Latest topics
» Polish traditionalists handicapped : Archbishop Lefebvre made a mistake
Wed Nov 15, 2017 8:20 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney in the USA when they interpret Vatican Council II with the irrational premise deny the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:18 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Bishop Robert J.McManus and Brother Thomas Augustine MICM,Superior,St.Benedict Center,Still River,MA, interpret Vatican Council II with the 'possibilites are exceptions' error
Mon Nov 06, 2017 8:47 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» SSPX must be aware of the deception of Abp.Guido Pozzo and confront it
Tue Oct 31, 2017 11:57 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Two popes must ask all Catholics to affirm Vatican Council II (premise-free) as they do
Mon Oct 30, 2017 5:16 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary Still River Ma., could lose canomical status because of Feeneyism
Sat Oct 28, 2017 5:54 am by Lionel L. Andrades

»  Traditionalists oppose Pope Francis on morals but give him a pass on salvation
Fri Oct 27, 2017 10:06 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Someone needs to help Cardinal Luiz Ladaria, Archbishop Pozzo and Archbishop Di Noia see how they use a false premise to interpret Vatican Council II
Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:53 pm by Lionel L. Andrades

» Robert Siscoe and John of St. Thomas Respond to Fr. Cekada
Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:25 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Still no denial from Abp.Guido Pozzo : SSPX must accept Vatican Council II with a false doctrine and the new theology based on an irrational premise Image result for Photo of Archbishop Guido Pozzo
Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:03 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Five Catholic academics accept the development of doctrine on salvation and Vatican Council II but reject it on morals and the death penalty
Sun Oct 22, 2017 5:32 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Dr.Robert Fastiggi wants Bishop Donald Sanborn and Chris Ferrara to affirm a magisterium in heresy and schism like him
Sun Oct 22, 2017 5:30 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» ]Christine Niles uses the false premise to interpret magisterial documents
Sat Oct 21, 2017 5:30 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» SSPX has a right to canonical status when they correct their doctrinal error in the 'chart'
Fri Oct 20, 2017 6:25 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» No one shows Massimo Faggioli his precise theological and philosophical mistake
Fri Oct 20, 2017 6:07 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Rethink "Feeneyism"?
Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:02 pm by tornpage

» Brother Andre Marie MICM, the Prior at the St. Benedict Center does not correct Frs.Brian Harrison and Cekada,Bishops Sanborn,Pirvanus,Kelly and Fellay
Wed Jun 28, 2017 4:24 pm by MRyan

» Revisiting Diocese/Parish Screening Policy
Wed Jun 28, 2017 4:03 pm by MRyan

» When sedes and trads can accept that Pius XII made a mistake then popes since John XXIII are no more in heresy
Wed Jun 28, 2017 3:08 pm by MRyan

» Doctrinal talks were conducted with Fr.Gleize on 'the other side'
Mon Jun 26, 2017 9:08 am by Lionel L. Andrades


Materialiter/Formaliter Sedeprivationists

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Materialiter/Formaliter Sedeprivationists

Post  MRyan on Thu Oct 20, 2011 12:39 pm

Jehanne wrote:
So, is he the Pope? Yes, absolutely, in virtue of his office. Is he a Catholic? No, I do not think that he is, therefore, I, as a Catholic, owe him no obedience. It would be like saying that I, as an American, owe obedience to a traitorous President.

How to make sense of this? Easy. Which is of higher authority? The President or the Constitution? Well, duh, it's the latter. The same is true of the Pope; the Ordinary and Supreme Magisterium of the Church is of a higher authority. The Pope can correct all of this, this afternoon (or morning where he is), if he wanted to, by making the necessary ex cathedra pronouncements. Catholic (sic) liberals know this, of course, which is why they are doing everything in their power to diminish the dogma of Papal Infallibility. So, yes, the Pope holds they Keys; he's just not using them, and until he does, I want nothing to do with him.
This is the classic sede error/heresy that confuses the authority of the office for the authority of the person of the Pope.

In fact, this sounds like the “half-a-pope is better than no pope” Materialiter/Formaliter form of sedevacantism (a “sedeprivationist”) by which the pope holds the papacy only in a “material sense, allowing him to nominate cardinals and prevent anyone else from being the pope, but that he lacks a formal possession of the papacy which is needed in order to gain the charisms of absolute authority and infallibility.”

Before I expose the fundamental error behind this false theory, I have a question for Jehanne:

If you hold to the sedeprivationist Materialiter/Formaliter form of sedevacantism, do you thus hold that the valid Pope does NOT possess supernatural Apostolic Primacy, to include the Primacy of Jurisdiction over the universal Church, but retains rather only a natural authority, in so far as the Church is a legal entity, to ensure material succession of the Papacy and thus, the perpetuity of true Apostolic Succession necessary for the perpetuity and indefectibility of the Church?

If so, how do explain how a valid Pope has lost or never possessed what is his by divine right -- full, episcopal, ordinary and immediate Apostolic Primacy over the universal Church?
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2276
Reputation : 2448
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Materialiter/Formaliter Sedeprivationists

Post  MRyan on Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:16 pm

Jehanne, in his benevolence, seems to have granted the Pope some special privileges particularly with regard to his potential to become once again (or for the first time) the visible Vicar of Christ, if only BXVI “repents of the false new religion, retracts its false liturgical rites, abrogates Vatican II, and condemns the heresies of modernism, ecumenism, and religious liberty. To them, as to this writer, the loss of authority on the part of the Vatican leadership is partial, not total.” (Griff Ruby)

Standing in infallible blatant opposition to this noxious half-a-pope theory is VCI and its First Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ which clearly and infallibly declared that the full and immediate divine right of Apostolic Primacy was given to the person of Peter directly by our Lord. Our Lord did not give these powers to an “office”, He gave them to the person of Peter who acts to carry out the various functions of his Apostolic Authority (office) that are inherent within his person, that of teaching, governing and sanctifying.

In other words, no Pope, no Primacy; no Primacy, no Pope – not formally, not materially, not in any way whatsoever; our Lord made it an all or nothing proposition - and promised he would be guiding the Church through His Vicar always and does so even "to this day".

When the pope-elect assumes the office of the Papacy, he assumes the supreme authority of that office within his person, and the “office” has no power or relevancy outside of the person of the Pope who alone can exercise the various functions of his office through his public person.

The Supreme and Ordinary Magisterium is not of an independent “authority” (or office) set apart from the Pope, and would have no meaning apart from the authority of the Pope – that’s what “Supreme” means because it refers to the Supreme Primacy and Authority of the Pope; and, with the Bishops in communion with him it is called the “Universal and Ordinary Magisterium”.

VCI, First Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ:

To him, in blessed Peter, full power has been given by our lord Jesus Christ to tend, rule and govern the universal Church.

2. Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.

3. In this way, by unity with the Roman Pontiff in communion and in profession of the same faith, the Church of Christ becomes one flock under one Supreme Shepherd.

4. This is the teaching of the Catholic truth, and no one can depart from it without endangering his faith and salvation.
And it is precisely this teaching that Jehanne departs from. Jehanne is telling us that the Pope is not a Catholic; yet, if he recognizes BXVI as a valid Pope, he must recognize that the Pope has full and immediate Apostolic Primacy over the universal Church. But this is what is denied if he is a true sedeprivasionsist who denies that a "material pope-in-waiting" cannot possess the divine right of full and immediate Primacy over the universal Church.

And this they call a "valid pope". I think our Lord and VC1 would call it something else.

In other words, Jehanne says he is NOT “bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world”; at least not until Pope BXVI starts acting like a “true” pope.

As such, Jehanne has committed a schismatic act and promotes a heretical position that separates the office from the person and Primacy of the Pope.

And to compare the divine hierarchical Constitution of the Church with the so-called Constitutional form of government of the US is just plain stupid (Jehanne loves to call everything and everyone “stupid” (except for Dawkins), including Doctors and Popes, so its time to see where the “stupid” shoe fits).

Unlike the authority of the President, the Pope receives his Supreme authority immediately from Christ, and there is no earthly authority higher than his – he is judged by no one but God alone (well; no one except Jehanne and his fellow sedeprivasionsists who “judge” when the Pope is unworthy of the Keys, and when he is worthy to assume the “office”, provided he behaves himself).

I must have missed where that was written in The First Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ. Perhaps Jehanne would be so kind as to point that out to me.
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2276
Reputation : 2448
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Materialiter/Formaliter Sedeprivationists

Post  simple Faith on Thu Oct 20, 2011 2:43 pm

Mryan wrote,
Unlike the authority of the President, the Pope receives his Supreme authority immediately from Christ, and there is no earthly authority higher than his – he is judged by no one but God alone (well; no one except Jehanne and his fellow sedeprivasionsists who “judge” when the Pope is unworthy of the Keys, and when he is worthy to assume the “office”, provided he behaves himself).

CLASSIC
avatar
simple Faith

Posts : 164
Reputation : 179
Join date : 2011-01-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Materialiter/Formaliter Sedeprivationists

Post  MRyan on Thu Oct 20, 2011 3:39 pm

simple Faith wrote:Mryan wrote,
Unlike the authority of the President, the Pope receives his Supreme authority immediately from Christ, and there is no earthly authority higher than his – he is judged by no one but God alone (well; no one except Jehanne and his fellow sedeprivasionsists who “judge” when the Pope is unworthy of the Keys, and when he is worthy to assume the “office”, provided he behaves himself).

CLASSIC
My spelling of "sedeprivasion[s]ists" with the extra "s" was indeed a classic!

But thanks, simple Faith, I think it reflects a simple truth.
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2276
Reputation : 2448
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Materialiter/Formaliter Sedeprivationists

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum