Sedevacantist... serious or without any merit?


#1

Can I please have some of the Catholics ( and orthodox ) explain to me if the sedevacantists in the Catholic realm have any points that should be taken seriously.

If so, can someone please explain them to me.

This comes on the heels of some of the discussions that have been posted more recently regarding the Popes and having to remain subject to them if one is to be considered a Catholic.

From some of the limited material I have read, they seem to have some valid points regarding the vacancy of the see of Rome.

Thanks for your help!


#2

‘Sede-vacantists’ are very good at making persuasive arguments. (I was nearly sucked into their arguments at one point!)

But, ultimately (and sadly, like the EO), it comes down to their interpretation of Catholic history/Church teachings vs the pope.

God Bless!

p.s I think, apart from the traditionalist forums, discussing sede-vacantism is not allowed! So you may see this thread disappear! :slight_smile:


#3

Any historian would say that the papacy passed from John XXIII to Paul VI to John Paul I to John Paul II to the present Pope Benedict XVI.

Really sedevacantism amounts to a claim that the Pope has defected from the authentic teachings of Jesus. However it is packaged slightly differently to avoid sounding like Protestantism. That the Pope is wrong isn’t a claim that can be easily dismissed. Many millions of non-Catholics would say the same, though they would give rather different reasons for the defection.

Sedevacantism is an attempt to simultaneously claim that the Pope is infallible whilst disobeying or disagreeing with him. It is thus without merit.


#4

A must read for better understanding dissident “catholics”

cuf.org/FileDownloads/dogmatizingdiscipline.pdf


#5

And yet again…cuf.org/FileDownloads/promultis.pdf


#6

My vote is “without any merit”. They basically believe the Church is now an invisible church and not a visible one. It’s only truly known to a few. If you’ll notice, during all of the interregnums, the Church has always known that we were in one. Suddenly we are now to believe that a few keen people have noticed that we don’t have a valid pope. Look at all of the other interregnums. What was going on? We had people in a position to elect a new pope trying to decide who was the new pope not to mention a few times where people were trying to get there own “pope” in there. They all had a common thread of people trying to get the seat filled. This didn’t and hasn’t happened in the visible Church as of the last 50+ years other than between the deaths of our beloved Holy Fathers.


#7

Ok.
2 questions.
Is it possible for a pope to be a heretic or even apostate when elected?
OR
Is it possible for a pope to become a heretic or even apostate?

I mean manifest. None of the material vs formal stuff.


#8
  1. Yes

  2. Yes

For example, say Pope Benedict “reveals himself” to be a heretic tomorrow - we can assume he would never dare publish anything too crazy, the heresy would be something quite minor. He might say Jesus’ Divinity didn’t include His hair…

He could never proclaim that as an infallible dogma, because it just doesn’t qualify as one of those teachings. We’d simply let him wallow in his own heresy for however many years, and when he died, the next pope, we would pray, would then state ALL of Jesus was Divine, including His hair.

You might say: “well, changing the liturgy is more important that that!” And I would say: “the ‘bad’ changes have been made by YOU in society, by allowing such things as guitars and bad architecture to invade the Church.” Don’t blame some bishops 40+ years ago for YOUR ugly parish church. Don’t blame them for wishy-washy homilies, don’t blame them for the ecumenicism/indifferentism that plagues the Church, don’t blame them for the ills of modern society - blame modern society!

In short, there is no merit to Sedevacantism; it is a “cop-out”, it is used by people that don’t want to face the real world, they don’t want to face a culture that is SICK, they want to pretend to be “back in the good ole days”. We live in an especially SICK society here in the United States, and it isn’t much better in France, and it’s really not all that much better in even Bavaria or Poland, and it’s getting worse in Spain and Portugal. The situations in Mexico, Central and South America are so far removed from our own in the West, it would be difficult to even convince people of the Sedevacantist frame of mind - I honestly believe it is a luxury of the West for people to even explore such novelties.

Instead of running around crying that the Holy See is vacant, why not run around and harass heretical priests and bishops? Why not continue to evangelize and instruct people in the Faith? Why not make it a point to go to Daily Mass at your local parish? Quit playing games, and join the real world: that’s what I say to the Sedevacantists and the like.


Someone explain again why Ecclesia Dei is ignored by friends and members of SSPX?
#9

Well said:thumbsup:
and
A big ditto:cool:


#10

I am interested to understand this too. The Sedavacantists I have met do seem to be very serious about their faith. Whether or not their claims have any merit is one of the things that brought me to this forum. My personal experience with the last three popes makes it impossible for me to agree with them that they are not valid popes. However, my research has led me to better understand the problems with modernism and “the spirit of vatican II” that they are objecting against. If there are any Sedavacantists here, can you answer the question: You believe that the teaching of the magesterium should be followed? What magesterium is valid, since you consider any from Vat II invalid?


#11

:confused:
AGAIN?

Why are you asking those who have no authority?:eek:
This forum is splattered with the offal of schism… read what solid theologians…approved by their Bishop…who are in union with Rome…have to say!
Educate don’t indoctrinate!:cool:

Arm yourself AGAINST these schism by reinforcing what the Church teaches and why she teaches it.
Mother Angelica puts it so succinctly…
“Garbage in…Garbage out…”
:thumbsup:


#12

completely and totally without merit, heretics, schismatics, you may regard their rantings in the same light as the garbage spewed by Call to Action and other heretical groups. I thought this was a banned topic, can we please give it a rest.


#13

it is a logical and spiritual impossibility for a Catholic who is “serious about his faith” to divorce himself from the Eucharist and from the Church who in her God-given authority confects the Eucharist. Such a person is more serious about their own opinions, preferences and prejudices that about true faith.


#14

May I ask why?


#15

I understood it differently. It seemed to me that they affirm the infallibility of the see of Peter (that is why they have not all become Orthodox) but that they consider that the See has been vacant. I don’t think they see themselves as being in disobedience or disagreemtne with the Pope, since they don’t recognize him as a valid pope. However, if I misunderstand this, please someone let me know, because I am very new in my study on this point.


#16

do Sedavacantists ever stop to consider perhaps the pope battles the things they oppose? such as the modernists around him? is it really that cut and dry? black and white? i’m sure the pope is tugged from all sides, all the time. is it so easy to judge who is an evil modernist out to destroy the church or who is a 100% traditonal orthodox trying to lift the church up? it’s easy to sit back and judge but i, for one, would not like to be the man in the pope’s shoes.


#17

Utterly without merit.


#18

In my humble opinion as a past DRE and CCD teacher…as someone who has made the journey from sadevacantism to orthodox Catholicism…may I suggest something?

Reverse your approach.
First exhaust what the Church teaches before asking them their opinion.
It is a quagmire that may well suck you in if you do not first put on the Armor of Faith.


#19

Because it is their opinion that I do not understand!

Reading this part sheds a little light on my previous inquiry as to why this topic is banned…:wink: I did read the official documents, which is why I did not remain in camp with the Sedavacantists. However, there are still a number of points I don’t understand about it and still would like to learn. I don’t see how I can become educated without asking questions, but if I have asked them in the wrong place,then I apologize.
Arm yourself AGAINST these schism by reinforcing what the Church teaches and why she teaches it.
Mother Angelica puts it so succinctly…
“Garbage in…Garbage out…”
:thumbsup:
[/quote]


#20

No, no, I do not believe you have asked this in the wrong forum…simply of the wrong informants. They are schismatic.
Think of schism as a tourniquet…stopping the flow of blood…in this case Grace.
Think of Heresy as amputation…if you leave the tourniquet on too long amputation will become necessary…No?

Now…ask the question of a theologian in union with Rome…you may get an answer that really helps instead of putting you in jeopardy.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.