Belloc and others who may care, I did not leave CMRI because they were patriotic, or Republican, or perhaps pro-Iraq war. I stomached all of that the way I would stomach other political mistakes made by Catholics throughout the history of the Church. None of that has any bearing on their Catholicity.
I left because they were allowing people to go to
una cuм Masses. To me, this is no different than a Catholic priest from,say, 1217, allowing someone to go to a Waldensian mass. It is not Catholic behavior to permit the laity to wander back and forth between un-Catholic sects and the Catholic Church.
The CMRI repeatedly points out the errors of SSPX and then tells people, "Go ahead and go there in an emergency." Sorry, this makes no sense. Either SSPX is good and Catholic IN ALL CASES or it is not. Would CMRI tell you to go to an Anglican church "in an emergency"? Come on!
My friend made the hilarious comment that this was like saying to an engaged couple, "If you can't find a priest around to marry you, just head over to Vegas." He also calls CMRI's policy "Being a little bit pregnant." This is how the devil works -- just slip in a little poison and then a little more until soon no one knows what the true doctrine is.
I believe that the only way to be Catholic in our time is to be sedevacantist. Someone may say, "It's only a difference of opinion about whether Ratzinger is Pope or not." That is where that person and I would have to part ways, hopefully for the moment. For me to accept that this man could be a Pope would be the most blasphemous insult to Jesus Christ. This is not just a man who made some mistakes in a letter, like Honorius, but a dogged, persistent enemy of Our Lord since the time he was a priest. An
una cuм Mass with Ratzinger is a sacrilegious horror.
John Daly, before for some reason deciding to defend SSPX, brought up this pertinent example:
St Hypathius, a Bithynian monk of the fifth century, insisted on suppressing the name of Nestorius, the patriarch of Constantinople, from the sacred diptychs from the moment when Nestorius began to preach his heresy, which denied the unity of person in Our Lord. Hypathius's ordinary, the bishop Eulalius (who was a suffragan of Nestorius), refused Nestorius's heresy, but rebuked the monk for having withdrawn from communion with their patriarch before he had been condemned by a council. Hypathius replied: "I cannot insert his name in the Canon of the Mass, because a heresiarch is not worthy of the title of pastor in the Church; do what you like with me; I am ready to suffer all, and nothing will induce me to change my behaviour." (Petits Bollandistes, 17th June)
St. Hypathius acted like a Catholic. He didn't wring his hands and go along with evil because "people are confused and they are in invincible ignorance," or whatever their excuses are to partake in offenses to God. He refused to participate, and led by example. You see, it is those who give you the easy out, who say "It's okay to do whatever because you're confused," who are the
authors of confusion. The Catholic Church is not a pick-and-choose buffet.
Notice who the saint is, too. It isn't the bishop who went along with the letter of the law, waiting indefinitely for the Church's judgment, but the lowly monk who KNEW right away that to insert Nestorius' name in the Canon was BLASPHEMY.
This disobedience to your superiors is not recommendable in all circuмstances; but only in special circuмstances, when those superiors are making you choose between them and Christ. And when you talk about special circuмstances, let me tell you, we are in one, boy. This is the GREATEST of all special circuмstances up to this point in time.
I feel as strongly about this as St. Hypatius did -- more strongly, because Ratzinger is far worse and more destructive than even Nestorius, and we do not have a functioning Church that can depose Ratzinger. Actually, we do, it's just that they refuse to do their duty.
The CMRI and SGG and SSPX ( more acronyms than Soviet Russia! ) can try to bully people with their seminary training all they want; but if they are wrong, they are still wrong. It is a historical fact that the clergy usually goes along with the prevailing government; in the time of Henry VIII, most of them were sucked into his Anglican Church; in the time of the French Revolution, most of them became "jureurs" and went along with the revolutionaries; and so on and so forth. As far as Vatican II, many stayed but many left as well. The point is, you cannot just go along with the clergy if they are heretics. The clergy are humans with human weaknesses; they are often afraid to rock the boat or have gotten too comfortable.
********
Like all of you, I am doing my best to try and save my soul. None of us here wakes up every morning and thinks, "I'm in the wrong and I want to burn in hell." Some people think that they must be in communion with their fellow Catholics even if those Catholics are riddled with heresies and are wrong. They don't want to miss their Sunday Mass even if it is sacrilegious.
I may have gone too far -- and I may pull back. If I can find a bishop who is not overbearing about NFP, I may accept his belief in it as a common error and attend his chapel. Or I may write to bishops and try to make them see the truth, and the one who does is the one who will get my support. Or I'll wait for the Minor Chastisement or Second Coming. I don't know. I'll tell you one thing, I haven't given up trying to find a Catholic bishop or priest. If one is reading this, please write me!
But I believe that we are where we are because of compromise and so I have set out on the course of being uncompromising where Catholic dogma is concerned. I fully believe St. Paul when he says, " But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema." That could be translated, "But though we, or a POPE, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema."
I do not go along with the rhythm method, or false interpretations of invincible ignorance, or the
una cuм with one of the worst heresiarchs the Church has ever seen, and who has usurped the PAPAL THRONE. When the Church is restored, I am positive that all of these things will be looked back on as abominations, and I want to be ahead of my time -- because my time is grotesque. Do you realize this is inarguably the worst moment of time in Christian history up until now?
I do not believe Christ wants me to participate in communion with heretics. He has given me the actual grace to stay at home for now. However, many of the clergy, who are most likely only material heretics, could change from one day to the next. Until 2007, when Bishop Dolan began to raise a hue and cry about it, the
una cuм wasn't even an issue for sedevacantists. Just as now, no one seems bothered by NFP, or has realized that Pius XII was almost surely an anti-Pope who taught and tried to enforce eugenics and social engineering. This could all change overnight.
I don't see the Church as dead but more like Sleeping Beauty, in a poisoned trance, awaiting Her prince. So those who say it is undergoing its mystical crucifixion and is now in the tomb seem to be right. It has a hierarchy -- so the gates of hell have not prevailed -- but they are in slumberland at the moment.
Topic: Karl Keating: Feeney & Followers αnтι-ѕємιтєs? (Read 5413 times)