Rad Trad Vocation?

[Credo in Deum]

Ah, yes, because the post-Council church is never divided or feuding with itself. ...right?

 

There is a difference between brothers and sisters disagreeing within the family home and bringing the case to the dad for a decision vs. brothers and sisters leaving home while saying: "You’re not my real dad.  My real dad would do as I say, and think as I think etc... I will not come back home until a dad I want is residing under the family roof."  

[Lefebvre]

There is a difference between brothers and sisters disagreeing within the family home and bringing the case to the dad for a decision vs. brothers and sisters leaving home while saying: "You’re not my real dad.  My real dad would do as I say, and think as I think etc... I will not come back home until a dad I want is residing under the family roof."  

 

I can't extend that analogy without torturing in a manner which would get me convicted; so I'm not going to try. I do think you're misrepresenting the sedevacantist premise however, which is not "the Pope is not the Pope because he disagrees with me" but rather "the Pope is not the Pope because he agrees with, and expounds upon, views which have been manifestly condemned as heretical." It is not bitter trads angry at liberalisation or new reforms, it is that nearly all sedevacantists believe that the liberalisation, reforms, etc. are so flawed or outright heretical that they contradict the indefectibility of the Church. Since the Church is, of course, indefectable, than the body which promulgated the errors/heresies can therefore not be the Church. You can freely argue whether or not the documents of Vatican II are, in fact, heretical; or whether the judgements of previous Pontiffs which are so often used to condemn those documents as heretical are infallible or binding in such a way that, as part of the magisterium, they could not be altered or disregarded by an ecumenical Council. It does both sedevacantism and your own position a disservice, however, to misrepresent the sede position in such a petty fashion.

[Credo in Deum]

I can't extend that analogy without torturing in a manner which would get me convicted; so I'm not going to try. I do think you're misrepresenting the sedevacantist premise however, which is not "the Pope is not the Pope because he disagrees with me" but rather "the Pope is not the Pope because he agrees with, and expounds upon, views which have been manifestly condemned as heretical." It is not bitter trads angry at liberalisation or new reforms, it is that nearly all sedevacantists believe that the liberalisation, reforms, etc. are so flawed or outright heretical that they contradict the indefectibility of the Church. Since the Church is, of course, indefectable, than the body which promulgated the errors/heresies can therefore not be the Church. You can freely argue whether or not the documents of Vatican II are, in fact, heretical; or whether the judgements of previous Pontiffs which are so often used to condemn those documents as heretical are infallible or binding in such a way that, as part of the magisterium, they could not be altered or disregarded by an ecumenical Council. It does both sedevacantism and your own position a disservice, however, to misrepresent the sede position in such a petty fashion.

 

 

Sedes think the reforms are heretical, and they think the council should be discredited as a heretical council.  Sedes will not join in communion with the Church until they see a Pope agrees with their position.   Dress up the descent in fancy terms all you want.  At the end of the day Sedes will never agree that there is a legitimate Pope, until said Pope agrees with the the Sede position.

[Lefebvre]

Sedes think the reforms are heretical, and they think the council should be discredited as a heretical council.  Sedes will not join in communion with the Church until they see a Pope agree with their position.   Dress up the descent in fancy terms all you want.  At the end of the day Sedes will never agree that there is a legitimate Pope, until said Pope agrees with the the Sede position.

I suppose the primary fault with that statement would be the implication that sedevacantists are either at fault for using their facilities of reason (illuminated by faith) to come to a conclusion, or at fault for logically adhering to the position which that conclusion has birthed. But I won't argue the point, lest I be warned for bickering again or somehow give scandal to the faithful; which of course is not my intention.

Edited August 18, 2014 by Lefebvre

[Poorly Catechized Convert]

Well, people read up and decide who to support. I personally lean towards regarding the Thuc line as legitimate based off of the various apologia on the matter published by Fr Antony Cekada, but having not read the SSPV's magnum opus (The Sacred and the Profane by Bp. Kelly) on the subject of the Thuc line's potential illegitimacy I cannot say for certain which I support.

Thanks for the reply. So how many Sedevacantist organizations are there? I know of the SSPV, CMRI, and the Most Holy Family Monestary (but they may not have parishes).

[Lefebvre]

Thanks for the reply. So how many Sedevacantist organizations are there? I know of the SSPV, CMRI, and the Most Holy Family Monestary (but they may not have parishes).

CMRI, SSPV, and then St Gertrude the Great Church and apostolate in Ohio. SGG is run by a bishop -- can't remember whether it's +Sanborn or +Dolan -- and they also run the Most Holy Trinity Seminary down in Florida. There are also a handful of independent sede parishes, which are usually run by graduates of Most Holy Trinity. Most Holy Family are straight nuts, and hate the rest of the sedes for various and sundry crazypants reasons.

[Poorly Catechized Convert]

Thanks for the information. His do the CMRI view St. Gertrude the Great? How are the independent parishes viewed.

I was aware of how THF was perceived. While I disagree with the sedevacantist position, I'd never judge the movement based on how MHF acts.

[Lefebvre]

Thanks for the information. His do the CMRI view St. Gertrude the Great? How are the independent parishes viewed.

I was aware of how THF was perceived. While I disagree with the sedevacantist position, I'd never judge the movement based on how MHF acts.

CMRI and SGG are quite friendly, their priests tend to co-operate.

[Gabriela]

+ Hi Lefebvre,

 

I just wanted to say that I (unfortunately) rarely see a trad Catholic argue with such charity and patience, and I would like to thank you for doing your small bit to improve the image of trads everywhere.

 

:-)

 

In Him,

 

curiousing

[puellapaschalis]

There are more of them. One of the things I learnt once I switched to the Trid Mass was not only that there are plenty of trads (and some sedes) who are genuinely lovely people, including when we're talking about Catholicism, but that getting over myself for more than half a minute to listen to them could show me why they're 'trads' in the first place, and hence to reduce my vitriol against them.

[Guest]

Good read

[PaxHominibus]

On 8/11/2014 at 10:30 PM, Nihil Obstat said:

God could not possibly call someone to a vocation which constituted disobedience to the just exercise of ecclesiastical authority. I think that should be an uncontroversial principle. The more difficult part is determining exactly what constitutes this form of disobedience. Obviously authority can be exercised in an unjust manner, in which case disobedience to the earthly power can constitute true obedience to God's perfect law.

In my opinion, the SSPV and CMRI do not fall into this category. I believe their rejection of modern popes is neither justified nor prudent.

 

If you are curious, and if it adds to my 'street cred', many people on this site would probably categorize me in the rad-trad camp, although semantically there is a lot of debate as to what actually defines the 'radical' aspect.

That's pretty much my take. That being said, as a layman, I really couldn't care less what the facultative situation is with the priest saying Mass so I would, in all likelihood, attend the Mass the OP might eventually say, should there be no other, more regular options.