chrysostom Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 Lefebvre I ask you to read this: http://papastronsay.blogspot.com/2011/02/to-lost-sheep-contradicting.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lefebvre Posted August 13, 2014 Author Share Posted August 13, 2014 This really needs to be moved to the debate table... Agreed, sadly. Interesting position. I want to respond in greater depth, although I am a bit pressed for time. Lefebvre, email me if you are so inclined. I.g.saintonge@gmail.com. I'd like to discuss this with you. But I think I will bow out of this thread. Will do. My dear friend I never said you were a heretic. I said to always hold the view that the seat is vacant is heresy. You are the one who applied the title of heretic towards yourself and sedevacantism since I think deep down you know the sedevacantists will never accept a postconcillar Pope as being valid and that the Church will never have a Pope that will say that Vatican II was an invalid council. Okay, point for Gryffindor. Lefebvre I ask you to read this: http://papastronsay.blogspot.com/2011/02/to-lost-sheep-contradicting.html I'm familiar with the miracles which Ss John XXIII and John Paul II are said to have worked through their intercession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrysostom Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 I'm familiar with the miracles which Ss John XXIII and John Paul II are said to have worked through their intercession. And what do you think of them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lefebvre Posted August 13, 2014 Author Share Posted August 13, 2014 And what do you think of them? I... I have no idea. Not the foggiest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cherie Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 Interesting position. I want to respond in greater depth, although I am a bit pressed for time. Lefebvre, email me if you are so inclined. I.g.saintonge@gmail.com. I'd like to discuss this with you. But I think I will bow out of this thread. Don't bow out! This is a very interesting discussion, and you're a great part of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lefebvre Posted August 13, 2014 Author Share Posted August 13, 2014 I... I have no idea. Not the foggiest. Emailed a sede bishop on the subject. Guess I'll find out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrysostom Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 (edited) Emailed a sede bishop on the subject. Guess I'll find out! Should I take that to mean that you'll find out what you'll think? Edited August 13, 2014 by chrysostom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lefebvre Posted August 13, 2014 Author Share Posted August 13, 2014 Should I take that to mean that you'll find out what you'll think? In a sarcastic way, yes. It's more of a "in the many, many sedevacantist papers and arguments and rebuttals etc that I've read, not a single one has addressed the miracles, so I'll ask a really smart sede directly to see how it would be handled" kind of thing. No offense to +Sanborn either, but I have a feeling I'm not going to like the answer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrysostom Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 In a sarcastic way, yes. It's more of a "in the many, many sedevacantist papers and arguments and rebuttals etc that I've read, not a single one has addressed the miracles, so I'll ask a really smart sede directly to see how it would be handled" kind of thing. No offense to +Sanborn either, but I have a feeling I'm not going to like the answer... Interesting. If the miracles are true I think the obvious conclusion is that the sedevacantist premise is false. Do you anticipate that you won't like the answer because you think it won't properly address the miracles or because it will push you closer to or further from the sedevacantist position? I don't know you well enough to know what you meant by that statement... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lefebvre Posted August 13, 2014 Author Share Posted August 13, 2014 Yes, that... would seem to be the obvious conclusion. It would be so simple, I am rather pre-emptively irritated I missed it. And I feel that His Grace's reply will not adequately address the issue; pushing me farther from the sede position. If the miracles could not be refuted; that would be hefty proof against sedevacantism. This irritates me due to, well, perhaps humiliation. I have been rather firm in the sede position and missing such a chink in the armor would be irksome. Of course, the most it would do is push me to the SSPX as the issues with VII are still extant, but that is another issue. Interesting, interesting indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catherine Therese Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 All the interesting conversations happen here when I'm either asleep or at work... I'll be popping BAC in here when I can get away from the office... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lefebvre Posted August 13, 2014 Author Share Posted August 13, 2014 There we go, moved to the proper place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dUSt Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 So my question here I suppose is, do you think God can call people to vocations outside what you consider the body of the Church? Like, into Byzantine Paganism? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisa Marie Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 I think there are two main parts to a vocation, the call and confirmation. The individual hears the call of God to a particular way of life, and the community confirms the call in an official way. So a man feels called to the priesthood, and the diocese accepts him for formation and the bishop lays hands on him. A woman feels called to a particular religious community, and the community accepts her. If either part is missing, it's not considered a "true" vocation. That's why, for example, even though some women may feel called to the priesthood, we know them to be misinterpreting something (at best) because the Church will not (and cannot) confirm that call. So regarding your question, God does not call anyone away from the Church. You may feel your call is valid because a sedevacantist community "confirms" it, but because they aren't in line with the pope, it's impossible for it to be a true call. Instead, it may be a call to be a priest within the proper hierarchical system, maybe even one with a particular love of traditional devotions and a gift with rhetoric and a mind for philosophy, but not with those who reject the pope. It can't work that way. I mean, think about it. If you suddenly allowed that, it'd set a dangerous precedent. What's to say I can't ignore my bishop and set up my own strange religious hippie liberal community that worships God as Mother and embraces new age philosophy? If I feel called to it and there are people around that agree with me, what's stopping me? You're effectively saying that authority doesn't really matter, all that really matters is what you feel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lefebvre Posted August 13, 2014 Author Share Posted August 13, 2014 I'm pretty sure I'm just going to have to pray for a long time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now