|
Post by Pacelli on Oct 20, 2022 11:14:07 GMT -5
When Catholics profess the Creed, they state that they believe in "one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church." Yet, in recent years there are some that claim to believe that the Church is apostolic, yet deny the Catholic teaching on the apostolic succession, pretending that it has somehow lapsed, and that in the world there are no longer any apostolic successors remaining, simply vacant offices. This heresy is unique to sedevacantists, so that is where it will be found. For too long it had grown in the shadows, not sticking its head out so it can be properly debunked, and many sedevacantists were unaware of its existence, myself included. That all changed in 2012, when, on the now closed Ignis Arden's forum, Fr. Cekada publicly put forth his idea that shocked all who were paying attention, by claiming that the apostolic succession can exist with only vacant offices, not with living apostolic successors. Fr. Cekada was told that this was a heresy during the exchange, and essentially made a joke out of the accusation. Fr. Cekada gave no Catholic source for his assertion, and when Catholic sources were presented, that refuted him, he wouldn't recant. I would urge all readers to read the lengthy exchange found HereIn order to put out this fire, I have put numerous resources, original scans or documents, on this forum for years, with the hope that if Catholics have easy access to the Catholic teaching that they would reject this heresy. Unfortunately, this has not proven to be enough, as I have been informed recently that not only has this heretical movement increased in numbers, but it has also taken root in Europe and other parts of the world. I have also been informed that many among the C-thesis adherents have now moved on from simply trying to solve the matter of the Petrine succession, and are now applying their ideas to the apostolic successors throughout the world, pretending that a "material succession" of bishops continues the apostolic succession. I have always presumed good will for those ensnared by this evil, as this heresy is something new, and my hope is that Catholics have just been caught unaware and did not realize that believing this heretical idea is in direct conflict with the Catholic Faith. Also, there is no Pope to condemn this new heresy, and the remaining Catholic bishops are in a state of confusion or cowardice or both, so don't expect much from them. They do not even stand up to the much more public heresies of Francis, never mind this small heretical movement! In the entire history of the Catholic Church, you will never find anyone who would have ever asserted this proposition, yet it exists today. It is a radical novelty, made up to try to make a particular school of sedevacantism make sense, but in doing so, it deviates from the Apostolic Faith and attacks the very Constitution of the Catholic Church itself. I will be posting in this thread numerous sources to demonstrate the Catholic position. Many of these have already been published in our resource library, but I want to revive them here to draw attention to them. One last point, and I ask the reader to think about this, those who hold the heretical teaching have no Catholic sources. All they have are their ideas and arguments, nothing more. They are alone and separated from Catholic teaching and theology.
|
|
|
Post by Clotilde on Oct 20, 2022 23:55:18 GMT -5
I think this demonstrates that it is not hard to go too far in this Crisis. Heretics never think they are breaking the law and now there is really no one with authority who is going to save them from themselves. They are free to continue this downward spiral into schism.
I know it is a simplification but the state of sedevacante has boundaries. We must have boundaries or we will splinter into dozens of different sects.
|
|
|
Post by samuelsede on Oct 21, 2022 3:02:18 GMT -5
Some excepts from two different articles expounding the C-thesis on the question of the present day hierarchy: 1.) The Cassiciacum Thesis A Brief Exposition, by Fr. Desposito: mostholytrinityseminary.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Cassiciacum-Thesis-2019-Script-Fr-D.pdfSome notes on the article: - Fr D states that the Catholic hierarchy, materially speaking, is the same before and after Vatican II. This he also refers to as the, 'current hierarchy.' - Said current hierarchy, "...has absolutely no authority in act....", enjoying only a legal status. - All dioceses in the world are occupied by 'adherents of Vatican II.' - He explains that sedevacantist bishops are unable to elect a new Pope because they lack ordinary jurisdiction and therefore have no right to represent the Church in an imperfect General Council. He goes on to say that the C-thesis, "...is the only explanation that satisfies the demands of Sacred Theology." The thesis argues that the present day hierarchy still has the 'power of designation' (carefully distinguished from the 'power to rule'), and that this is necessary to the Church's constitution. From this it seems that the C-Thesis -- at least in its current form admitted by the RCI -- maintains a purely material Catholic hierarchy with no authority in act, i.e., that there are no formal successors of the apostles living in the Church today. 2.) Explanation of the Thesis, by Bishop Sanborn (RCI) mostholytrinityseminary.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Explanation-of-the-Thesis.pdfHe doesn't explicitly say there are no bishops with ordinary jurisdiction remaining today, but nor does he identify any alternative hierarchy other than this supposed, 'material,' novus ordo hierarchy.
|
|
|
Post by samuelsede on Oct 21, 2022 3:12:23 GMT -5
Some excepts from two different articles expounding the C-thesis on the question of the present day hierarchy: 1.) The Cassiciacum Thesis A Brief Exposition, by Fr. Desposito: mostholytrinityseminary.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Cassiciacum-Thesis-2019-Script-Fr-D.pdfView AttachmentView AttachmentSome notes on the article: - Fr D states that the Catholic hierarchy, materially speaking, is the same before and after Vatican II. This he also refers to as the, 'current hierarchy.' - Said current hierarchy, "...has absolutely no authority in act....", enjoying only a legal status. - All dioceses in the world are occupied by 'adherents of Vatican II.' - He explains that sedevacantist bishops are unable to elect a new Pope because they lack ordinary jurisdiction and therefore have no right to represent the Church in an imperfect General Council. He goes on to say that the C-thesis, "...is the only explanation that satisfies the demands of Sacred Theology." The thesis argues that the present day hierarchy still has the 'power of designation' (carefully distinguished from the 'power to rule'), and that this is necessary to the Church's constitution. From this it seems that the C-Thesis -- at least in its current form admitted by the RCI -- maintains a purely material Catholic hierarchy with no authority in act, i.e., that there are no formal successors of the apostles living in the Church today. 2.) Explanation of the Thesis, by Bishop Sanborn (RCI) mostholytrinityseminary.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Explanation-of-the-Thesis.pdfView AttachmentHe doesn't explicitly say there are no bishops with ordinary jurisdiction remaining today, but nor does he identify any alternative hierarchy other than this supposed, 'material,' novus ordo hierarchy. But in his article, 'On Being a Pope Materially,' a he does seem to argue that the present day Catholic hierarchy is entirely material. In the section 14. 'The duration of the right of designating,' he writes: mostholytrinityseminary.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/On-Being-a-Pope-Materially.pdfLater in the article he states:
|
|
|
Post by samuelsede on Oct 21, 2022 3:36:30 GMT -5
Some excepts from two different articles expounding the C-thesis on the question of the present day hierarchy: 1.) The Cassiciacum Thesis A Brief Exposition, by Fr. Desposito: mostholytrinityseminary.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Cassiciacum-Thesis-2019-Script-Fr-D.pdfView AttachmentView AttachmentSome notes on the article: - Fr D states that the Catholic hierarchy, materially speaking, is the same before and after Vatican II. This he also refers to as the, 'current hierarchy.' - Said current hierarchy, "...has absolutely no authority in act....", enjoying only a legal status. - All dioceses in the world are occupied by 'adherents of Vatican II.' - He explains that sedevacantist bishops are unable to elect a new Pope because they lack ordinary jurisdiction and therefore have no right to represent the Church in an imperfect General Council. He goes on to say that the C-thesis, "...is the only explanation that satisfies the demands of Sacred Theology." The thesis argues that the present day hierarchy still has the 'power of designation' (carefully distinguished from the 'power to rule'), and that this is necessary to the Church's constitution. From this it seems that the C-Thesis -- at least in its current form admitted by the RCI -- maintains a purely material Catholic hierarchy with no authority in act, i.e., that there are no formal successors of the apostles living in the Church today. 2.) Explanation of the Thesis, by Bishop Sanborn (RCI) mostholytrinityseminary.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Explanation-of-the-Thesis.pdfView AttachmentHe doesn't explicitly say there are no bishops with ordinary jurisdiction remaining today, but nor does he identify any alternative hierarchy other than this supposed, 'material,' novus ordo hierarchy. But in his article, 'On Being a Pope Materially,' a he does seem to argue that the present day Catholic hierarchy is entirely material. In the section 14. 'The duration of the right of designating,' he writes: mostholytrinityseminary.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/On-Being-a-Pope-Materially.pdfView AttachmentLater in the article he states: View AttachmentLastly, in an article by Fr. Ricossas -- available on the RCI website -- entitiled, ' Pope Papcy and the Vacant See,' it is explicitly stated, "No one - not the College of Cardinals, nor the College of Bishops, nor the council, nor the Chamberlain - enojoys this supreme Authority which is proper to the monarchical (and non-collegial) constitution of the Church. Neither does anyone enjoy the charism of infallibility: not the College of Cardinals, nor the College of Bishops: not as it is dispersed throughout the world, nor as it is reunited in a Council, for the said College lacks the Head which is the Roman Pontiff. In the same way, to the Church is missing Her supreme legislator, the Roman Pontifff, who regulates ecclesiastical discipline and the worship of God. From this point of view (and from this point of view only!), the existence of non-existence of the power of jurisdiction or of Magesterium in the College of Bishops is of little impact. We have amply answered this question in Sodalitium.57 Consequently, even though the permanence of ordinary jurisdiction or the power of Magisterium in the subordinate Episcopate would obviously be very useful, nevertheless this permanence is not absolutely necessary for the indefectibility of the Church.58 However, the permanence of an electoral college able to designate a true and legitimate Roman Pontiff (since the ‘BEING WITH’ remains in Christ) is solely and exclusively necessary for indefectibility." (emphasis mine) mostholytrinityseminary.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Fr.-Ricossas-article-Pope-Papacy-and-the-Vacant-See.pdfThe referenced Sodalitium issue no.55 is entirely in French, but -- using an online translator -- it seems they believe that a purely moral continuity of the College of Bishops is sufficient. They inter this from the fact that moral continuity in Petrine succession is sufficient for there to be perpetual Successors in the Primacy of Peter, as we know a temporary vacancy in the Apostolic See does not destroy this, so long as there are always legitimate electors of a Pope in the Church. Essentially, they are saying that what is true for the Head is true for the subordinate bishops. This is also the same objection Fr. Cekada made to Mr. Lane in their exchange over this matter. Therefore, I think it wise to expend more effort showing why the perpetual succession of Popes is does not function in the same way as the Apostolic Succession at large, and therefore why it is not legitimate to argue from a temporary vacancy of the Apostolic See to a universal vacancy of all Episcopal Sees.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Oct 21, 2022 22:56:12 GMT -5
The Papacy isnt the rule of faith but its defender...if a Pope or anti pope doesnt defend the faith..it changes nothing.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Oct 22, 2022 16:57:16 GMT -5
Sorry for the delay, things have been busy for me. This is from a previous post on this forum. Keep checking, more will be posted. So I don't overwhelm with forum, I'll keep it at only one per day. (The following is the English translation, kindly provided by forum member Eric H, of excerpts from St. Robert Bellarmine’s work, Controversiis Christianae Fidei, Book 2, 1721, taken from pages 69-89. I am reposting it here from its original posting in the thread, “Necessity of Lawful Pastors” with the hope that this teaching of St. Robert Bellarmine will not be buried into obscurity, as this part of Church teaching is currently being challenged. I have added some emphasis to the post not found in the original.) Eric H wrote:original post by EricH found HERE
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Oct 22, 2022 17:01:50 GMT -5
Samuel,
Thank you for your posts which demonstrate the slide into this heresy by various sedevacantists.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Oct 23, 2022 17:34:08 GMT -5
I wanted to add here a link to the source of St. Robert's quotes. It's in Latin, as the book is yet to be fully translated. On this forum, everything is above board, and EricH is an honorable man, so I have confidence that his translations are good, but if anyone wants to translate it for yourself, feel free. I don't have the time to dive into translating, and even having studied Latin for years, I find it tedious to translate it. archive.org/details/bub_gb_SfJq79_HdscC/page/n7/mode/1up?view=theater
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Oct 23, 2022 17:42:15 GMT -5
Lawful and authorized pastors of the Church
The following is an exact reproduction of Q and A, taken from "The Church of Christ is Apostolical," Rev. James J. McGovern, DD., The Manual of the Holy Catholic Church, Chicago, 1906., pgs 157-158. Imprimatur Aug 24, 1906, Most Reverend James Edward Quigley, Archbishop of Chicago.
|
|
|
Post by Clotilde on Oct 23, 2022 18:22:23 GMT -5
I think this demonstrates that it is not hard to go too far in this Crisis. Heretics never think they are breaking the law and now there is really no one with authority who is going to save them from themselves. They are free to continue this downward spiral into schism. I know it is a simplification but the state of sedevacante has boundaries. We must have boundaries or we will splinter into dozens of different sects. This emerging heresy has the potential to separate a large proportion of clergy who hold sede vacante and those that follow them from the Catholic Church. Please offer your Mass, Holy Communion and Rosary intentions for the defeat of this heresy and all that flows from it (including the no Una Cum position). I see a major split coming if this isn’t quelled. Beyond chapels and priests, this has the ability to make brother Catholics enemies and sow discord within families.
|
|
|
Post by Clotilde on Oct 23, 2022 23:45:08 GMT -5
I see a major split coming if this isn’t quelled. Beyond chapels and priests, this has the ability to make brother Catholics enemies and sow discord within families. These are the kinds of sectarian attitudes that are being publicly expressed by people seen as being respectful laity. It is very bad. I already disliked him after a I saw him on Catholic Family Podcast. I’m sorry but their segment on women reading theology, or whatever it was, disappointed me. I was hoping for some form of reference or practicality, but it derailed into the husband is the head of the home. I don’t know a single traditional Catholic woman who doesn’t love, honor, and obey their husbands so, I felt like he did not answer the question nor did he explain how study fits into everyday life with the ease of obtaining information, nor did it consider temperaments or even the preferences of the man. I know men who are bored by women who do not match them intellectually. It seemed to end by saying (without saying) if the husband isn’t sede, the wife needs to correct him. Bad advice. Saying this as a woman who can make amazing cakes, brownies, brisket, handmade pasta… Anyhow, sorry to go off on a tangent, but yes, this embodies precisely the behavior we are speaking about. I find it distasteful and it is getting harder to avoid.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Oct 24, 2022 8:52:56 GMT -5
From: Herrmann, Theologiæ Dogmaticæ Institutiones, n. 282., all emphasis added: (The source of this quote is from a post made by John Lane in which he presented it in his discussion on this thread linked HERE pages 9-10.)
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Oct 25, 2022 12:04:33 GMT -5
The following is taken from Manual of Catholic Theology, Joseph Wilhelm D.D. PH.D. and Thomas B. Scannell D.D., 1909. Linked HERE
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Oct 26, 2022 12:19:14 GMT -5
I would ask the readers to take note of the words, "always ruled." If an organization is always ruled then there is no time that it is not ruled.
Secondly, take note of the term, "essential." If something is essential to something it must be part of it. Essential parts of a living human body are the brain and the heart. If either are missing the man is no longer living. Non-essential parts of a living man may be the appendix, an arm, a leg, etc.
The same in regards to the successors of the apostles, they form an essential part of the Church. The Church must have what is essential, as the lack of an essential element would mean that it is no longer the same Church, it's essence would have changed into something different.
|
|