1 year ago2 points(+0/-0/+2Score on mirror)1 child
I think he was excommunicated for ordaining bishops without permission, but I dont think he was an outright sedevacantist. Actually, it seems hes been excommunicated twice.
Im still confused about Vigano as well, who didnt express any sedevacantist leanings (and in fact repudiated sedevacantism a few times) who deliberately got himself excommunicated after randomly deciding to call the pope illegitimate.
Considering that the Church is currently swarming with modernists, who are outright heretics, I'm not entirely sure how legitimate either of their excommunications are, since both were excommunicated for opposing modernism,
I think he took the SSPX "recognize and resist" position ultimately
I don't think he was ever sedevacantist but was sedevacantist-adjacent and probably more sympathetic over time to the view, he would publish "eleison comments" periodically on his views
imo Vigano seems to be acting like another Lefebvre, leading the people into a no man's land of "recognize and resist": the idea Francis is a "real pope" that Vigano ("schismatically") resists. I think sedevacantism is more logical in contrast, although I also think the character of "sedevacantism" today resembles that more of the Western Schism than a "clean" break (the sedevacantists have no known clergy with ordinary jurisdiction nor a clearly agreed upon "alternative" / conclavist papal claimant, so their operations are kind of irregular, to put it simply)
My proposed solution to this predicament is the whole Vatican 2 church needs to reject Vatican 2 and then elect a new pope; while "sedevacantism" I think is true, as mentioned they have no known clergy, hence this seems to imply there must be clergy in the Vatican 2 church. The only way then that we can combine the Vatican 2 viewpoint with sedevacantism I see is to think of the present "schism" as like the Western Schism, it must not be a "real" schism but more like a confusion about what's going on today. This would allow us to reject the V2 claimants and teachings and yet attempt to somehow preserve the legitimacy of religious orders. (Unless one takes an apocalyptic sedevacantist view that the world is simply going to end, and there are no more popes or clergy around... it's some years later though that I've been aware of sedevacantism without the world ending, so at least so far this viewpoint has not come to be correct and is speculative)
I appreciate any further insight that might be had on how we could straighten out these issues
My issue with Sedevacantism is that we dont ultimately know whats going on in the Pope's soul and whether or not he's being coerced into making the heretical statements he's made. Someone can make an off the cuff heretical remark out of ignorance or human fear without being a formal heretic, (see St, Peter, who denied Christ three times out of fear of the jews). Ultimately the Pope is a reflection of the Laity, and like it or not Pope Francis is a perfect mirror of the generation of Cultural Catholics he comes from. Theres also the issue of whether or not being a formal heretic can even make someone's papacy illegitimate, since I'm unsure if the issue has ever even arisen in the past. My main issue with sedes though is that they would rather separate themselves from the rest of the Heirarchy and put their heads in the sand than go in and purge the Seminaries of heresies, which is what needs to be done to actually fix things.
I think those issues have been addressed, if you want to research them or I can provide info if requested
For me I had a clear experience that what was going on wasn't Catholic as the people neither seemed to believe or practice Catholicism, so it felt like sedevacantism in some sense was a necessary conclusion as all the "new stuff" seemed to directly oppose traditional Catholic belief and practice:
I feel this way a little bit too, I feel both sides are going to extremes and would like both to be put together. To me the Vatican 2 church is pretty much devoid of "Catholicism" and so a lot of sedevacantists (boomers) kind of "despair" about it and just want to try to pray at their little chapels or home away from it.
On the other hand, these "little operations" ignore some of the normal functioning of the Church and the institutions that are still intact with the Vatican 2 church (having most of the physical churches, colleges and schooling, nonprofits, and other such machinations).
So while I necessarily side with a specific little sedevacantist view and group of sorts loosely, I view this more as a temporary regrettable situation, whereas I do think a lot of sedes kind of don't care what happens with the V2 church: they feel powerless to change it, think maybe the world is ending soon, and their energies are absorbed with whatever little operations they're involved with.
Problem is, we have seen how the V2 hierarchy systematically shuts down any opposition, so it seems kind of pointless to try to "resist them from within". There is a whole list of "trad groups" that have made deals with the Vatican, only for the Vatican to force them to abandon traditional practices.
Hence this has made me conclude that when V2 is resolved, as I think it will be, it will probably be done all at once, with understanding going viral that the papal claimants since V2 cannot possibly be popes and V2 is not Catholic, leading to the election of a Catholic pope and end of the present drama.
The trads have mostly "failed" to set up any organized widespread "independent" operations, and they don't really have ordinary jurisdiction to do so. Yet, the V2 church has defected from Catholic teaching... but with the only visible clergy claimants being left (who might possibly have ordinary jurisdiction). Hence it seems at some point that pool of clergy will have to be considered to be that Catholic clergy and will have to elect a pope, with V2 being rejected.
I did have some talks with a late "conclavist" papal claimant about contacting various cardinals and bishops in the V2 church about conclavism (which is, sedevacantists electing a pope). Didn't end up happening, and I don't espouse the conclavist view anymore. Sedevacantists don't seem to have attempted to provoke much in the way of a widespread official response to sedevacantism, from the V2 church. Probably it will be done by someone eventually.
So yeah, I have gotten a sense of some sedevacantists just condescendingly having their own little operations and "looking down" on the V2 church, and I don't really identify with that. I think for the most part a lot of people don't even know about the idea of sedevacantism, although a growing number do.
>Problem is, we have seen how the V2 hierarchy systematically shuts down any opposition, so it seems kind of pointless to try to "resist them from within
Any opposition that is public, yes, but they cant do anything if Traditionalists take over the seminaries. Theyre currently desperate for priests, if we provide the priests, they will not be able to do anything about us taking back the Church. The jews took over the seminaries this way, and we can take them back in the same manner.
Im still confused about Vigano as well, who didnt express any sedevacantist leanings (and in fact repudiated sedevacantism a few times) who deliberately got himself excommunicated after randomly deciding to call the pope illegitimate.
Considering that the Church is currently swarming with modernists, who are outright heretics, I'm not entirely sure how legitimate either of their excommunications are, since both were excommunicated for opposing modernism,
just found out about Williamson's death
I think he took the SSPX "recognize and resist" position ultimately
I don't think he was ever sedevacantist but was sedevacantist-adjacent and probably more sympathetic over time to the view, he would publish "eleison comments" periodically on his views
imo Vigano seems to be acting like another Lefebvre, leading the people into a no man's land of "recognize and resist": the idea Francis is a "real pope" that Vigano ("schismatically") resists. I think sedevacantism is more logical in contrast, although I also think the character of "sedevacantism" today resembles that more of the Western Schism than a "clean" break (the sedevacantists have no known clergy with ordinary jurisdiction nor a clearly agreed upon "alternative" / conclavist papal claimant, so their operations are kind of irregular, to put it simply)
My proposed solution to this predicament is the whole Vatican 2 church needs to reject Vatican 2 and then elect a new pope; while "sedevacantism" I think is true, as mentioned they have no known clergy, hence this seems to imply there must be clergy in the Vatican 2 church. The only way then that we can combine the Vatican 2 viewpoint with sedevacantism I see is to think of the present "schism" as like the Western Schism, it must not be a "real" schism but more like a confusion about what's going on today. This would allow us to reject the V2 claimants and teachings and yet attempt to somehow preserve the legitimacy of religious orders. (Unless one takes an apocalyptic sedevacantist view that the world is simply going to end, and there are no more popes or clergy around... it's some years later though that I've been aware of sedevacantism without the world ending, so at least so far this viewpoint has not come to be correct and is speculative)
I appreciate any further insight that might be had on how we could straighten out these issues
For me I had a clear experience that what was going on wasn't Catholic as the people neither seemed to believe or practice Catholicism, so it felt like sedevacantism in some sense was a necessary conclusion as all the "new stuff" seemed to directly oppose traditional Catholic belief and practice:
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2016/09/28/4-very-few-americans-see-contraception-as-morally-wrong/
https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2016/09/28/poll-finds-many-us-catholics-breaking-church-over-contraception-abortion-and-lgbt
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/08/05/transubstantiation-eucharist-u-s-catholics/
> My main issue with sedes
I feel this way a little bit too, I feel both sides are going to extremes and would like both to be put together. To me the Vatican 2 church is pretty much devoid of "Catholicism" and so a lot of sedevacantists (boomers) kind of "despair" about it and just want to try to pray at their little chapels or home away from it.
On the other hand, these "little operations" ignore some of the normal functioning of the Church and the institutions that are still intact with the Vatican 2 church (having most of the physical churches, colleges and schooling, nonprofits, and other such machinations).
So while I necessarily side with a specific little sedevacantist view and group of sorts loosely, I view this more as a temporary regrettable situation, whereas I do think a lot of sedes kind of don't care what happens with the V2 church: they feel powerless to change it, think maybe the world is ending soon, and their energies are absorbed with whatever little operations they're involved with.
Problem is, we have seen how the V2 hierarchy systematically shuts down any opposition, so it seems kind of pointless to try to "resist them from within". There is a whole list of "trad groups" that have made deals with the Vatican, only for the Vatican to force them to abandon traditional practices.
Hence this has made me conclude that when V2 is resolved, as I think it will be, it will probably be done all at once, with understanding going viral that the papal claimants since V2 cannot possibly be popes and V2 is not Catholic, leading to the election of a Catholic pope and end of the present drama.
The trads have mostly "failed" to set up any organized widespread "independent" operations, and they don't really have ordinary jurisdiction to do so. Yet, the V2 church has defected from Catholic teaching... but with the only visible clergy claimants being left (who might possibly have ordinary jurisdiction). Hence it seems at some point that pool of clergy will have to be considered to be that Catholic clergy and will have to elect a pope, with V2 being rejected.
I did have some talks with a late "conclavist" papal claimant about contacting various cardinals and bishops in the V2 church about conclavism (which is, sedevacantists electing a pope). Didn't end up happening, and I don't espouse the conclavist view anymore. Sedevacantists don't seem to have attempted to provoke much in the way of a widespread official response to sedevacantism, from the V2 church. Probably it will be done by someone eventually.
So yeah, I have gotten a sense of some sedevacantists just condescendingly having their own little operations and "looking down" on the V2 church, and I don't really identify with that. I think for the most part a lot of people don't even know about the idea of sedevacantism, although a growing number do.
Any opposition that is public, yes, but they cant do anything if Traditionalists take over the seminaries. Theyre currently desperate for priests, if we provide the priests, they will not be able to do anything about us taking back the Church. The jews took over the seminaries this way, and we can take them back in the same manner.