TCat asked me this:
"Have you admitted that the only reason to stick with the Vatican 2 church, or by extension the SSPX who tolerate the "pope" ... is because they got all the churches and schools and the Vatican and the relics?"
My answer is no.
My conversion from being a Baptist to the Catholic Church is because there was no substantive legality and nothing solid in being a Baptist. The only thing Baptists had was a torn up Bible they smuggled away from the Catholics. It is hilarious how a Baptist acts like such a lawyer when it comes to Scriptures. They can quote you chapter and verse to prove their points. I know this, because that's what I used to do.
But there were many questions, such as "Is it true that once you're saved, you're always saved?" and "What about those verses in the Old Testament about praying for the dead?" Another question that popped up in my mind a lot was "What was the Church like after Acts, and what happened to that movement?" And, of course, there was "Where did we get our Bible from?"
It was a long and mostly solitary road getting to the Church. I'm ever grateful to my sponsor for introducing me to the Universal Church of God. I truly feel like the Holy Spirit led me here. In the same way birds can somehow magnetically migrate around the world...that's how I felt led to the Eucharist.
And as a Catholic, I believe in apostolic succession. And since I believe in apostolic succession, I believe that a man can become a priest, turn into a bad man, but still be a priest. A man can become ordained as a priest, commit great sins, and still have the authority to perform the sacraments. And even if that man were to die and go to Hell, he will still remain a priest forever--in Hell.
This goes for priests, bishops, cardinals, and popes. There's been plenty of bad popes. Pope John XV divided up the Church's funds among his family members, Urban VI was irrationally violent toward his enemies, and let's not forget good ol' Alexander VI who had at least one son, likely slept with his own daughter, and had near-orgiastic parties. Yet, these men were popes.
So, I do not think that just because there's bad men in the Peterine Office means that the Office doesn't exist. It's just an office with not-so-good people in it.
Another question from TCat:
"If the conciliar church was a fraction of the size it is now, would you bother throwing in your support to that entity?"
I would throw in my support to the authority of that entity. I support the office of the US presidency, but I hardly ever like the man in that office. Perhaps that is a good comparison?
"What if the Sedevacantists were greater in number, would you think that it was a numbers game? What if SV had the churches and the Vatican, would you still hold that "Francis I" was the true pope?"
Yes. Apostolic succession is a big deal breaker. The guy was chosen as the Vicar of Christ at Conclave. He is the substitute teacher for Christ--albeit, a "messy" one, as Voris likes to tastelessly joke.
"How outrageous does the hierarchy of the conciliar church have to get for you to admit that they are not Catholic - by reason of they do and preach the opposite of what the faith has always done and preached?"
Excellent question. I do not know.
Since I respect the apostolic succession, I suppose I'd be kneeling and kissing the ring of a child-molesting cardinal if it came down to it. A horrible thought, I suppose.
But I've read many stories of saints. I remember reading the story of a saintly nun (forgot her name) who agreed with Heaven to suffer the pains of Hell in place of another nun who was actually sent there. The hero nun suffered hellish torments for a few years, and because of that sacrifice, the damned nun was allowed to avoid perdition. This same saintly nun suffered many humiliating and cruel policies from her superior. Yet, she always obeyed her superior in spite of this unjust treatment. Christ was pleased at this. We are to obey authority, particularly if it is from the Church.
I'll wrap it up with this question:
"Why talk to the forum of the so called 'Resistance' who supports Francis I, the leader of the modernist apostacy?"
I talk to whoever. I have no problem talking to people I disagree with. It's even better if this disagreement is out in the open and understood between them, me, and anyone else reading our conversation.
If someone is in error, it's best to try to help them correct the error. Kicking dirt into their eyes doesn't seem like the best policy. At least at this point in history.
Also, although the transsexual scandal at FE has given me pause, I might say something to someone over there every now and then. But honestly, I don't feel compelled to be too social there, and I'm trying to take a break from Cathinfo as well.
But I'm not out to identify with the collective mind of a particular forum. When I started participating on forums in the beginning, it was just to meet other Traditional Catholics and learn. I don't identify with FE, CI, or SD. I identify with Christ and the Church that carries His Authority.