected pope, then it is a dogmatic fact he is the pope. But that dogmatic fact can go away. It is not permanent. Here are the 4 ways:

Involuntarily:

1. Death
2. Insanity
Voluntarily:
3. Resignation
4. Choosing heresy


The Church says that if number 4 is the case, the man automatically ceases to be pope. The bishops' continued recognition doesn't make him a pope against divine law that he ceased. Determined recognition only makes them go with him into heresy.

St. Bernard believed the final Antichrist would be a false pope suckering most of the world of Catholics. The bishop's recognition won't make him the pope, it only makes them fall into apostasy.

This is rock solid. Please don't ignore it.

Look at your assertions.

Quote
The Church says that if number 4 is the case,...
Are you certain that is all the 'Church says' - what does the 'Church' actually say about the loss of office - nothing.  What you are dealing with is the opinion of theologians. This way we have clarity on the level of authority that we are discussing.

Now concerning #4, you are only stating part of the opinion and it is by no means the only opinion on this topic.  Selecting one and rejecting another opinion without reason is not rational.

So I am not 'ignoring' the 'fact', I am simply taking into account the whole premise put forward and the consistency between the cited authorities.  A Catholic does not have actionable knowledge that a Pope has lost his office until the Church makes a declaration. http://tradicat.blogspot.ca/2013/03/sedevacantism-and-manifest-heretic.html

As far as:

Quote
St. Bernard believed the final Antichrist would be a false pope ...

What St. Bernard believed is ok, however that provides neither you nor I actionable information.  How do you know that Pope Francis is the last Pope?  You won't know until he does some of the actions listed in the apocalypse (which he hasn't).

So quoting St. Bernard as it is a fact to support your assertion is a non sequitor.

Lastly, with respect to:
Quote
tradical, it is fine if you want to say as soon as a man is elected pope, then it is a dogmatic fact he is the pope.

What you and the other sedes seem to have a problem with is that I am simply taking the consistant and (as far as I can tell) universal opinion of theologians that the acceptance of a newly elected Pope by all the bishops in union with the See of Peter establishes an infallible (ie can't be wrong) dogmatic fact that the elected man IS Pope.  Even the lauded and finally provided citation of Cardinal Billot is consistent with what constitutes the dogmatic fact.

So ... I'm not really saying anything - I'm just taking what is contained in the theological text books at face value without trying to warp it to suit my own opinion. 

P^3
P^3
Prayer
Penance
Patience
 

Offline RobertJS

  • It prays to poofread!
  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1432
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #122 on: August 21, 2014, 12:16:46 PM »
Since 1870 when all the bishops gathered to discuss infallibility in Rome, it has been categorically taught as a truth to the general clergy and laity that a pope can become a heretic and automatically cease to be pope. Any tolerated differing opinion on that fact, existing before then, has been dropped.

This is the second time I have brought up the Antichrist, and the second time you are dodging the point. I said nothing about applying it to Francis. I am talking theoretically about the final Antichrist. This is a matter of principle.

Now, according to St. Bernard, if all the bishops recognize the Antichrist as the pope, does that make him pope as a dogmatic fact? Or does it make those bishops fall into apostasy?

Which?

ideo mittit illis Deus operationem erroris ut credant mendacio
 

Offline tradical

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1022
  • Thanked: 189 times
    • Tradicat
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #123 on: August 21, 2014, 12:24:18 PM »
Since 1870 when all the bishops gathered to discuss infallibility in Rome, it has been categorically taught as a truth to the general clergy and laity that a pope can become a heretic and automatically cease to be pope. Any tolerated differing opinion on that fact, existing before then, has been dropped.

This is the second time I have brought up the Antichrist, and the second time you are dodging the point. I said nothing about applying it to Francis. I am talking theoretically about the final Antichrist. This is a matter of principle.

Now, according to St. Bernard, if all the bishops recognize the Antichrist as the pope, does that make him pope as a dogmatic fact? Or does it make those bishops fall into apostasy?

Which?

Robert,
You have neglected (yet again) to provide a reference. I am completely aware of any magisterial document that supports your affirmation.

If that is your case about the antichrist - then it is a red-herring and your point was unclear.

If the antichrist were to be elected Pope in a 'lawful' fashion, then following the theology, the Church would be protected from provided a universal acceptance by the bishops.

P^3



P^3
Prayer
Penance
Patience
 

Offline Greg

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Major
  • ****
  • Posts: 13810
  • Thanked: 8332 times
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #124 on: August 21, 2014, 12:27:44 PM »
tradical, it is fine if you want to say as soon as a man is elected pope, then it is a dogmatic fact he is the pope. But that dogmatic fact can go away. It is not permanent. Here are the 4 ways:

Involuntarily:

1. Death
2. Insanity
2b His porch swing can break and leave him in a permanent vegetative state.
Voluntarily:
3. Resignation
4. Choosing heresy

Fixed.
 

Offline RobertJS

  • It prays to poofread!
  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1432
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #125 on: August 21, 2014, 12:44:12 PM »
Since 1870 when all the bishops gathered to discuss infallibility in Rome, it has been categorically taught as a truth to the general clergy and laity that a pope can become a heretic and automatically cease to be pope. Any tolerated differing opinion on that fact, existing before then, has been dropped.

This is the second time I have brought up the Antichrist, and the second time you are dodging the point. I said nothing about applying it to Francis. I am talking theoretically about the final Antichrist. This is a matter of principle.

Now, according to St. Bernard, if all the bishops recognize the Antichrist as the pope, does that make him pope as a dogmatic fact? Or does it make those bishops fall into apostasy?

Which?

Robert,
You have neglected (yet again) to provide a reference. I am completely aware of any magisterial document that supports your affirmation.

If that is your case about the antichrist - then it is a red-herring and your point was unclear.

If the antichrist were to be elected Pope in a 'lawful' fashion, then following the theology, the Church would be protected from provided a universal acceptance by the bishops.

P^3

If #4 is what you need more information for, then obviously it will need to be provided to you.

Your response to the Antichrist question seems to be saying that the majority of bishops will not recognize him as a true pope. But that is flatly against what is predicted in Scripture to happen - the majority of bishops falling into apostasy. You are trying to maintain that the majority of bishops cannot go into apostasy, which is plainly false.

ideo mittit illis Deus operationem erroris ut credant mendacio
 

Offline JuniorCouncilor

  • Korporal
  • **
  • Posts: 476
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Religion: Catholic as can be
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #126 on: August 21, 2014, 02:25:28 PM »
I think the question that Sedevacantists need to answer is: What would they have to change/do if their theory is wrong. 

I think I would have to try to think up some other synthesis for Christianity, because it would seem absolutely clear to me that the claims of the Catholic Church are false-- yet the miracles that back up individual claims are real enough.

I guess I would have the option of becoming a modernist too-- which may, indeed, come to the same thing as the above.  After all, the Church made its peace with modernism at Vatican II, as the head of Bergoglio's select commission of Cardinals has said.  But frankly, yuck.

You have to realize that sedevacantism is a last-ditch defense.  I don't think most people will go there unless they don't think they can otherwise keep the Catholic faith-- and even then, they probably have a part of their mind that says "you're just rationalizing-- you should be more honest and just admit that the Church has defected."  But then, there actually is a basis in history and theology for the claims of sedevacantism, so it can't just be written off as rationalizing.

So, if you're going to argue here, realize that you're on the edge of a knife-- stray but a little and you will fail.  If you convince people that the recognition by the bishops makes a man infallibly the pope, but you fail to remove their objection-- for example-- that a true pope could never canonize a man who committed public scandals against the first commandment... well, in that case, you should expect to be the immediate cause of people apostasizing.

Personally, if I were you, I would try to remove the objection before insisting on the 'dogmatic fact' argument.

God bless.
 

Offline voxxpopulisuxx

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 5410
  • Thanked: 112 times
  • If I agreed with you, we'd both be wrong.
  • Religion: duhhhhh
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #127 on: August 21, 2014, 05:37:06 PM »
I think the question that Sedevacantists need to answer is: What would they have to change/do if their theory is wrong. 

I think I would have to try to think up some other synthesis for Christianity, because it would seem absolutely clear to me that the claims of the Catholic Church are false-- yet the miracles that back up individual claims are real enough.

I guess I would have the option of becoming a modernist too-- which may, indeed, come to the same thing as the above.  After all, the Church made its peace with modernism at Vatican II, as the head of Bergoglio's select commission of Cardinals has said.  But frankly, yuck.

You have to realize that sedevacantism is a last-ditch defense.  I don't think most people will go there unless they don't think they can otherwise keep the Catholic faith-- and even then, they probably have a part of their mind that says "you're just rationalizing-- you should be more honest and just admit that the Church has defected."  But then, there actually is a basis in history and theology for the claims of sedevacantism, so it can't just be written off as rationalizing.

So, if you're going to argue here, realize that you're on the edge of a knife-- stray but a little and you will fail.  If you convince people that the recognition by the bishops makes a man infallibly the pope, but you fail to remove their objection-- for example-- that a true pope could never canonize a man who committed public scandals against the first commandment... well, in that case, you should expect to be the immediate cause of people apostasizing.

Personally, if I were you, I would try to remove the objection before insisting on the 'dogmatic fact' argument.

God bless.
This is exacxtly the case...well stated. Remove the objection to a ST John Paul2 and I shall return to the position that the Man in rome holds the true seat of Peter.
Lord Jesus Christ Most High Son of God have Mercy On Me a Sinner (Jesus Prayer)

“You can never cross the ocean until you have the courage to lose sight of the shore.” – Christopher Columbus
911!
"Let my name stand among those who are willing to bear ridicule and reproach for the truth's sake, and so earn some right to rejoice when the victory is won. "— Louisa May Alcott

“From man’s sweat and God’s love, beer came into the world.”St. Arnold (580-640)

Geocentrism holds no possible atheistic downside.
 

Offline tradical

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1022
  • Thanked: 189 times
    • Tradicat
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #128 on: August 21, 2014, 09:10:36 PM »
Since 1870 when all the bishops gathered to discuss infallibility in Rome, it has been categorically taught as a truth to the general clergy and laity that a pope can become a heretic and automatically cease to be pope. Any tolerated differing opinion on that fact, existing before then, has been dropped.

This is the second time I have brought up the Antichrist, and the second time you are dodging the point. I said nothing about applying it to Francis. I am talking theoretically about the final Antichrist. This is a matter of principle.

Now, according to St. Bernard, if all the bishops recognize the Antichrist as the pope, does that make him pope as a dogmatic fact? Or does it make those bishops fall into apostasy?

Which?

Robert,
You have neglected (yet again) to provide a reference. I am completely aware of any magisterial document that supports your affirmation.

If that is your case about the antichrist - then it is a red-herring and your point was unclear.

If the antichrist were to be elected Pope in a 'lawful' fashion, then following the theology, the Church would be protected from provided a universal acceptance by the bishops.

P^3

If #4 is what you need more information for, then obviously it will need to be provided to you.

Your response to the Antichrist question seems to be saying that the majority of bishops will not recognize him as a true pope. But that is flatly against what is predicted in Scripture to happen - the majority of bishops falling into apostasy. You are trying to maintain that the majority of bishops cannot go into apostasy, which is plainly false.

You are off base. What I am maintaining is that for the past 6 elections the Bishops in union have all agreed who was Pope.

If you want to segue into the assertion that there has been a complete apostasy of Bishops - well you go ahead and prove that for each individual bishop from the successive conclaves were in a state of apostasy.

Also please keep in mind that it has to be explicit because if you think it was only in the 'internal forum' then your theory is pooched because you can't prove it.

P^3
P^3
Prayer
Penance
Patience
 

Offline JuniorCouncilor

  • Korporal
  • **
  • Posts: 476
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Religion: Catholic as can be
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #129 on: August 21, 2014, 09:22:26 PM »
I think the question that Sedevacantists need to answer is: What would they have to change/do if their theory is wrong. 

I think I would have to try to think up some other synthesis for Christianity, because it would seem absolutely clear to me that the claims of the Catholic Church are false-- yet the miracles that back up individual claims are real enough.

I guess I would have the option of becoming a modernist too-- which may, indeed, come to the same thing as the above.  After all, the Church made its peace with modernism at Vatican II, as the head of Bergoglio's select commission of Cardinals has said.  But frankly, yuck.

You have to realize that sedevacantism is a last-ditch defense.  I don't think most people will go there unless they don't think they can otherwise keep the Catholic faith-- and even then, they probably have a part of their mind that says "you're just rationalizing-- you should be more honest and just admit that the Church has defected."  But then, there actually is a basis in history and theology for the claims of sedevacantism, so it can't just be written off as rationalizing.

So, if you're going to argue here, realize that you're on the edge of a knife-- stray but a little and you will fail.  If you convince people that the recognition by the bishops makes a man infallibly the pope, but you fail to remove their objection-- for example-- that a true pope could never canonize a man who committed public scandals against the first commandment... well, in that case, you should expect to be the immediate cause of people apostasizing.

Personally, if I were you, I would try to remove the objection before insisting on the 'dogmatic fact' argument.

God bless.
This is exactly the case...well stated. Remove the objection to a ST John Paul2 and I shall return to the position that the Man in rome holds the true seat of Peter.

Thank you, sir.   :toth:
 

Offline tradical

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1022
  • Thanked: 189 times
    • Tradicat
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #130 on: August 21, 2014, 09:28:49 PM »
I think the question that Sedevacantists need to answer is: What would they have to change/do if their theory is wrong. 

So, if you're going to argue here, realize that you're on the edge of a knife-- stray but a little and you will fail.  If you convince people that the recognition by the bishops makes a man infallibly the pope, but you fail to remove their objection-- for example-- that a true pope could never canonize a man who committed public scandals against the first commandment... well, in that case, you should expect to be the immediate cause of people apostasizing.

Personally, if I were you, I would try to remove the objection before insisting on the 'dogmatic fact' argument.

God bless.

The problem is that the 'objections' go on ad-infinitem. 

The root issue is the uncertainty of who is Pope.  Once it is ascertained who is the Pope (Francis for better or worse ... mostly worse) - it becomes a question of reconciling the person's beliefs with the rest of the doctrine. Point by point.

For example: Is Pope John Paul II a Saint? Well, following the general opinion of theologians (which is the same authority for the other dogmatic fact) the answer is yes. 

Does this create a problem for the indefectibility of the Church?  The answer is no.

All that is infallible with regards to canonization is that Pope John Paul II is in Heaven. By the mercy of God he was in a state of grace when he died.

Does the extension of his 'cult' (in the proper sense when discussing Saints) to the Universal Church impact the Church's indefectibility? The answer is no.  As long as it does not explicitly require an immoral act (eg Have you kissed a Koran today?)  no - not every act of discipline is guaranteed to be perfect. 

But a person has to be willing to study the implications of each act and not jump off into rash assumptions that every bishop has left the Church etc.

P^3





I
P^3
Prayer
Penance
Patience
 

Offline voxxpopulisuxx

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 5410
  • Thanked: 112 times
  • If I agreed with you, we'd both be wrong.
  • Religion: duhhhhh
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #131 on: August 21, 2014, 10:11:35 PM »
The church teaches infallabley in her Traditions....and there has never been a saint who was a public and notorious. Unrepentant sinner up. Until their death. According to Church Tradition one is a venerated saint when. One is unmistakenly acting as Christ would.
Lord Jesus Christ Most High Son of God have Mercy On Me a Sinner (Jesus Prayer)

“You can never cross the ocean until you have the courage to lose sight of the shore.” – Christopher Columbus
911!
"Let my name stand among those who are willing to bear ridicule and reproach for the truth's sake, and so earn some right to rejoice when the victory is won. "— Louisa May Alcott

“From man’s sweat and God’s love, beer came into the world.”St. Arnold (580-640)

Geocentrism holds no possible atheistic downside.
 

Offline RobertJS

  • It prays to poofread!
  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1432
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #132 on: August 22, 2014, 03:49:15 AM »
tradical, it is fine if you want to say as soon as a man is elected pope, then it is a dogmatic fact he is the pope. But that dogmatic fact can go away. It is not permanent. Here are the 4 ways:

Involuntarily:

1. Death
2. Insanity
2b His porch swing can break and leave him in a permanent vegetative state.
Voluntarily:
3. Resignation
4. Choosing heresy

Fixed.

Yes, brain death is the worst form of mental health.

ideo mittit illis Deus operationem erroris ut credant mendacio
 

Offline RobertJS

  • It prays to poofread!
  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1432
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #133 on: August 22, 2014, 04:07:34 AM »
Since 1870 when all the bishops gathered to discuss infallibility in Rome, it has been categorically taught as a truth to the general clergy and laity that a pope can become a heretic and automatically cease to be pope. Any tolerated differing opinion on that fact, existing before then, has been dropped.

This is the second time I have brought up the Antichrist, and the second time you are dodging the point. I said nothing about applying it to Francis. I am talking theoretically about the final Antichrist. This is a matter of principle.

Now, according to St. Bernard, if all the bishops recognize the Antichrist as the pope, does that make him pope as a dogmatic fact? Or does it make those bishops fall into apostasy?

Which?

Robert,
You have neglected (yet again) to provide a reference. I am completely aware of any magisterial document that supports your affirmation.

If that is your case about the antichrist - then it is a red-herring and your point was unclear.

If the antichrist were to be elected Pope in a 'lawful' fashion, then following the theology, the Church would be protected from provided a universal acceptance by the bishops.

P^3

If #4 is what you need more information for, then obviously it will need to be provided to you.

Your response to the Antichrist question seems to be saying that the majority of bishops will not recognize him as a true pope. But that is flatly against what is predicted in Scripture to happen - the majority of bishops falling into apostasy. You are trying to maintain that the majority of bishops cannot go into apostasy, which is plainly false.

You are off base. What I am maintaining is that for the past 6 elections the Bishops in union have all agreed who was Pope.

If you want to segue into the assertion that there has been a complete apostasy of Bishops - well you go ahead and prove that for each individual bishop from the successive conclaves were in a state of apostasy.

Also please keep in mind that it has to be explicit because if you think it was only in the 'internal forum' then your theory is pooched because you can't prove it.

P^3

Apostasy or heresy, it doesn't matter.

I have already presented to you the example of St. Athanasius & followers and how they completely separated from the Arian clergy because of their association with that one, subtle, philosophical error against the doctrine of the Trinity. Yes, this was before Rome condemned Arianism. The state of the bishops since the late 1960's has far exceeded that historical example. Now it is the heresy of religious liberty to the clear activity at Assisi. Mortalium Animos of 1928 condemns the bishops for apostasy, and those who support them:

"For which reason conventions, meetings and addresses are frequently arranged by these persons, at which a large number of listeners are present, and at which all without distinction are invited to join in the discussion, both infidels of every kind, and Christians, even those who have unhappily fallen away from Christ or who with obstinacy and pertinacity deny His divine nature and mission. Certainly such attempts can nowise be approved by Catholics, founded as they are on that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule. Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little turn aside to naturalism and atheism, as it is called; from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion. "

ideo mittit illis Deus operationem erroris ut credant mendacio
 

Offline voxxpopulisuxx

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 5410
  • Thanked: 112 times
  • If I agreed with you, we'd both be wrong.
  • Religion: duhhhhh
Re: Why can't trads get along?
« Reply #134 on: August 22, 2014, 05:52:36 AM »
Couldnt be clearer than that. There is no rebuttle possible;;  Assisi was exactly what was condemned
« Last Edit: August 22, 2014, 05:59:52 AM by voxxpopulisuxx »
Lord Jesus Christ Most High Son of God have Mercy On Me a Sinner (Jesus Prayer)

“You can never cross the ocean until you have the courage to lose sight of the shore.” – Christopher Columbus
911!
"Let my name stand among those who are willing to bear ridicule and reproach for the truth's sake, and so earn some right to rejoice when the victory is won. "— Louisa May Alcott

“From man’s sweat and God’s love, beer came into the world.”St. Arnold (580-640)

Geocentrism holds no possible atheistic downside.