Generally, there are some sedevacantists out there that have some nuances here and there, but for the most part, they tend to say that. Caller: Yeah, it definitely helps. And again, thanks for having me on. I don’t think they are entirely on the wrong track, but I believe there are decent rebuttals to their answers. Why Sedevacantism is False … I saw these videos and they are pretty much straw man attacks. And so that’s effectively what it is in a nutshell. AngelusDomini April 21, 2020, 2:19am #65. I can not find it in my dictionary. The "sedevacantist" only wishes to be a Catholic, nothing more: to believe what Catholics have always believed, worship as Catholics have always worshipped, live as Catholics have always lived. So, everyone after the Second Vatican Council. I have no doubt that the bishops are, as a college, successors of the apostles. So, clearly what the pope was doing there in Quo Primum is he was binding anybody who was not a pope. This article originally appeared on the Traditionalist blog Athanasius Contra Mundum on September 3rd, 2009. But those situations are not representative of the Church as a whole. Take something like Christ’s real presence in the Eucharist, or someone who denies the teaching that it is wrong to directly kill an innocent human being. I’ve also read “What Went Wrong With Vatican II” by Ralph McInerny. Another thing is, know your stuff. And Michael, I’m super glad you are a contributor as well. Yeah. Sedevacantism is the claim, espoused by certain extreme traditionalist Catholics, that there is currently no valid pope because of a great apostasy by either the pope or the whole Church. Okay. I think those are some helpful tips when engaging sedevacantists that I’ve noted in my experience. There are also apostates here in America. What are your thoughts? Thank you all so much for listening, everybody. When … And I totally understand when you said that since I’m going through the education of the Catholic Church, and even besides going through RCIA I’ve been doing a lot of my own research on the Catholic Church, which is again why I want to join the Catholic Church, I definitely found the truth in it. Thus the Sedevacantist must maintain that the Church preserves the Four Marks despite lacking a Successor to Peter, while the orthodox Catholic must prove that such a scenario would mean the Marks had been lost. So, it seems like one of the common arguments they make is that the See of Peter, the Holy See has been empty, the Chair of Rome is empty, because the pope can not be a heretic, premise one. What do you do when you think the ultimate ecclesial authority, the pope, doesn’t really have that authority? Because it has not only the element of continuity, but it also has the element of development that occurs, and you can’t arbitrarily fossilize a certain stage in the Church’s history and say “There can be no departures from this. M. P. Hill, S.J. I think it’s also an untenable thesis and, again, causes more problems than it really solves. It is sinful.” But then again, I don’t want to sell the farm and go too far with it because I think some of their concerns are not actual problems to begin with. Let’s dive into that one before we talk about other problems and arguments they make. And I would agree with you. Sedevacantists are a type of traditional catholics. And I was actually already scheduled to do the interview we’re going to do today, but I think the interview is actually very appropriate because it deals with the subject of authority and illicit authority. Therefore, Pope so-and-so is a heretic.” But they fail at the first premise because Proposition X is not a heresy, or they’ve formulated it incorrectly. Know your material. Well, my last question would be this: what are some practical tips for people who, when sedevacantism comes up in discussions with friends or family, though honestly I feel like it ends up coming up the most for me on the internet. The term “great apostasy” is really a theological term that’s based on some passages that indicate there will be a great falling-away from the faith towards the end of the world. Philosophy. And that’s what I really appreciate about Reason and Theology, is that there are a lot of Catholic podcasts out there and Catholic shows, but there are very few that will offer debates or dialogues with non-Catholics. Right. And if you’re just learning Church teaching for the first time, you may not want to be exposing yourself to material that has a high risk of distorting things or presenting it in an imbalanced way. So, we saw that with people contesting elections and things with the US government. Now there was another component to your question which is: has the Church abandoned its traditions? Is Pope Francis not the real Pope? It’s a good question. Absolutely fundamental difference there. Sedevacantism is one of the many positions held by Traditional Catholics. Now, the proposition “no salvation outside of the church,” that is infallibly taught. The real answers to these questions may surprise you. Thank you sedevacantist for bringing up the problems, but stay with the pope and work to stop them. And I love the work that Michael does with his channel, and so I thought he would be great to have on to talk about this subject. Very excited for you to monitor that. Sedevacantist claims and arguments require context to be refuted. Famulus April 21, 2020, 2:07am #64. And I’m so glad you were here on the show today with us. There’s a bit of a dispute about whether a priest could do this, but let’s say you got to be ordained by a bishop with valid holy orders. That is something that, and there can be heresy really to things that are theological teachings but also moral teachings, but not as many moral categories fall under this. They generally don’t know those distinctions, but their arguments hinge on those distinctions. So what happens with these sedevacantists is they will typically say things like “Vatican II was the point of the rupture,” and maybe even a little earlier than that, with Pope John XXIII, “He was not a valid pope for…reasons,” which are really hard to specify. I’m in dialogue with a young woman who is a sedevacantist. And often that isn’t the case with most people. And I’ll be talking in my dissertation about the teaching authority, the magisterium. When a pope dies, the see is vacant sure. Traditional Catholicism. Similarly, Jesus asks “Will the son of man find faith when he comes back?” So all this and various other indicators suggest that by the end of the world we’re gonna have dramatically diminished in size. Interviews, round table discussions, debates. I love the Catholic Faith and wish only to profess it in all its purity and fullness. He is a member of one of the break away independent traditionalist "Catholic" Churches which do not recognize the Pope and some of the teachings of the Catholic Church. You have to be formal in it, but then also the subject matter has to be something that you ascend to with divine and Catholic faith. Nobody can reform it. Yeah. During the “reign” of Antipope John Paul II, there were many false apparitions in various parts of the world. And then Vatican II said all kinds of horrible things, in their mind, that contradicted the historic faith. One of the things that Christ promised is that he would be with his church till the end of time. What are other tips or resources you would recommend for people? So, there are issues about the canonical authority and issues related to jurisdiction of the priests that were ordained by these bishops. There are some irregularities there when it comes to canon law. And though that may be true, I think it just causes more problems than they’re solving at this point, identifying the true church and now identifying it to just a select few. They basically say the exact argument that I mentioned at the end So just to show my ignorance what is sedevacantism? :shrug: ... the Catholic Church would have an “empty chair of St. Peter” until a new Pope is named. It talks about how the Church will almost pass out of existence, but Christ will return to save it at the last moment. “Debating” a sedevacantist - probably the most challenging for me so far, because admittedly they “know” much more about certain documents than me, which is good - it forces me too learn more about our Faith. I have others also, probably about six or eight contributors, it’s in its early genesis. That is why I’m working on, as a little project right now, an anthology that covers this. The Church is bigger today than it has ever been in the past, and so it has more members now than it has ever had in the past. And so it can’t just be something that is taught with a lower level in the magisterium; it has to be actually something that is dogmatic, that is in the deposit of faith and has been confirmed by the Catholic Church definitively. It’s a topic very, very dear to me for many reasons. The minor premise, that the popes are heretics, the problem seems to be, and you could address this more at length in your reply, the problem it seems to be the understanding of what constitutes a heresy. Right. So it’s hard to say “we’re in a great apostasy” or “THE Great Apostasy” when the Church is bigger than ever. Sedevacantism is the position held by some people who identify as Catholic that the present occupier of the Holy See is not truly the pope due to the mainstream church's espousal of what they see as the heresy of modernism and that, for lack of a valid pope, the See has been vacant since the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958 or the death of Pope John XXIII in 1963. Sedevacantist statements are often built upon false assumptions that, when removed, collapse any … And they didn’t. So the people who are making these arguments simply do not understand what an apostasy is. Whereas a formal heretic, there actually is consent there. That’s one of the big problems that I’ve noticed with sedevacantism. This will bring back many good catholics who have become sedevacantist. If you die in the state of mortal sin, you’re separated from God for all eternity. The Catholic’s Ready Answer [1915], Rev. I am not convinced by their answers here. Have a blessed day. Pope so-and-so believes and teaches Proposition X. Okay, after pope emeritus passes away, that is going to cause some people to become sedevacantists. We do not doubt that you know well how vain and worthless this evasion is. What the post-conciliar era is effectively saying is that, prior to the death of an infant, it is possible and we can have the hope that God remits the original sin of that infant so that they’re not dying in a state of mortal or original sin because, of course, infants don’t have mortal sin, but even if you die in a state of original sin alone, you are deprived of the beatific vision. A famous sedevacantist is Mel gibson who supports the death penalty. So, this is nothing new to the post-conciliar era. But it’s still something I don’t think we can ignore, but we need to engage it in a charitable way. With love in Christ. Please advise. You had a little bit of buyer’s remorse afterwards by one bishop—I’m thinking of Marcel Lefebvre— but at the time of the Council, he didn’t you know, shout from the rooftops, “This is all wrong.” He signed the Vatican II documents. Yeah. And how do you know which group, now, that identifies as the true church, how do you know when they have selected a pope? Well, one of the things you discover when you read the Church’s documents and when you study the course of history is, although tradition has elements of continuity that are the same all the way down through Church history and have been since the first century, there are other elements of tradition that adapt and that develop with the course of time. Therefore, there has not been a pope since the Second Vatican Council. Catholic Questions and Answers – One of the best ways to learn is to ask questions. Peter did not stop being pope when he refused to dine with the gentile Christians. The term is unauthorised. Catholic Answers Focus actually did a great interview with a representative of the Society for Catholic Answers Focus, a very enlightening interview, and I think a very helpful and educational one. On Tuesdays and Thursdays, we talk apologetics, theology, how to explain and defend our Catholic faith, and that’s what we’re going to talk about today. Sedevacantism. However, he was publicly accused by a fellow sedevacantist clergyman, Denis Chicoine, of being involved in homosexual relationships with underage associates, ... Radio-Free Catholic. The Revealing Heresies in Msgr. "Above all taking the shield of faith, with which you can quench all the flaming darts of the evil one" – Ephesians 6:16 They then turn around and take this to say if you teach that it’s possible for, let’s say an unbaptized baby, to go to heaven, or at least to not go to hell, then you’re a heretic. And I don’t see the sedevacantists saying the gates of Hell have prevailed. True or False Pope? We are not a new church since Vatican II. I don’t think God would providentially allow that, especially for so long and worldwide. Yeah. Or you can just go to YouTube, type in “reason and theology,” and you’ll see the R&T channel pull up right there. Pax_et_Caritas April 11, 2007, 8:40pm #3. Because we really need to examine these close alternatives to Catholicism that some people who are disenchanted with the church feel like that they should go to instead and also feel, how do we invite our brethren within these churches or communities or belief systems to be able to come into the fullness of Christ’s church? You can’t do that.” And they’ll cite Quo Primum, a papal document, I think it’s from the 16th century, that has a line in there saying that no one has the authority to change these rubrics or this element of the mass. I mean, there’s a guy in Kansas who calls himself Pope Michael, and he’s not the real pope, so that makes him an anti-pope. But they reject the Church and refuse to cede on Teachings. They do recognize him as the Pope. And I totally understand when you … It’s interesting, people who care a lot about Eastern Orthodox relationships with Catholics and how to understand authority, you also have to figure out sedevacantism because it circles around kind of these similar questions. I am wondering, why does he support it while current Romen Catholic don’t? What happens to sedevacantism, if they’re waiting for the true pope to arrive, how could that be if it seems like they’ve totally severed a connection with the past? Are there any shorter treatments of this subject that I can give to her? I’ll be seeing you in a few weeks as well for the Catholic Economics Round Table. So, the problem is they will identify certain propositions as heretical and they will say, “Okay, well, this person who claims to be the pope can’t be the pope because he maintains this proposition.” But in fact, it’s not something heretical. So, it’s a very dangerous place to be. vaya con Dios, dave [/quote] sede = seat vacante = empty. So in your opinion, Jimmy, you would say that there are—this is just a clarification for me personally— you would say that there definitely are not any anti-popes, and all of the bishops still have their full succession from the original Church from the beginning, correct? You have not committed apostasy. Sedevacantist claims are purely negative (“the putative Catholic Church is heretical, therefore we by default are the true Church”) resting on certain doctrinal controversies and arguments over whether something is a legitimate theological conclusion or actual heresy (claims that the Catholic Church has fallen into heresy are not new, just ask the Greeks or the non … All right. So my thing is, in order to prevent that, I think that we just need to make better distinctions, become more nuanced, and become a little bit more informed so that we don’t fall into that position and so that we can maintain the idea that Pope Francis is the Pope, and yet not necessarily agree with everything he says. It’s a really sad state to be in, if you were to maintain that thesis. But yes, this is another area that I’ve noted with them. Click here to learn about the Society of Saint Pius V. O kay, so that’s sedevacantism. And when it comes to reforming the liturgy, he was binding them as far as prohibiting them from reforming the liturgy, but that doesn’t mean a future pope could not do so. But very quickly, certainly by Saint Paul’s time, they started saying Mass in Greek. He also promised the gates of hell would not prevail against it. I think that would be the best way to describe it. So, if you deny the teaching that it is wrong to directly kill an innocent human being, that would constitute heresy. He’s the one that the college of cardinals elected, and I have no doubt about that. And some of the uses refer to events that are already in our past, but—or actually, “great tribulation” is the term I’m thinking of there. They might not agree with everything he says, but they will definitely recognize that he’s the pope. The Community, while living in the world, attempt to live according to the Rule of Saint Augustine as much as is practically possible. No. Whatever your theory on how God does this is really irrelevant because the point is it is permitted and in fact magisterial to say that we can have the hope that God does remit that original sin and so they don’t die in a state deprived of his grace. 0.o. So we just don’t see the conditions necessary for The Great Apostasy. And so I think you’re right about this, that one of the problems in sedevacantism is they’ll say, “Proposition X is a heresy. I’m your host, Catholic Answers apologist and speaker Trent Horn. Posts about sedevacantist written by The Catholic Knight. I completed my Master of Arts in Theological Studies with Christendom a couple of years ago, and I’m working on a doctorate right now on theology with Pontifex. Nobody is claiming that an infant who dies in a state of mortal sin sees the beatific vision. A huge one for me, the definitive guide against sedevacantism, in my opinion, is John Salza and Robert Siscoe’s book, True or False Pope? And I try to balance things out. Many people have grown quite concerned that Pope Francis might, in fact, be a bad pope. And now we get into some debates. 4. A Catholic ecumenical council approved and promulgated by a true Pope -- which is what Salza believes Vatican II (1962-65) to have been -- can propose as Catholic doctrine condemned Freemasonic ideas?!" And then if you go listen to that interview, you’ll hear more of the backstory about SSPX, that its origination was because Archbishop Marcel Lefebre illicitly consecrated bishops during the pontificate of Pope Saint John Paul II, which incurred an excommunication that was later lifted. And if Vatican II had done something that fundamentally betrayed the faith, then number one, the gates of hell would have prevailed against the Church, which Jesus said wouldn’t happen, and number two, there would have been an outcry from the bishops! And so it just causes more problems than I think it really solves. Welcome to The Counsel of Trent podcast. So there just would have been, at the Council, some kind of massive protest if it did anything fundamentally wrong. It’s an honor to be with you. But what I find problematic with a lot of these sedevacantist claims is they don’t understand what an apostasy is. What is most difficult when engaging sedevacantist arguments, and dangerous for the unprepared, is that, as with Protestantism, there is much that is true in sedevacantist presentations. So Michael, welcome to The Counsel of Trent podcast. I’m actually going to be on that channel soon to do a Catholic Economics Round Table, it’s going to be super fun. Our attention must be diverted from the external to the internal needs of man. But they would say that the see has been vacant, as you noted, from the Second Vatican Council onward. Well, whatever else that means, it means there’s not going to be a sudden apostasy of the bishops who were guided by the Holy Spirit, according to Jesus, and by Jesus himself. Well, here’s the thing: the bishops of the world, who are guided by the Holy Spirit and are successors of the apostles—they were there at Vatican II! Sedevacantism. So, then let’s jump right into sedevacantism. This means that the great tragedy of the Church’s decapitation was kept a secret for ten years . It had already been a tradition, but now it was an infallibly defined one. For those inclined to investigate further, here are links to articles that provide a deeper explanation of the foregoing argument, together with citations to the writings of popes, theologians, canon law experts, and saints whose writings provide the unassailable basis for the sedevacantist argument in Catholic teaching. So, we have these two elements here. Bishop Victor Bendico of Baguio warned the faithful against a “sedevacantist” group that is reportedly sprouting in one of the parishes in the diocese. And soon, within a couple of centuries, mass was being said in Latin. It’s a very stringent definition. Just because somebody has a mistaken theological belief, or even disagrees with something that’s widely considered to be true within the Catholic faith, it doesn’t make them a heretic. I’ll read online, both on the theological left and the theological right, will throw this word around haphazardly saying somebody is a heretic. But the main thing for everyone to understand is SSPX is not sedevacantism because as you said, Michael, they recognize Pope Francis is the Pope. And it seems to my mind, well, before we get to the main arguments that people will make, you or I as a Catholic, what is just the overarching problem with this claim that the see has been empty going on now for about 60 years? You look in Europe, there are a bunch of apostates in Europe. So the sedevacantist teaches that John Paul II was an impostor and the same for Benedict XVI. Therefore, he couldn’t possibly be the pope.” But when you really get down to it and start to ask them, “Okay. In his new book THE SEDEVACANTIST DELUSION John C. Pontrello addresses the Vatican II problem at a time when the divisions among traditionalists and modernists is reaching a climax. Coache,[1] make it a matter of faith, and refuse to assist at Masses where the priest prays for the pope. Father Z is not a Sedevacantist in the least, unless one’s definition of Sedevacantism is anyone who criticizes or disagrees with the Pope on some issues (in which case 90% of Catholics, and great Saints like St Peter Damian and St Catherine of Siena would qualify as “Sedevacantists” in one way or another). Welcome to The Counsel of Trent podcast, a production of Catholic Answers. So, identifying what is heretical is a huge weakness for sedevacantists in my estimation. So a first thought I’d have is: is this the right time in your journey to be trying to process this kind of information? The other one, though, they misunderstand is the infallible teaching that someone who dies in a state of mortal sin is separated from God for all eternity. So, know your stuff and know how to respond. Because the claim is that if the office of the Holy See has been vacant for, let’s say, going on what now, 60 years or so? But sometimes I’ll record the episode at one point in history, and then when the episode airs, the national mood shifts a little bit. I’m really excited about that. Does that give you some help? He gives them the graces of baptism so they are baptized in a loose sense, not with water but perhaps by vicarious baptism of desire of the parents. Sedevacantist catholic answers cruise * In some cases the a formal certificate of Wilmington North Carolina. And then, in your explanation, I think it’s important to distinguish that from the Society of Saint Pius X, or SSPX, because a lot of people conflate the two. And we do all kinds of stuff on there. You didn’t have a protest of bishops denouncing the Vatican II documents at the time of Vatican II. Host: All right, how’s all that, Brent? And they jump the gun and think that just everything is heretical that a pope may say, or they just think that everything is a problem. Sedevacantism is the position held by some people who identify as Catholic that the present occupier of the Holy See is not pope due to the mainstream church's espousal of what they see as heresies of modernism and that, for lack of a valid pope, the See has been vacant since the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958, the death of Pope Saint John XXIII in 1963, the death of Pope Saint … And have there been a large number of them in certain parts of the world today? Anytime someone is attacking somebody else, you have a big risk that they’re distorting things. And it seems to me you could actually challenge both of those premises based on the definitions that are in them. Is this something you’ve noticed when they kind of focus on the mass? I’m going over some of his essays right now. I am not convinced by their answers here. Sure. What is the overall problem with this view? Now there was another component to your question which is: has the Church abandoned its traditions? Traditional Catholicism. And I would tell them, “Look, you need to get back to the sacraments.” If we’re in a position where the vast majority of people in the world can no longer receive the sacraments, I think you might need to rethink some things here. Kasper. And then another thing is I would ask them, “Okay, let’s just go ahead and accept the sedevacantist thesis hypothetically. So, I would actually quote Vatican II to tell them genuinely, and from a very concerned heart, that I’m very concerned that they are putting their salvation in jeopardy because they are formally, well, at the very least, materially in schism, but in many cases formally in schism. And your guys’s channel, it’s really one of the few Catholic channels, and Catholics I see out there, like you, Erick Ybarra, who has some of the best stuff on the papacy I’ve ever seen, you guys are doing great work, which is why I figured you would be great to come in today to talk about sedevacantism, about these disputes. So, it does kind of tie into what we’re discussing today when it comes to authority. We tend to focus on charitable dialogue and conversations on the channel. I don’t see the “gates of Hell” argument making a lot of sense here. Premise two, all of the popes after the Second Vatican Council are heretics. This will bring back many good catholics who have become sedevacantist. Traditional Catholicism. This is something that we find in the pre-conciliar church, really from the 1500s onwards. So, finding a sedevacantist who’s aware of the distinction between formal heresy and material heresy, or better yet, a public heretic versus a notorious heretic and the crime of heresy, if they know those distinctions, you’ve found somebody extremely exceptional. Has the perennial teaching changed, or has it been further affirmed and deepened even more? They insist frequently—and frankly—on an uncharitable reading of every development, and portray it as if it was an unacceptable development, and they have essentially fossilized a certain stage of development in the history of the Church and said “Any departure from that is an apostasy.” And that’s just a misrepresentation, both of the concept of apostasy and of the way tradition works. This is somebody who holds to something that is heretical, but they don’t know it. elvisman January 9, 2007, 8:12pm #2. estesbob: I saw a note where this is now allowed to be discussed in the Traidtional Catholicism forum. Yeah. Some theologians say he’s automatically deposed; other theologians say that, no, the bishops actually have to declare that he has been deposed by God so that the faithful know to distance themselves from the heretic, as Titus 3:10 tells us.