If they don't recognize the Pope, they are not Catholic.

 

Whatever they are they claim to be more Catholic than Catholics. Their ridiculous spin on things make them sound more like a bad tabloid newspaper. I think they are what you would call "Sedevacantists" and follow "Sedevacantism"...

 

Sedevacantism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

or "Traditionalist Catholics"...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditionalist_Catholic

If they don't recognize the Pope, they are not Catholic.

 

When you say "recognize" what exactly are you referring to? Orthodox Catholics do not follow that Pope the same way Roman Catholics do, do you still consider them as "recognizing" him?

When you say "recognize" what exactly are you referring to? Orthodox Catholics do not follow that Pope the same way Roman Catholics do, do you still consider them as "recognizing" him?

 

Recognize the Pope as the leader of the Church.

Whatever they are they claim to be more Catholic than Catholics. Their ridiculous spin on things make them sound more like a bad tabloid newspaper. I think they are what you would call "Sedevacantists" and follow "Sedevacantism"...

 

Sedevacantism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

or "Traditionalist Catholics"...

 

Traditionalist Catholic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

If they are Sedevacantists, then they are Sedevacantists. Catholics are Catholics.

 

The people who do not believe in the validity of Vatican II are not Catholics.

If they are Sedevacantists, then they are Sedevacantists. Catholics are Catholics.

 

The people who do not believe in the validity of Vatican II are not Catholics.

 

That's cool.

 

Personally I'm not all that up on all things Catholicism, and as the years roll by I've retained less and less.

 

Even as a kid when my parents, aunts (one a nun), and uncles all sat around at family get togethers and took turns dissecting their knowledge of Catholicism in what appeared to be more or less a competition of words, whatever I did catch was mostly by osmosis, and not a serious intent on taking notes, however I did learn early that faking signs that I'd one day be a good little alter boy would garner praise and a pat on the back.

 

My aunt the nun would be the one less inclined to brag about her knowledge as she mostly sat peacefully and quietly while smiling beautifully.

 

Most of the kids sat there on my aunt's plastic covered sofas and chairs fighting the urge to giggle or sleep, and were thrilled when we got the green light (mostly because we showed outward signs of being antsy and fidgety) to go to the second floor to raid the toy box that could be found there to temporarily sustain us in our boredom until we got too rambunctious and were told to pipe down and get back downstairs. I'd liken our excited behavior to caged lions who were temporarily set free.

 

A few of the cousins were able to bypass the unwritten "Children are to be seen and not heard" law and contribute to the conversation if they showed that they were good little stewards of the Catholic doctrine, or were on their way to either ordination, or a family life where they too would in turn pass the traditions on to their offspring.

 

Even while in grade school I learned to remain teacher's pet by exemplifying myself as a budding good Catholic by volunteering to do the readings at Mass and other various roles that earned me praise, while to me I was just enjoying the theater of it all.

 

Although storms of internal questions were building in my mind, I didn't dare express them to the priests and nuns as I knew that that would just irritate them by their lack of any real answers, and just make me fall out of their favor, and shock them that I actually had an analytical mind as well, and not one who was just a programmed individual reciting like a puppet all that I had been taught.

Whatever they are they claim to be more Catholic than Catholics. Their ridiculous spin on things make them sound more like a bad tabloid newspaper. I think they are what you would call "Sedevacantists" and follow "Sedevacantism"...

 

Sedevacantism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

or "Traditionalist Catholics"...

 

Traditionalist Catholic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

The used to be a group of these guys out in I think Montana. A dozen or so I guess. They actually "elected" their own "pope". I think he called himself Pope Pius XIII.

If they are Sedevacantists, then they are Sedevacantists. Catholics are Catholics.

 

The people who do not believe in the validity of Vatican II are not Catholics.

 

Eh, it is really hard to put your finger on what makes someone Catholic. There are fringe groups who splintered off of the church in communion with the pope they still consider themselves Catholics and practice virtually identical to Catholics.

 

There is a priest in Louisville who he and a parishioner decided they wanted to get married but he still be a priest so he left the church and started what he calls a Independent Catholic church in Louisville. It is pretty small, I think he actually has a second job due to the small size of the church. He, his wife and the parishioners still consider themselves Catholic. The say they look to Rome for guidance, not authority. Oh well.

The used to be a group of these guys out in I think Montana. A dozen or so I guess. They actually "elected" their own "pope". I think he called himself Pope Pius XIII.

They still are all over. In Walton Verona, KY there is a “Society of St Pius X” or something like that. The diocese made it very clear they are not Catholic.

(Covington bishop cautions faithful about attending SSPX Walton, Ky. church | Catholic Telegraph )

 

Eh, it is really hard to put your finger on what makes someone Catholic. There are fringe groups who splintered off of the church in communion with the pope they still consider themselves Catholics and practice virtually identical to Catholics.

 

There is a priest in Louisville who he and a parishioner decided they wanted to get married but he still be a priest so he left the church and started what he calls a Independent Catholic church in Louisville. It is pretty small, I think he actually has a second job due to the small size of the church. He, his wife and the parishioners still consider themselves Catholic. The say they look to Rome for guidance, not authority. Oh well.

Please see above article for info about the priests who claim to be Catholic.

 

This short Bible passage is applicable for for everyone (not just clergy). In brief, what you say doesn’t matter if you don’t practice it, meaning just because someone claims to be something does not mean they are.

 

James 2:14-26

Faith without Works Is Dead

14 What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him?[c] 15 If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead.

18 But some one will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith. 19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder. 20 Do you want to be shown, you foolish fellow, that faith apart from works is barren? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar? 22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works, 23 and the scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness”; and he was called the friend of God. 24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead.

They still are all over. In Walton Verona, KY there is a “Society of St Pius X” or something like that. The diocese made it very clear they are not Catholic.

(Covington bishop cautions faithful about attending SSPX Walton, Ky. church | Catholic Telegraph )

 

Very strange limbo the Society finds itself in. The excommunication for the "schismatic act" of installing bishops without the approval of Rome was lifted in 2009. It would then seem that since that was the only document outlining their supposed schism that they are no longer held to be such. However, Pope Benedict also made it clear that the priests and bishops of the Society that have been ordained by these falsely-appointed bishops remain under suspension a divinis and cannot exercise the normal powers and rights of clergy.

 

However, Rome has also said that the sacraments received from these clergy may be valid, even though the priests know that they are not permitted to bestow them.

 

So are they schismatic or are they not? Rome has declined to clarify.

Very strange limbo the Society finds itself in. The excommunication for the "schismatic act" of installing bishops without the approval of Rome was lifted in 2009. It would then seem that since that was the only document outlining their supposed schism that they are no longer held to be such. However, Pope Benedict also made it clear that the priests and bishops of the Society that have been ordained by these falsely-appointed bishops remain under suspension a divinis and cannot exercise the normal powers and rights of clergy.

 

However, Rome has also said that the sacraments received from these clergy may be valid, even though the priests know that they are not permitted to bestow them.

 

So are they schismatic or are they not? Rome has declined to clarify.

 

I was not familiar with all this and tried to do a little research... You are correct about the lift of excommunication, but according to the latest activities of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei ( Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ), the Society of St Pius X is still not canonical. This would confirm that they are still schismatic.

 

As for the sacramental validity, I'll share with you what I found.

 

From http://www.ewtn.com/library/liturgy/zlitur366.htm :

"Concretely, this means that the Masses offered by the priests of the Society of St. Pius X are valid, but illicit, i.e., contrary to Canon Law. The Sacraments of Penance and Matrimony, however, require that the priest enjoys the faculties of the diocese or has proper delegation. Since that is not the case with these priests, these sacraments are invalid. It remains true, however, that, if the faithful are genuinely ignorant that the priests of the Society of St. Pius X do not have proper faculty to absolve, the Church supplies these faculties so that the sacrament is valid (cf. Code of Canon Law, canon 144).

 

FWIW, as I'm sure you know people can only be baptized once, so I would have to assume that the Sacrament of Baptism is valid since anyone (even you and me) in emergency situations can baptize.

One more and I'll stop derailing this thread. When those bishops were appointed by the Society, many of the Society's members still wanted communion with Rome and so they left, forming the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, a group dedicated to the Traditional Mass, but in full communion with the Church of Rome. I was first introduced to the Tridentine Mass as a college student when I went to mass at Holy Family Church in Dayton, Ohio, a parish run by the Fraternity.

 

I get frustrated with the Church leadership on occasion. Mostly I get frustrated when someone's at the front of the church during mass playing a lousy song on a guitar that may or may not be about Jesus written in 1974 instead of some spectacular piece of ancient music that lifts one's mind and soul toward the heavens. When I originally got this thread off course, that's all that was, not a belief in any crazy sedevacantist nonsense or a thought that the Church after Vatican II wasn't really the Church. I maintain that the council was a spectacularly bad idea during a time of immense upheaval in the world; instead of being a calming force amid a sea of troubles, the men responsible for leading the flock leaped right into rough waters without the ability to swim out.

 

I believe Pope Francis to be a good man and quite probably the right man at the right time to lead this Church. If he's the living embodiment of what the spirit of the Second Vatican Council is supposed to be all about, then he may just be the one to change my mind.

One more and I'll stop derailing this thread. When those bishops were appointed by the Society, many of the Society's members still wanted communion with Rome and so they left, forming the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, a group dedicated to the Traditional Mass, but in full communion with the Church of Rome. I was first introduced to the Tridentine Mass as a college student when I went to mass at Holy Family Church in Dayton, Ohio, a parish run by the Fraternity.

 

I get frustrated with the Church leadership on occasion. Mostly I get frustrated when someone's at the front of the church during mass playing a lousy song on a guitar that may or may not be about Jesus written in 1974 instead of some spectacular piece of ancient music that lifts one's mind and soul toward the heavens. When I originally got this thread off course, that's all that was, not a belief in any crazy sedevacantist nonsense or a thought that the Church after Vatican II wasn't really the Church. I maintain that the council was a spectacularly bad idea during a time of immense upheaval in the world; instead of being a calming force amid a sea of troubles, the men responsible for leading the flock leaped right into rough waters without the ability to swim out.

 

I believe Pope Francis to be a good man and quite probably the right man at the right time to lead this Church. If he's the living embodiment of what the spirit of the Second Vatican Council is supposed to be all about, then he may just be the one to change my mind.

 

No need to stop in this thread, I enjoy it. In fact, based on the first paragraph I think you and I are in full agreement. Since the Church has no problem with the traditional Mass, there is no way I could. In fact, I've been to it more than once and it is a neat thing to experience.

 

I guess the only disagreement we have is in most of the second paragraph, which is relatively difficult for me to comment on. I am much too young to be able to discuss the pre-Vatican II and post-Vatican II Church because I was not alive. However, I trust that the Holy Spirit empowers the leaders of the Church to make their decisions and always has and that papal infallibility is a very real thing. JMO.

I guess the only disagreement we have is in most of the second paragraph, which is relatively difficult for me to comment on. I am much too young to be able to discuss the pre-Vatican II and post-Vatican II Church because I was not alive. However, I trust that the Holy Spirit empowers the leaders of the Church to make their decisions and always has and that papal infallibility is a very real thing. JMO.

 

I'm not old enough to directly comment on it either. And we agree on the decisions of the Church; though we should be wary of applying papal infallibility further than it is intended to go. All people have free will and the pope and the cardinals are more than free to make poor decisions. The Church is larger than any of them and its understanding of the truth is not created by any of them.

They still are all over. In Walton Verona, KY there is a “Society of St Pius X” or something like that.

 

Actually, the people in Montana don't like the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) either LOL. SSPX tries to get back into communion with Rome, those Montana folks believe every pope from Vatican II is a heretic and therefore not the legitimate pope.

There is something special about the Latin Mass, but it's not for me on a regular basis.