New Sungenis vs Dimond debate
#13
The SV arguments are pretty strong.  But those arguments have little to do with the Dimond brothers per se.  Those arguments have been developed by other SVs and some, frankly, by non-SV Trads who have just been wondering how things can be so FUBAR.  Mario Derksen (an SV) wrote some very strong arguments about 5 years ago.  Then there is the Christ of Chaos guy too who presents much strong arguments than the Dimond brothers.

However, there is an equally strong proof that SVism is in error.  None of the SV camps can get even 1% of the way to claiming to be the Universal Church.  It just does not wash with me that God lets the entire billion strong Catholic Church dissolve in 50 years, and the most credible force opposing that modernism, the SSPX and the FSSP, who currently function on every continent, then actually make the major error of showing fidelity (in principle if not practice) to 5 false Popes in a row, while the Holy Ghost deserts Rome to move to a weird little splinter group in Oshkosh, Missouri or Yackandandah, VIC

I cannot get to Mass with my family at either.  Neither can 99% of the rest of Traditionalists around the world.  SVism is simply too marginal to be a viable option.

That would be the gates of Hell prevailing in my opinion. To say the gates of Hell have not prevailed because Pope Gregory XIII was enthroned in his mother's conservatory with 5 on-lookers is to my mind completely nuts.

If SVs were as coherent a force as the SSPX and provided a genuine and nearly universal "rest-stop" or island of sanity in this crazy FUBAR world then I'd gladly throw my hat in the ring with them.  But they are not any less screwy and prone to bad decisions and poor judgement that the other sections of Traditionalism.  And that suggests to me that SVs don't have exclusivity on the power of the Holy Ghost.

If SVs had the truth I'd expect them to have grown in leaps and bounds over the past 30 years and provide the best, most edifying places to go to Church, have the holiest priests and be highly attractive compared to the alternatives.

I do agree with Dimond though that argument that Popes need to be formally charged with their heresy "just so we can check they are not mistaken" is completely crazy.  That would be like saying Bernie Madoff was not guilty until he could show you that he could add up and take away.  The argument that the Supreme Head of the Church could be invincibly ignorant of Church teaching is completely crackers.  It's the same bullshit as claiming that B16 used "mental reservation" when he told the world that the Third Secret of Fatima had been revealed "in its entirety".  

I can only conclude that if you are confused and find yourself in a minefield that the most sensible thing to do is stay still.  And if you don't find the current situation highly confusing then you're either 1000 times smarter than me, or substantially more stupid.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by faith3faith - 08-11-2011, 07:54 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by Joshua - 08-12-2011, 05:01 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by ggreg - 08-14-2011, 03:03 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by Sigfrid - 08-14-2011, 05:44 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by Sigfrid - 08-14-2011, 05:57 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by ggreg - 08-14-2011, 06:14 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by ggreg - 08-14-2011, 06:15 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by ggreg - 08-14-2011, 06:37 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by Gregory I - 08-18-2011, 01:47 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by timoose - 08-18-2011, 09:22 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by ggreg - 08-19-2011, 10:36 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by ggreg - 08-19-2011, 02:51 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by Gregory I - 08-19-2011, 08:11 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by Windmill - 08-20-2011, 03:23 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by Gregory I - 08-20-2011, 05:48 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by nmoerbeek - 08-22-2011, 12:18 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by ggreg - 08-22-2011, 01:23 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by nmoerbeek - 08-22-2011, 10:37 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by Gregory I - 08-22-2011, 08:03 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by Gregory I - 08-25-2011, 08:09 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by ggreg - 08-25-2011, 08:12 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by Gregory I - 08-25-2011, 08:31 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by Gregory I - 08-29-2011, 01:13 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by Gregory I - 09-01-2011, 07:11 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by Gregory I - 09-04-2011, 02:59 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by INPEFESS - 09-04-2011, 03:13 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by Gregory I - 09-04-2011, 01:46 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by INPEFESS - 09-05-2011, 03:40 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by INPEFESS - 09-05-2011, 04:04 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by ggreg - 09-05-2011, 05:21 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by INPEFESS - 09-05-2011, 10:42 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by Gregory I - 09-06-2011, 12:46 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by ggreg - 09-06-2011, 01:11 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by ggreg - 09-06-2011, 04:19 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by ggreg - 09-07-2011, 04:27 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by INPEFESS - 09-07-2011, 06:24 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by thomas7 - 09-07-2011, 02:44 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by Gregory I - 09-07-2011, 08:42 PM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by ggreg - 09-08-2011, 08:25 AM
Re: New Sungenis vs Dimond debate - by INPEFESS - 09-08-2011, 08:33 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)