Does anyone know anything about this. The church without a Pope for 40 years. The Pope Pius XIII who was a cappucin monk? I have heard of the group that follows Pius X and keep the Latin Mass and think our Roman Catholic Church has strayed but I have never heard of this. Has anyone else?
The TCC is a sedevaticanist group, and the “pope” was probably elected by a few close family members. I find it really hard to believe that God would let a Billion, billion with a “B”, catholics fall into heresy, instead proping up a ridiculously small church (I’m guessing that the following would be that of an average parish - 2000 families or so).
In any case SPPX is a different thing all together. SPPX doesn’t claim to have its own pope. However it does ordain, appoint bishops, and celebrate the Latin Mass all without permission.
I saw this some time back and really paid no attention to it. There is a good deal of writings about Vatican II and the NO mass. What I did not see (and if anybody did, please reply to this) is any concrete evidence to show that the large Catholic Church is in schism or heresy. Some people claim that one of the previous Popes (the name escapes me at this time) stated that the Latin Mass will always be said in the Catholic Church. What they do not realize is that there are masses that are said in Aramaic by the Eastern Rites of the church. I agree with the previous poster that I can not see how the Holy Spirit could allow a large group of Catholics especially the bishops and cardinals to go into schism and heresy.
Yur just not lookin hard enough.:coffeeread:
The group referenced by the OP are known a CONCLAVISTS:
The main Sedevacantist groups are: the Society of St. Pius V, whose founders were expelled from the Society of St. Pius X over the issue of sedevacantism; the Ngô Ðình Thuc Pierre Martin line of episcopal succession; and the Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen, also known as the Tridentine Latin Rite Church, Oblates of Mary Immaculate Queen of the Universe.
Out of Sedevacantism came Conclavism; although there are some Conclavists that did not have Sedevacantist roots. As the term Conclavist implies, they have elected their own pope. This, however, is strongly opposed by the vast majority of Sedevacantists.
The second Conclavist church was the “true Catholic Church,” which is based in Montana, United States. They are a Sedevacantist sect that believe that after they had “wandered in the wilderness” for 40 years after the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958, they elected “Pope Pius XIII” (Fr. Earl Lucian Pulvermacher, OFM Cap) in 1998. The so-called conclave took place by telephone.
Yes, they recognize the BXVI as their spiritual leader and believe in the Catholic Church doctrine. They have never left the Church.
However it does ordain, appoint bishops, and celebrate the Latin Mass all without permission.
Certainly without the French bishops’ permission. But maybe we can use the word “tolerated” for the time being until things get straightened out? Rome has conceded all ordinations, appointments, and celebrations to be VALID.
They also have declared Islam to be VALID.
Which does tend to obscure the word.
When, please, did Rome concede that any SSPX functions were valid? Documentation please.
Depends on what you mean by ANY:
As in NOT ANY or
ANY at all.
VALID is correct. A brief search on this forum or I-Net will provide you with your request. (“you have no need that any man teach you; but google.” (1Jn 2:27)
Now PARTICULAR SACRAMENTS and Episcopal Prerogatives are another story!
Not needed. Valid ordination means valid exercise of function. The same is true about the Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, Catholic offshots like Old Catholics, groups like SSPX, and episcopi vagantes. Liceity is a different matter from validity and that’s the problem with SSPX. Validity is not.
Amen. I speak from distant experience. A bunch of us were sent home from kindergarten for having Liceity.
OK, I agree.
My sentiments exactly.
So what is the official standing with Rome of Conclavists? Are they considered schismatic, non-Catholic, or what?
Rome declares NOTHING except towards folks they want to put into the Conciliar Church tent. Who wants a bunch o trouble makers??
However, there is the Decree on “Your conscience makes Salvation possible…to anyone”.
So we have to assume they are in the way of Salvation.
So Rome just ignores them? They’ve never made a statement about this group?
To qualify for “a statement” you have to be causing a noteworthy drain on the collection basket. That is, a really big bunch a people that have resources.
They don’t qualify on either criteria.
And also have the ability to attract a large number of souls away from the Church? But don’t the small number they have captured still matter enough for an official statement, a warning of some kind?
If no one is joining them who, prey tell, are they needing to warn?
If the ones captured are acting in good conscience, which we must assume, just like any “strange” belief system, then the church has already decreed that they are in the way of salvation. So, what’s to warn?
Oh, yes, I forgot about the other application of the EENS doctrine.