Author Topic: CMRI Contra Mundum? (Read 7731 times)

SeanJohnson · « **on:** March 25, 2012, 04:44:32 PM »

So, I was just curious:

There is another thread going that in entering into a discussion of which sede groups are legit, good, wacko, etc.

Question: There seems to be a strong preference on this forum for the CMRI. Why is that so?

I would have thought that the former SSPX sedes would have the most followers, and the CMRI the fewest (because of the Thuc validity issue).

Sede Catholic · « **Reply #1 on:** March 25, 2012, 05:14:02 PM »

In Sacramental Theology, the Church stipulates that it is a actually gravely sinful to cast doubt on the Validity of

Holy Orders, unless a positive doubt exists.

The Vatican say that the Thuc Lineage is valid.

Marcel Lefebvre admitted that the Thuc Lineage was valid.

So any sspx-ers had better acknowledge the validity of the Thuc Lineage, or else they are claiming that he,

Marcel Lefebvre, was actually wrong about something.

There is no reason at all to doubt the validity of the Thuc Lineage.

According to the mind of the Church, to create doubts about it would be gravely sinful.

Sede Catholic · « **Reply #2 on:** March 25, 2012, 05:19:01 PM »

Pope Pius XI personally selected Fr. Thuc to be consecrated a Bishop.

Sede Catholic · « **Reply #3 on:** March 25, 2012, 05:21:50 PM »

That is about the highest recommendation that Bishop Thuc could receive.

He was personally selected by Pope Pius XI to be Consecrated a Bishop.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #4 on:** March 25, 2012, 05:26:24 PM »

Quote from: Sede Catholic

In Sacramental Theology, the Church stipulates that it is a actually gravely sinful to cast doubt on the Validity of

Holy Orders, unless a positive doubt exists.

The Vatican say that the Thuc Lineage is valid.

Marcel Lefebvre admitted that the Thuc Lineage was valid.

So any sspx-ers had better acknowledge the validity of the Thuc Lineage, or else they are claiming that he,

Marcel Lefebvre, was actually wrong about something.

There is no reason at all to doubt the validity of the Thuc Lineage.

According to the mind of the Church, to create doubts about it would be gravely sinful.

Sede-

Let's not get off track.

I don't want this thread to be pro v con on sedevacantism.

I want it to be about why, on this forum, the preference is for the CMRI.

There was another thread on the validity of the Thuc consecrations (30+ pages long) regarding their validiy, so I think it safe to say the questionability of his consecrations is fair game.

Question:

1) If you are going to be sede, why not Fr. Cekada, Sanbourn, Dolan, Pope Michael I, etc?

2) If you were to rank the various sede groups, how would you stack them in terms of most clergy?

3) How about in terms of most laity (if different)?