Sedevacantism

[Jonathan95]

Hi,

I've been convinced of the Catholic Faith after having read about it for like 3 weeks.

But I've been confused when I encountered Sedevacantist sites, who say that the Vatican II council is invalid or such, and that the current pope is an "anti-pope" etc.

I find good arguments from both sides (i.e. those who are against Sedevacantism, and those who are for it), but some seem to contradict each other. They often refer to prophecies of Saints regarding apostasy, and also a message from Our Lady of La Salette regarding apostasy, and the Arian crisis where Catholics were a remnant.

Therefore, I've been spending a lot of time trying to find the truth regarding this issue. This has been hard, since I haven't read about the Catholic Faith etc for so long, I don't know if all they say is taken out-of-context or not etc, or if their interpretations of certain Papal statements etc are true. I've prayed to God regarding this and asked for the intercession of Mary, that I will be led into the truth etc.


Do I have to become a member of a Catholic church in order to truly be a Catholic?

Because, according to Sedevacantists, I'd commit a mortal sin by attending a "Novus Ordo" mass. They also consider the new rite of ordination invalid, thus they consider confession to such Priest invalid.

Since I don't know for sure if the Sedevacantist position is true or not, I chose to not be part of a Catholic church, at least not yet. For now, I want to spend time on studying the Catholic Faith instead.

 

[Alonso_Castillo]

Sedevacantism is not a single church, there is not a proper order of ministers, there is not a visible head of the church in sedevacantism, in fact the very Word sedevacantism implies that there is not one to have jurisdiction over all of them. That is quiet uncatholic from whatever point of view, in fact sedevacantism has splited in many groups, again and again.


Catholicism is the New Covenant anounced by the prophets since the Old Testament. no prophet said that the New Covenant was to be diluted, or was to be disapeared before the second coming of the Lord. Their stronges card against catholicism is the Vatican II council reforms of the Liturgy and of the eclesiology of the Church.

Now, If sedevacantism has good points against some Catholic members it is true, for me the most important point would be their denounce againts the exceses of some bad priests on the liturgical practice. But it is unfair to say that The Whole Catholic Church is comiting those exceses. For them tha open calling of the Pope John Paul II to freedom of religión seemed like apostasy against true faith, in stead of a call to reduce violence against Catholics in noncatholic societies Like the Muslim World.

One of the core elements of the Catholic Church Ecclesiology is the Unity of the Church in an effective way by the will of Jesús in the Successor of Peter. to whom Christ gave his keys of the Heavenly Kingdom.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Hi,

I've been convinced of the Catholic Faith after having read about it for like 3 weeks.

But I've been confused when I encountered Sedevacantist sites, who say that the Vatican II council is invalid or such, and that the current pope is an "anti-pope" etc.

I find good arguments from both sides (i.e. those who are against Sedevacantism, and those who are for it), but some seem to contradict each other. They often refer to prophecies of Saints regarding apostasy, and also a message from Our Lady of La Salette regarding apostasy, and the Arian crisis where Catholics were a remnant.

Therefore, I've been spending a lot of time trying to find the truth regarding this issue. This has been hard, since I haven't read about the Catholic Faith etc for so long, I don't know if all they say is taken out-of-context or not etc, or if their interpretations of certain Papal statements etc are true. I've prayed to God regarding this and asked for the intercession of Mary, that I will be led into the truth etc.


Do I have to become a member of a Catholic church in order to truly be a Catholic?

Because, according to Sedevacantists, I'd commit a mortal sin by attending a "Novus Ordo" mass. They also consider the new rite of ordination invalid, thus they consider confession to such Priest invalid.

Since I don't know for sure if the Sedevacantist position is true or not, I chose to not be part of a Catholic church, at least not yet. For now, I want to spend time on studying the Catholic Faith instead.

I think Sedevacantists and Rad Trads have some valid points, because I believe that the left side of the Church hijacked what Vatican II was meant to do, and just made the Church look Protestant, between the music, the liturgy, and the social justice issues, as well as contraception and abortion views.

My suggestion for you is to read the Catechism, and follow the footnotes. After you do that, you would be better informed about the faith than many Catholics. ( I once went to a Parish Mission in which the speaker kept holding up a copy of the Catechism, and one older woman asked me what that book was...) Read the documents, not someone's interpretation of them. Study the faith from a historic viewpoint, too. Read Scripture, and see if what Scripture says is what the Church believes and teaches.
And finally, remember that, to stay inside the barque of Peter, it is necessary to not lean too far to the left or the right. If you do either, you fall out of the boat and drown.

 

[Rhamiel]

I look at it this way

God created a Church for all people

now for most of history, most people either had very limited reading skills, and or books were very rare and expensive

so the Papacy is a sign for the learned scholar and the simple shepherd
the scholar can go into the rich history of the papacy and the ancient councils and the primacy of rome
but for the simple farmer who would not have copies of the councils, a copy might not even exist within 100 miles of a medieval village, he could know that being in communion with the Pope in Rome meant being in the Church

 

[WarriorAngel]

They are apostates..

 

[Jonathan95]

I think Sedevacantists and Rad Trads have some valid points, because I believe that the left side of the Church hijacked what Vatican II was meant to do, and just made the Church look Protestant, between the music, the liturgy, and the social justice issues, as well as contraception and abortion views.

What has happened to the contraception and abortion views?

Is the new liturgy invalid?

My suggestion for you is to read the Catechism, and follow the footnotes. After you do that, you would be better informed about the faith than many Catholics. ( I once went to a Parish Mission in which the speaker kept holding up a copy of the Catechism, and one older woman asked me what that book was...) Read the documents, not someone's interpretation of them. Study the faith from a historic viewpoint, too.

I don't think I can understand everything in the documents and Catechism on my own. How can I know my interpretation of it is right?

For example, some have different interpretations on "Outside of the Church no salvation", but I know that the current Catechism talks about people who through no fault of their own don't know about Christ and his Church.

What do you mean study from a historic viewpoint?

Do you have any good books to recommend?

Read Scripture, and see if what Scripture says is what the Church believes and teaches.

I already do that here, it's a good site that I've used a lot: John Salza Apologetics: Scripture/Fathers

 

[Azureknight 773]

Nonsense! Attending the Novus Ordo DOES NOT make you a sinner who has done a mortal sin. The new Mass (Novus Ordo) is as holy as the Old, only this time, it is a lot simpler and is translated into multiple languages for one's benefit.

 

[Jonathan95]

Nonsense! Attending the Novus Ordo DOES NOT make you a sinner who has done a mortal sin. The new Mass (Novus Ordo) is as holy as the Old, only this time, it is a lot simpler and is translated into multiple languages for one's benefit.

Ok, but they also changed the prayer text at Good Friday, and the words of consecration.

I read this:

Pope St. Pius V, De Defectibus, chapter 5, Part 1:
“The words of Consecration, which are the FORM of this Sacrament, are these: FOR THIS IS MY BODY. And: FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD, OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL TESTAMENT: THE MYSTERY OF FAITH, WHICH SHALL BE SHED FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE REMISSION OF SINS. Now if one were to remove, or change anything in the FORM of the consecration of the Body and Blood, and in that very change of words the [new] wording would fail to mean the same thing, he would not consecrate the sacrament.”

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441: “…the holy Roman Church, relying on the teaching and authority of the apostles Peter and Paul… uses this form of words in the consecration of the Lord’s Body: FOR THIS IS MY BODY. And of His blood: FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD, OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL TESTAMENT: THE MYSTERY OF FAITH, WHICH SHALL BE SHED FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE REMISSION OF SINS.

 

[football5680]

What has happened to the contraception and abortion views?

Nothing. They were condemned before and afterwards.

Is the new liturgy invalid?

No, it is valid.

I don't think I can understand everything in the documents and Catechism on my own. How can I know my interpretation of it is right?

The Catechism is pretty clear and straightforward because this is the goal. The Catechism explains what Catholics believe and the reason for it. If you don't understand something then you can go talk to a priest and ask him what it means.

 

[Alonso_Castillo]

What has happened to the contraception and abortion views?

Nothing as Far as I know, Perhaps some bad priests have taught something different to the Catholic Teachings. But that is quite rare.

Is the new liturgy invalid?

Absolutetly Yes,

I don't think I can understand everything in the documents and Catechism on my own. How can I know my interpretation of it is right?

You can ask here.

For example, some have different interpretations on "Outside of the Church no salvation", but I know that the current Catechism talks about people who through no fault of their own don't know about Christ and his Church.

As Well as Paul teaches in the sacred scripture:

Romans 2


[Romans 2]

​

​

{2:1} For this reason, O man, each one of you​

who judges is inexcusable. For by that which you judge

another, you condemn yourself. For you do the same things
that you judge. {2:2} For we know that the judgment of God
is in accord with truth against those who do such things.
{2:3} But, O man, when you judge those who do such things
as you yourself also do, do you think that you will escape the
judgment of God? {2:4} Or do you despise the riches of his
goodness and patience and forbearance? Do you not know
that the kindness of God is calling you to repentance?
{2:5} But in accord with your hard and impenitent heart, you
store up wrath for yourself, unto the day of wrath and of
revelation by the just judgment of God. {2:6} For he will
render to each one according to his works: {2:7} To those
who, in accord with patient good works, seek glory and
honor and incorruption, certainly, he will render eternal life.
{2:8} But to those who are contentious and who do not
acquiesce to the truth, but instead trust in iniquity, he will
render wrath and indignation. {2:9} Tribulation and anguish
are upon every soul of man that works evil: the Jew first, and
also the Greek. {2:10} But glory and honor and peace are for
all who do what is good: the Jew first, and also the Greek.
{2:11} For there is no favoritism with God. {2:12} For
whoever had sinned without the law, will perish without the
law. And whoever had sinned in the law, will be judged by
the law. {2:13} For it is not the hearers of the law who are
just before God, but rather it is the doers of the law who shall
be justified. {2:14} For when the Gentiles, who do not have
the law, do by nature those things which are of the law, such
persons, not having the law, are a law unto themselves.
{2:15} For they reveal the work of the law written in their
hearts, while their conscience renders testimony about them,
and their thoughts within themselves also accuse or even
defend them, {2:16} unto the day when God shall judge the
hidden things of men, through Jesus Christ, according to my
Gospel. {2:17} But if you are called by name a Jew, and you
rest upon the law, and you find glory in God, {2:18} and you
have known his will, and you demonstrate the more useful
things, having been instructed by the law: {2:19} you become
confident within yourself that you are a guide to the blind, a
light to those who are in darkness, {2:20} an instructor to the
foolish, a teacher to children, because you have a type of
knowledge and truth in the law. {2:21} As a result, you teach
others, but you do not teach yourself. You preach that men
should not steal, but you yourself steal. {2:22} You speak
against adultery, but you commit adultery. You abominate
idols, but you commit sacrilege. {2:23} You would glory in
the law, but through a betrayal of the law you dishonor God.
{2:24} (For because of you the name of God is being
blasphemed among the Gentiles, just as it was written.)
{2:25} Certainly, circumcision is beneficial, if you observe
the law. But if you are a betrayer of the law, your
circumcision becomes uncircumcision. {2:26} And so, if the
uncircumcised keep the justices of the law, shall not this lack
of circumcision be counted as circumcision? {2:27} And that
which is by nature uncircumcised, if it fulfills the law, should
it not judge you, who by the letter and by circumcision are a
betrayer of the law? {2:28} For a Jew is not he who seems so
outwardly. Neither is circumcision that which seems so
outwardly, in the flesh. {2:29} But a Jew is he who is so
inwardly. And circumcision of the heart is in the spirit, not in​

​

​

the letter. For its praise is not of men, but of God.​

What do you mean study from a historic viewpoint?

That you have to take into account the historical environment, the historical moment in which some teaching came to happen in order to you can understand the spirit of the precepts and of the teachings.

Do you have any good books to recommend?​

I already do that here, it's a good site that I've used a lot: John Salza Apologetics: Scripture/Fathers​

I would recomend you to visit New Advent site:

NEW ADVENT: Home​

​

 

[Erose]

What has happened to the contraception and abortion views?

The Church's doctrine hasn't changed on either. There is a progressive element who wants to go the way of the Anglicans. Thank God we have the Petrine Ministry to make sure that doesn't happen.

Is the new liturgy invalid?

Here is one of the problems with their assertion. There is not one liturgy. There never has been one liturgy. Our Eastern brothers, both Orthodox and Catholic have different liturgies than ours and theirs is just as valid as ours.

The one liturgy that most of them keep holding on to as THE liturgy is the Tridentine liturgy. The problem with this and maybe they just don't know, but the Tridentine liturgy is a REVISED liturgy that occurred under Pope Pius X who was pope at the beginning of the 20th century. It isn't the liturgy that was always used by the Church as they would like to claim. In reality Latin is not the language that the Roman Church always has used. Greek was the first liturgical language of Rome. It was until the 4th century under Pope Damasus that the liturgy was translated into Latin (i.e. the common language of the people). But even at that point the liturgy was prayed in every language it had made contact with, i.e. Greek, Egyptian, Aramaic, Chaldean, etc.

What happened after Vatican II, was that it was decided that the mass should be translated into the language of the common people, so that those people could participate more fully in the mass. The reason being is that basically before the vernacular people came to the church, the priest and the liturgical team would celebrate mass for the people, while the people either followed along reading the English translation of the mass in their missals, or as many did at that time practice their favorite devotion until they were called to do something.

The Church wanted to get back to basics when it came to the liturgy. They wanted to take out what was regarded as unnecessary components, get the people more active, ie. the mass becomes a prayer of the Church and not just her priests. Even though the priest has a singular unique necessary roll that cannot be filled by anyone other than a priest, the people of the Church are suppose to be the ones offering up the sacrifice through the priest, as it was done from the beginning.

Anyway long story short the Novus Ordo is a necessary reform that eliminated many unnecessary components that entered into the mass over the centuries, and it eliminated some clericalisms that entered into the mass as well. Not saying that the Tridentine mass is wrong, for it is a very beautiful liturgy, but much of what people lament over the loss of reverence, is also found in the Novus Ordo, if done correctly.

Reverence and Sacredness is not always the ritual, but also how you celebrate that ritual. I have compared both, and while there are many things I like about the Tridentine Mass, it is in my opinion no more reverent than the Novus Ordo, if the Novus Ordo is done correctly.

I don't think I can understand everything in the documents and Catechism on my own. How can I know my interpretation of it is right?

I would recommend finding a parish that has a RCIA program, and join in. Signing up for RCIA doesn't mean you have to become Catholic, but you can get many of your questions answered there.

For example, some have different interpretations on "Outside of the Church no salvation", but I know that the current Catechism talks about people who through no fault of their own don't know about Christ and his Church.

I would stick with what the Church teaches. People who take the strict approach to this doctrine, are usually failing to understand historical situations in which certain documents are written.

The Church has never stopped teaching this doctrine, but it has had to be made more understanding depending upon the circumstances of each period of the Church. For example today, we so many Christians who are not in full Communion with Christ's established Church through no fault of their own, who are living their lives for Christ as they understand they should. These men and women are still members of the Church, through their baptisms, but just not in full communion out of ignorance of Christ's will. It would be a difficult sell to say that these people who are living their lives for Christ outside the communion of the Catholic Church are doomed to hell.

What do you mean study from a historic viewpoint?

The Church is a historical entity. She has a history. For the last 2000 years she has existed and has grown, and has gone through rough patches and some good patches. Much of the writings of the Scripture and the Church Father's to be interpreted correctly require a historical context.

Do you have any good books to recommend?

I've heard Catholic for Dummies is actually a very good book, for newbies. If the Catechism of the Catholic Church is at this time too confusing or clear for you, you can also try the YouCat as well, which was written for young Catholics (15-30 years old); but is good for anyone who doesn't have a lot of time to delve into a book like the CCC.

Jonathan, one of the things you will learn about our Faith is that it is rich and deep. A well that can never go dry. I also would recommend praying to God for the graces you need to continue this journey. You may not realize it but God's grace is necessary in all steps of this journey, even at the stage you are at. For we can do nothing with Him.

 

[Jonathan95]

The Church's doctrine hasn't changed on either. There is a progressive element who wants to go the way of the Anglicans. Thank God we have the Petrine Ministry to make sure that doesn't happen.

Here is one of the problems with their assertion. There is not one liturgy. There never has been one liturgy. Our Eastern brothers, both Orthodox and Catholic have different liturgies than ours and theirs is just as valid as ours.

I know there are differences in the liturgy, but what about when the words of consecration changes and the prayer for the Jews at Good Friday?

I would recommend finding a parish that has a RCIA program, and join in. Signing up for RCIA doesn't mean you have to become Catholic, but you can get many of your questions answered there.

I live in Sweden, not USA. But I've e-mailed a nearby church, that seems to have such course or similar.

I would stick with what the Church teaches. People who take the strict approach to this doctrine, are usually failing to understand historical situations in which certain documents are written.

What do you mean historical situations?

The Church has never stopped teaching this doctrine, but it has had to be made more understanding depending upon the circumstances of each period of the Church. For example today, we so many Christians who are not in full Communion with Christ's established Church through no fault of their own, who are living their lives for Christ as they understand they should. These men and women are still members of the Church, through their baptisms, but just not in full communion out of ignorance of Christ's will. It would be a difficult sell to say that these people who are living their lives for Christ outside the communion of the Catholic Church are doomed to hell.

But what if they have no fault of they own? I.e. they know that the Catholic Church exists, yet don't want to find out the truth about it?

Or if they teach heresies, even though they know what the Catholic Church teaches.

I've heard Catholic for Dummies is actually a very good book, for newbies. If the Catechism of the Catholic Church is at this time too confusing or clear for you, you can also try the YouCat as well, which was written for young Catholics (15-30 years old); but is good for anyone who doesn't have a lot of time to delve into a book like the CCC.

Someone recommended that book for me, and I'm considering to buy it for my Kindle application on my computer.

But I've came far by just reading good Catholic Apologetics etc on the internet, so I'm still not sure if I should put money on that book.

I read reviews of YouCat on Amazon, and some say that it has moral issues, for example approval of masturbation, and theological issues. If you are interested, I can quote from a few reviews. Someone recommended this instead: http://www.amazon.com/This-Is-Faith-Complete-Explanation/dp/0895556421/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

Same with Catholicism for dummies. I heard that it approves of masturbation for teens.

Jonathan, one of the things you will learn about our Faith is that it is rich and deep. A well that can never go dry. I also would recommend praying to God for the graces you need to continue this journey. You may not realize it but God's grace is necessary in all steps of this journey, even at the stage you are at. For we can do nothing with Him.

I have prayed and cried a lot regarding my journey. Tears can be connected to God's grace I think. Yes, we can do nothing without God.

 

[Jonathan95]

I would recomend you to visit New Advent site:

NEW ADVENT: Home​

​

I have visited it before, it's a good site. (if anyone missed, also see my post above this one)

 

[Erose]

I know there are differences in the liturgy, but what about when the words of consecration changes and the prayer for the Jews at Good Friday?

1) You have to look at the critical words said, i.e. THIS IS MY BODY and THIS IS THE CHALICE (CUP) OF MY BLOOD. What occurs before or after is not what is critical. It is these two phrases that effects the transubstantiation. For more information on this I would recommend reading what St. Thomas Aquinas has to say about it in his Summa under article 78.

2) We still pray for the Jews on Good Friday. That hasn't changed here is a quote from the liturgy:

Let us pray for the Jewish people, the first to hear the word of God, that they may continue to grow in the love of his name and in faithfulness to his covenant. (Prayer in silence. Then the priest says Almighty and eternal God, long ago you gave your promise to Abraham and his posterity. Listen to your Church as we pray that the people you first made your own may arrive at the fullness of redemption. We ask this through Christ our Lord. Amen

I live in Sweden, not USA. But I've e-mailed a nearby church, that seems to have such course or similar.

I pray that you may find what you seek.

What do you mean historical situations?

Remember the Church is 2000 years old, so it has gone through many periods in history, were it was a persecuted Church, the only Religion in Europe, to basically one of many religions as it is today. So many writings have a historical overtone to them, that if not understood well, could lead one to confusion and misunderstanding. Just yesterday my son asked me what is going on in France. I said: I am not sure why? Well the book that you have me reading (Explanation of Catholic Morals) is talking about France. I had to explain to him that the book that I have him reading was written in 1904.

Another example is the readings from Scripture particularly by St. Paul, discussing the conduct of slaves and masters. Well if you read these passages with a modern mentality, then it sounds like St. Paul is advocating slavery. But when you read these passages in the light of 1st century Middle East, where slavery was a norm, and realize that St. Paul nor the Church have the power to abolish slavery, then you understand that St. Paul was giving guidelines to improve the relationship between master and slave.

There are many examples of these, but hopefully you get the picture.

But what if they have no fault of they own? I.e. they know that the Catholic Church exists, yet don't want to find out the truth about it?

Again it depends on circumstance. Most Protestants today grew up being taught that the Catholic Church is the harlot of Babylon and she isn't a Christian religion, but something else. That mentality is changing, but it is still out there. Imagine how hard it would be if you have that preconditioning that something is evil, even though it isn't. Are you going to give it the time of day? Probably not.

The key is this. If you are convinced that the Catholic Church is what she says she is, and you reject entering full communion with her, then there is no salvation for you. Why? Because when you knowingly reject the Church you reject Christ as well, who has sent her.

Now if I think the Church is the harlot of Babylon, well then from my conscious' sake I am rejecting her because I am accepting Christ. If one becomes Catholic thinking that she is the harlot of Babylon and dies with this misunderstanding, then he or she will have no salvation either.

Like I said context.

Or if they teach heresies, even though they know what the Catholic Church teaches.

Again it depends upon what they believe. If they believe that the Catholic church is the one true Church, and they are teaching things that are contradictory and they know it, then they have a huge problem. If they are doing it because they don't believe the Catholic Church is the one true Church, or if they are ignorant of what is the true teaching, then they fall into the category of the invincible ignorance, which God will not hold against them.

But I've came far by just reading good Catholic Apologetics etc on the internet, so I'm still not sure if I should put money on that book.

Be careful what you read online, for there is a good bit of stuff out there that can lead you astray. There are many websites that pretend to be Catholic, but that is only to suck you in, and get you to read their garbage. Just be careful.

I read reviews of YouCat on Amazon, and some say that it has moral issues, for example approval of masturbation, and theological issues. If you are interested, I can quote from a few reviews. Someone recommended this instead: This Is the Faith: A Complete Explanation of the Catholic Faith: Canon Francis Ripley: 9780895556424: Amazon.com: Books

I have read some of the Youcat with my kids and I haven't read anything in there that is heretical. I doubt very seriously that it advocates masturbation. I will look though when I get home.

Same with Catholicism for dummies. I heard that it approves of masturbation for teens.

Again, I find that very doubtful.



I

have prayed and cried a lot regarding my journey. Tears can be connected to God's grace I think. Yes, we can do nothing without God.

Keep it up. The first stepping stone onto the journey of faith is humility.

 

[Rhamiel]

the Pope is a symbol of unity for the Christian faith

He is not the only symbol of Christian unity, but he is a sign of it

the sedevacanists want to have the "catholic faith" but they do not want the Pope

this is pride and schism

now, I do not think that we should be too harsh on the Sedevacanists, just as we should not be harsh with Eastern Orthodox or Protestants
we should try and show all people the love of Christ

 

[Alonso_Castillo]

I think that each who self cuts from communion with the Bishop of Rome falls not into firm shore but into the deep ocean of any way of disorder. The fall bounds to nothing, because even when saying that the bible and the teachings of the Fathers would be enough for keeping orthodoxy, that one is avoiding the fact that Jesus wants our Unity.

The Truth is that we don't like authority, "we are free spirits" who don't need any guide. at least that is what they use to think. Papacy bothers us for being an objective and effective source of authority over our lives.

We don't see God, but we see the pope and when the pope speaks in the name of God in order to us to repent, then it happen that we hate Pope. And yet pope has the authority that Jesus gave to Peter to rule the Church in his absence, But as long as we do not see Jesus many don trust him, many don't follow his orders, and many hate the pope.

 

[Azureknight 773]

Ok, but they also changed the prayer text at Good Friday, and the words of consecration.

I read this:

Pope St. Pius V, De Defectibus, chapter 5, Part 1:
“The words of Consecration, which are the FORM of this Sacrament, are these: FOR THIS IS MY BODY. And: FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD, OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL TESTAMENT: THE MYSTERY OF FAITH, WHICH SHALL BE SHED FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE REMISSION OF SINS. Now if one were to remove, or change anything in the FORM of the consecration of the Body and Blood, and in that very change of words the [new] wording would fail to mean the same thing, he would not consecrate the sacrament.”

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441: “…the holy Roman Church, relying on the teaching and authority of the apostles Peter and Paul… uses this form of words in the consecration of the Lord’s Body: FOR THIS IS MY BODY. And of His blood: FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD, OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL TESTAMENT: THE MYSTERY OF FAITH, WHICH SHALL BE SHED FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE REMISSION OF SINS.

Except that there came a revision of the old New Mass into the renewed New Mass by giving it a translation that is much, much closer to the Latin version. For instance, [The Cup....] was then revised to [The Chalice of....] right now. Go and watch an EWTN OLAM Daily Mass for you to see that one.

Our Pope-Emeritus Benedict the XVI has emphasized this a long time ago that we have to bring unto the surface, the closest translation as possible to maintain the integrity and sanctity of the Holy Liturgy.

Speaking of which, both the Ordinary and Extraordinary forms now has the same wordings on their similar grounds like this part:

P (Priest): The Lord be with you.
R (response of the people): And with your spirit.
P: Lift up your hearts.
R: We have lifted them up to the Lord.
P: Let us give thanks to the Lord, our God.
R: It is right and just.

from the old translation:

P (Priest): The Lord be with you.
R (response of the people): And also with you.
P: Lift up your hearts.
R: We have lifted them up to the Lord.
P: Let us give thanks to the Lord, our God.
R: It is right to give Him thanks and praise.

Right now, even 3 out of the 5 of the Great 5 got a closer translation than that of the old translation, they are: The Gloria, The Credo, and The Sanctus which is a very good thing.

 

[Jonathan95]

1) You have to look at the critical words said, i.e. THIS IS MY BODY and THIS IS THE CHALICE (CUP) OF MY BLOOD. What occurs before or after is not what is critical. It is these two phrases that effects the transubstantiation. For more information on this I would recommend reading what St. Thomas Aquinas has to say about it in his Summa under article 78.

Where? Didn't find.

2) We still pray for the Jews on Good Friday. That hasn't changed here is a quote from the liturgy:

Let us pray for the Jewish people, the first to hear the word of God, that they may continue to grow in the love of his name and in faithfulness to his covenant. (Prayer in silence. Then the priest says Almighty and eternal God, long ago you gave your promise to Abraham and his posterity. Listen to your Church as we pray that the people you first made your own may arrive at the fullness of redemption. We ask this through Christ our Lord. Amen

Yes, compare with: “for the perfidious Jews: that Our Lord and God may lift the covering off their hearts, so that they may acknowledge Jesus Christ Our Lord.”

The key is this. If you are convinced that the Catholic Church is what she says she is, and you reject entering full communion with her, then there is no salvation for you. Why? Because when you knowingly reject the Church you reject Christ as well, who has sent her.

I thought the matter was about knowing of the Church, just like knowing of Christ, rather than being convinced of it, yet denies it.

How would one not be held accountable because he has heard about Christ, yet is not convinced? In Jesus time, there were Jews who didn't accept him, yet they knew what the Scriptures said, and they were held accountable.

Be careful what you read online, for there is a good bit of stuff out there that can lead you astray. There are many websites that pretend to be Catholic, but that is only to suck you in, and get you to read their garbage. Just be careful.

Ok, well I've been reading on Catholic Answers

Except that there came a revision of the old New Mass into the renewed New Mass by giving it a translation that is much, much closer to the Latin version. For instance, [The Cup....] was then revised to [The Chalice of....] right now. Go and watch an EWTN OLAM Daily Mass for you to see that one.

Ok, but what about the rest of it? Does it say "for you and for many unto the remission of sins"

Rather than "for all" instead of "for many"?

The Catechism of the Council of Trent explains why "for all" shouldn't be used.

 

[Erose]

Where? Didn't find.

SUMMA THEOLOGICA: The form of this sacrament (Tertia Pars, Q. 78)

Yes, compare with: “for the perfidious Jews: that Our Lord and God may lift the covering off their hearts, so that they may acknowledge Jesus Christ Our Lord.”

I think a mountain out of a mole hill is being done here. We still pray for the Jews on Good Friday. Yes the wording has changed no doubt, but that wording is NOT dogmatically sealed and unchangeable. The liturgy has gone through frequent reforms through the centuries. The wording of the Tridentine mass was given to us by Jesus on the 1st Holy Thursday. The Tridentine mass itself is a revision of the liturgy that occurred at the beginning of the 20th century. What I am saying is that the intercessions of Good Friday are not dogmatic statements that cannot be changed. The Church has full liberty to add, subtract, or change any of those intercessions we recite on Good Friday.

I thought the matter was about knowing of the Church, just like knowing of Christ, rather than being convinced of it, yet denies it.

The situation today is that there are many Christians who believe IN Jesus Christ, and strive to be disciples of Him, who are not convinced that the Catholic Church is the true Church of Christ. In fact many honest Christians who love Christ dearly have a negative view of the one True Church, through no fault of their own.

This falls under the area of moral theology, and you have to examine the situation via the requirements needed for someone to enter the state of mortal sin. For one to commit a mortal sin, it requires three conditions:1) The matter has to be grievous. 2) One must have knowledge that what he/she is doing is a mortal sin. 3) One must commit it freely.

In most of the situations we are discussing it is item two that is the hangup. 1) Is it a grievous matter to not be a member of Christ's Church? Yes. 2) If a person does not know that the Catholic Church is the true Church is he/she accountable? No.

How would one not be held accountable because he has heard about Christ, yet is not convinced? In Jesus time, there were Jews who didn't accept him, yet they knew what the Scriptures said, and they were held accountable.

But where they? The being convinced part (or having knowledge) is definitely a requirement, as we discussed above. If a Jew was not convinced that Jesus was the Son of God, but continued to live his or her life for God... Well that is a matter for God to judge, not us. Our job is bring Christ to all men, Jew and Gentile, so no excuse can be given. Let God determine who is and is not held accountable.

Ok, well I've been reading on Catholic Answers

Good site with good info. There is a site out there called "Just For Catholics" that sucks Catholics in by pretending to be a Catholic website, but is an anti-Catholic site instead. Very sneaky site.

Ok, but what about the rest of it? Does it say "for you and for many unto the remission of sins"

Rather than "for all" instead of "for many"?

The Catechism of the Council of Trent explains why "for all" shouldn't be used.

The current liturgy uses the term "for many".

 

[mark46]

I guess I am missing something.

If you are convinced of the Catholic Faith, then why would you even read anything by those who call the pope an anti-pope. You must understand that there is one Church.

I suggest that you take an RCIA course, and having a mentor with which to talk.

Books by Scott Hahn are most readable are good for exploring the faith.

There are many views within the Church, and of our brother and sisters in Orthodox and Protestant churches. However, if you wish to join the Catholic Church, I suggest spending time before and after joining (at least 2-3 years) when you do NOT explore the documents of the heretics, those questioning the pope, and especially those calling him an anti-pope. Learn what the Church teaches. Enter into its ways of prayer and worship. In short, get an understanding of what the Church teaches BEFORE you look at those who oppose it.

Then when considering views of others, carefully consider what the Church has to say about these teachings. Pray about these issues. Understand that the Church cannot be wrong about such things. There can be nuances of understanding. Another could have a different view on what it means to be pope. Another might have a different understanding of what free will means.

However, there are serious error being taught by some. The group you mentioned is clearly among these.

BOTTOM LINE
Ignore those who oppose the Church.

Hi,

I've been convinced of the Catholic Faith after having read about it for like 3 weeks.

But I've been confused when I encountered Sedevacantist sites, who say that the Vatican II council is invalid or such, and that the current pope is an "anti-pope" etc.

I find good arguments from both sides (i.e. those who are against Sedevacantism, and those who are for it), but some seem to contradict each other. They often refer to prophecies of Saints regarding apostasy, and also a message from Our Lady of La Salette regarding apostasy, and the Arian crisis where Catholics were a remnant.

Therefore, I've been spending a lot of time trying to find the truth regarding this issue. This has been hard, since I haven't read about the Catholic Faith etc for so long, I don't know if all they say is taken out-of-context or not etc, or if their interpretations of certain Papal statements etc are true. I've prayed to God regarding this and asked for the intercession of Mary, that I will be led into the truth etc.


Do I have to become a member of a Catholic church in order to truly be a Catholic?

Because, according to Sedevacantists, I'd commit a mortal sin by attending a "Novus Ordo" mass. They also consider the new rite of ordination invalid, thus they consider confession to such Priest invalid.

Since I don't know for sure if the Sedevacantist position is true or not, I chose to not be part of a Catholic church, at least not yet. For now, I want to spend time on studying the Catholic Faith instead.