OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 19, 2014, 12:59:22 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Ex cathedra  (Read 9911 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,701


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #45 on: August 16, 2013, 12:37:45 AM »

When I look at my text, it is not crossed out, but when posted, most of what I wrote is crossed out.  Can anyone correct this?  Thanks.

LOL, what a day.  I thought you were just being heavily sarcastic.  I laughed! 
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
Hawkeye
Дїѡни́сїй Качема́ческїй, Oнома́тодоѯологъ
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Priestless Old Belief
Jurisdiction: Betwixt Antioch and familiarity
Posts: 666


"The Emperor Alexander died at Taganrog."


« Reply #46 on: August 16, 2013, 12:40:24 AM »

When I look at my text, it is not crossed out, but when posted, most of what I wrote is crossed out.  Can anyone correct this?  Thanks.

LOL, what a day.  I thought you were just being heavily sarcastic.  I laughed! 

I was a little disappointed when it turned out to be otherwise.
Logged

Quote from: Leo Tolstoy to Grand Duke Nikolai Mikhailovich
[W]hatever was hidden behind the name of the hermit Feodor . . . let historical evidence fail to connect Alexander with Kuzmich, the Legend lives in all its beauty and sincerity.
lovesupreme
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,139


This is where I choose to tread


« Reply #47 on: August 16, 2013, 01:10:19 AM »

As Orthodox Christians, we cross everything.

...

EVERYTHING. Shocked
« Last Edit: August 16, 2013, 01:10:29 AM by lovesupreme » Logged

I am prone to bouts of sarcasm. Please forgive me if my posts have offended you.
Wandile
Peter the Roman
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - Roman Rite
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 1,202


Pray for me, a sinner


« Reply #48 on: August 16, 2013, 01:34:31 AM »

I don't think the church sees sedevacantists as a problem in need of fixing, honestly. It's a small group of people.

The Roman Church seems content to continue liberalizing (whatever that means), so I think it's content to leave Traditionalists behind. BUT, I think the Church does see itself as a "big tent" where traditionalists and charismatics can co-exist so long as each says they're loyal to the Pope. The communion, then, is based on fealty to the Pope and not shared liturgy or faith. I think that's the way it's heading but others will surely disagree with that assessment.
It comes down to that, all the while we are told by those loyal to their supreme pontiff, that the papacy isn't the totality of their church.  What else do you have in common?

Faith

This is a good answer, but I wonder how true it is... Is it the case that those in the FSSP believe the same as those dancing bishops in Rio?  Does my priest who quoted Hindu texts last Sunday during his homily believe the same as Pius XII who said the Apostolic See never allowed its children to partake in non-Catholic assemblies?  How about the neo-catechumenal way and the Popes of the Assisi meetings: would any Pope have agreed with this before?  Does this not evidence a huge difference in the Faith?  And sure, one could argue that the Faith is still the same but pastorally changed... I respond that if one believes now what the church taught for the past 500 years, that makes one canonically irregular at best (see the SSPX).

Anyway, that's off topic so I'll cease...

Faith is shared by All Churches of the Catholic Church. At local level there will always be those who dissent from the faith, those who teach heresy, those who disregard doctrine for whatever reason or don't believe doctrine A or B, those who disrespect the liturgy by having Mass filled with abuses and absurd behavior. All in all such deviations by certain people and groups at local level exist in EVERY RELIGION and DENOMINATION even Orthodoxy. There are those who claim to be Orthodox but believe in Immaculate conception  for an example. Those that doubt the real presence, or deny the truth of the sacrament of confession etc. Does this now mean Eastern Orthodoxy is not united in faith? I think you see the point being made. Such things will always exist as Satan works hard to break down Gods Church.

However lets not exaggerate the situation and make it seem as if the acts of the minority are the general happenings in the Catholic Church. Its not like there are clown masses in every second church now... Roll Eyes These things are the actions of a few.

 Unity of faith is reality. I can attest to this from personal experience  where at the local Maronite church, we (Roman and Maronite) commune together and believe and teach the same doctrines. We are all catholic and share the one faith of the Catholic Church. We are brethren of the same flock
Given the heavy Latinization of the Maronites, we know where that unity comes from.

LOL this is a pathetic answer. There is always an excuse for you. By this standard a lot of orthodoxy is in false unity of faith given the major byzantinization of eastern orthodoxy (e.g, Antiochans).

Secondly the unity of faith for most Catholics is felt. I'm sorry about your experience but again lets not make the minority the general happenings as we know that's not the case. FYI the Catholic Church isn't only in America Wink

The truth will remain the truth. Faith us what unites us as Catholics. You can argue until your face us blue but that's the truth no matter how much you hate it.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2013, 01:36:51 AM by Wandile » Logged

"There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Anyone who resists this truth perishes." - St. Louis Marie de Montfort

"When we pray, the voice of the heart must be heard more than that proceeding from the mouth." - St Bonaventure.
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,636



« Reply #49 on: August 16, 2013, 01:53:34 AM »

LOL this is a pathetic answer. There is always an excuse for you. By this standard a lot of orthodoxy is in false unity of faith given the major byzantinization of eastern orthodoxy (e.g, Antiochans).

Had you studied liturgical history a bit, you would know that this is untrue. The Liturgical Customs of the Great Church of Constantinople (please, let us not call it such a crude term as the 'Byzantine Rite', for I know not what a 'Byzantine' is supposed to be), effected a sort of synthesis between the different typica of the East (a mongrel, in the words of Fr. Taft). The Melkite Christians in the East rather voluntarily changed their liturgical usages over time in order to match the liturgical usages of the Great Church. The difference between the two situations is in fact quite vast, for while the Great Church incorporated many aspects of other rites into its own liturgical synthesis, the relationship of the Maronites to the Latins was quite one-sided, if not inorganic.

The truth will remain the truth. Faith us what unites us as Catholics. You can argue until your face us blue but that's the truth no matter how much you hate it.

I think it is understandable that we might have our reservations about this, when we see the vast difference between what the Melkites believe, what the Latins believe, what the Chaldeans believe, etc. That the Latin Church is in communion with both Copts and Chaldeans (while affirming their right to retain their traditional Christologies) is perhaps somewhat telling.
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
Apotheoun
"Three realities pertain to God: essence, energy, and the triad of divine hypostaseis." St. Gregory Palamas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Melkite Catholic
Posts: 1,416


St. John Maximovitch


WWW
« Reply #50 on: August 16, 2013, 02:14:06 AM »

Below is a link to a brief article on the "Romanization" of the Maronite Rite:

Maronite Rite: History of Romanization
Logged

"All that the Father has belongs likewise to the Son, except Causality."
St. Gregory Nazianzen

"We should believe that divine grace is present in the icon of Christ and that it communicates sanctification to those who draw near with faith."
St. Theodore Studite
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,135



« Reply #51 on: August 16, 2013, 01:44:21 PM »

I don't think the church sees sedevacantists as a problem in need of fixing, honestly. It's a small group of people.

The Roman Church seems content to continue liberalizing (whatever that means), so I think it's content to leave Traditionalists behind. BUT, I think the Church does see itself as a "big tent" where traditionalists and charismatics can co-exist so long as each says they're loyal to the Pope. The communion, then, is based on fealty to the Pope and not shared liturgy or faith. I think that's the way it's heading but others will surely disagree with that assessment.
It comes down to that, all the while we are told by those loyal to their supreme pontiff, that the papacy isn't the totality of their church.  What else do you have in common?

Faith

This is a good answer, but I wonder how true it is... Is it the case that those in the FSSP believe the same as those dancing bishops in Rio?  Does my priest who quoted Hindu texts last Sunday during his homily believe the same as Pius XII who said the Apostolic See never allowed its children to partake in non-Catholic assemblies?  How about the neo-catechumenal way and the Popes of the Assisi meetings: would any Pope have agreed with this before?  Does this not evidence a huge difference in the Faith?  And sure, one could argue that the Faith is still the same but pastorally changed... I respond that if one believes now what the church taught for the past 500 years, that makes one canonically irregular at best (see the SSPX).

Anyway, that's off topic so I'll cease...

Faith is shared by All Churches of the Catholic Church. At local level there will always be those who dissent from the faith, those who teach heresy, those who disregard doctrine for whatever reason or don't believe doctrine A or B, those who disrespect the liturgy by having Mass filled with abuses and absurd behavior. All in all such deviations by certain people and groups at local level exist in EVERY RELIGION and DENOMINATION even Orthodoxy. There are those who claim to be Orthodox but believe in Immaculate conception  for an example. Those that doubt the real presence, or deny the truth of the sacrament of confession etc. Does this now mean Eastern Orthodoxy is not united in faith? I think you see the point being made. Such things will always exist as Satan works hard to break down Gods Church.

However lets not exaggerate the situation and make it seem as if the acts of the minority are the general happenings in the Catholic Church. Its not like there are clown masses in every second church now... Roll Eyes These things are the actions of a few.

 Unity of faith is reality. I can attest to this from personal experience  where at the local Maronite church, we (Roman and Maronite) commune together and believe and teach the same doctrines. We are all catholic and share the one faith of the Catholic Church. We are brethren of the same flock
Given the heavy Latinization of the Maronites, we know where that unity comes from.
LOL this is a pathetic answer.
It's a rather pathetic case.

I've been to Maronite churches in the Middle East-let alone the West-that struck me as little different from Italian churches (where I have also been).

There is always an excuse for you.

I don't deal in excuses, only reasons.  That the Vatican has a need for the former because it cannot justify itself by the latter isn't my problem.

By this standard a lot of orthodoxy is in false unity of faith given the major byzantinization of eastern orthodoxy (e.g, Antiochans).
Cavardossi answered this for the most part (though there was some measure towards the end of involuntary actions among the Antiochians: but then they had set up the rites of Constantinople in the first place).

The Antiochians do not have to commemorate another Patriarch other than there own in each and every DL, for instance, unlike the Maronites.  Nor can a sole bishop appeal over the Patriarch and the Holy Synod to another patriarch-as one did when the issue of married clergy abroad came up among the Maronites.

The Antichochian Orthodox shared the same Faith as Constantinople long before the former adopted the rites of the latter. The Maronites integration into the Vatican's communion went in tandem with its Latinization.

Secondly the unity of faith for most Catholics is felt. I'm sorry about your experience but again lets not make the minority the general happenings as we know that's not the case. FYI the Catholic Church isn't only in America Wink
Yes, we are everywhere: I myself have been in all the ancient Pentarchy and 11 out of the 15 Autocephalous churches.

As for the Vatican, FYI I've been there, and its churches on three continents (four, if Europe counts as separate).  You want to talk about your Dutch correligionists?

The truth will remain the truth.
Sure will-we celebrate that every Sunday of the Triumph of Orthodoxy.

Faith us what unites us as Catholics.
Sure does.  We do not need to commemorate a supreme pontiff at every Divine Liturgy, from whom our bishops must have their "faculties" renewed, for that.

You can argue until your face us blue but that's the truth no matter how much you hate it.
I only hate falsehood.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,531


« Reply #52 on: August 16, 2013, 03:57:19 PM »

I myself have been in all the ancient Pentarchy and 11 out of the 15 Autocephalous churches.

I only in 5.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,135



« Reply #53 on: August 16, 2013, 08:37:39 PM »

I myself have been in all the ancient Pentarchy and 11 out of the 15 Autocephalous churches.

I only in 5.
I've been around a bit longer.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
lovesupreme
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,139


This is where I choose to tread


« Reply #54 on: August 16, 2013, 08:42:34 PM »

I've only been to two different Orthodox churches.

Come to think of it, I've been to more Roman Catholic churches. Shocked

Watch someone use this anecdote as proof of the true catholicity of Rome. Tongue
Logged

I am prone to bouts of sarcasm. Please forgive me if my posts have offended you.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,174



« Reply #55 on: August 17, 2013, 11:53:31 AM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

But your first part is quite correct: there's no consensus (even among Roman Catholics). There's no official list of ex cathedra statements ... there could be 2 (that's the popular number to quote among laypeople) or thousands, or none, or your favorite number. (I guess for the nerds reading this I should say "your favorite non-negative integer". Although even that could be problematic too, if someone said "My favorite non-negative integer is a google.")
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Apotheoun
"Three realities pertain to God: essence, energy, and the triad of divine hypostaseis." St. Gregory Palamas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Melkite Catholic
Posts: 1,416


St. John Maximovitch


WWW
« Reply #56 on: August 17, 2013, 12:12:29 PM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

But your first part is quite correct: there's no consensus (even among Roman Catholics). There's no official list of ex cathedra statements ... there could be 2 (that's the popular number to quote among laypeople) or thousands, or none, or your favorite number. (I guess for the nerds reading this I should say "your favorite non-negative integer". Although even that could be problematic too, if someone said "My favorite non-negative integer is a google.")
Yes. Bishop Gasser at Vatican I said that, "Already thousands and thousands of dogmatic judgments have gone forth from the Apostolic See," but it does seem like a rather useless thing if it is not possible to tell what is or is not ex cathedra. It really is hard to see how it helps to make anything definitive if no one can actually agree about what statements are definitive.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2013, 12:12:42 PM by Apotheoun » Logged

"All that the Father has belongs likewise to the Son, except Causality."
St. Gregory Nazianzen

"We should believe that divine grace is present in the icon of Christ and that it communicates sanctification to those who draw near with faith."
St. Theodore Studite
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,135



« Reply #57 on: August 17, 2013, 12:35:31 PM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.
So you say.

But who are you?

Here is the real Roman Catholic bishop in Rome:


But your first part is quite correct: there's no consensus (even among Roman Catholics). There's no official list of ex cathedra statements ... there could be 2 (that's the popular number to quote among laypeople) or thousands, or none, or your favorite number. (I guess for the nerds reading this I should say "your favorite non-negative integer". Although even that could be problematic too, if someone said "My favorite non-negative integer is a google.")
pretty much defeats the purpose of Vatican I, if Vatican II didn't do that.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,975


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #58 on: August 17, 2013, 12:41:29 PM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

But your first part is quite correct: there's no consensus (even among Roman Catholics). There's no official list of ex cathedra statements ... there could be 2 (that's the popular number to quote among laypeople) or thousands, or none, or your favorite number. (I guess for the nerds reading this I should say "your favorite non-negative integer". Although even that could be problematic too, if someone said "My favorite non-negative integer is a google.")
Yes. Bishop Gasser at Vatican I said that, "Already thousands and thousands of dogmatic judgments have gone forth from the Apostolic See," but it does seem like a rather useless thing if it is not possible to tell what is or is not ex cathedra. It really is hard to see how it helps to make anything definitive if no one can actually agree about what statements are definitive.

That is its sheer brilliance.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #59 on: August 17, 2013, 01:11:35 PM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.



Yes, they are. Robert Bellermine, Cajetan and a host of others stated that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. No official proclamation needs to be made since he loses the office automatically. Sedevacantism is a valid opinion given the current state of things in the roman church.


Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,975


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #60 on: August 17, 2013, 01:18:15 PM »

The Orthodox have been sedevacantists for a thousand years. If people want the real deal, they need to join the Society of St. Pius I, the only pious Pius.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Apotheoun
"Three realities pertain to God: essence, energy, and the triad of divine hypostaseis." St. Gregory Palamas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Melkite Catholic
Posts: 1,416


St. John Maximovitch


WWW
« Reply #61 on: August 17, 2013, 01:19:54 PM »

The Orthodox have been sedevacantists for a thousand years. If people want the real deal, they need to join the Society of St. Pius I, the only pious Pius.
And the Orthodox are Catholic.
Logged

"All that the Father has belongs likewise to the Son, except Causality."
St. Gregory Nazianzen

"We should believe that divine grace is present in the icon of Christ and that it communicates sanctification to those who draw near with faith."
St. Theodore Studite
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,975


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #62 on: August 17, 2013, 01:24:21 PM »

The Orthodox have been sedevacantists for a thousand years. If people want the real deal, they need to join the Society of St. Pius I, the only pious Pius.
And the Orthodox are Catholic.

Exactly. The true Roman Catholics, unlike those "Roman Catholics" who pretend to be so, but are neither Roman, nor Catholic, nor the Church.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Apotheoun
"Three realities pertain to God: essence, energy, and the triad of divine hypostaseis." St. Gregory Palamas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Melkite Catholic
Posts: 1,416


St. John Maximovitch


WWW
« Reply #63 on: August 17, 2013, 01:30:19 PM »

The Orthodox have been sedevacantists for a thousand years. If people want the real deal, they need to join the Society of St. Pius I, the only pious Pius.
And the Orthodox are Catholic.

Exactly. The true Roman Catholics, unlike those "Roman Catholics" who pretend to be so, but are neither Roman, nor Catholic, nor the Church.
I am deeply offended by your politically incorrect comment. Not really. Grin
Logged

"All that the Father has belongs likewise to the Son, except Causality."
St. Gregory Nazianzen

"We should believe that divine grace is present in the icon of Christ and that it communicates sanctification to those who draw near with faith."
St. Theodore Studite
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #64 on: August 17, 2013, 01:35:47 PM »

The Orthodox have been sedevacantists for a thousand years. If people want the real deal, they need to join the Society of St. Pius I, the only pious Pius.

Orthodox.....Sedevacantists before is was cool.
Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,174



« Reply #65 on: August 17, 2013, 01:47:08 PM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

Yes, they are. Robert Bellermine, Cajetan and a host of others stated that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. No official proclamation needs to be made since he loses the office automatically. Sedevacantism is a valid opinion given the current state of things in the roman church.

I wasn't aware of Cajetan specifically, but I knew that Robert Bellermine and many others taught that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. I doesn't affect my statement however: Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #66 on: August 17, 2013, 01:57:54 PM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

Yes, they are. Robert Bellermine, Cajetan and a host of others stated that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. No official proclamation needs to be made since he loses the office automatically. Sedevacantism is a valid opinion given the current state of things in the roman church.

I wasn't aware of Cajetan specifically, but I knew that Robert Bellermine and many others taught that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. I doesn't affect my statement however: Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

What are they? What dogma do they deny which denies them the title: Roman Catholic?
Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
Apotheoun
"Three realities pertain to God: essence, energy, and the triad of divine hypostaseis." St. Gregory Palamas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Melkite Catholic
Posts: 1,416


St. John Maximovitch


WWW
« Reply #67 on: August 17, 2013, 02:07:04 PM »

I think that Sedevacantists are Roman Catholics. They're just not Roman Catholics in good standing (i.e., in full communion with Rome). I have no doubt - even though there are not many of them - that Rome would like them to come back into the fold, much like the SSPX.
Logged

"All that the Father has belongs likewise to the Son, except Causality."
St. Gregory Nazianzen

"We should believe that divine grace is present in the icon of Christ and that it communicates sanctification to those who draw near with faith."
St. Theodore Studite
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,135



« Reply #68 on: August 17, 2013, 03:19:55 PM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

Yes, they are. Robert Bellermine, Cajetan and a host of others stated that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. No official proclamation needs to be made since he loses the office automatically. Sedevacantism is a valid opinion given the current state of things in the roman church.

I wasn't aware of Cajetan specifically, but I knew that Robert Bellermine and many others taught that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. I doesn't affect my statement however: Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.
Is that Ex Cathedra?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,174



« Reply #69 on: August 17, 2013, 03:40:44 PM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

Yes, they are. Robert Bellermine, Cajetan and a host of others stated that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. No official proclamation needs to be made since he loses the office automatically. Sedevacantism is a valid opinion given the current state of things in the roman church.

I wasn't aware of Cajetan specifically, but I knew that Robert Bellermine and many others taught that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. I doesn't affect my statement however: Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.
Is that Ex Cathedra?

No. And thank you for trying to bring us back on topic. Smiley
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Wandile
Peter the Roman
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - Roman Rite
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 1,202


Pray for me, a sinner


« Reply #70 on: August 17, 2013, 03:54:06 PM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

Yes, they are. Robert Bellermine, Cajetan and a host of others stated that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. No official proclamation needs to be made since he loses the office automatically. Sedevacantism is a valid opinion given the current state of things in the roman church.

I wasn't aware of Cajetan specifically, but I knew that Robert Bellermine and many others taught that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. I doesn't affect my statement however: Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

What are they? What dogma do they deny which denies them the title: Roman Catholic?

They are Sedevacantist, plain and simple.

They broke communion with the Holy See. Can anyone to claim to be part of a church when not in union with its bishop and the other bishops in unity with the one bishop they are all in communion with? (Unity of Faith, St.Cyprian answers this)
Logged

"There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Anyone who resists this truth perishes." - St. Louis Marie de Montfort

"When we pray, the voice of the heart must be heard more than that proceeding from the mouth." - St Bonaventure.
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,636



« Reply #71 on: August 17, 2013, 04:17:22 PM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

Yes, they are. Robert Bellermine, Cajetan and a host of others stated that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. No official proclamation needs to be made since he loses the office automatically. Sedevacantism is a valid opinion given the current state of things in the roman church.

I wasn't aware of Cajetan specifically, but I knew that Robert Bellermine and many others taught that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. I doesn't affect my statement however: Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

What are they? What dogma do they deny which denies them the title: Roman Catholic?

They are Sedevacantist, plain and simple.

They broke communion with the Holy See. Can anyone to claim to be part of a church when not in union with its bishop and the other bishops in unity with the one bishop they are all in communion with? (Unity of Faith, St.Cyprian answers this)
If a bishop publicly preaches heresy, it is the duty of every Christian not to accept communion with that bishop. Of course, the Sedevacantists take this a step further and claim that any pope who preaches heresy ceases to be a pope, and that all of the popes since <insert Pope here> (they can't agree on which pope it is), has been an anti-pope.
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #72 on: August 17, 2013, 04:24:02 PM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

Yes, they are. Robert Bellermine, Cajetan and a host of others stated that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. No official proclamation needs to be made since he loses the office automatically. Sedevacantism is a valid opinion given the current state of things in the roman church.

I wasn't aware of Cajetan specifically, but I knew that Robert Bellermine and many others taught that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. I doesn't affect my statement however: Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

What are they? What dogma do they deny which denies them the title: Roman Catholic?

They are Sedevacantist, plain and simple.

They broke communion with the Holy See. Can anyone to claim to be part of a church when not in union with its bishop and the other bishops in unity with the one bishop they are all in communion with? (Unity of Faith, St.Cyprian answers this)

That's just it. They don't believe the popes are actually popes. To refuse to be in communion with your lawful superior is schism. If you don't actually believe the man who claims the title is who he says he is.....that's a different matter.

The SSPX (where I went for 4+ years) fit the definition of schism since they give lip service to the pope and bishops but refuse to have anything to do with them.

Are you of the Vatican 2, Catholic Answers, John Paul II the greatest pope ever variety of Catholic? I'm interested in where you are coming from.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2013, 04:24:32 PM by #1Sinner » Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
#1Sinner
Moderated
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Rome
Posts: 233



« Reply #73 on: August 17, 2013, 04:26:37 PM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

Yes, they are. Robert Bellermine, Cajetan and a host of others stated that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. No official proclamation needs to be made since he loses the office automatically. Sedevacantism is a valid opinion given the current state of things in the roman church.

I wasn't aware of Cajetan specifically, but I knew that Robert Bellermine and many others taught that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. I doesn't affect my statement however: Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

What are they? What dogma do they deny which denies them the title: Roman Catholic?

They are Sedevacantist, plain and simple.

They broke communion with the Holy See. Can anyone to claim to be part of a church when not in union with its bishop and the other bishops in unity with the one bishop they are all in communion with? (Unity of Faith, St.Cyprian answers this)
If a bishop publicly preaches heresy, it is the duty of every Christian not to accept communion with that bishop. Of course, the Sedevacantists take this a step further and claim that any pope who preaches heresy ceases to be a pope, and that all of the popes since <insert Pope here> (they can't agree on which pope it is), has been an anti-pope.

You are correct. It's really quite simple, as far as the sedevacantist argument goes. You can't be the head of something you are not even a member of. Since the post Vatican 2 popes have publicly professed heresy (according to sedevacantists) they aren't even Catholic.....let alone the head of the Church.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2013, 04:26:52 PM by #1Sinner » Logged

I hereby recant of defending "orthodoxy" and trying to persuade fellow Catholics of embracing schism. I adhere to the Catholic Faith as preserved by the Church of Rome and Her Pontiffs.
Wandile
Peter the Roman
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - Roman Rite
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 1,202


Pray for me, a sinner


« Reply #74 on: August 17, 2013, 04:32:40 PM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

Yes, they are. Robert Bellermine, Cajetan and a host of others stated that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. No official proclamation needs to be made since he loses the office automatically. Sedevacantism is a valid opinion given the current state of things in the roman church.

I wasn't aware of Cajetan specifically, but I knew that Robert Bellermine and many others taught that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. I doesn't affect my statement however: Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

What are they? What dogma do they deny which denies them the title: Roman Catholic?

They are Sedevacantist, plain and simple.

They broke communion with the Holy See. Can anyone to claim to be part of a church when not in union with its bishop and the other bishops in unity with the one bishop they are all in communion with? (Unity of Faith, St.Cyprian answers this)
If a bishop publicly preaches heresy, it is the duty of every Christian not to accept communion with that bishop. Of course, the Sedevacantists take this a step further and claim that any pope who preaches heresy ceases to be a pope, and that all of the popes since <insert Pope here> (they can't agree on which pope it is), has been an anti-pope.

Yes I know this already. This is their position and true in theory. The reality is what matters though. The Popes aren't in heresy and a group claiming to be Catholic can't be catholic when not in communion with the bishop of that Church (who is orthodox). That is why they are not Catholic.

Every heretic and schismatic needs some sort of justification for their position to remain in said position. So too the sedevancists must believe the Popes have fallen and continue to be in heresy. Just as the Arians went off believing they were orthodox, just like the nestorians and monophosites etc. Same devil, new dress.

However I'm just here to present the catholic position  angel
« Last Edit: August 17, 2013, 04:45:04 PM by Wandile » Logged

"There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Anyone who resists this truth perishes." - St. Louis Marie de Montfort

"When we pray, the voice of the heart must be heard more than that proceeding from the mouth." - St Bonaventure.
Wandile
Peter the Roman
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - Roman Rite
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 1,202


Pray for me, a sinner


« Reply #75 on: August 17, 2013, 04:40:06 PM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

Yes, they are. Robert Bellermine, Cajetan and a host of others stated that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. No official proclamation needs to be made since he loses the office automatically. Sedevacantism is a valid opinion given the current state of things in the roman church.

I wasn't aware of Cajetan specifically, but I knew that Robert Bellermine and many others taught that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. I doesn't affect my statement however: Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

What are they? What dogma do they deny which denies them the title: Roman Catholic?

They are Sedevacantist, plain and simple.

They broke communion with the Holy See. Can anyone to claim to be part of a church when not in union with its bishop and the other bishops in unity with the one bishop they are all in communion with? (Unity of Faith, St.Cyprian answers this)
If a bishop publicly preaches heresy, it is the duty of every Christian not to accept communion with that bishop. Of course, the Sedevacantists take this a step further and claim that any pope who preaches heresy ceases to be a pope, and that all of the popes since <insert Pope here> (they can't agree on which pope it is), has been an anti-pope.

You are correct. It's really quite simple, as far as the sedevacantist argument goes. You can't be the head of something you are not even a member of. Since the post Vatican 2 popes have publicly professed heresy (according to sedevacantists) they aren't even Catholic.....let alone the head of the Church.

Peter and I are just explaining why they are not Catholic despite them claiming to be so...
« Last Edit: August 17, 2013, 04:43:39 PM by Wandile » Logged

"There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Anyone who resists this truth perishes." - St. Louis Marie de Montfort

"When we pray, the voice of the heart must be heard more than that proceeding from the mouth." - St Bonaventure.
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Stratopedarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18,701


"And you shall call his name Jesus..."


WWW
« Reply #76 on: August 17, 2013, 04:55:24 PM »

But of course many on this site will root for them because " of my enemy..."

Oh, I don't know.  I think sedevacantists embrace "Orthodox" ecclesiological principles to advance their arguments, but they are still fundamentally Roman Catholic.  That they believe the Pope to be a heretic and therefore not a Pope doesn't change the fact that they would only recognise as a Roman Catholic (and thus a member of the "true Church") someone who believes many of the things we reject as heterodox innovations(e.g., papal infallibility, Filioque, etc.).  To use your analogy, the enemy of my enemy is still my enemy, and in an ideological sense perhaps moreso than the current crop of "legitimate" RC's.    
Logged

The Mor has spoken. Let his word endure unto the ages of ages.

Please, James, tell us more about women!
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,135



« Reply #77 on: August 17, 2013, 05:02:11 PM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

Yes, they are. Robert Bellermine, Cajetan and a host of others stated that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. No official proclamation needs to be made since he loses the office automatically. Sedevacantism is a valid opinion given the current state of things in the roman church.

I wasn't aware of Cajetan specifically, but I knew that Robert Bellermine and many others taught that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. I doesn't affect my statement however: Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

What are they? What dogma do they deny which denies them the title: Roman Catholic?

They are Sedevacantist, plain and simple.

They broke communion with the Holy See. Can anyone to claim to be part of a church when not in union with its bishop and the other bishops in unity with the one bishop they are all in communion with?

(Unity of Faith, St.Cyprian answers this)
Cyprian the Bishop By J. Patout Burns
http://books.google.com/books?id=egbXJlUgAW8C&pg=PA158&dq=cyprian+all+bishops+successors+peter&hl=en#v=onepage&q=cyprian%20all%20bishops%20successors%20peter&f=false
As he put it
Quote
The doctrine of St. Cyprian upon the point before us is extremely full and clear from many passages of his treatises and epistles. A remarkable passage from the treatise "de Unitate Ecclesiae," has been quoted above, in which he says plainly, that "Christ gave to all the Apostles equal authority," and that "all the other Apostles were what Peter was, endowed with an equal participation of honour and power."

In other places he says, "There is one God, and one Christ, and one Church, and one Chair founded by the voice of the Lord on Peter." This doctrine is thus repeated in the Epistle of Cornelius to St. Cyprian: "Nor are we ignorant that there is one God, one Christ, the Lord whom we have confessed, one Holy Ghost, that there ought to be one Bishop in the Catholic Church." This assertion, which at the first sight might seem to favour the modern claims of the Roman see, is thus interpreted in the treatise "de Unitate:" "The Episcopate is one; of which every individual (Bishop) participates possessing it entire. And again, elsewhere: "From Christ there is one Church, divided throughout the whole world into many members; and one Episcopate, diffused by the 'concordant numerosity' of many Bishops'." Thus the Episcopate is "single and indivisible," but held in equal truth and fulness by many. All alike hold under the promise made to St. Peter'. That promise was addressed to him personally, "to manifest unity;" but in him, was addressed alike to all. There are many shepherds, but the flock is one; in order that if any member of our college (Bishops) endeavour to make heresy, and tear the flock of Christ, the rest may assist, and like good shepherds, collect the Lord's sheep into the flock. All shepherds hold by no other right than that of legitimate and successive ordination. Yet St. Peter himself, whom the Lord chose first and on whom He built His Church, when afterwards Paul disputed with him about circumcision, did not claim any thing to himself so insolently or arrogantly as to say that he held a primacy, or that he ought rather to be obeyed by the present and future generation.
The sayings of the great forty days, between the resurrection and ascension ... By George Moberly
http://books.google.com/books?pg=PA181&lpg=PA181&dq=the+episcopate+is+one+episcopatum+unum&id=XIQrAAAAYAAJ&ots=8gPpU-mje5#v=onepage&q=the%20episcopate%20is%20one%20episcopatum%20unum&f=false
On St. Cyprian, consider his translation of the letter of Firmilian into Latin:

Ah, yes. His translation into Latin of Firmilian's letter for Rome shows that:

17. And in this respect I am justly indignant at this so open and manifest folly of [Arbp.] Stephen [of Old Rome], that he who so boasts of the place of his episcopate, and contends that he holds the succession from Peter, whom the foundations of the Church were laid, should introduce many other rocks and establish new buildings of many churches; maintaining that there is baptism in them by his authority. For they who are baptized, doubtless, fill up the number of the Church. But he who approves their baptism maintains, of those baptized, that the Church is also with them. Nor does he understand that the truth of the Christian Rock is overshadowed, and in some measure abolished, by him when he thus betrays and deserts unity...
24. Consider with what want of judgment you dare to blame those who strive for the truth against falsehood. For who ought more justly to be indignant against the other?—whether he who supports God’s enemies, or he who, in opposition to him who supports God’s enemies, unites with us on behalf of the truth of the Church?—except that it is plain that the ignorant are also excited and angry, because by the want of counsel and discourse they are easily turned to wrath; so that of none more than of you does divine Scripture say, “A wrathful man stirreth up strifes, and a furious man heapeth up sins.”For what strifes and dissensions have you stirred up throughout the churches of the whole world! Moreover, how great sin have you heaped up for yourself, when you cut yourself off from so many flocks! For it is yourself that you have cut off. Do not deceive yourself, since he is really the schismatic who has made himself an apostate from the communion of ecclesiastical unity. For while you think that all may be excommunicated by you, you have excommunicated yourself alone from all[/u]; and not even the precepts of an apostle have been able to mould you to the rule of truth and peace, although he warned, and said, “I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, with all lowliness and meekness, with long-suffering, forbearing one another in love; endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all.”
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.iv.lxxiv.html

On that:
I am seeking independent verification of information contained in an Orthodox encyclical

The encyclical in question is
"Encyclical of the Eastern Patriarchs, 1848 A Reply to the Epistle of Pope Pius IX, "to the Easterns""

In it they say...

"...witnessed by the great Basil (Ep. 48 Athan.) to be "the most venerable of all the Churches in the world." Still more, the second Ecumenical Council, writing to a Council of the West (to the most honorable and religious brethren and fellow-servants, Damasus, Ambrose, Britto, Valerian, and others), witnesseth, saying: "The oldest and truly Apostolic Church of Antioch, in Syria, where first the honored name of Christians was used."

I have looked at the cite www.ccel.org which gives documents by Church Fathers.

The 48th epistle by Basil begins...
Letter XLVIII.

To Eusebius, Bishop of Samosata.

I have had considerable difficulty in finding a messenger to convey a letter to your reverence, for our men are so afraid of the winter that they can hardly bear even to put their heads outside their houses.  We have suffered from such a very heavy fall of snow that we have been buried, houses and all, beneath it, and now for two months have been living in dens and caves.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf208.ix.xlix.html

Am I missing something regarding the reference (Ep. 48 Athan.)?

Also, I can't find the letter sent by the second ecumenical council to 'the west'



My best guess is that it is this epistle which Basil wrote to Athanasius, which is being referenced: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf208.ix.lxvii.html

In it he writes:
Quote
No one knows better than you do, that, like all wise physicians, you ought to begin your treatment in the most vital parts, and what part is more vital to the Churches throughout the world than Antioch?  Only let Antioch be restored to harmony, and nothing will stand in the way of her supplying, as a healthy head, soundness to all the body.  Truly the diseases of that city, which has not only been cut asunder by heretics, but is torn in pieces by men who say that they are of one mind with one another, stand in need of your wisdom and evangelic sympathy.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Wandile
Peter the Roman
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - Roman Rite
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 1,202


Pray for me, a sinner


« Reply #78 on: August 17, 2013, 05:37:36 PM »

Wow, this thread really got off-topic early.

I don't think there's a consensus, especially when you consider that some Roman Catholic groups think the seat has been vacant for decades.  Lips Sealed

Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

Yes, they are. Robert Bellermine, Cajetan and a host of others stated that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. No official proclamation needs to be made since he loses the office automatically. Sedevacantism is a valid opinion given the current state of things in the roman church.

I wasn't aware of Cajetan specifically, but I knew that Robert Bellermine and many others taught that a pope who became a heretic would cease to be the pope. I doesn't affect my statement however: Sedevacantists are not Roman Catholics.

What are they? What dogma do they deny which denies them the title: Roman Catholic?

They are Sedevacantist, plain and simple.

They broke communion with the Holy See. Can anyone to claim to be part of a church when not in union with its bishop and the other bishops in unity with the one bishop they are all in communion with?

(Unity of Faith, St.Cyprian answers this)
Cyprian the Bishop By J. Patout Burns
http://books.google.com/books?id=egbXJlUgAW8C&pg=PA158&dq=cyprian+all+bishops+successors+peter&hl=en#v=onepage&q=cyprian%20all%20bishops%20successors%20peter&f=false
As he put it
Quote
The doctrine of St. Cyprian upon the point before us is extremely full and clear from many passages of his treatises and epistles. A remarkable passage from the treatise "de Unitate Ecclesiae," has been quoted above, in which he says plainly, that "Christ gave to all the Apostles equal authority," and that "all the other Apostles were what Peter was, endowed with an equal participation of honour and power."

In other places he says, "There is one God, and one Christ, and one Church, and one Chair founded by the voice of the Lord on Peter." This doctrine is thus repeated in the Epistle of Cornelius to St. Cyprian: "Nor are we ignorant that there is one God, one Christ, the Lord whom we have confessed, one Holy Ghost, that there ought to be one Bishop in the Catholic Church." This assertion, which at the first sight might seem to favour the modern claims of the Roman see, is thus interpreted in the treatise "de Unitate:" "The Episcopate is one; of which every individual (Bishop) participates possessing it entire. And again, elsewhere: "From Christ there is one Church, divided throughout the whole world into many members; and one Episcopate, diffused by the 'concordant numerosity' of many Bishops'." Thus the Episcopate is "single and indivisible," but held in equal truth and fulness by many. All alike hold under the promise made to St. Peter'. That promise was addressed to him personally, "to manifest unity;" but in him, was addressed alike to all. There are many shepherds, but the flock is one; in order that if any member of our college (Bishops) endeavour to make heresy, and tear the flock of Christ, the rest may assist, and like good shepherds, collect the Lord's sheep into the flock. All shepherds hold by no other right than that of legitimate and successive ordination. Yet St. Peter himself, whom the Lord chose first and on whom He built His Church, when afterwards Paul disputed with him about circumcision, did not claim any thing to himself so insolently or arrogantly as to say that he held a primacy, or that he ought rather to be obeyed by the present and future generation.
The sayings of the great forty days, between the resurrection and ascension ... By George Moberly
http://books.google.com/books?pg=PA181&lpg=PA181&dq=the+episcopate+is+one+episcopatum+unum&id=XIQrAAAAYAAJ&ots=8gPpU-mje5#v=onepage&q=the%20episcopate%20is%20one%20episcopatum%20unum&f=false
On St. Cyprian, consider his translation of the letter of Firmilian into Latin:

Ah, yes. His translation into Latin of Firmilian's letter for Rome shows that:

17. And in this respect I am justly indignant at this so open and manifest folly of [Arbp.] Stephen [of Old Rome], that he who so boasts of the place of his episcopate, and contends that he holds the succession from Peter, whom the foundations of the Church were laid, should introduce many other rocks and establish new buildings of many churches; maintaining that there is baptism in them by his authority. For they who are baptized, doubtless, fill up the number of the Church. But he who approves their baptism maintains, of those baptized, that the Church is also with them. Nor does he understand that the truth of the Christian Rock is overshadowed, and in some measure abolished, by him when he thus betrays and deserts unity...
24. Consider with what want of judgment you dare to blame those who strive for the truth against falsehood. For who ought more justly to be indignant against the other?—whether he who supports God’s enemies, or he who, in opposition to him who supports God’s enemies, unites with us on behalf of the truth of the Church?—except that it is plain that the ignorant are also excited and angry, because by the want of counsel and discourse they are easily turned to wrath; so that of none more than of you does divine Scripture say, “A wrathful man stirreth up strifes, and a furious man heapeth up sins.”For what strifes and dissensions have you stirred up throughout the churches of the whole world! Moreover, how great sin have you heaped up for yourself, when you cut yourself off from so many flocks! For it is yourself that you have cut off. Do not deceive yourself, since he is really the schismatic who has made himself an apostate from the communion of ecclesiastical unity. For while you think that all may be excommunicated by you, you have excommunicated yourself alone from all[/u]; and not even the precepts of an apostle have been able to mould you to the rule of truth and peace, although he warned, and said, “I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, with all lowliness and meekness, with long-suffering, forbearing one another in love; endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all.”
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.iv.lxxiv.html

On that:
I am seeking independent verification of information contained in an Orthodox encyclical

The encyclical in question is
"Encyclical of the Eastern Patriarchs, 1848 A Reply to the Epistle of Pope Pius IX, "to the Easterns""

In it they say...

"...witnessed by the great Basil (Ep. 48 Athan.) to be "the most venerable of all the Churches in the world." Still more, the second Ecumenical Council, writing to a Council of the West (to the most honorable and religious brethren and fellow-servants, Damasus, Ambrose, Britto, Valerian, and others), witnesseth, saying: "The oldest and truly Apostolic Church of Antioch, in Syria, where first the honored name of Christians was used."

I have looked at the cite www.ccel.org which gives documents by Church Fathers.

The 48th epistle by Basil begins...
Letter XLVIII.

To Eusebius, Bishop of Samosata.

I have had considerable difficulty in finding a messenger to convey a letter to your reverence, for our men are so afraid of the winter that they can hardly bear even to put their heads outside their houses.  We have suffered from such a very heavy fall of snow that we have been buried, houses and all, beneath it, and now for two months have been living in dens and caves.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf208.ix.xlix.html

Am I missing something regarding the reference (Ep. 48 Athan.)?

Also, I can't find the letter sent by the second ecumenical council to 'the west'



My best guess is that it is this epistle which Basil wrote to Athanasius, which is being referenced: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf208.ix.lxvii.html

In it he writes:
Quote
No one knows better than you do, that, like all wise physicians, you ought to begin your treatment in the most vital parts, and what part is more vital to the Churches throughout the world than Antioch?  Only let Antioch be restored to harmony, and nothing will stand in the way of her supplying, as a healthy head, soundness to all the body.  Truly the diseases of that city, which has not only been cut asunder by heretics, but is torn in pieces by men who say that they are of one mind with one another, stand in need of your wisdom and evangelic sympathy.


I don't mean to be rude but I'm not gonna read all that Undecided

Just to touch on your map. Your map proves nothing contrary to what I said. All can claim truth but claiming such does not make it so... Heretics have their community but no matter how much they claim to be orthodox, they are not. Sedevancists ,in the same light, are not Catholic

Secondly the part of St.Cyprian I was referring to is this one to show the logic if why the sedevancists are not Catholic
Quote
There [John 6:68–69] speaks Peter, upon whom the Church would be built, teaching in the name of the Church and showing that even if a stubborn and proud multitude withdraws because it does not wish to obey, yet the Church does not withdraw from Christ. The people joined to the priest and the flock clinging to their shepherd are the Church. ought to know, then, that the bishop is in the Church and the Church in the bishop, and if someone is not with the bishop, he is not in the Church. They vainly flatter themselves who creep up, not having peace with the priests of God, believing that they are
secretly [i.e., invisibly] in communion with certain individuals.
For the Church, which is one and Catholic, is not split nor divided, but it is indeed united and joined by the cement of priests who adhere one to another" (ibid., 66[69]:Cool.
s

I don't know why you showed me a whole discussion about the one episcopate and unity of bishops as well as the little touch of Antiochan triumphalism at the end  Huh How is any of this relevant to the Catholicity of sedevancists?
« Last Edit: August 17, 2013, 05:56:23 PM by Wandile » Logged

"There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Anyone who resists this truth perishes." - St. Louis Marie de Montfort

"When we pray, the voice of the heart must be heard more than that proceeding from the mouth." - St Bonaventure.
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,531


« Reply #79 on: August 17, 2013, 05:38:59 PM »

So who was the real pope then?
Logged
Wandile
Peter the Roman
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - Roman Rite
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 1,202


Pray for me, a sinner


« Reply #80 on: August 17, 2013, 05:57:54 PM »

So who was the real pope then?

This has nothing to do with anything

But to answer your question, the line of Roman Popes is recognized as the legitimate line.

Quote
Pope Pius II decreed that no appeal could be made from pope to council; this left no way to undo a papal election by anyone but the elected pope. No such crisis has arisen since the 15th century, and so there has been no need to revisit this decision. The alternate papal claimants have become known in history as antipopes. Those of Avignon were dismissed by Rome early on, but the Pisan popes were included in the Annuario Pontificio as popes well into the 20th century. Thus the Borgia pope Alexander VI took his regnal name in sequence after the Pisan Alexander V.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Schism
« Last Edit: August 17, 2013, 06:11:20 PM by Wandile » Logged

"There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Anyone who resists this truth perishes." - St. Louis Marie de Montfort

"When we pray, the voice of the heart must be heard more than that proceeding from the mouth." - St Bonaventure.
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,636



« Reply #81 on: August 17, 2013, 06:05:32 PM »

So who was the real pope then?

This has nothing to do with anything

Sure it does. You basically claim that St. Cyprian should be interpreted as supporting the papacy of Vatican I. The question, then, of what one does when there are three competing popes, is a perfectly relevant question for your interpretation of St. Cyprian.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2013, 06:06:36 PM by Cavaradossi » Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
Wandile
Peter the Roman
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - Roman Rite
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 1,202


Pray for me, a sinner


« Reply #82 on: August 17, 2013, 06:09:33 PM »

So who was the real pope then?

This has nothing to do with anything

Sure it does. You basically claim that St. Cyprian should be interpreted as supporting the papacy of Vatican I. The question, then, of what one does when there are three competing popes, is a perfectly relevant question for your interpretation of St. Cyprian.

read up. I modified my post.

Secondly I never said anything about Vatican 1 Huh

I was just explaining the logic behind why sedevancists aren't Catholic. As Cyprian taught that you are not in the Church of the bishop if you are not with that bishop. Or as he says, no "invisible communion"...
« Last Edit: August 17, 2013, 06:14:08 PM by Wandile » Logged

"There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Anyone who resists this truth perishes." - St. Louis Marie de Montfort

"When we pray, the voice of the heart must be heard more than that proceeding from the mouth." - St Bonaventure.
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,531


« Reply #83 on: August 17, 2013, 06:13:41 PM »

So who was the real pope then?

This has nothing to do with anything

Sure it does. You basically claim that St. Cyprian should be interpreted as supporting the papacy of Vatican I. The question, then, of what one does when there are three competing popes, is a perfectly relevant question for your interpretation of St. Cyprian.

read up. I modified my post.

So those who followed other popes were schismatics?
Logged
Wandile
Peter the Roman
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - Roman Rite
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 1,202


Pray for me, a sinner


« Reply #84 on: August 17, 2013, 06:15:18 PM »

So who was the real pope then?

This has nothing to do with anything

Sure it does. You basically claim that St. Cyprian should be interpreted as supporting the papacy of Vatican I. The question, then, of what one does when there are three competing popes, is a perfectly relevant question for your interpretation of St. Cyprian.

read up. I modified my post.

So those who followed other popes were schismatics?

Simply put, yes. The greater sin however is on those that mislead those who knew no better. But yes
its like how we view the Orthodox...if that helps
« Last Edit: August 17, 2013, 06:17:50 PM by Wandile » Logged

"There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Anyone who resists this truth perishes." - St. Louis Marie de Montfort

"When we pray, the voice of the heart must be heard more than that proceeding from the mouth." - St Bonaventure.
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,636



« Reply #85 on: August 17, 2013, 06:19:36 PM »

So who was the real pope then?

This has nothing to do with anything

Sure it does. You basically claim that St. Cyprian should be interpreted as supporting the papacy of Vatican I. The question, then, of what one does when there are three competing popes, is a perfectly relevant question for your interpretation of St. Cyprian.

read up. I modified my post.

So those who followed other popes were schismatics?

Simply put, yes. The greater sin however is on those that mislead those who knew no better. But yes
its like how we view the Orthodox...if that helps

How do you know, other than faith, which pope was the true pope?
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
Wandile
Peter the Roman
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - Roman Rite
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 1,202


Pray for me, a sinner


« Reply #86 on: August 17, 2013, 06:24:35 PM »

So who was the real pope then?

This has nothing to do with anything

Sure it does. You basically claim that St. Cyprian should be interpreted as supporting the papacy of Vatican I. The question, then, of what one does when there are three competing popes, is a perfectly relevant question for your interpretation of St. Cyprian.

read up. I modified my post.

So those who followed other popes were schismatics?

Simply put, yes. The greater sin however is on those that mislead those who knew no better. But yes
its like how we view the Orthodox...if that helps

How do you know, other than faith, which pope was the true pope?

Depends how much is known of the situation by the one deciding where allegiance lies.
Logged

"There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Anyone who resists this truth perishes." - St. Louis Marie de Montfort

"When we pray, the voice of the heart must be heard more than that proceeding from the mouth." - St Bonaventure.
Apotheoun
"Three realities pertain to God: essence, energy, and the triad of divine hypostaseis." St. Gregory Palamas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Melkite Catholic
Posts: 1,416


St. John Maximovitch


WWW
« Reply #87 on: August 17, 2013, 06:25:34 PM »

So who was the real pope then?

This has nothing to do with anything

Sure it does. You basically claim that St. Cyprian should be interpreted as supporting the papacy of Vatican I. The question, then, of what one does when there are three competing popes, is a perfectly relevant question for your interpretation of St. Cyprian.

read up. I modified my post.

So those who followed other popes were schismatics?

Simply put, yes. The greater sin however is on those that mislead those who knew no better. But yes
its like how we view the Orthodox...if that helps

How do you know, other than faith, which pope was the true pope?
Good question. It was just a matter of faith. It was not something that could be objectively proved.
Logged

"All that the Father has belongs likewise to the Son, except Causality."
St. Gregory Nazianzen

"We should believe that divine grace is present in the icon of Christ and that it communicates sanctification to those who draw near with faith."
St. Theodore Studite
Cyrillic
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,023


Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo


« Reply #88 on: August 17, 2013, 06:27:17 PM »

So who was the real pope then?

This has nothing to do with anything

Sure it does. You basically claim that St. Cyprian should be interpreted as supporting the papacy of Vatican I. The question, then, of what one does when there are three competing popes, is a perfectly relevant question for your interpretation of St. Cyprian.

read up. I modified my post.

So those who followed other popes were schismatics?

Simply put, yes. The greater sin however is on those that mislead those who knew no better. But yes
its like how we view the Orthodox...if that helps

How do you know, other than faith, which pope was the true pope?

Depends how much is known of the situation by the one deciding where allegiance lies.

But if you lived in France or England you couldn't just go to a parish of the competing pope.
Logged

"Claret is the liquor for boys; port for men; but he who aspires to be a hero must drink brandy."
-Dr. Samuel Johnson
Wandile
Peter the Roman
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - Roman Rite
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Pretoria, South Africa
Posts: 1,202


Pray for me, a sinner


« Reply #89 on: August 17, 2013, 06:36:29 PM »

So who was the real pope then?

This has nothing to do with anything

Sure it does. You basically claim that St. Cyprian should be interpreted as supporting the papacy of Vatican I. The question, then, of what one does when there are three competing popes, is a perfectly relevant question for your interpretation of St. Cyprian.

read up. I modified my post.

So those who followed other popes were schismatics?

Simply put, yes. The greater sin however is on those that mislead those who knew no better. But yes
its like how we view the Orthodox...if that helps

How do you know, other than faith, which pope was the true pope?

Depends how much is known of the situation by the one deciding where allegiance lies.

But if you lived in France or England you couldn't just go to a parish of the competing pope.

This is why I said the greater sin is on those misleading those who knew no better. If one is truly ignorant or incapable of doing something about the situation, God knows...They are entrusted to the divine wisdom and mercy of God. How then can one be called a schismatic?

The true schismatics are those that know what they are doing and yet persist 
Logged

"There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Anyone who resists this truth perishes." - St. Louis Marie de Montfort

"When we pray, the voice of the heart must be heard more than that proceeding from the mouth." - St Bonaventure.
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.238 seconds with 72 queries.