For the TL;DR version, see this site that is AWESOME, and explains why Sedeprivationism is obvious nonsense.
Sedes Sapientiae Fidelium
In my book Reclaiming the Catholic Church from 2020, I essentially showed why the Novus Ordo “Catholic” Church (called the Novus Orco by me) is a false Church, a total usurpation of actual Catholicism and that there has been no valid Pope since 1958. I also stated it very clearly there that Sedeprivationsim is a non-starter and completely outdated idea that has nothing of value to offer today. Sedevacantism is the only route left. The only thing sedeprivationism has is that the etymology is more correct in the name. the seat is not exactly “vacant” but rather “occupied” illegally and invalidly by an usurper, that is “preventing” a proper Pope from sitting in it validly and legally.
Unlike all the heretics pretending to be Christians, Catholicism has its doctrines and dogma ALL written down, so one can’t argue that X means Y or that up means down, like the 45,000+ denominations of Protestantism all invariably do.
The rules, both Divine (immutable and unchangeable in time) and Ecclesiastical (human rules for the efficient running of the Church which can and do and have changed over time) are ALL codified. And as of 1917, they are all embodied in ONE volume that had some 40,000 documents vetted both before and after it and over 40 years of scrutiny by theologians, clergy and academics in order to find any flaw with it or any Church documents that contradicted themselves in its creation. There was never anything found that required changing anything or “reinterpreting” anything.
Now, because these rules are based on ROMAN Law, and not the ridiculous loophole filled nonsense that passes for “law” in the American system, the entire code of canon law of 1917 is a beautiful document that is perfectly consistent, logical and absolutely irrefutable. 2000 years of historical documents were sifted through to make sure everything that was ever declared a divine law was retained exactly as it was meant to be, infallibly, since the start. And the rules for the Church laws (that can and have changed) were too codified, with the clear and logical understanding that the past cannot invalidate the future nor the future invalidate the past.
As a result, WHY the fake Popes since 1958 are actually NOT Catholic and as such cannot possibly be Popes or clergy of any kind, is crystal clear.
Anyone of normal intelligence and with a reading comprehension that I call normal, and that WAS normal, for any 15 year old child in 1985, but which today is probably rare, given half the planet thinks men can get pregnant, can read the CoCL of 1917 and see with very simple logic and clarity, as well as with historical precedent WHY and HOW the fake “clergy” is fake. they are at best heretics, and at worst never-where Catholics but merely Satanists posing as “Catholics” like Roncalli, who even took on the name of a previous antipope John XXIII to make it obvious he was a Freemason.
Anyway…
So as far as anyone reasonable is concerned, the only Catholic clergy left are the Sedevacantists.
HOWEVER, mostly driven by an American Bishop, who clearly thinks very highly of himself, but with no real reason to, since he obviously has tried to superimpose American legalism over Roman law, which has no such “loopholes” on Canon Law, the thesis known as Cassiciacum Theory, that was originally invented by Father Michel-Louis Guérard des Lauriers, has been pushed onto most of the remaining Catholics, be they clergy or laity.
The thesis, basically states (counter to ALL Catholic history, teaching and dogma) that a Pope can be validly elected but spiritually not elected, making them a kind of Pope-Elect 1 that is “materially” Pope but not “formally” Pope.
It’s an absurd theory that was invented at the time of Vatican II as really a quite obvious way to allow the cowardly clerics that had not immediately grabbed Roncalli and afterwards Montini —and thrown them out of the Papal throne with serious kicks to their posterior if not a literal burning at the stake— to “reconsider” and boycott the Freemasons now squatting throughout the Vatican. The fact the Vatican was already infested with Satanists was of course exposed by the list of Freemasons in the Vatican published by Mino Pecorelli in his magazine Osservatore Politico , and for which, at least in part, as well as exposing the corruption of then Minister Andreotti, Mino was assassinated, being shot four times at close range with a .38 revolver, by a man that was never caught.
Unfortunately, the Bishop/s and clergy pushing this false doctrine or theory, apparently are hoping that the Satanists currently squatting throughout the Vatican, like pedophile-and-cocaine-snorting prone Gargoyles, will miraculously have a change of heart and revert to being “good guys” and all will be well.
Only two problems with that:
- They are in essence saying a Satanist can just say “Oh yeah, by the way, Vatican II was all wrong so I am the real Pope now, okay guys?” And they would all go: “Okay then!” And clap like trained seals. It’s absurd and ridiculous.
- Catholic Canon Law expressly forbids a heretic, even if he were to truly repent to have any kind of clerical authority over ANYONE, ever again. They are to FOREVER spend the rest of their life in perpetual penance hidden away in a monastery.
All of which is logic a normal 5 year old can understand.
There is really NOTHING to argue about.
It’s ALL encapsulated in three legs of an absolutely immovable stool:
Canon 188.4 which basically just states that clergy who publicly act as heretics, promote heresy and do so repeatedly and obviously are heretics and not Catholics and NO ONE need to say or officiate or do anything to make it so. The law and fact themselves make it so. Which is obvious because otherwise you’re saying a priest that eats babies at the altar instead of the host would still need to go through some “legal process” before it is clear he is not Catholic. It’s nonsense of course. A heretic is a heretic. End of. And the crimes of heresy of the fake Popes that enacted Vatican II are all over the 16 documents of Vatican II. All of which I covered in autistic detail in my book RTCC .
Ex Cum Apostolato Officio which clearly states once a heretic you will NEVER be acting as clergy to laypeople again, as well as make it clear that this rule applies to ALL levels of clergy.
Roman Law which is based on basic principles that are codified and logic and reason, not past rulings (case law) like Anglo and American law. There are principles to be generally followed, but each case is judged on its merits and logic and reason rules. For example the law of silent assent is Roman Law. If you keep silent, then it is assumed you agree with whatever was said about you or the situation. You don’t get to stand on the sidelines and claim later you never agreed.
As a result Sedeprivationism is nonsensical, ahistorical, and completely illogical as it goes against established Canon Law, Catholic dogma, basic reason and Logic, and ultimately truth. And it also opens the door for the Satanists to fool even MORE people.
Now, it needs to be said that not all the clergy who subscribe to Sedeprivationist are some kind of evil schemers. As far as I am aware they are all VALID clergy, VALIDLY ordained in accordance with proper Catholic dogma and the CoCL of 1917, so in that respect they are good guys.
However, they are, at best, in error. And this site that sprung up a few days ago and is in four languages as far as I can tell, has taken that theory, and demolished it piece by piece in a work so clear, so pristine, and so absolutely logical and transparent that no one sane that reads it can in any way keep to the “The Thesis” other than by wilful ignorance, severe cognitive dissonance, pure emotional “feeling” (one of those people that cannot be convinced by facts, as Aristotle pointed out over two and a half millennia ago) or, pride, ego and a need to be right. I pray, and to date have not (yet?) seen any evidence that any sedeprivationist clergy are actually intentionally trying to subvert Catholicism. So this is not a personal attack on any of them; though a certain Bishop DOES stand out , having acted arrogantly, in contravention of Canon Law, and basic logic, as well as the common good. But even in this instance, I still think it’s ego and pride, not intentional wish to deceive. Nevertheless, even if one has good intentions, their errors need to be pointed out and stopped. And the time for private conversation on this has long since passed, as well as been fruitless. So a public dialogue f these errors is certainly required now, and I salute the producers of the Contra-Thesis website , because it is one of the better theological documents I have ever read. And one I am certain despite much gnashing of teeth, no sedeprivationist can make a logical and valid refutation of.
a term that has never existed in Catholicism and the one or two times it was ever used in the historical past was merely as a colloquialism to refer to a potential Pope, not as some kind of quasi-limbo state of being a material but not formal Pope
This post was originally published on my Substack. Link here
