www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Sedevacantist?

Hi, im new here. I stopped by and wanted to know if there are any sedevacantist here who are in the forum?

I myself hold this position for very good reasons and just wanted to know if any here hold this position as well?

sincerely, matt.

Matt,

I'm pretty sure no one here is Sedevacantist. I don't even think there are any SSPX-ers in here.

Since you have offered the information, may I ask you why you hold this position?

Logos Teen

Glory to Jesus Christ!

My friend,

I think you will find very few Eastern Catholics subscribing to the heresy of Sedevacantism. This is primarily a phenomenon amongst ultra-traditionalist Roman Rite Catholics. Most Eastern Catholics are more concerned with living their Traditions and saving their soul. We however did not have the massive overhaul that the Latin Church did. Many Roman Rite Catholics were severelly hurt by the swift changes. That is understandable and I think you will find sympathy with many Byzantine Catholics who would be horrified if our Bishops did to our Liturgy what Rome did to theirs. We still have the fulness of our Traditions; for this we must be immensily grateful. Nevertheless, in spite of the changes as a Catholic of the Roman Rite you owe obedience to the Roman Pontiff. Your Liturgical books are those promulagated by Pope Paul VI. It is a severe thing to subscribe to the heresy that the Vatican II Popes are Anti-Popes. To slander the Holy Father is to incur the wrath of SS Peter and Paul. Remember, those who knowingly leave the Communion of the Catholic Church and reject her cannot achieve eternal Salvation and Theosis. I would counsel you to at best read the documents of Vatican II with proper commentaries and attend the Normative Mass with an appreciation of its spirit. Another option would be to go to a canonically erected Tridentine Mass chapel in Communion with a Diocesan Bishop in Union with His Holiness Pope John Paul II or an indult Liturgy.

You will find that Sedevantists are nothing more than Protestants wearing Catholic clothes. Their groups produce endless schisms and scandals.

Come home; Your Mother the Church is waiting, but do not delay the day of your Salvation.

Your friend in Christ,

Robert

quote by Robert Horvath:

**************************************************
I would counsel you to at best read the documents of Vatican II with proper commentaries...
**************************************************

Robert,

Well said, as was your entire post.

In Jesus and Mary,

Paul

Glory be to Jesus Christ!

Dear Paul:

It is an epidemic among traditional Roman Catholics to only know second hand information about Vatican II or to have a proof text methodology and a selective reading of Conciliar and post-Conciliar texts. Even Sedevancatist scholars tout a pseudo-academic analysis of the Conciliar documents often perpetrating myths or exaggerations about masonic infiltration et al.
The Latins need to push further informed catechisis about the Second Vatican Council. And as members of the Eastern Church to appreciate what the Council did to expand our rights and traditional praxis and the restoration of our patrimony.

Dear Robert,

I agree with all you said - but I don't agree that the post-conciliar Latin Church has somehow lost its Tradition.

It has discarded its Tridentine liturgy, although not entirely.

But it has not lost any of its Tradition with a capital "T."

Right, Steve?

Alex

I need to word my posting carefully so as not to offend any of our brothers and sisters in Christ who may post or read here. So I am sorry if I offend, it would be unintended but I do need to rant.

Having been a Latin layman all my life (so far) I lived through all the changes in the Western practice. I have seen how badly the Liturgy is done when people are unprepared and lacking in direction or inspiration. In the early days that was quite a problem. I would have to say however that overall the efforts of all the lay people and religious have been inspiring even if they fall short of some others expectations. If you could imagine the burst of creativity as the whole western church was called upon to reexamine it's practices. I note also that the biggest complainers were usually the least involved in parish life, and they endured the liturgy with a strong sense of nostalgia.

The rubrics of the Latin rite had evolved over time and many people don't want to accept that notion. For many modern Roman Catholics Vatican I is ancient history and they somehow think that the era is the gold standard for liturgical practice. It is forgotten that the Apostolic church was likely to be quite different in externals from anything we moderns would be familiar with. My only point here is that if we are to return to earlier practices why stop at Vatican I or Trent? Older doesn't always equal better but we can benefit by the study of the past.

I think we need to remember that the Roman sedevacantists are the emotional sons and daughters of the old Roman triumphalists. If the contemporary Papacy had nurtured or encouraged Latin-rite supremacy in all things the sedevacantists would just not exist. Since the Papacy disappoints them there must be another reason, since a true Pope would not abandon what THEY treasure so greatly!

Not even most Orthodox would argue that the current Pope is not legitimately in place. They might argue that he does not have the authority that is claimed for him but they do not challenge his right to the See of Rome. Roman sedevacantists may think that they have kindred spirits in the East but they do not. It must come as quite a shock but they live in an illusory world, which they choose to define on their own terms.

Lord knows I'm a major fan of traditional Roman Catholicism, but I don't see anything in any of the V2 documents that contradict anything that was and is in the Roman Tradition.

ChristTeen287

If you don't want tobe in communion with the Pope John Paul II because he's too liberal or whatever reason, why don't you become Orthodox then? It's much more logical, and less polemic.

Remie:"If you don't want tobe in communion with the Pope John Paul II because he's too liberal or whatever reason, why don't you become Orthodox then? It's much more logical, and less polemic."

Remie, being upset with Rome is not a good reason to become Orthodox. One must have love for the Orthodox Church and what it stands for first, and also have an unreserved adherance to and unconditional belief in the Eastern Orthodox Faith. One must not leave something out of anger, IOW. One must believe that one is going toward something in a journey of Faith.

OrthodoxEast

Now let me explain why i hold this position, not only because of the popes heresy but vatican lls.

Now this is what the council teachstuff like this.

"" The council states that the (church) of christ (subsists) in the catholic church ""

this is what the council teaches and jp2 proclaims.

The church of christ (is) the catholic church.

now before i give you this link, let me post some more qoutes.

ST. Vincent Lerins..

"" When a foulness invades the whole church (return) to the church of the past ""

ST. Cajetan..

"" One must (resist) the pope who (openly) destroys the church ""

Pope Innocent lll..

"" One must obey a pope in all things as long as he does not go against the universal customs of the church, but shall he go against the customs he need (not) be followed ""

St robert bellarmine; de romano, pontifice, ll, 30

"" A pope who is a (manifest) heretic automatically per se ceases to be pope and head ""

Pope Leo Xlll satis cognitam, 15, june 29, 1986

"" It is absurd to imagine that he who is outside can command inside the church ""

I have this link, its very good and very informative. this will explaian what i just explained way more intense.

http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/Sedevacantism_Refuted.html

if your wondering why i hld that jp2 is in heresy i could provide tons of moments where jp2 publically rejected the faith.

sincerely matt.

Saying that the Catholic Church is the Church of Christ and that the Catholic Church susbsists in the Church of Christ is the exact same thing. Look up the definition of "subsists."

I'll leave the other quotes for everyone else to trudge through.

Logos Teen

please read the link brother.

also subsist mean, to exist in, to subside in.

which leaves the slight chance that christ is present in (other) churches.

the church of christ (is) the catholic church.

it is the body of christ, the only body, had mans ignorance of never been shown than it would be the only church ever created.

please read the link.

sincerely matt.

please read the link brother.

also subsist mean, to exist in, to subside in.

which leaves the slight chance that christ is present in (other) churches.

the church of christ (is) the catholic church.

it is the body of christ, the only body, had mans ignorance of never been shown than it would be the only church ever created.

please read the link.

sincerely matt.

OrthodoxEast:

No I was just kidding, it was never my case so there's no problem about that. I just tried to mean that it was more logical to be Orthodox than to be sedevacantist, from my point of view (sedevacantism doesn't make so much sense to me).

I remember reading in a newsgroup about a Bishop of the Kyiv Patriarchate who joined a sedevacantist group in Germany, his profession of faith was a must read. He later repented from that.