- Other blogs, same writer
- A thread from Catholic.com (more may be added)
- Answering Steve Rudd
- Have these dialogues taken place? Yes.
- Copyright issues on blogposts with shared copyright
- I think I wrote a mistaken word somewhere on youtube - or perhaps not
- What is Expertise? Some Things It is Not.
- It Seems Apocalypse is Explained in a Very Relevant Part
- Dialoguing Mainly with Adversaries
- Why do my Posts Right Here Not Answer YOUR Questio...
Monday, September 21, 2020
Robert Sungenis Recommends Gate-Keeping
Here he holds a speech about basically gate-keeping:
Walk Away From Sedevacantists!
Robert Sungenis Channel | 21.IX.2020
Here I answer:
Look here, you consider "Pope Francis" as more often wrong than right.
Sounds like the description of a heretic, doesn't it?
As "archbishop of Buenos Aires" he was very good friends with Tony Palmer, a modernist Anglican. Not a fairly Christian Anglican, like C. S. Lewis who believed the Gospels had happened with miracles and all, and Christian morality was obliging (even if he got parts of it wrong), no, a modernist one. They had an agreement, if Bergoglio died first, Palmer would give him a burial of an Anglican bishop, if Palmer died first (and he did) Bergoglio would give him the burial of a Catholic bishop (and after "assuming papacy as Pope Francis", he did).
Sounds like Bergoglio was eligible to papacy?
Human, yes, male, yes, baptised, yes, Catholic ... not really.
Whether I "have authority over you" is immaterial. You can step away from me, because you find anyone disputing Bergoglio's papacy a "haereticus" and "excommunicatus vitandus", if you like to pretend that, but you can also step away from me because you have an argument you could lose.
Again, someone described Sedevacantism as "be your own pope". I'm not. Since I very definitely discarded Bergoglio over his "canonisation" of the Assisi prayer meeting perpetrator in 2014, I have submitted to someone else as Pope, namely Pope Michael.
Again, you may say David Bawden had no authority to convoke a conclave in 1990. Ordinary circumstances, I agree, he agrees. But ordinary circumstances, Monsignor Lefèbvre had no authority to consecrate bishops in 1988 either.
Monsignor invoked the virtue of epikeia, which gives counsel on unusual (normally illegal) measures in unusual circumstances, and David Bawden analysed the virtue and its classic cases in moral theology as implying a duty to use it to make the unusual circumstances disappear, to restore normality. Not just find a modus vivendi.
You came very close to saying I have no authority over you, they have no authority over you, so don't listen to them ... at time signature 2:10!
And you came close to saying sedes pretend to have a position because they argue, and I argue too - how about definitely defining what sede "pretends to have a position"? To show logically how sedes differ from you?
Well, I guess, that would involve pointing to Pope Michael, whom some would like to deal with by "gatekeeping".
He really does say he has, since elected in an emergency conclave in 1990, not just a position, but even the highest one for Catholics. Pope.
I agree he is most probably Pope, and definitely much more probably than Bergoglio, who was ineligible in 2013 for the reason stated, like Wojtyla was in 1978.