Started by Kaesekopf, December 31, 2021, 01:01:56 PM
Quote from: Michael Wilson on April 21, 2022, 04:18:10 PMT.D.The SSPX does not hold to the sed position and in fact is hostile to it.
Quote from: TerrorDæmonum on April 21, 2022, 04:14:43 PMMaybe the reform that is needed of The Sacred Sciences (renaming it to make sense, and enforcement of rules, or some sort of enforced participation standard) could include the addition of similar board for specific Council and Decrees discussions.The whole idea that questions whether a council, decree, or Pope has contradicting another is an open invitation to the Sedevacantist debate, otherwise, the idea that there can be any real contradiction on doctrine could be dismissed entirely.
Quote from: Justin Martyr on April 21, 2022, 05:01:43 PMTo be fair, there is a difference between a thread on "Here are two different magisterial texts which appear to contradict themselves. Do they contradict?
QuoteGiven that the Council does not define doctrines, whatever discussions people have about them will be about interpretations and politics: regardless of what people claim, there is nothing new.
QuoteHere's a BLATANT contradiction. CHECKMATE Vatican II sect. Go ahead and do your mental gymnastics NEO-CATHOLICS."The former is a legitimate discussion to understand what distinctions to make. The latter is anti-catholic posting.
Quote from: TerrorDæmonum on April 23, 2022, 01:16:58 PMFurther clarification is needed: does the Sedevacantist Thesis include all infinite possible "the apparent Pope is not actually the Pope" claims, discussions, and debates including those views which hold some other person to actually be the Pope?