Dealing With Sedevacantism

Sedevacantism can, and in many cases certainly is, the product of an arrogant mentality; the behaviour, so to speak, of the one who goes away with the ball because he doesn't like how the match is going. In other cases, though, Sedevacantism is – unfortunately – espoused by sincere Catholic souls; that is, by people who, because of a warped conception of what the Earthly Jerusalem is, find no other way to keep believing in the Church than by, in short, deciding that this Church has become a huge, worldwide deception, and opening an emergency exit door for themselves in this rather childish belief that the true church be the pure and incorrupted one to which they, and very few others the world over, belong. As if Christ had allowed almost all, bar the very few smarties, to be deceived as to what the Church is.

Still, the fact remains: some of these Sedes are faithful Catholics who, whatever their errors, I believe far more pleasing to God than, say, 97% of Western Bishops. Some of them are, also, very good at explaining Catholic doctrine, and defending the Tridentine Mass. This is no surprise, as in many cases we are talking, whatever Voris & Co. May think, of very orthodox, high quality Catholics.

Should we, therefore, link to their material, may the one or other Catholic blogger have asked ask?

I would answer that it depends on the actual situation, and of the weighing that we must make of whether the exposure to the good material is outweighed by the exposure to the bad one.

I use a case-by-case approach. I have linked to Sedevacantist sites when I thought it ethically correct to link to the source of the material of the day – a blog article, say – but I have never felt it necessary to go as far as to link to their books, or videos, or any other extensive, systematic exposure to them, even in arguments not pertaining to Sedevacantism. Say: a Sedevacantist can have the best videos about the Tridentine Mass around, but I would still not link to them.

I would, though, do it in the one case, that I thought this material the only reasonably good material available; not, of course, without a warning about the other convictions of the author.

I must say that, up to now, this has never happened, and I very much doubt that it will ever happen. It's not that we have ever needed Sedevacantists to explain to us things we did not know. The world of Traditionalism – including all Catholicism before the Council – is simply immense, and the Internet sources are becoming vaster every day, with more and more old books and other sources being made available. It's not that your reader has to watch a certain video, or read a certain article. Alternative sources are most certainly available.

In one words: if there were no Sedevacantism, there would be no occasion in which a Traditionalist Catholic blogger could not find perfectly acceptable (I do not say perfect, or even best; but perfectly acceptable) sources for the issue at hand.

Others will, of course, have different opinions. I only tell you which approach I personally consider best. In our disgraceful times, Sedevacantism can easily become a temptation for imperfectly formed Catholics, who in their desperation think they have finally found the answer to the events unfolding under their own eyes. I do not think they should be exposed to this temptation, unless there are very valid reasons for that.

Which is why on this blog you don't find link to videos of Sedevacantists – however good this videos might be – but only the occasional link concerning the issue of the day, and Even that only with a word or three of warning.



Posted on November 18, 2014, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. 10 Comments.

  1. If as some sedevacantist proclaim, that the chair of St. Peter has been vacant for over a half a century were true it would necessarily follow that the protection of the Holy Ghost and the promise of Jesus to St. Peter and to His Church did not survive. It would have meant that the gates of hell did prevail in destroying the very essence of what sedevacantist claim to love. They proclaim for decades that there is no Peter. They claim that all the recent papal elections were not for true Popes. They claim that the recent Popes were heretics or anti Popes or worse. Their pain for the most part is very profound and very real and as you say Mundabor, this position is where they find comfort to soothe their pain.

    We are living smack dab in the middle of what we were warned would happen by centuries of previous Popes, Saints and church approved visionaries if we did not safeguard and live our faith in reverence and abide to the sound doctrines taught with consistent clarity and accuracy in earlier ages. We received a Pope Francis because he reflects the will of great majority of would be catholics. We deserve this punishment and must together pray, live, act and fight our way out of it one second at a time.



  2. The website JMJ audio books is sede. However the quality and range of its books one can download is second to none. While I avoid their books on the papacy, I certainly enjoy their books from Pre Vatican 2 spiritual masters

  3. I solemnly aver that the seat of the Bishop of Rome is not empty and with even higher and more solemn solemnity proclaim, from Chicago unto the world, that I sure as hell wish it was.

  4. > As if Christ had allowed almost all,
    > bar the very few smarties,
    > to be deceived as to what the Church is.

    You are surely aware of the fact that ~83% if the world population is not Catholic.

    Christ allows that.

    Based on recent polls, even among the ~17% who is nominally catholic, about 80%-90%is dissenting from the faith in crucial areas, so in other worlds, they don’t profess the True Faith, – so in other words, they are not really Catholics.

    So we are down to 1-2% of the world population being really Catholics – and that is the optimistic estimation!

    And God allows that. (It’s not His fault; he revealed everything we need to know.)

    Therefore, I don’t think we can rely on numbers as a theological argument.

    • The argument does not stand.

      The fact is not one of numbers, but of who believes that the Church is the Church.

      Even a Hindu or a Calvinist know that the Catholic church sits in Rome, and is lead by a Pope. May they consider it a supersitition, they talk of the same organisation we talk.

      I never heard of a Muslim uncertain as to who is the Pope.


  5. Hi,

    My Strawman post just got put up at Pew Sitter. 🙂


  6. This earlier article (preceding the more recent one on means of deposing a heretical pope) of Fr Siscoe explains how a manifestly formal heretic maintains the office of the pope (even though he has severed his connection with the soul of the Church, the internal forum) until a declaration of such severence has been made in the external forum by the pope himself, or the Church, through the appropriate authorities.

  1. Pingback: Processes: Work of Human Hands | The Deus Ex Machina Blog

%d bloggers like this: