Most of the Sedes and people sympathizing with the Sedes are from the USA. You don't hear about Sedevacantists from Italy as much when Italy is more Catholic than the USA. You don't hear much about it from Mexico either and that's a super Catholic country. Or Ireland.
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
I heard they were very big in France. Its possible because putting the mass into English erased some of the unique Catholic identity vs Protestant identity that used to be a big thing here. It used to be if you were Catholic you wouldn't go to public school, you belonged to Catholic Fraternal organizations, etc, etc.
They really hate the loss of identity going on. They want to hang on to how the church used to be. Now younger priests are trying to bring the old culture back but the Sedes aren't holding their breath until it becomes how it once was.
SSPX (society pius X) is massive in France. They do traditional latin mass and have militarized youth wings. They are in a grey area between acceptance and excommunicado. Vatican tolerates them.
>l
Is there data on their numbers in france? I've never been to a latin mass here. I know they exist but from what I find it's like 1-2% max of parishes
In france i can find
>FSSPX in france: 211 Priests
>FSSP in france: 95 priests
doesn't seem that big
SSPX isn't actually sedevacantist though, they just disagree on the reforms and wish to continue the latin mass as much as they can get away with, but if they were actually denying the legitimacy of the pope they wouldn't be as tolerated. The founder Lefebvre actually defied the pope and was excommunicated as a result, but the rest of the org is on much better terms since then.
The meme at the top of this page is deeply stupid. To gain a real understanding of sedevacantism, regularly read these sites:
Novus Ordo Watch
&
WM Review
Also see my Youtube channel.
Two of the core components of the American psyche are dissent and rebellion.
The Sedes elected their own Pope
>QUESTION: How would you determine the authenticity of a Marian apparition?
>She would explicitly endorse me.
lmao, you can't make this shit up
Every Catholic in the USA is a traitor, same for israelites and Muslims, but they don't pretend to be Americans.
Wasn't there a bunch of Somalians brought to Minnesota by Lutheran churches? Anglo Americans are the biggest Shabbos goys too and would start a fight or argument with anyone who criticised their precious israeliterinos. You don't see Israeli flags flying in Catholic churches or Catholics showing the same support for Israel that Anglo Americas and Prot Americans do. Prots seem to pay more heed to the old testament than Catholics do and they consider the News the chosen people which Catholics most certainly do not.
>It's another example of "Protestantism is wrong because some Protestants don't share my views on immigration and Israel"
I'm not saying Protestantism is wrong just that they're bigger traitors to America than Catholics. Both Prots and Caths have been heavily subverted in America though but American wasp prots suffer from the mind virus of zionism and follow the old testament too much. Prots name their kids after old testament figures and Catholics name their kids after new testament figures and saints. Catholics are more Christian because of the emphasis on the new testament.
The Old Testament is 75 percent of the Bible anon.
Its the new testament that matters most if you're a Christian. You don't see Catholic priests waffling on about irrelevant old testament shite like prots in America.
But they are waffling on the doctors of the church a lot and church tradition. They're always talking about the councils.
How is it irrelevant if it's in our Bible? The Christian Bible has always been mostly made up of the OT. If it wasn't important, it wouldn't be included in the Bible.
Its only included because of prophecies relating to the coming of Christ and genisis and such . The early church fathers and doctors are more relevant than most prophets of the OT. I do like some of the profound stuff in the OT but I don't think there should be as much emphasis on the ot as prots give it.
They aren't as relevant because they aren't scripture. Thinking only the NT counts is Marcionism which is heretical.
>You don't see Catholic priests waffling on about irrelevant old testament shite like prots in America.
Lmao the only thing Catholics do is constantly try to find predecessors of their doctrines in the Old Testament (like Mary is kinda the ark of the covenant, so that means she was bodily assumed into heaven somehow)
you are making race an idol
the Old Testament is not "shite"
I'm not the anon you're replying to but the fact that he used the British and Irish word 'shite' combined with the fact that he's a Catholic suggests he is Irish, like myself, in which case he's likely a reacting against a very strong tendency among Ulster Scots Protestants (and formerly Anglo-Irish Protestants in general) to actually make an idol of race and regard Irish Catholics as Canaanites fit for extermination (a very sizable number of Scots- and Anglo-Irish Protestants literally believe the native Catholic Irish are Canaanites who deserve destruction by divine decree, owing to the prevalence of British Israelism here, promoted by the British government to Protestants of British descent in Ireland for divide-and-rule purposes via the Orange Lodge system). In Ireland there is a polar distinction between Catholics who, since the Cullenite 'reform' of the 19th century, feel uncomfortable with the Old Testament and Protestants who have alas at times tended to brazenly ignore the fundamental message of the New Testament. The political traditions of Orangeism give an extremely ugly slant to the OT in Protestant tradition and have resulted in a certain Marcionite slant to popular Catholicism in Ireland. This situation has created a certain imbalance in the Catholic attitude to the Bible in Ireland which is responsible in part for the recent religious crisis here.
How was Catholicism different in Southern Italy and Sicily vs. Ireland? Italian American Catholics in the USA tend to be Trump supporters but this isn't true of the Irish American Catholics who lean more towards Hillary than the Italians do.
I don't know much about American history but Irish-Americans seem to have had a longstanding tactical alliance with the Democratic party since before the Civil War. Party loyalty is an Irish trait which withstands the vicissitudes of ideological shifts in the party. Ireland is still divided semi-tribally between parties who are ideologically identical but took opposing side in the Irish Civil War, over whether the Treaty with the British which created the Irish state was sufficient in granting independence and territorial integrity. America is very rarely a faithful reflection of the old country and a given country should never be judged by its American diaspora.
The Irish Catholics as a whole have been throughout modern history socially conservative (as regards sexual morality etc.) and economically left-wing and anti-imperialist. In contrast with Italy, where nationalism was anti-Catholic, there has been a certain consonance of Catholicism and nationalism in Ireland, in which nationalism has been ecumenical and non-sectarian but yet closely associated with the historically-oppressed Catholic majority.
It's ironic but in the USA, the Italian Americans are usually more nationalistic than the Irish ones or Polish ones. They're the most conservative group of the white Catholics. They're also the bluntest about things and less PC than most American whites.
https://lavocedinewyork.com/en/news/2020/11/19/massive-support-for-trump-and-the-end-of-italian-american-identity/
19th century nationalism was a very different thing to 21st century nationalism. Nationalism was generally liberal in the 19th century, and bear in mind that ideas associated with extreme reactionary conservatism and populism in modern times were taken for granted even by liberals of the 19th century. There is an underrated Italian-Irish conflict in the US. The Irish dominated the American Catholic Church and Italians felt like their own traditions were being subordinated by the Irish. The Irish on the other hand resented the fact that the Italians came from a country in which Catholicism was an established rather than suppressed religion and still chose to associate with an anti-clerical nationalism - a nationalism which enjoyed the respect of the wider world - whereas the nationalism of the Catholic Irish was regarded with scorn internationally. The Irish perceived the Italians as ungrateful for the fact that they came from a country where Catholicism was free, were choosing to identify with a Masonic British-backed nationalist movement, came freely as economic migrants to America and yet expected the same privileges as themselves, whereas the Irish were advocates of a nationalism despised internationally (because it was not explicitly anti-Catholic) and a religion despised under the British state, and were refugees from a system of enforced poverty and population displacement rather than voluntary economic migrants, and had born the brunt of Anglo-Saxon Protestant discrimination while building up the infrastructure of the Catholic Church in America. As well as that, the labour movement in America was mostly the work of the Irish and southern Italians came in as scabs and strike breakers, undermining many gains. The Irish refused to concede what they'd fought for to Italians straight of the both, and this created deep mutual resentment eventually bridged by intermarriage. 'Italian-Irish' is practically its own ethnicity on the east coast of the US.
Not really.
In my American town there are Italian mobsters who use the local government and courts to dictate and steal peoples private/personal property.
These Italians will be in both parties.
Right now they are trying to force out local non-Italians and replace them with any race of New Yorkers and New Jersians.
Italians moved to suburbs more than the Irish who stayed in cities maybe.
Meds
>I'm not saying Protestantism is wrong just that they're bigger traitors to America than Catholics.
I don't see much difference in migration views. If anything Catholics are more tolerant of illegal immigrants than Evangelicals.
>Prots name their kids after old testament figures and Catholics name their kids after new testament figures and saints.
This might be news for you but most Protestants are not Amish. Not that it matters much. America is not getting destroyed because some guy names his child Jedediah.
Not to mention that Daniel, David, Joseph, Aaron, Isaac, Benjamin, Jacob etc. are all OT names
Cry about, gods children will inherit the earth and zogmerica will be vanquished.
Americans hate hierarchy, their minds can't understand it
America is a Protestant country, so much so that even the Catholics are Protestants.
>America is a Protestant country
You mean the Southern states.
Anglicans aren't protestants they're papists with a pallette swap and all sects derived of Anglicans are invalid forms of Christianity.
Physical distance from Rome, ultratraditionalist converts, and lack of a strong clerical culture from historical religious plurality. Basically, most American sedes are infected with American Protestantism.
Correct
Its very popular in france, even if it's never really talked about
The US is so culturally protestant that their Catholics hate the pope and their atheists evangelize as if they had to spread their own godless gospel.
America itself was founded on rebellion, and then later characterized itself as having capitalism in its blood and as part of their spiritual identity. A nation born of rebellion against God (protestants) then rebellion against their King (English) with an unhealthy focus on "freedom" (the consumer capitalism vice of picking and choosing what THEY want WHEN they want it like petulant children) make it so that they hate any sort of obedience. Naturally, capitalism, protestantism and rebellion is part of their lifeblood. Which is what the Ashkenazi elite capitalized on to keep their golem controlled.
>Protestant colonials revolt against a Protestant king of a Protestant nation
>Tradcath larpers seethe for some reason
You're missing the part where the puritans rebelled against the Church of England because they thought that their protestant brethren was still far too Catholic. It was a colony of religious extremists who hated catholicism with every fiber of their being and whose entire identity revolved around protesting against anything resembling catholicism, which later evolved into the american distaste for power structures and propensity towards libertarianism.
That doesn't make sense because Anglicans are LITERALLY just Catholics with a palette swap. Lutherans are the only true Protestants.
Huh?
Lutherans and Anglicans are largely the same.
>Ireland
You don't hear about it in Ireland because Ireland nowadays is a secular country of atheists and agnostics. Catholicism in Ireland is dying fast. Their baptism rates are kept up purely because of Catholic schools demanding it, but ofc Catholic schools only pump out edgy atheist teenagers
>atheists and agnostics
The vast majority of Irish people hold Catholic beliefs even though they don't regularly attend mass. I'm a working class Irish man and know what I'm talking about whereas you're probably an American and don't know what your talking about. Faith is still strong here even if mass attendance isn't.
>Faith is still strong here even if mass attendance isn't.
How does that make sense to you? WHY aren't you going to mass?
captcha: G8GAY
Anti-clericalism. Not the poster you're replying to but this kind of 'folk Catholicism' which totally contradicts Catholic dogma is a thing in historically Catholic countries.
What do they have faith in that makes them Catholic? Sounds like just Prots in denial.
Belief in holy wells, the centrality of Our Lady etc. See Mexico. Folk Catholicism is sub-intellectual (though it is not incompatible with a more intellectual approach) so don't expect too much intellectual coherency from it. It's arguably not an exaggeration to say that Ireland was the most consistently Catholic nation in Europe from the time of Saint Patrick until the 1990s.
Catholic Ireland 'died' in the 1990s-2010s but is making a discreet recovery. Irish Catholicism was extremely clericalist and equated the sanctity of priests with the truth of the religion itself, which is a consequence of the penal era, during which time the Irish priests were truly extraordinary men and a true realisation of the Christian ideal. Their heroism under persecution accustomed the Irish to regard priests as almost infallible, and so when the illusion was shattered by the current crooked generation of priests (I'm referring of course to the sex abuse scandals) the effects were devastating. As time goes on people are adopting a more balanced understanding and the 'apostasy' is increasingly looking like a typical episode of Catholic anti-clericalism, which is normal and healthy for a Catholic society. The clergy needs to be held to account by the laity just as the clergy needs to watch over the laity. This poster is correct:
.
Sedevacantism is pretty minor though in Ireland, a country in which people have been murdered for being Catholic within our own millennium.
When will they realise that they are being just like Protestants and Orthodox?
America has a rich history of Protestantism and anti-Catholicism.
It's also really big in France. France is not a very religious country but the Native French practicing Catholics that do exist (And there's a lot more than you'd expect) tend to be pretty hardcore. Not to Mention Poland has a very lard community of them.
I think hardcore traditionalist/Sedevacantist Catholicism is most popular where Catholics have a persecution complex and has been historically marginalized. The three countries I see the most Sedevacantist Catholics in are Poland, USA and France. What do the USA, France, and Poland all have in common? Their recent history is full of Anti Clericalism. Poland experienced decades of State Atheism, The conflict between the French Republic and Catholic Church was so bad that civil wars nearly broke out around the turn of the century, and America has a long and proud history of anti Catholicism and persecution against Catholic peoples like Irish, Hispanics, and Italians.
That's not to say that they are unheard of in Spain, Brazil, Italy etc but the intensity of persecution isn't there. Mexico used to be very repressive against the Church but the hardcore secularist/state atheist laws have been repealed for over 50 years now.
probably just tradcath zoomers that will be orthodox next week and pagan the week after that
This. They think "catholicism is le based" and convert, immediately shouting how they better than everyone else. Than after some time they've had enough of Francis' latest remark and move on to the next thing.
A few years ago we had all kinds of zoomers talking about how paganism was le epic and how we should learn from Hinduism
>Sedevacantist Catholics
I can see why they think that allowing women and homosexual priests would be a departure from the way things are supposed to be. Also they aren't even condemning homosexuality anymore. Modern Catholicism is a mistake. That's just my opinion as a sane agnostic.
Women and homosexual priests aren't allowed
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/02/gay-people-should-not-join-catholic-clergy-pope-francis-says
https://www.npr.org/2020/02/12/805174586/pope-francis-wont-allow-church-to-ordain-women-and-married-men-in-south-america
The Catholic church is into PR moves. So they still condemn homosexuality in the official doctrine while giving them lip service.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/pope-same-sex-unions-licit/2021/03/15/8c51ee80-8581-11eb-be4a-24b89f616f2c_story.html
https://apnews.com/article/vatican-decree-same-sex-unions-cannot-bless-sin-077944750c975313ad253328e4cf7443
Why does the Vatican say israelites don't need to be converted to go to heaven
>https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/12/10/459223058/catholics-should-not-try-to-convert-jews-vatican-commission-says?t=1655934350281
>Furthering a thaw in relations that began 50 years ago, the Vatican has released a new document about Catholics' historic ties with israelites, whom Pope Benedict once called the church's "fathers in faith." Among the panel's conclusions: israelites don't need to be converted to find salvation.
The document's name is a quote from Romans 11 which pretty much seems to say the same thing
t. atheist who just read Romans 11
This Sedevacantist Pope Michael is acting as a mini Pope. Any thoughts on this?
>Any thoughts on this?
Sad!
They think the Catholic church is in error. What should they do?
Check their catechism. The Catholic Church is indefectible.
>They think the Catholic church is in error. What should they do?
They could watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMzQCpuGOnI
And this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMzQCpuGOnI
And they could read some of the material noted here:
And they owe to their conscience and acting in good faith to read or watch material that defends Pope Francis against the accusation (or implication) of heresy, such as:
The Church has lived through bad popes before. The sedevacantist position is a toxic "solution" to this situation, because it threatens the salvation of otherwise fervent Catholics. (I must admit that in some respects sedevacantism strikes me as a trick of the devil designed to destroy the spiritual lives of otherwise faithful Catholics.)
In sum, sedevacantism is a temptation that should be avoided; and rather, the person so tempted should submit to the obvious permissive will of God in allowing Francis to become Pope.
Oops, meant to post this as the second youtube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwuA512YCl8
But there's an attempt to form a one world religion. This is the end result to ecumenicalism. Ecumenicalism leads to a one world religion where everything is relative and we have a bunch of new age nonsense pushed on us.
Francis worships the idol of Pachamama. Thomas Aquinas says we only follow legitimate authority. We will never do this. The Vatican as of now is on the path to bringing legitimacy to the antichrist and there's predictions that it will. I would argue that their salvation depends more on getting away from these heretical influences currently in the church and its relativism. Sedevcantists are restorationists. What we wish to do is return the church to its former glory and turn back the clock. We'll be happy to come back to you if some things are done. The church left us; we didn't leave the church.
mexican catholics couldnt understand mass before vatican ii probably had something to do with it.
The difference between SSPX/SSPV and the other split offs is that they're trying to get back to how the Catholic church once was and want to go back to tradition. This is quite clear.
The church left the Sedes. Sedes didn't leave the church.