Author Topic: Clarification re: Sedevacantism and the Forum  (Read 2856 times)

Offline Kaesekopf

  • Enkindle in us the virtues of humility and patience So we too may obediently do your will faithfully.
  • Oberst
  • Major
  • *****
  • Posts: 21598
  • Thanked: 8360 times
    • Suscipe Domine
  • Religion: Catholic
Clarification re: Sedevacantism and the Forum
« on: December 31, 2021, 02:01:56 PM »
This Forum is a traditional Catholic forum.  We take it as granted that there is a Crisis in the Church, and that the shepherd is struck. 

Sedevacantism-related posting should be relegated to the appropriate subforum, "The Sedevacantist Thesis." 

To reiterate the subforum's rules:
Please note that the purpose of the sedevacantist thesis subforum is to provide a place where members can engage in discussion of the sedevacantist position.  It is not intended to be a hang out or safe zone, and snide or uncharitable remarks will not be tolerated. Anyone posting here is allowed to argue their case but must do so reasonably and without being needlessly inflammatory.

If you have any questions or need clarification please PM the staff.  Thank you.

As mentioned in forum rules and by moderation elsewhere, the sedevacantist thesis is allowed to be discussed and debated on our forum, and sedevacantists are free to post here. We view sedes, as we do all others, as Catholics, unless we see specific truth as to why they are not in the Church (formal heresy, schism, excommunication, etc.) The forum looks to the times of the Great Western Schism, noting that Sts. Catherine of Siena and Vincent Ferrer differed on their views of the Roman Pontiff, yet remained in communion with another. This is true Charity, love which comes from God, and His grace.

Dogmatic sedevacantism may be said to be a general attitude toward the current crisis in the Church which regards the state of the Seat of Peter to be practically de fide.  This means that one who believes that the Seat is currently occupied has lost their Catholicity (or, at the very least, experiences a dramatically reduced Catholicity) due to grave error which is likely at least materially heretical.

Dogmatic sedevacantism is forbidden on this forum and is subject to moderation.  While Suscipe Domine is a sedeplenist forum, sedevacantists are welcome to post here in all sub-fora.  However, it is also the stance of the forum that the question of the loss of a valid papacy in the occasion of heresy is an open one among Catholics with no binding, universal Magisterial teaching on the subject.  Therefore, Catholics are free to hold varying opinions on the legitimacy of the post-Conciliar papacies.  Any posts which claim or even imply a superiority in the faithfulness or orthodoxy of Catholics who hold a varying opinion on the state of the papacy will be subject to discipline.

For further clarification, it should be noted that the section of the clarification below applies to dogmatic sedeplenism as well.  SD is a sedeplenist forum, and as such, one is quite free to hold that sedevacantism is theologically flawed or dangerous.  But since the theological opinion undergirding sedevacantism has not been condemned by the Church, it is against forum rules to imply an inferiority in Catholicity among sedevacantists (and vice versa).

As such, the title of this clarification will be changed to better reflect the full scope of this rule. 

Quote
However, it is also the stance of the forum that the question of the loss of a valid papacy in the occasion of heresy is an open one among Catholics with no binding, universal Magisterial teaching on the subject.  Therefore, Catholics are free to hold varying opinions on the legitimacy of the post-Conciliar papacies.  Any posts which claim or even imply a superiority in the faithfulness or orthodoxy of Catholics who hold a varying opinion on the state of the papacy will be subject to discipline.

Any further questions or clarifications will follow as necessary.
Wie dein Sonntag, so dein Sterbetag.

I am not altogether on anybody's side, because nobody is altogether on my side.  ~Treebeard, LOTR

Jesus son of David, have mercy on me.
 
The following users thanked this post: Jayne, Elizabeth.2, Baylee

Offline GiftOfGod

  • "The new mass, sacraments, and priests are bastards." - Archbishop Lefebvre, An Open Letter to Confused Catholics, page 116
  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 2206
  • Thanked: 756 times
  • Religion: Catholic (traditional)
Re: Clarification re: Sedevacantism and the Forum
« Reply #1 on: December 31, 2021, 02:35:38 PM »
Deporting sedes to a ghetto won't solve this forum's problems.
If attending Mass, the ordinary form as celebrated everyday around the world be sinful, then the Church no longer exists. Period.
Rather, if the NOM were the lex credendi of the Church, then the Church would no longer exist. However, the true mass and the true sacraments still exist and will hold the candle of faith until Our Lord steps in to restore His Bride to her glory.
We could compare ourselves to the Catholics in England at the time of the Reformation. Was it sinful for them to attend Cranmer's service?
We have to remind ourselves that all the machinery of the "Church" continued in place. They had priests, bishops, churches, cathedrals. But all of them were using the new "Book of Common Prayer" instead of the Catholic Mass. Ordinary lay people could see with their own eyes an enormous entity that called itself the "Church," but did the true Church still exist in that situation? Meanwhile, in small hiding places in certain homes were a handful of true priests offering the true Mass at the risk of imprisonment, torture and death.

 

Offline Baylee

  • Korporal
  • **
  • Posts: 273
  • Thanked: 251 times
Re: Clarification re: Sedevacantism and the Forum
« Reply #2 on: December 31, 2021, 03:31:15 PM »
Deporting sedes to a ghetto won't solve this forum's problems.

Hmm...I don't know.  Would it mean the anti-sedes aren't allowed in?
 

Offline Heinrich

  • Steig mal auf den Berg hinauf
  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Major
  • ****
  • Posts: 10055
  • Thanked: 5338 times
  • Gott, wende Dich zu uns und gib uns neues Leben
  • Religion: römisch-katholisch
Re: Clarification re: Sedevacantism and the Forum
« Reply #3 on: December 31, 2021, 09:48:53 PM »
Deporting sedes to a ghetto won't solve this forum's problems.

I think Käse should make you a sweetheart deal: moderator of sede sub.
Schaff Recht mir Gott und führe meine Sache gegen ein unheiliges Volk . . .   .                          
Lex Orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi.
"Die Welt sucht nach Ehre, Ansehen, Reichtum, Vergnügen; die Heiligen aber suchen Demütigung, Verachtung, Armut, Abtötung und Buße." --Ausschnitt von der Geschichte des Lebens St. Bennos.
 

Offline Philip G.

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 1573
  • Thanked: 651 times
  • Ordinary Cult
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Clarification re: Sedevacantism and the Forum
« Reply #4 on: January 01, 2022, 01:01:16 AM »
Is it permitted for either a sedeplenist, or a sedevacantist, to categorize their counterpart, if and only if they manifest the forum's definition of dogmatism in this regard, as having lost their catholicity?

No offense, but personally, I find(and have felt this way since day one reading the rules) the following a disappointing sentence in the rules on SD.  Maybe it would help to expand on it.  Because, I cannot seem to read it in a positive light.

Any posts which claim or even imply a superiority in the faithfulness or orthodoxy of Catholics who hold a varying opinion on the state of the papacy will be subject to discipline.

Metaphorically speaking, I see nothing wrong males puffing out their chests and banging on them with their fists like apes.  That is not a bad thing.  It is not threatening behavior.  I view it as hierarchy in action.  I consider it healthy.  What is bad is when one camp of apes travels across the jungle to the other camp of apes and attempts to massacre them.  Or, when the group attempts to massacre one of their own.  In other words, mob rule to attack other member(s) on a forum is bad, whether they represent a larger group or idea, or their own idea(s).  That is what should be subject to discipline in my opinion.  And, that is not a by-product of genuine superiority, which raises up all those around.  But, it is a by-product of inferiority, which should be the key word, whether the moderator is skilled enough to weave that into a rule.

Maybe it is just my opinion, but a post that doesn't at the very least imply superiority, isn't a post worth reading in my opinion.  Contrast that with posts that dogmatize superiority.  Please, discipline those!  I think those are easy enough to spot.  As for "claims" of superiority, just like in sports, some claims can be authentic and therefore worthy, and some claims can be manufactured, and therefore a fail.  Claims are an art form.   

« Last Edit: January 01, 2022, 10:42:54 AM by Philip G. »
For the stone shall cry out of the wall; and the timber that is between the joints of the building, shall answer.  Woe to him that buildeth a town with blood, and prepareth a city by iniquity. - Habacuc 2,11-12
 

Offline Jayne

  • Mary Garden
  • Major
  • ****
  • Posts: 16014
  • Thanked: 8497 times
  • Comic Sans Frontières
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Clarification re: Sedevacantism and the Forum
« Reply #5 on: January 01, 2022, 11:08:50 AM »
Deporting sedes to a ghetto won't solve this forum's problems.

Gift, when you requested a separate subforum for discussing Covid and related issues, it was a great idea.  KK made a child board in response and it improved my experience of the forum.  It made it easier for me to avoid discussions that were of little interest to me, often included implications that I was less than Catholic for my views, and sometimes even included animosity and name-calling.

People want to contain discussion of sedevacantism in its own subforum for similar reasons.  For many of us, the topic is not very interesting and often includes unpleasantness.  I want it all in one place so it is easier for me to avoid when I want to.

It is not a ghetto in the sense that SV members are allowed to post only in that spot.  These members can participate freely in forum discussions and I appreciate that they do so.  They often make good contributions to topics that are of interest to me.  But I don't want to see SV dragged into every thread any more than I want to see anti-vaxx dragged into every thread.
Jesus, meek and humble of heart, make my heart like unto Thine.
 
The following users thanked this post: Kaesekopf, orate, Michael Wilson

Offline TerrorDæmonum

  • Declina A Malo & Fac Bonum
  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3598
  • Thanked: 2071 times
  • Breves Dies Hominis Sunt
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Sedevacantism and the Forum
« Reply #6 on: January 01, 2022, 01:25:12 PM »
Is this rule still in effect:

Quote
2) It is necessary for every poster, including sedevacantists, to use a pope's regnal name when posting. Even anti-popes are afforded this respect. Immature name-calling will not be tolerated.


Offline Elizabeth.2

  • Mary Garden
  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1151
  • Thanked: 1436 times
Re: Clarification re: Sedevacantism and the Forum
« Reply #7 on: January 01, 2022, 01:37:04 PM »
Deporting sedes to a ghetto won't solve this forum's problems.

I think Käse should make you a sweetheart deal: moderator of sede sub.
:cheeseheadbeer:
 
The following users thanked this post: Heinrich

Offline Kaesekopf

  • Enkindle in us the virtues of humility and patience So we too may obediently do your will faithfully.
  • Oberst
  • Major
  • *****
  • Posts: 21598
  • Thanked: 8360 times
    • Suscipe Domine
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Sedevacantism and the Forum
« Reply #8 on: January 01, 2022, 04:58:22 PM »
Is this rule still in effect:

Quote
2) It is necessary for every poster, including sedevacantists, to use a pope's regnal name when posting. Even anti-popes are afforded this respect. Immature name-calling will not be tolerated.

Yes, however a little bit of leeway is granted if one refers to a former pontiff by surname....
Wie dein Sonntag, so dein Sterbetag.

I am not altogether on anybody's side, because nobody is altogether on my side.  ~Treebeard, LOTR

Jesus son of David, have mercy on me.
 

Offline TerrorDæmonum

  • Declina A Malo & Fac Bonum
  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3598
  • Thanked: 2071 times
  • Breves Dies Hominis Sunt
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Clarification re: Sedevacantism and the Forum
« Reply #9 on: January 02, 2022, 10:09:20 PM »
Anti-Catholic posting (accusing Popes of heresy, denying Church councils, etc) outside of the appropriate forum looks like any anti-Catholic posting.

There are many different types of Sedevacantists...where is the cut off for denial of the Church? Can those who assume that Vatican 2 and the documents and people are heretical post that anywhere? What about those who say the same about Vatican 1? Or Chalcedon?

What about Sedevacantists who are new, and don't have the most common dates of the start of this thesis?

What about those who don't share these views who respond to such threads and get accused of not being trad or whatever? This could easily stifle any discussion and this forum would be de facto Sedevacantist if those are the only topics that can be discussed without being mobbed and accused.

Can those who accuse ecclesiastical authority of heresy because the opinion holder doesn't know what "subsist" means be accused of heresy for failure to demonstrate acceptance of the Council of Trent's description of the Church but instead having a weird abstract notion of it instead of what we were infallibly taught?

The Sedevacantist Thesis is held by some Catholics who can rationalize this, but to others, the same arguments are essentially just an attack of the entirety of the Church.

And the more and more one is exposed to the unrestrained and undisciplined expression of those opinions, the more cannot see it any other way.

The uncertain views of Sedevacantists should not lead to mass promotion of their conclusions, because the conclusion is not the only conclusion of their arguments.

Offline andy

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1096
  • Thanked: 606 times
Re: Clarification re: Sedevacantism and the Forum
« Reply #10 on: January 02, 2022, 11:03:51 PM »
FWIW: FSSPX totally allows or even invites sedevacantist's faithful to attend Masses they say.
 
The following users thanked this post: Jayne

Offline Kaesekopf

  • Enkindle in us the virtues of humility and patience So we too may obediently do your will faithfully.
  • Oberst
  • Major
  • *****
  • Posts: 21598
  • Thanked: 8360 times
    • Suscipe Domine
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Clarification re: Sedevacantism and the Forum
« Reply #11 on: January 02, 2022, 11:08:47 PM »
Deporting sedes to a ghetto won't solve this forum's problems.

It would solve one particularly contentious problem, though. 
Wie dein Sonntag, so dein Sterbetag.

I am not altogether on anybody's side, because nobody is altogether on my side.  ~Treebeard, LOTR

Jesus son of David, have mercy on me.
 
The following users thanked this post: OCLittleFlower, Jayne

Offline TerrorDæmonum

  • Declina A Malo & Fac Bonum
  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3598
  • Thanked: 2071 times
  • Breves Dies Hominis Sunt
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Clarification re: Sedevacantism and the Forum
« Reply #12 on: January 03, 2022, 09:43:20 AM »
To clarify, the arguments Sedevacantists use do not lead to their position alone, they lead to:

  • Eastern Orthodoxy: easier to reject the Pope and follow a tradition that seem stable and which claims to represent orthodox Christianity
  • Protestantism: easier to see the broader historical view of Protestants who made the same arguments against the Popes in the past and see their simplified theology and history as easier
  • Unbelief (apostasy): the arguments do not leave anything that resembles the  Church's teaching about the Church in general, so one's conclusion would most likely be that the Church is false from the beginning

Sedevacantists who strive to be orthodox Catholics are a minority in those who are convinced of the arguments they use.

The other positions are schismatic or heretical, and the Sedevacantist position in itself is not, but is so close that one can easily be persuaded by their arguments or any individual representation that it is.

That is why great care must be taken in discussing the uncertain opinions of Sedevacantists.

If I were convinced of their claims, which I am not for many reasons, I would not become a Sedevacantist and wait for some word from on high: I would review the doctrines of the Church and see what the logical conclusion actually is.

The position is not simply a matter of the identify of the Pope at any given time, but a much longer and more severe situation than the name would suggest.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2022, 11:17:11 AM by Pæniteo »
 
The following users thanked this post: Jayne, Xavier, Justin Martyr

Offline TerrorDæmonum

  • Declina A Malo & Fac Bonum
  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3598
  • Thanked: 2071 times
  • Breves Dies Hominis Sunt
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Clarification re: Sedevacantism and the Forum
« Reply #13 on: March 30, 2022, 07:14:28 PM »
Are Sedevacantist sources generally acceptable for citation and promotion on the general forum, particular in General Catholic Discussion?

It seems that such sources would not be appropriate, because of the implicit promotion and the fact that those sources would lead directly to this topic.

Furthermore, any source which uses any terminology to deny the validity of priests, ranging (Popes, bishops, cardinals, priests) is explicitly promoting the view.

Offline TerrorDæmonum

  • Declina A Malo & Fac Bonum
  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3598
  • Thanked: 2071 times
  • Breves Dies Hominis Sunt
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Clarification re: Sedevacantism and the Forum
« Reply #14 on: March 31, 2022, 11:18:37 PM »
Being heckled by Sedevacantists, having them post their propaganda without restraint, and being the target of their "opponents" has made this forum very annoying to use as a Catholic.

It is not about the Pope, but everything else: it is more than Sedevacantism, but the emergence of something else that is increasingly diverging.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2022, 12:37:31 PM by TerrorDæmonum »
 
The following users thanked this post: mikemac, Justin Martyr