Is sedevacantism the worst of all heresies?

[littleway]

The set up of the site has changed since last time I was here a few months ago but I'm pretty sure that last time I was here the rules stated that sedevacantism was not allowed to be promoted.

[NorthernTrad]

I think I've done that.

Next, according to the rules?

Really?  I haven't seen any sources other than your own opinion.

[V_Leonius]

I agree with you littleway but it is best just to ignore them they will soon disappear as all heresies do given time.

[Custodes]

I am not a sedevacantists, I do not condone sedevacantism. But... 

"Any baptized person who, while retaining the name of Christian, obstinately denies or doubts any of the truths proposed for belief by the divine and Catholic faith, is a heretic;"

What dogma do sedevacantists deny?

If it is heresy to hold that a certain man is an anitpope, then why didn't the supporters of the antipopes have to recant their heresy after the Great Western Schism was resolved?

[littleway]

The last time i checked no-one was allowed to promote sedevacantism. I have said all I have to  say about it. If anyone wants to promote it, in an explicit or implicit way, I will let the moderators do their job.

The topic of this thread is: "Is sedevacantism the worst of all heresies?"

I'm obviously not interested in discussing whether or not it is a heresy. It is. I just would like to see if people regard it as the worst of all. I do.

[Custodes]

...The topic of this thread is: "Is sedevacantism the worst of all heresies?"

I'm obviously not interested in discussing whether or not it is a heresy. It is. I just would like to see if people regard it as the worst of all. I do.

My answer to your question is No.

How can it be the worst heresy when it's not a heresy? Sedevacantism is foolish and just plain wrong, but it's not heresy.

Is cherry pie the worst of all elephants? I'm obviously not interested in discussing whether whether or not it is an elephant. I just would like to see if people regard it as the worst of all. If you point out that cherry pie is not an elephant, then obviously you are promoting cherry pie. If anyone wants to promote it, in an explicit or implicit way, I will let the moderators do their job.

[littleway]

Okey dokey.

[tleatherland]

...The topic of this thread is: "Is sedevacantism the worst of all heresies?"

I'm obviously not interested in discussing whether or not it is a heresy. It is. I just would like to see if people regard it as the worst of all. I do.

My answer to your question is No.

How can it be the worst heresy when it's not a heresy? Sedevacantism is foolish and just plain wrong, but it's not heresy.

Is cherry pie the worst of all elephants? I'm obviously not interested in discussing whether whether or not it is an elephant. I just would like to see if people regard it as the worst of all. If you point out that cherry pie is not an elephant, then obviously you are promoting cherry pie. If anyone wants to promote it, in an explicit or implicit way, I will let the moderators do their job.

It's always been my understanding that sedevacantism is not heresy properly defined. From what I remember (and my memory is slipping as I grow older), Michael Davies and the authors of The Great Facade both called it a "theological opinion" accepted by the Church (particulary St. Bellarmine), although they didn't/don't accept it as applicable to the current crisis.

[lefebvre_fan]

It's always been my understanding that sedevacantism is not heresy properly defined. From what I remember (and my memory is slipping as I grow older), Michael Davies and the authors of The Great Facade both called it a "theological opinion" accepted by the Church (particulary St. Bellarmine), although they didn't/don't accept it as applicable to the current crisis.

Exactly. Sedevacantism is merely an opinion (a false opinion, mind you, except in the unlikely event that a future pope or council would declare it to be true). There have been times in the church's history when the Holy See has been vacant for as long as three years. The vacancy or occupancy of the throne of Peter is not a matter of theological doctrine, so how can it be a heresy? Keep in mind that I disagree with the sedevacantists over this issue and agree that they are totally wrong to be spreading this false belief - however, I would not go as far as to call them heretics. Although I'm reluctant to speak down to my elders, littleway, I think you need to read further into this matter before continuing your dissertation. A good place to start would be this article: Sedevacantism.

Edit: I guess I should add that sedevacantism is a valid theological opinion, as tleatherland says, but it does not apply in the current situation of the Church.

[V_Leonius]

I am not a sedevacantists, I do not condone sedevacantism. But...  

"Any baptized person who, while retaining the name of Christian, obstinately denies or doubts any of the truths proposed for belief by the divine and Catholic faith, is a heretic;"

What dogma do sedevacantists deny?

If it is heresy to hold that a certain man is an anitpope, then why didn't the supporters of the antipopes have to recant their heresy after the Great Western Schism was resolved?

They actually deny several dogma's but I will limit myself to listing the most obvious ones as I really don't like discussing these people.

According to Christ's ordinance, Peter is to have sucessors in his Primacy over the whole Church and for all time.  (De fide.)

The successors of Peter in the Primacy are the bishops of Rome.  (De fide.)

The Pope possesses full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole Church, not merely in matters of faith and morals, but also in Church discipline and in the government of the Church.  (De fide.)

De fide: of faith: used to designate doctrines held to be revealed by God and so requiring the unconditional assent of faith by all

source:  Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma - Dr. Ludwig Ott
             Nihil Obstat: Jeremiah J. O'Sullivan, D.D -Censor Deputatus
            Imprimatur: Cornelius, Ep.Corgagiensis et Ap. Adm. Rossessis.
                                   ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ever learning, and never attaining to the knowledge of the truth.  Now as Jannes and Mambres resisted Moses, so these also resist the truth, men corrupted in mind, reprobate concerning the faith.  But they shall proceed no farther; for their folly shall be manifest to all men, as theirs also was.   2 Timothy 3:7-9