JoeZollars wrote:I have never personally seen true holiness in an Orthodox setting, not saying it don't exist but I must put my "fingers in the nail marks etc."
Joe, let me quote a post from you from a few months ago on the one Orthodox temple you visited for Paschal services:
JoeZollars wrote:I hope it does grow. It's such a wonderfully holy place. It's an absolutly amazing parish. And like I said, Fr. Mark is among the holiest people I've ever met.
As you know Joe the Canons of the Latin Church have a provision for the anathamatization of a heretical Pontiff, but this is to be initiated by the Holy Office or now known as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The rather unfortunate thing is that although lay people have a right to decry heresy in traditional Catholic theology, they cannot judge a Pontiff who is a heretic; only the Curia can investigate these matters and make a decision and invoke an ecclesiastical court to make a decision.
There are provisions that if no cardinal is left alive, a popular election of the Pope is possible. However with so many claimants, unless one is utterly convinced JPII is the Pope (which he theoretically cannot be), one can not help to be at least in practice sedevacantist.
I would REALLY love to see these provisions. My familiarity with the 1983 CIC, and my limited knowledge of the 1917 CIC, leads me to conclude that no such provisions exist, or if they once did, they have been outlawed since anything to the contrary of the 1917 CIC, and later of the 1983 CIC (including things in '17 contrary to '83), have no canonical force. Am I wrong? If so, where are these provisions?
I wll look them up for you, but my 1917 PioBenedictine Code is in storage right now.
The 1983 code is in my opinion without credence as it originated outside the actual Catholic Church. Thus I have burned more copies than I have read.
But as you can see this is a very confusing issue and thus I take my stance in the sedevacantist camp until one side is proven beyond a shadow of a doupt to be the true successor of Peter.
However due to financial reasons, and the work I do for the KofC I must ask that this not be spread around.
Joe Zollars
Joe,
You should be disbarred from the KofC! You are NOT Catholic, but a schismatic!
And you don't know Orthodoxy. You only went to one Orthodox service and that is just NOT ENOUGH.
Traditionalist Catholics: there are good and bad. There are also good and bad Orthodox. I don't like Roman apologists on the net and think they are nasty, so don't assume only Orthodox are nasty!
Sheesh, Joe, on the one hand I feel sad/worried/confused/concerned for you; on the other hand, I wonder why you keep flopping like a fish from one pond to another!!!
anastasios
Disclaimer: Many older posts were made before my baptism and thus may not reflect an Orthodox point of view.
Please do not message me with questions about the forum or moderation requests. Jonathan Gress (jgress) will be able to assist you.
Please note that I do not subscribe to "Old Calendar Ecumenism" and believe that only the Synod of Archbishop Kallinikos is the canonical GOC of Greece. I do believe, however, that we can break down barriers and misunderstandings through prayer and discussion on forums such as this one.
Glory to Jesus Christ!
Here is a reference to the sedevacantist position regarding the canonical issues of a Pope-heretic. http://www.sedevacantist.org/offices.html
It however does not go into procedure.
According to a canon lawyer friend the current procedure for handling a Pope-heretic would be via a Tribunal set up by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Even though a heretic automatically loses his office as per his ascription to heresy, it must be confirmed by the CDF that he is a heretic. Once found to be a heretic he is subjected to the authority of the Tribunal and deposed and excommunicated.
There you go.
Regarding Joe:
Scene from the Movie Elizabeth -
Queen Elizabeth: "I do not desire to make windows into men's souls."
Joe may God assist you on your journey.
In Christ,
Alexis
canoncially I can't be considered a schismatic because I never took any formal steps towards schism. and I also attend the local Novus Ordo services with regularity with my Dad.
Also one of my three part time jobs is doing work for the Knights and I can't afford to loose that income just yet. There aren't many jobs in Podunk USA. And I could loose my insurance coverability, actualy I would as its only open to Knights in good standing.
Also, having mentioned Dad (a Eucharistic Minister at the local NO parish), I could very well loose the rest of my family. The only thing that has kept them from disowning me so far is the rent they get from me every month. I've already lost a great deal of my family, and don't want to loose the rest.
And since I am not entirely convinced of either the sedevacantist or feeneyite positions, I have not made any formal steps towards them, other than loosing my Confessor who wasn't exactly an indultee himself. He was a retired jesuit who for a time took up residence at an SSPX priory, but later left because he felt he was a burden financially on the Priory and they had younger Priests coming up.
why do I jump from "pond to pond"? the way I see it, other than my brief excursion towards Orthodoxy, I haven't jumped ponds. I'm searching for the actual, true Catholic Church. But ultimatly I am looking for the fullness of truth, which explains everything from conversion from the protestant heresy and my brief excursion towards Orthodoxy, to my present dilema concerning Sedevacantism and Feeneyism.
Umm, did I claim to know anything about Orthodoxy? If I did, please tell me where so that I can fix it. I know I know nothing about Orthodoxy, and intended to write only that which I had seen with my own two eyes.
Joe Zollars
Anastasios,
You should be disbarred from the KofC! You are NOT Catholic, but a schismatic!
What does it matter, they're all schismatics?
Seraphim