Author Topic: Last Pope?  (Read 595 times)

Vinny Zee

Re: Last Pope?
« Reply #20 on: February 03, 2018, 09:40:51 AM »

That may be true.  It may also be true that the non/anti-sedevacantist position will cause one to not even consider the comments of Jean Guitton.

So you agree with confirmation bias and the effect it could have on both camps?
 

2Vermont

Re: Last Pope?
« Reply #21 on: February 03, 2018, 10:20:44 AM »

That may be true.  It may also be true that the non/anti-sedevacantist position will cause one to not even consider the comments of Jean Guitton.

So you agree with confirmation bias and the effect it could have on both camps?

I am saying that it is possible.  You seem to think it's a definite.
"Anything, but sedevacantism"

(If you are open to sedevacantism and not a rabid anti-sede, then this is not about you)
 

ClemensMaria

Re: Last Pope?
« Reply #22 on: February 03, 2018, 10:42:06 AM »
I doubt that the testimony of this one man is the only evidence that causes him to believe that Pius 12 was the last pope.

ClemensMaria you mean? I would not say that either. I was not trying to imply the statement of Jean Guitton was the reason and only reason he was a sedevacantist. I have seen his other comments and I am sure he has other multiple reasons. The point of my argument was that the sedevacantist position could be the reason to cause one to have confirmation bias when analyzing the comments of Jean Guitton.

That may be true.  It may also be true that the non/anti-sedevacantist position will cause one to not even consider the comments of Jean Guitton.
Yes, exactly.  I never offered the quote (which can be found in Fr Villa’s book on J23) as a definitive proof of the sede vacante position.  It is just another small piece of evidence.  But I guess who needs evidence if you can just deny the published testimony of a man who had no motive for lying about such a thing.  And who is not known as a liar.  And I should also point out that the r&r folks have no such compunction about accepting the same man’s testimony concerning P6’s motivation for producing the Novus Ordo Missae, i. e. to make it acceptable to the Protestants.
 

TKGS

Re: Last Pope?
« Reply #23 on: February 03, 2018, 12:25:12 PM »
Has anyone heard any sedevacantist clergy reference this quote?
 

Vinny Zee

Re: Last Pope?
« Reply #24 on: February 03, 2018, 01:11:42 PM »

That may be true.  It may also be true that the non/anti-sedevacantist position will cause one to not even consider the comments of Jean Guitton.

So you agree with confirmation bias and the effect it could have on both camps?

I am saying that it is possible.  You seem to think it's a definite.

I personally feel the first mistake in any conversation is to tell another person what they think. I never used the word definite. I offered it up as an explanation to what was happening in the thread and what ClemensMaria stated.  Also note when I said, "both camps" I meant both camps. It happens to everyone.
 

Vinny Zee

Re: Last Pope?
« Reply #25 on: February 03, 2018, 01:21:16 PM »

Yes, exactly.  I never offered the quote (which can be found in Fr Villa’s book on J23) as a definitive proof of the sede vacante position.  It is just another small piece of evidence.  But I guess who needs evidence if you can just deny the published testimony of a man who had no motive for lying about such a thing.  And who is not known as a liar.  And I should also point out that the r&r folks have no such compunction about accepting the same man’s testimony concerning P6’s motivation for producing the Novus Ordo Missae, i. e. to make it acceptable to the Protestants.

Him being a liar or not has nothing to do with the conversation. There are plenty of well intended people in the world who are misinformed, or mistaken, etc. I am neither, nor have I seen anyone else, accuse him of being a liar.  A liar would be one who blatantly knew their statement was false and therefore, if Guitton knew PPXII never made the statement and he said he did, that would be lying. From my observation, others were inquiring whether there was more to the quote, whether he recalled it all correctly, etc. Finally, asking questions is not denying "published testimony." Your sentence implies either one must accept the published testimony, no ifs, and or buts about it or they are "denying" it.
 

2Vermont

Re: Last Pope?
« Reply #26 on: February 03, 2018, 01:40:48 PM »

That may be true.  It may also be true that the non/anti-sedevacantist position will cause one to not even consider the comments of Jean Guitton.

So you agree with confirmation bias and the effect it could have on both camps?

I am saying that it is possible.  You seem to think it's a definite.

I personally feel the first mistake in any conversation is to tell another person what they think. I never used the word definite. I offered it up as an explanation to what was happening in the thread and what ClemensMaria stated.  Also note when I said, "both camps" I meant both camps. It happens to everyone.

That's why I said "seems" smarty pants.
"Anything, but sedevacantism"

(If you are open to sedevacantism and not a rabid anti-sede, then this is not about you)
 

ClemensMaria

Re: Last Pope?
« Reply #27 on: February 03, 2018, 02:54:21 PM »
Vinny Zee, what’s your evidence for calling into question the veracity of Jean Guitton’s testimony?
 

Vinny Zee

Re: Last Pope?
« Reply #28 on: February 03, 2018, 03:39:42 PM »
Vinny Zee, what’s your evidence for calling into question the veracity of Jean Guitton’s testimony?

I have no evidence because I am not calling it into question and you will find no where in this thread where I called it into question. Remember, my initial comment was that confirmation bias will cause us to not consider other sides of a story or questions about a piece of evidence. I never called it into question. Others were asking you for more clarification and they were calling it into question. I made an observation of how the conversation was going along.
 

2Vermont

Re: Last Pope?
« Reply #29 on: February 04, 2018, 07:38:08 AM »
Vinny Zee, what’s your evidence for calling into question the veracity of Jean Guitton’s testimony?

I have no evidence because I am not calling it into question and you will find no where in this thread where I called it into question. Remember, my initial comment was that confirmation bias will cause us to not consider other sides of a story or questions about a piece of evidence. I never called it into question. Others were asking you for more clarification and they were calling it into question. I made an observation of how the conversation was going along.


Did you realize that those "others" were sedes when you wrote:

Due to the fact Sedes firmly believe Pius XII to be the last Pope, the suggestion he made such a statement confirming this seems to be something that will be accepted regardless or without any real thorough investigation.

Your comment above seemed to be applied to all sedes and yet a number of us questioned the quote.  Are you not showing your anti-sede bias here....again? 
"Anything, but sedevacantism"

(If you are open to sedevacantism and not a rabid anti-sede, then this is not about you)