CathInfo.com

I can't find fault in a Catholic who believes what is printed in My Catholic Faith or the Baltimore Catechism, regarding Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus. I think there is abundant good faith among traditional Catholics; a desire to be faithful to Holy Mother Church.

This quickness to toss accusations of the sin of heresy, and mortal sins against the faith, and accusations of bad will are. . . terrifying to say the least.

I sense acts of inquisition without the authority to condemn, if that makes sense.

We live in strange times.

Sorry for the above incorrect statement. However, the fact that the Dimond Brothers (who possess a "holier than thou" attitude towards all non-Feeneyite Catholics) still attend Byzantine Catholic Masses for Sacraments makes them hypocrites, plain and simple.

They are receiving sacraments from Novus Ordo clergy in Novus Ordo churches, then have they audacity to continuously and publicly say that all non-Sedevacantists are damned to Hell. Thus, they are receiving sacraments from NO priests who are damned to hell. You would think that they would at least go to a Sedevacantist mass to receive Sacraments (since they make a living trash-talking the NO Church). Since they keep going to NO Churches to receive sacraments, why should anyone take those 2 seriously??

If this is where they attend mass, I can certainly understand your comments here.  
 
However, perhaps there is no other option for them to receive valid sacraments....although I suspect that there has got to be at least one traditionalist chapel that is within reasonable distance. 

things are just getting clearer and clearer!

Thanks so much

still don't know what a feenyite is but that's OK

don't know if the NO Mass is valid but that's OK

guess I don't need to know... and neither does anyone else who might come here

I'll be more than happy to explain these things to you. First, a Feeneyite is someone who followed the errors of Father Leonard Feeney, a Jesuit Priest [1897-1978] who claimed that "without water baptism, there is absolutely no salvation."
Also, the NO Mass is valid if you believe that Pope Paul VI was a true pope. That's because as Pope, he (along with many other Popes before him) continuously violated #5 of Quo Primum (and that's okay because it is not dogmatic). 

What does #5 of Quo Primum say? Here it is:

"by this present Constitution, which will be valid henceforth, now, and forever, We order and enjoin that nothing must be added to Our recently published Missal, nothing omitted from it, nor anything whatsoever be changed within it under the penalty of Our displeasure."

Pope Paul VI arguably violated #5 of Quo Primum more than any other Pope since 1570 when he created the NO Mass. However, the NO Mass (even though it's barely Catholic and the Latin Mass is a billion times better because of this) is still valid and licit because it:

a.) has a valid consecration of the host (transubstantiation takes place because the words in Luke 22:19 are said to make it valid); and

b.) to deny the validity and licitness of the NO Mass would be violating an important canon law (which all Catholics must obey) and that law is the following:

Canon 7 of Chapter 9 in  Session 22 of The Council of Trent –"If any one saith, that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs, which the Catholic Church makes use of in the celebration of masses, are incentives to impiety, rather than offices of piety; let him be anathema." (Denzinger 954)

I hope that this helped you.