This is indeed a controversy on an undeniably undecided issue among Catholics. In controversies there are two sides. It is most important to hear from both of them in a spirit of humility, whether or not you have PRAYERFULLY taken a side already. You’ve done much to make this interchange possible, Kevin.. thank you! Let us pray for greater understanding between both sides and yet stronger unity among Catholics! May God bless you all!
Thank you for this explanation it was excellent. As a simple Catholic man I do not believe that we have a true Pope and we haven't had a true Pope since Pope Pius the 12th. So in the meanwhile I'll keep praying for a true Pope to take the chair of St Peter.
This just simplified everything. Thank you Father for explaining things in simple terms. I now get it. To be honest, the thesis is like sitting on the fence, making it similar to the R&R POV. So, definitely not for me. Either it is a yes or a no, no middle ground for me.
I find it refreshing that the various degrees of Sedevacanist Theology are coming together to discuss our theological differences, instead of getting into autistic arguments with the vatican ii sect members who are indifferent at best or hostile at worst to Sedevacantism. Before we can spread the God's Truth, we must get our own house in order. I am praying for a spirit of revival of fervor, courage, and unity in the Sedevacanist community. We need to remember what the various Saints have written that every day, maybe our last, so we should do what we can, while we still have time. And prepare ourselves spirituality. May Our Lord and His Blessed Mother bless and keep you abundantly!
This is an objectively false comment. We don't need to settle an unsettled matter before spreading the truth that the Vatican 2 religion is not the Catholic Church
Thank you so much for this interview. This is exactly my viewpoint. Traditional bishops ARE the valid bishops and can teach, santify and rule the whole Church. That's the only possible explanation to the situation today.
And they can convene an imperfect general council (see St. Robert Bellarmine, Doctor of the Church) to elect the Pope with the help of the Holy Ghost. Amen
I would like to thank Fr. Vili Lehtoranta and Mr. Kevin Davies for reminding us of the basic point - the presentation of the theological position and discussion must always take place under gentlemanly conditions. I think this is a very important part of the conversation. Congratulations on the program!
This was excellent (very edifying words from Fr. L) and appreciate being able to hear both sides. What makes sense to me is that what may have seemed to be the case in the 1970’s can at this point in time no longer hold up (just like the una cum mass). I don’t take a stand either way against the other but pray for all of our Bishops and priests to find unity under One True Pope (but I don’t see Bergoglio converting!). Yes, pray for charity in these discourses. Maranatha!
Great show.Thank you Mr Davis for organising this debate and thank you Father for your explanations.Your intervention was convincing and enlightening.The conciliar church can definitely not be the catholic church, there is no way around that.The Thesis introduces more confusion than explanation indeed.
Kevin looking sinister in the thumbnail. (Joking) Respectfully,all of these differences of opinion just divide us, including the Resistance-SSPX. Until we have a Catholic Pope,these are opinions. We need to pray & work for Traditional Catholic unity.
Excellent! Several years back a relative (now deceased) wrote, who was part of the Pius X church in Post Falls, that the Pope was a heretic but he still is the Pope. This was what she believed. We have always been sedevacantists. A heretic cannot be a true Pope.
,SGG, CMRI, MHTS and others around world have their differences. But they all love Catholic Church, and are very brave and kind. Amazing, amazing Clergy
Bp Sanborn said very clearly: V2 "popes" (including Roncali as a promotor) are not real Catholic Popes. Personally, I concern the issue as not for layman to dig into, as we never could have been competent in the area for discussion. However I can see many (if not all) "totalist" priests are followers of thesis in practice.
I find it very hard to find anything more irritating and more wrong then this: concern the issue as not for layman to dig into, as we never could have been competent in the area for discussion. First off you only know the competence of yourself alone so do not use the word "we" speak only for yourself. Secondly and more importantly It is God's word and the teachings of Christ that are to be listened to and adhered to. God's word and Christ's teachings, for the most part, are very clear and simple. The long winded b.s. of these educated men is meaningless. They are suppose to be spreading the Gospel not debating if the vicar of Lucifer on Earth is a bench warmer or not
The more I learn of Thesis the more I'm convinced it's a false. No disrespect meant to anyone. Thanks Fr. Lethoranta, and thanks Kevin. I would like to hear from someone that holds the Conclavist opinion.
The Thesis could have worked back when it was first conceived, but it doesn't make any sense in light of what we know now and the developments that have happened.
@@haroldramirezmedina9153 I just think it's absurd in the current year to believe that we must depend on non-Catholic, mostly laymen (none of the Cardinals are valid bishops, and I don't think any of the eligible to vote Cardinals are valid priests) College of Cardinals to elect a non-Catholic layman to be the material Pope-elect, and to then hope that they somehow recant their errors and go receive valid holy orders in order to actually take office. It also bothers me that some who adhere to the Thesis think it's a mortal sin to attend an Una Cum Mass (which is ironic considering that Bp des Lauriers did not believe it to be a mortal sin). No disrespect to the priests and bishops that hold that stance, but it just seems inconsistent and hypocritical to me. May God have mercy on us all during these extraordinarily confusing times.
I would respectfully agree with the learned Father. It is totally impossible for The Church to propose heresy, error, chaos. Therefore V2 cannot be The Church.
What would you say of a Doctor who would only diagnose a disease if he also had the cure? Not having all the answers does not make the problem not exist.
I believe the council of Constance is the closest precedent we can look to. Was the Council of Constance a perfect council? However we cannot be in to big of a hurry. We must be careful to avoid a council like what happened at the council of Pisa.
@@thechurchmilitant4293 Not really. If there is no authority from God there is no Pope even if the election is valid. The thesis puts spiritual ahead of material.
@@christianthinker2536 I'm really not interested in getting into into fruitless theological debates, if you agree with Bishop Sanborn's theological position, then your channel name is a misnomer, it should be " the christian 300 IQ taker." 🙄😬
I became an Epistemologically Honest and Humble Agnostic after many years of studying Philosophy/The Sciences and Theology; Especially The Branches of Metaphysics and Epistemology. However, I was Born and Baptized into Sedevacantism, and I received the Prescribed Sacraments I needed during my years of bearing The Faith I once held as a Mystical Treasure. Despite my Epistemic Uncertainty.. if it wasn't for my upbringing in The Traditional Catholic Faith, I would have never pursued my life and career in Philosophy, and I am ever Curious and Wonder daily of The Mystical. There is much Metaphysical Depth that is "possible" and even though I am Agnostic, I despise the Militant Atheists who attack The Mystical and rely only on their mere Materialistic- Sensory Perception. Knowledge I believe has more levels than just The Sensible. They say Faith is above Reason, but not against it. Truth is Objective they say, and ofcourse I agree with that. Nothing stirs my Curiosity more than The Catholicism I grew up in... and o' how Diligent their Zealous Priests are! 👏🔥📖🔥
I’ve had countless arguments with atheists on Facebook and have come to the conclusion that the great majority of them pretend to demand evidence for a God because they reject and deny any evidence that defies the laws of science as with documented miracles which they’ve pre decided to write off as “debunked.” Their actual insistence in denying God lies in their refusal to recognize a higher moral authority which explains why they are typically immoral heathens. As for atheists who sincerely seek a God like Edith Stein, CS Lewis and Felix LeSeur - they eventually found Him. I would suggest that your intelligence is getting in the way of converting to the truth and that you’re overthinking at the peril of losing your soul my friend.
A true Roman Catholic will forever have to defend the faith; to plant seeds to win hearts and minds for Jesus. Peter is “the rock,” the foundation of the faith. Peter is the first pope. His profession of faith is recognized by Jesus as a response that comes from God the Father Himself. Upon this rock I will build my church. If we accept the truth of Jesus, we therefore must accept his church. Robert Bellarmine was ordained in 1570, when the study of Church history and the fathers of the Church was in a sad state of affairs. His most famous work is his three-volume Disputations on the Controversies of the Christian Faith. Particularly noteworthy are the sections on the temporal power of the pope and the role of the laity. Robert Bellarmine devoted his life to the study of Scripture and Catholic doctrine.
So if Francis goes down every checklist Bishop Sanborn (who helped me become Catholic and I have greatest respect for) and every other checklist for Francis yo become Pope, and every sedevacantist in the world accepts him as Pope, I won't accept him. Will I be excommunicated? We have 2 sets of Catholics, one accepting francis, one not. This isn't like when we had 3. What will happen to me? Pope Paul IV (in my weak opinion) trumps this thesis
I think in the question unity, Sedes (exclude feenyites) do have unity of Faith, and because of it the also compel to follow Cannon law a traditions. That proves there is also unity of governance. So there is unity. What Sede have is a state of feud caused by diversity of opinions on moving forward with Church. This is an effect of having no Pope. What is called Impefect Council is not imperfect, becuase it's not possible to have pope in it, since there isn't one. I think that designation is incorrect. Are you going to say that Holy Order of Bp. are also imperfect because there was no Pope? There is an ancient Aphorisms that says none one is obliged to the impossible. As such, the imperfect Council is not imperfect since it's impossible to have a pope sitting in the council, and there very reason of Council is to address the lack of Pope.
And Jesus calling unto him a little child, set him in the midst of them, and said: Amen I say to you, unless you be converted, and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, he is the greater in the kingdom of heaven. And he that shall receive one such little child in my name, receives me. But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it was better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea. Douay-Rheims Bible Matthew 18
Think of "Totalism" as a flavor of Sedevacantism. The other flavor, sometimes referred to as "Sedeprivation", has some different legal nuances, but both positions are well within the boundaries of Catholic theology.
