Any explanations? Their points seem correct. Are the last popes actually antipopes? I don’t know what to think.
Does any of that nonsense really “seem correct” to you? How so? Please explain.
How does separating yourself from the Church founded by Jesus Christ “seem correct?”
Prince, don’t go down that road.
Their points are usually half baked conspiracy theories, mixed in with some envy that they didn’t get their own way at Vatican II.
If they were that loyal to the chair of Peter, why are they hiding out in some office in America selling old VHS tapes instead of campaigning against the Church of Satan if that’s what it really is? You’d think they’d be a little more feverent and pro-active.
I just looked at the first link–the “101 Heresies” of St. John Paul II. I just looked at the first “heresy” and checked the sources and it is completely false.
That website says the Pope taught that “the Catholic Church lacks unity” in paragraphs 7-10 of Ut Unum Sint.
In paragraphs 7-10 of Ut Unum Sint the Pope notes that many Christians desire to see unity among all Christians and that unity of the Church is a necessity. In paragraph 11 he address the Catholic Church and in the very first sentence says:
“11. The Catholic Church thus affirms that during the two thousand years of her history she has been preserved in unity, with all the means with which God wishes to endow his Church, and this despite the often grave crises which have shaken her, the infidelity of some of her ministers, and the faults into which her members daily fall.”
If the website can be so misleading with their #1 “heresy,” why should I bother with the rest?
The young Mr. Pollock is hardly a reliable source. Even when I was a sedevacantist, I thought some of his writings way over the top.
I’m a glutton for punishment, so I checked the “#2 heresy.” First, Dz 102 says infants are baptized for remission of sins. It doesn’t say anything about their ultimate salvation.
In EV 99, St. John Paul II speaking of babies killed in the womb, says “To the same Father and his mercy you can with sure hope entrust your child.” Again, nothing about salvation.
Anyway, St. Thomas Aquinas said such babies could indeed be saved. Will this website say he also was not a Catholic? In reply to the objection that since Baptism cannot reach into the womb but original sin can, then Adam’s sin is more powerful than Christ’s, St. Thomas responds:
[quote=St. Thomas]Children while in the mother’s womb have not yet come forth into the world to live among other men. Consequently they cannot be subject to the action of man, so as to receive the sacrament, at the hands of man, unto salvation. They can, however, be subject to the action of God, in Whose sight they live, so as, by a kind of privilege, to receive the grace of sanctification; as was the case with those who were sanctified in the womb.
So this person is 0-2 with two blatant misleads…
It is against CAF rules to discuss sedevantism on these forums. None of these people should be responding the way they are to your post. I wish I could help you, but I can’t because of the CAF rules. All I can say is persevere and keep seeking the truth. God bless you!
Genesis, if you are in the mind to do both extra penance and an act of supreme charity for some of your “separated brethren” (i.e. sedevacantists), refute each of the alleged heresies he listed and post them somewhere.
When Catholics start reading matter such as those links contain, they are already in a frame of mind to accept them. That is what is so diabolical about the whole mess.
Psudo-Catholic tin foil hat groups. :eek:
Troll alert :eek:
Maybe one day. This kind of thing is the perfect example of how being an extreme fault-finder in others will ultimately lead you to unjustly accuse someone of something that isn’t true.
[quote=St. Peter Damien, Letter 44]It is only too true that he who customarily takes pleasure in reviling the failings of others will not avoid sinning himself, since even if he is zealous in practicing justice, at some times he will have to fall into the snares of slander.
Sedevacantism is a banned topic in these forums.