Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: Nado

Your attitude is making people step off the narrow path.

More of your Cushingite NO philosophy.

FYI, preaching what the church infallibly teaches, ie that one must receive the sacrament of baptism for their hope of salvation, is what keeps them from attempting to be able to plead ignorance, something you are against, but be honest to yourself at least, no way does it make people step off the narrow path - if they are of good will, it can only make them strive to get on and stay on the narrow path, the ONLY path which leadeth to life for the few there are that find it.

You skirt one again that you are promoting an IMPOSSIBLE thing, against the divinity and holiness of the Church of Christ. You won't even argue it, you just go on tangents instead, like a mental case.

What is there to skirt - your opinion? Because your opinion is contrary to de fide decrees, you are the one who skirts the truth and you skirt it in a similar manner in which you attempt to foolishly justify schism because you foolishly preach the pope is not the pope - as if you, of all people, would have a clue.

Like all heretics, you make dogma heresy and heresy dogma. I am of the opinion that the reason you do this is from your years in the conciliar church and the rest of the time you spend obsessing over your opinion of a  Vacant Chair.

We know that few make it to heaven and the rest go to hell - but like all heretics, your philosophy has few going to hell and the rest, you have going to heaven. In your warped theology, the only ones who go to hell will be those who do the Catholic thing by defending the absolute necessity of belonging to the Catholic Church and the absolute necessity of the sacraments for salvation.

Can you see now how you make dogma heresy and heresy dogma?

Sigh. Last time, I typed out a detailed response to you, Nado, citing many Magisterial texts and theology manuals explaining the common teaching before Vatican II, and I don't frankly have the inclination to cite them all again. I do not believe in Feeneyism, I believe in Thomism, like St. Alphonsus believed, and St. Pius X taught, as did several others. If you are really open to a discussion, then answer these questions.

1. St. Pius X said, "Christians, when interrogated, must answer that those who die as infidels are lost. " Do you believe and affirm this?

2. Pope Alexander VII condemned the shamelessly liberal proposition that it was not necessary to believe even that God existed and rewarded good and evil. In the other thread, you claimed this did not refer to salvation. I ask two questions, do you admit atheists cannot be saved? I sure hope you do. Next, do you admit that it is a mortal sin, and heresy, to say or to think that a godless atheist can be saved? Practically every single theologian before the heretic Karl Rahner believed and taught that. There is no disagreement at all, that faith in God and in His justice at least is necessary as a means for salvation.

3. St. Alphonsus, following St. Thomas, in the History of heresies, which the Church has approved and commended, and explaining this is the testimony of all the ancient Fathers, says that infidels who persist in doing what lies in their power, will be given the grace to embrace the Faith and be saved. Elsewhere, in his Theologia Moralis, which the Church has recommended with the highest praises, he states the fundamental mysteries of the Faith, like the Trinity and Incarnation, are necessary as a means, arguing against the minority of theologians who thought otherwise. Do you believe him?

St. Francis Xavier bought 3 million souls into the Church by his own hand, because he knew and believed that those who die without belieiving in Jesus Christ are lost. This was the answer he gave to the Japanese, also explaining the point about the natural law, when they asked him why their ancestors were lost without the Christian Faith. His answer, that the law is inscribed on the hearts of all men by God, and that whoever obeys God and does what lies in his natural power to love God and seek the truth, will not fail to be enlightened by Him about Christ, so delighted the Japanese and resolved all their doubts and queries, that they asked him no more, except to become Christian. This is not Feeneyism, this is Thomism, this is Tradition, it has only good fruits, unlike the novel opinion you hold. Fr. Michael Mueller, whom Rome and the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith also highly praised for his preaching and teaching, firmly believed and taught the same, and together with a friend of his, received over ten thousand heretics into the one fold of Christ.

“Still we answer the Semipelagians, and say, that infidels who arrive at the use of reason, and are not converted to the Faith, cannot be excused, because though they do not receive sufficient proximate grace, still they are not deprived of remote grace, as a means of becoming converted.  But what is this remote grace?  St. Thomas explains it, when he says, that if anyone was brought up in the wilds, or even among brute beasts, and if he followed the law of natural reason, to desire what is good, and to avoid what is wicked, we should certainly believe either that God, by an internal inspiration, would reveal to him what he should believe, or would send someone to preach the Faith to him, as he sent Peter to Cornelius.  Thus, then, according to the Angelic Doctor, God, at least remotely, gives to infidels, who have the use of reason, sufficient grace to obtain salvation, and this grace consists in a certain instruction of the mind, and in a movement of the will, to observe the natural law; and if the infidel cooperates with this movement, observing the precepts of the law of nature, and abstaining from grievous sins, he will certainly receive, through the merits of Jesus Christ, the grace proximately sufficient to embrace the Faith, and save his soul.”

Quote from: Cantarella

The Americanists are determined to change the dogma on salvation. BOD was never relevant or an issue with EENS but the Americanists made it one and unfortunately today the Americanist error of invincible ignorance as an exception to EENS has spread throughout the Church as to become "Church teaching". The sedevacantists here in CI have elevated the concept into a DOGMA, which not even the conciliar popes have done.

Correct.

And if you go to a CMRI chapel and tell the priest that BoD is not doctrine, don't be at all surprised if he tells you that if you think that way, you're not Catholic, and that you'll have to find somewhere else for the sacraments, even if every church within 50 miles is NovusOrdo.  I know this happens because I saw it happen.

The CMRI is filled apparently with Lovers of Error.  (Not unlike CI threads, actually.)

.  

This is  happening right now to a very, very good friend of mine.  The family is practically being run out of the chapel.  My friend is very stressed and has asked me for help.  I don't know what to tell her.

And if you go to a CMRI chapel and tell the priest that BoD is not doctrine, don't be at all surprised if he tells you that if you think that way, you're not Catholic, and that you'll have to find somewhere else for the sacraments, even if every church within 50 miles is NovusOrdo.  I know this happens because I saw it happen.

At my SSPX chapel there used to be a sedevacantist who did not believe in BOD or BOB. Even though the priest did not agree with these two beliefs and knew he held them he still considered the person to be a Catholic and let him receive the sacraments.

Quote from: CathMomof7

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Quote from: Cantarella

The Americanists are determined to change the dogma on salvation. BOD was never relevant or an issue with EENS but the Americanists made it one and unfortunately today the Americanist error of invincible ignorance as an exception to EENS has spread throughout the Church as to become "Church teaching". The sedevacantists here in CI have elevated the concept into a DOGMA, which not even the conciliar popes have done.

Correct.

And if you go to a CMRI chapel and tell the priest that BoD is not doctrine, don't be at all surprised if he tells you that if you think that way, you're not Catholic, and that you'll have to find somewhere else for the sacraments, even if every church within 50 miles is NovusOrdo.  I know this happens because I saw it happen.

The CMRI is filled apparently with Lovers of Error.  (Not unlike CI threads, actually.)

.  

This is  happening right now to a very, very good friend of mine.  The family is practically being run out of the chapel.  My friend is very stressed and has asked me for help.  I don't know what to tell her.

Well, they could either look for a new chapel or just be quiet about this particular subject (prudence would sometimes dictate silence when you know it'll do more harm than good).  Apart from that, it's hard to say anything with no details.

I would agree that this is a good strategy in the short term. One can back away from confrontation over this, and keep the availability of the sacraments until  other possibilities present themselves.  I would start seriously looking for another chapel but even if you have to stay on there, you know them now for what they are, and besides most all of the priests who are descended from the SSPX line have this same defect.
I have known the SSPX has been weak on this doctrine since I first attended. It is hard to abide but their error is not my error, and sometimes one must by necessity live with such things.