Who's a sede?

[gladius_veritatis]

First, Gladius, let me apologize for my tone i get very angry sometimes when people don't understand and on internet that happens often.

 

Indeed, I do understand your meaning, and I only acted as I did, in hope of helping you (as I would ask others to do for me, if I were to lose my temper).  No worries, my friend, and if you called me a brainless dolt, I would not take it personally.  Apology, though unnecessary, accepted.

 

I didn't mean the power absolutely comes from the person but from the person who holds the office (basically the Office is nothing without a person to hold it) and the source for these things when a Pope dies (i believe thought i'm not sure) is the whole Episcopacy.

 

The powers are essentially part of the office, and the man who holds the office is invested with said power (just like the Pres. of the USA).  The Papacy is always what Christ intended it to be, Pope to fill the See or not.

 

The bps. alive after the Pope dies still exercise their power which is normal to their office, as the Pope himself had invested their office with a share of his own power, and this share remains unless they themselves die, resign, or exit for some other reason (heresy, etc.).

 

Neither can they do what a Pope can but they hold the power in such a way that they can only use it to elect a new Pope nor could they dissolve the Papal Office or even forget about it but must open a conclave for as long as it takes to elect a new Pope and keep it open until they elect a new Holy Father.

 

When did the conclave begin recently (after JP2's death)?   I do not think it started immediately (although I cannot remember exactly).  It starts whenever the electors can get there.  In the old days, this took some time, but the Church was just fine.  During the three year vacancy, the conclave did not just meet day after day and reach no decision.  There were circumstances which made it impossible to even meet at all during long stretches of this three year period.

  

I'm sorry i thought you meant the 'sacerdotal powers' in the part i bolded above.

 

I figured you did, which is why I thought it good to clarify my meaning (which may have been poorly expressed originally by me).

 

Sorry again for my anger, you know how it is on forums like these. i excuse my ignorance I only know a little about a few Popes, i just know what i know and sometimes i can't even remember that.

 

No sweat, my good Jonathan, and I can sympathize with (rather serious) memory issues.  If you would like to know some about John XXII, and why he is (wrongly) used as an example of an heretical Pope, let me know (I will gladly do a new thread, or whatever seems appropriate).

 

I just find it so very hard to believe that the Chair of St. Peter is empty especially when i was taught that the Papacy was the one of the most important foundations of the Church.

 

Who would not, as the Papacy is the foundation of the Church ("Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will build My Church")?   I just do not see how keeping the V2 'Popes' as the foundation helps anything, as there has been nothing but an ever-increasing destruction of the Church of which they are supposedly the foundation - carried out principally by these very men.

 

[BarJonas]

Just my humble 2 cents worth... and with great appreciation for the complexities of the discussion, and those who admirably support their comments, I still tend toward the more than compelling axiom that "emulsifies" all of the proofs and supports from those like GV: i.e.,  it is impossible that true shepherds of the Lord's flock, most notably the Pope, can, through words (teaching) and actions (symbolic gestures), promulgate that which is injurious to the faithful and contrary to the Faith.  The obvious correlary is that those "shepherds" who have demonstrably and pertinaciously done so, for nearly half a century, are in fact not true shepherds... they do not adhere to or manifest the perfect will and rule of Christ, but are imposters and enemies. Some catholics "fall" to one side of that key word "impossible", and conclude that these hurtful "shepherds" must be, nonetheless, "true" shepherds.... and others (SV's) find themselves, quite painfully, on the other side of that key word.... i.e, if such is "impossible", as taught by the Bride of Christ for centuries, then those FACTS must be confronted with Faith, Hope and Charity with eyes firmly fixed upon The Chief Shepherd (I Peter 5:4). These days are as it was "in the days of Noah". Incredulity begs the flood... faith embraces the true Ark, and not its counterfeit. Christ's sheep know His Voice, and are known by Him... they flee from the voices of strangers (Ref.: the Gospels).

BarJonas

[orangemetal]

i'm sticking with my gut here and saying that every person has free will even the Pope (even St. Peter denied Christ), they have their sins just like we have ours. Just because someone holds the Petrine Office has not mean that they have a 'get of sin free' card even the sin of heresy, nor can any saint's quote make me believe it because they do not have the guarantee of Infallibility that a Pope has.

[Kephapaulos]

i'm sticking with my gut here and saying that every person has free will even the Pope (even St. Peter denied Christ), they have their sins just like we have ours. Just because someone holds the Petrine Office has not mean that they have a 'get of sin free' card even the sin of heresy, nor can any saint's quote make me believe it because they do not have the guarantee of Infallibility that a Pope has.

I know, Orangemetal. How many here have heard the audio recording of Bishop Fellay's recent speech?

[gladius_veritatis]

i'm sticking with my gut here and saying that every person has free will even the Pope (even St. Peter denied Christ), they have their sins just like we have ours.

There is nothing in this statement that I would disagree with, as I am not saying that there is even a single person in the world without free will (or ever has been), nor that any besides Our Lady have not sinned.

 

BTW, nice dancing banana!      Slight change from your previous avatar, eh?

[fabiola]

Also, my two cents worth ... I started another topic similar to this one which really asks where is the moral continuity to the papacy in a never-ending sede-vacante.  I know we must flee from heresy.  As Fr. Faber states, "The crowning disloyalty to God is heresy.  It is the sin of sins ...."  I think there might be some truth in the idea of the necessity of a conclave.  I think it becomes fairly impossible to think that there will be moral continuity in the papacy in a sede-vacante of many more years.

The papacy is absolutely indispensable as the source of unity for the Church.  It is not a pretty little addition to an otherwise glorious Church.  Without a person in the Chair of Peter for many more years, the sede groups will become more and more like the Old Catholics or Eastern Orthodox.  In not too many years, heresies will begin to grow in this group ... it is inevitable.  There needs to be a head, and not just an invisible head.

[gladius_veritatis]

I think there might be some truth in the idea of the necessity of a conclave. I think it becomes fairly impossible to think that there will be moral continuity in the papacy in a sede-vacante of many more years.

If it is needed, God will bring it to pass, by moving His faithful people to take the appropriate action.   The Church is in Divine Hands, even during the best of times, and no one can ultimately resist the designs of God.

The papacy is absolutely indispensable as the source of unity for the Church. It is not a pretty little addition to an otherwise glorious Church.  There needs to be a head, and not just an invisible head.

 

This is true, and the V2 "popes" prove this point rather forcibly.   Their shenanigans have served to totally wreck the unity among hundreds of millions of people who call themselves Catholics.   They have served as the most stupendous principle of disunity the world has ever seen (in or out of the Church).

[orangemetal]

If it is needed, God will bring it to pass, by moving His faithful people to take the appropriate action.   The Church is in Divine Hands, even during the best of times, and no one can ultimately resist the designs of God.

 

This is true, and the V2 "popes" prove this point rather forcibly.   Their shenanigans have served to totally wreck the unity among hundreds of millions of people who call themselves Catholics.   They have served as the most stupendous principle of disunity the world has ever seen (in or out of the Church).

Gladius, the problem i have with these statements is that it leaves us especially "traditional" Catholics actionless and that is not the Catholic way. We have free will which means that we can and have (which is why we're in this Great Crisis) resisted the 'designs' of God. Adam and Eve did it even when God directly told them not to. And we will continue to be able to defy God until the end of time as the actions of the Popes of the last 40 years have shown and our own daily sins and vices. Our Lady of Fatima said to stop sinning, start praying, and do penance, this is the only way things will get better. I firmly believe in the Consecration of Russia and there is something that each of us can do to make it happen and that is for each of us to consecrate ourselves to Mary as St. Montfort said to along with so many other Saints.

 

Kyrie eleison

Jonathan

[gladius_veritatis]

Gladius, the problem i have with these statements is that it leaves us especially "traditional" Catholics action-less and that is not the Catholic way   ...   I firmly believe in the Consecration of Russia and there is something that each of us can do to make it happen and that is for each of us to consecrate ourselves to Mary as St. Montfort said to along with so many other Saints.

Read these two ideas, which are separated by the three dots ( ... ).

 

You (unintentionally) negate the first point by the one mentioned second.   Action, as you clearly see, is not just exterior.  In fact, the exterior action is useless w/o the interior life providing the "divine energy", as it were, which is largely why we ended up where we are - a Catholic clergy and laity utterly devoid of interior life, but running around in circles, working to no real purpose.  This is why St. Pius X read (as his bedside book) and recommended The Soul of the Apostolate.   He knew modernism (and the excessive occupation with external actions) would leave men as dry, dead fruit, just hanging on the vine (which would eventually be swept away).

 

I said it elsewhere, but nice dancing banana!

 

Addendum: the Divine "inaction" wrought our salvation.

[orangemetal]

Gladius, the problem i have with these statements is that it leaves us especially "traditional" Catholics action-less and that is not the Catholic way   ...   I firmly believe in the Consecration of Russia and there is something that each of us can do to make it happen and that is for each of us to consecrate ourselves to Mary as St. Montfort said to along with so many other Saints.

Read these two ideas, which are separated by the three dots ( ... ).

 

You (unintentionally) negate the first point by the one mentioned second.   Action, as you clearly see, is not just exterior.  In fact, the exterior action is useless w/o the interior life providing the "divine energy", as it were, which is largely why we ended up where we are - a Catholic clergy and laity utterly devoid of interior life, but running around in circles, working to no real purpose.  This is why St. Pius X read (as his bedside book) and recommended The Soul of the Apostolate.   He knew modernism (and the excessive occupation with external actions) would leave men as dry, dead fruit, just hanging on the vine (which would eventually be swept away).

 

I said it elsewhere, but nice dancing banana!

 

Addendum: the Divine "inaction" wrought our salvation.

What are you saying, Gladius? i don't understand what you mean. All i meant by what i said is that talk like that is what makes some not want to anything