I'm not a Sedevacantist, but....
#21
(02-19-2017, 04:07 AM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(02-19-2017, 03:46 AM)In His Love Wrote: Do we even know if the discussion is over women's ordination? The women deacons in the early Church weren't ordained, so even if this practice does come back (which I wouldn't be a fan of), it isn't necessarily a heresy. Ordination, of course, would be, because women can't be ordained to any position tied to the clergy.
As I pointed out earlier, I went through this same thing in the Anglican Communion 40+ years ago. First it was the 'restoration of the ancient Order of Deaconesses'. Then it was the 'ordination' of female 'deacons'  (at which point I left). Then, after 'womyn deacons' had been approved, it was a battle over 'womyn priests'. They were approved, and then the fight was over 'bishopesses', now, totally approved by the Anglicans. At each step, the faithful were assured there was nothing to worry about, that it wouldn't go any further. I didn't believe the bollocks then, any more than I believe the claptrap mow.
This ^^^^  multiplied by a factor of 1,000.

cradle-Catholics, you may know a lot about the heresy of Protestantism, but you do not know the first thing of the Protestant experience.  What jovan said is exactly what I experienced as a Lutheran.  We say these difficult words to you, because we have already witnessed and experienced this. 

First it was changing the liturgy, then a desire to be more inclusive, then it was to include more women into the liturgy of the church....until finally you end up with the US Congregationalist church, which believes that the Koran and the Baghavad Gita are just as holy and divinely inspired as Sacred Scripture, and homosexuals are more vital to the church and community, than the families, with openly-lesbian pastors/bishops.

We protestants left our 'church', our 'faith', because we in our hearts desire to seek that which man has striven for all his life, Truth and Beatification.  By the grace of God it has led us to the Catholic Faith, however we still will strive for the truth and if the visible church makes acts that are contrary to that Truth, we will be more apt to leave and seek elsewhere.  Now does this mean we reject Catholicism? Not necessarily, though some may erroneously will, but what it will mean is that we will be open to the possibility that some Catholics have said that the men in the Vatican are not Catholic and neither is Vatican II.  It may lead us to Sede-ism, or something else for that matter.  However, we will strive to continue seeking the same Truth that brought forth the beautiful minds of the Church Fathers, Angelic Doctors, and saints.
Reply
#22
(02-19-2017, 08:59 AM)austenbosten Wrote: cradle-Catholics, you may know a lot about the heresy of Protestantism, but you do not know the first thing of the Protestant experience.  What jovan said is exactly what I experienced as a Lutheran.  We say these difficult words to you, because we have already witnessed and experienced this. 

First it was changing the liturgy, then a desire to be more inclusive, then it was to include more women into the liturgy of the church....until finally you end up with the US Congregationalist church, which believes that the Koran and the Baghavad Gita are just as holy and divinely inspired as Sacred Scripture, and homosexuals are more vital to the church and community, than the families, with openly-lesbian pastors/bishops.

We protestants left our 'church', our 'faith', because we in our hearts desire to seek that which man has striven for all his life, Truth and Beatification.  By the grace of God it has led us to the Catholic Faith, however we still will strive for the truth and if the visible church makes acts that are contrary to that Truth, we will be more apt to leave and seek elsewhere.  Now does this mean we reject Catholicism? Not necessarily, though some may erroneously will, but what it will mean is that we will be open to the possibility that some Catholics have said that the men in the Vatican are not Catholic and neither is Vatican II.  It may lead us to Sede-ism, or something else for that matter.  However, we will strive to continue seeking the same Truth that brought forth the beautiful minds of the Church Fathers, Angelic Doctors, and saints.

This is a really interesting perspective.  For you or Jovan, I'm sure you'd say you can't know for sure, but do you have a hypothesis as to why some people resist this change from the start, and why others go forward with it gung-ho?

I'm kind of ambivalent on the inclusion part.  I get that we don't want inclusion to mean anything goes, but when people speak badly of inclusion, I know how many will understand that, and that is that not only what they do or believe is excluded, but they themselves will be.  It's a really tough dichotomy to navigate between which, even if it doesn't have to be tough, in reality it has been.

Since you have already been through this, I'm sure at one point you were convinced the church you were a part of was right then, right?  What do you think would be different for you now, that you'd still cling to Catholicism in some way, rather than be convinced that everything that is going on is proof that the Catholic Church isn't what it claims to be?  I still accept the Catholic position on divorce/remarriage and contraception, but what is going on in the Vatican, and the, at least potential, heresy that sounds as if it may become formal very soon, seems much worse than the remarriage and contraception issues.  Since every Catholic response to Orthodoxy is "Yeah, but, contraception! Divorce and remarriage!" I can only assume that that is the only real point of disagreement many Catholics have with Orthodoxy.  I don't really understand how a Catholic looks at this situation and says to him or herself, "This is still the true Church even though its head is about to go into serious heresy, I will remain but resist," rather than "I can't believe the True Church would do this, maybe I'm wrong about divorce and contraception and this isn't actually the Church I thought it was," especially if they have already been part of another church and come to that conclusion before.
Reply
#23
(02-19-2017, 02:36 PM)Melkite Wrote: This is a really interesting perspective.  For you or Jovan, I'm sure you'd say you can't know for sure, but do you have a hypothesis as to why some people resist this change from the start, and why others go forward with it gung-ho?

Because if you love the Faith, you will strive to preserve it; if you detest the Faith, you will seek to change it.

Quote:Since you have already been through this, I'm sure at one point you were convinced the church you were a part of was right then, right?  What do you think would be different for you now, that you'd still cling to Catholicism in some way, rather than be convinced that everything that is going on is proof that the Catholic Church isn't what it claims to be?

Well it could make me open to the sede-vacantist view.  However, I will believe the Church will come through on-top.  We must remember the dark hours of the Church, in which the great Doctor wearily wrote after the failed council to denounce the Arian heresy:  "The whole world groaned, and was astonished to find itself Arian."


I must trust in God and believe in the awesome power that God has to lure His enemies into a trap and destroy them.  I must remember that the Church's enemies will be strangled to death and trampled under the heel of Mary.

Bergoligio will not be able to destroy the Church, even if he tried consciously.  Neither will Her enemies, Nero couldn't do it, Diocletian couldn't do it, Arian couldn't do it (though it came close after his death), Mohommad couldn't do it, the Cathars couldn't do it, Luther couldn't do it.

Niether will the Masons, nor the Modernists, nor the pedophile Christ-haters in the Church.  All of these mere stupid mortals lack the angelic intelligence of Lucifer and look at how God dispatches Lucifer.

[Image: c45518644f5356b4e47bdb75e8c2df78.jpg]

[Image: f875f110c2464cb96a9349d408d52b53.jpg]

[Image: 5e8dfe81f64450a2b6995ad4cb53a9f8.jpg]



In the end, God will triumph, because He already has triumphed!
Reply
#24
Ann Barnhardt has written[url=http://"http://www.barnhardt.biz/2016/06/19/vocem-alienorum-the-voice-of-antipope-francis-bergoglio-is-the-voice-of-a-stranger/"] a blog post[/url] explaining in detail why she believes that Francis is an antipope and that Benedict is still the Pope.

Personally, I'll accept Francis as Pope until a future Pope declares him to be otherwise, as happened with the Avignon papal claimants during the Western Schism.
Reply
#25
(02-19-2017, 07:59 PM)MichaelNZ Wrote: Personally, I'll accept Francis as Pope until a future Pope declares him to be otherwise, as happened with the Avignon papal claimants during the Western Schism.
This is my position as well. The authority to determine who is Pope and who is not rests with the Papacy itself, not individual priests or laypeople.
Reply
#26
I agree with MichaelNZ and In His Love.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)