Well said. I have said many times in the past how Cekada's novel "Una cuм" construct was a convenient, selfish, self-serving device to "remove the competition" and make more income/money for himself and his chapel(s).

What better way to "own" your parishioners, than by removing all other Masses as an option?

It's diabolically brilliant -- and quite obvious.

He only adopted this stance several years after Bp Sanborn did.  When I first got to MHT in 1999, DD and AC were not at all anti-una cuм.  They saw each other very often (Fr. C was spending one week a month at MHT teaching) -- yet he failed to see any merit in the position.  Oddly, Sanborn's adherence to Cassiciacuм is more consistent with a NON-anti-una cuм stance.  Fr. Martin Stepanich was always staunchly against the anti-una cuм position -- and his training and experience were orders of magnitude greater than any at MHT, SGG, etc.  Such is Traddieland, such are these times.

Why the CMRI Is Not an Option for Serious Catholics
BY STEPHEN HEINER · JANUARY 21, 2022

Heiner is an unprincipled, opportunistic DB.  He passes for reasonably smart within the Traddieland of 2022 but is, in the end, a pseudo-intellectual whose "journalism" is suspect.

It was in reference to this article by Bp. Sanborn: http://www.traditionalmass.org/images/articles/Opinionism.pdf

Thank you.  I am very familiar with the article.  I confess I do not see how such a take (right or wrong) is a novelty of any kind, much less on a level remotely similar to pontificating about V2-una cuм as a mortal sin, even for those assisting at Holy Mass.

Perhaps I misunderstood your comment.

It's hilarious to see this because it makes the Dimonds look tamer now.

I remember Stephen encouraging me to attend the CMRI back in 2013-2014.

Stephen has bought hook, line and sinker into the MHT cult. Pretty sad.

Yeah, don't the Dimonds think that the problem is with what comes out of the pulpit rather than the Canon?

Heiner is ... in the end, a pseudo-intellectual ...

That is how he always came across to me. 

What's a "DB"?  Sorry, I just can't work it out from context.

I was wondering too.    I even looked it up:

https://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/DB
Although from the context I figured it wasn't Decibel nor Dumb Blonde.     Nevertheless, something derogatory.

It's another way to already divide the already horrifically divided Traditionalist Catholic world, which is becoming Protestantism without the theology, if it isn't already there. What's one of the hallmarks of Northern Europe's biggest export 500 years after the Reformation? Division. Thousands of splits in half a millennium.

Most of the Trad world, especially the St. Gertrude crowd is the same. Non-una-cuм is just their way of making themselves into their own church by inventing their own theology and making themselves the only acceptable place to go to Mass and the Sacraments. It's asinine.

Any kind of Communicatio in Sacris/Divinis with a heretic and/or schismatic or Communicatio in Sacris/Divinis with those in communion with a heretic or schismatic was unanimously held to be forbidden by all of the Church Fathers & Church Councils as well as the vast majority of theologians, Popes, and Doctors of the Church.

The logic is simple.

a) If Bergoglio is a heretic then one cannot be in communion with him, directly or indirectly, (knowingly and intentionally) under pain of heresy and mortal sin.

b) The CMRI & similar groups believe Bergoglio is a heretic.

c) The CMRI and similar groups are in indirect communion with Bergoglio. i.e. They are in communion with those who are directly in communion with Bergoglio such as the SSPX which offers the Una cuм Mass.

d) The CMRI and similar groups are heretics themselves for being in intentional indirect communion with a man they consider a heretic.

Proof?

Canon Croegaert:

“To pray for the Pope is to give witness that you live in communion with the Head of the true Church.” (Les Rites et les Priéres du Saint Sacrifice de la Messe, 2:106)

Maurice de la Taille S.J. (1872-1933):

“Moreover, since today neither in the commemoratio pro vivis nor in any other part of the Mass does the Church commend by name any living person except such a one as is considered to be in communion with her, today it would also appear sinful to mention by name in any liturgical prayer whatever, an infidel, a heretic, a schismatic, or an excommunicated person. This privation of the common suffrages of the Church is by no means confined to the excommunicati vitandi alone, as may be seen from the Code of Canon Law (can. 2262, parag. 1).” (De la Taille 2:318.)

Pius VI, Charitas (# 29), April 13, 1791: “Keep as far from you as possible all intrusion and schism.… Above all, avoid and condemn the sacrilegious intruders..… Keep away from all intruders… do not hold communion with them, especially in divine worship.”

II Council of Constantinople, 680-681: “If any ecclesiastic or layman shall go into…the meetinghouses of the heretics to join in prayer with them, let them be deposed and deprived of communion [excommunicated]. If any bishop or priest or deacon shall join in prayer with heretics, let him be suspended from communion.” (Sacrorum Conciliorum, XI:635)

Council of Carthage: “One must neither pray nor sing psalms with heretics, and whoever shall communicate with those who are cut off from the communion of the Church, whether clergy or layman: let him be excommunicated.” (Patrologiae Cursus Completus 56:486)

Pope Benedict XIV:

“The second part of the same warning follows in which, as was noted above, the Greek priest is enjoined, during the Mass, after he has prayed for the Roman Pontiff, to pray also for his own bishop, and for his Patriarch, provided that they be Catholic; for if one or the other or both were a schismatic or a heretic, he would not be permitted to make a mention of them.” (Ex Quo, § 18)

“...but let him carefully avoid making mention of the names of schismatics or heretics.” (Ex Quo, § 18)

1729 the Vatican Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith decreed:

“… There is hardly any rite among the heterodox that is not stained with some error in faith… especially where a commemoration is made of living Patriarchs and Bishops — schismatics and heretics — who are proclaimed preachers of the Catholic faith. For this reason, any Catholics who come together under circuмstances like this to celebrate a rite of prayer and worship cannot excuse themselves from the sin of evil common worship, or at least, from the sin of pernicious scandal.” (SC de Prop. Fide, Instruction (Pro Mission. Orient.), 1729, Fontes 7:4505)

“Moreover, since today neither in the commemoratio pro vivis nor in any other part of the Mass does the Church commend by name any living person except such a one as is considered to be in communion with her, today it would also appear sinful to mention by name in any liturgical prayer whatever, an infidel, a heretic, a schismatic, or an excommunicated person. This privation of the common suffrages of the Church is by no means confined to the excommunicati vitandi alone, as may be seen from the Code of Canon Law (can. 2262, parag. 1).” (De la Taille 2:318.)

On June 22, 1859, the Holy Office declared the following:

“Communication with heretics can be either in a condemned doctrine, or in rites and other signs indicative of adherence to a false [non-Catholic] sect, with the accompanying scandal of the faithful, to whom the Church therefore forbids this communion, lest the faith be lost or endangered. Whence St. John the Evangelist strictly commands: ‘if anyone comes to you and does not bring this (i.e., the Catholic) doctrine, do not receive him into the house, or say to him, Welcome. For he who says to him, Welcome, is sharer in his evil works.’ II John 20. These words evidently imply that everything is forbidden that is expressed by a welcome, in so far as it constitutes liturgical actions instituted to signify ecclesiastical unity. Wherefore we read that a law was enacted by the Fathers of the Council of Carthage ‘against praying or singing with heretics’ as is cited by Benedict XIV. It is therefore illicit to invite heretics to a choir during sacred services, to sing alternately with them, to give them peace or sacred ashes and other such tokens of external worship [with or in front of them], which are rightly and reasonably regarded as signs of interior bond and agreement. This is to be done neither in the active sense, namely by giving them such things, or in the passive sense, by accepting from them [such as receiving the sacraments from them] in their sacred services.” (SO Instruction Communicatio, 22 June 1859, in Collectanea S. Cong. de Prop. Fide 1:1176.)

In 1864 the Holy Office decreed that Catholics cannot contribute to the building of heretical churches and that heretics cannot sing in our churches nor serve at the altar at Mass. (Col., vol. I, p. 692, n. 1257 (1864))

In 1817 the Holy Office decreed that it is not licit to receive the nuptial blessing from a non-Catholic minister. (Col., vol. I, p. 420, n. 717 (1817))

In 1841 the Holy Office decreed that a Catholic bishop is forbidden to go to a schismatic Greek church to chant the doxology. (Col., vol. I, p. 519, n. 921 (1841))

In 1789, 1803, and 1864 the Holy Office decreed that Catholics are forbidden to be godparents at the baptisms of schismatics and heretics. (Col., vol. I, p. 371, n. 600, 1 (1789); Col., vol. I, p. 405, n. 672, 2 (1803); Col., vol. I, p. 692, n. 1257, 1 and 4 (1864))

In 1789 the Holy Office decreed that Catholics are forbidden to give stipends for a Mass offered by a schismatic priest since this would be a form of support of false worship and confirming the schismatic priest in his error by financial support. (Col., vol. I, p. 371, n. 600, 2 (1789))

In 1753 the Holy Office decreed that Greek Rite Catholics, when they do not have their own church, cannot go to the Greek rites said by heretics and schismatics. (Col., vol. I, p. 231, n. 389, ad 2 (1753))

In 1636 the Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith decreed that Catholics are not only banned from singing an acclamation for the schismatic Patriarchs of Constantinople but added that since the Patriarchs were also heretics they deserved to be cursed instead. The Sacred Congregation instructed the bishop to repel from his church the Greeks who sang these acclamations, if indeed he could effectively do so, for the Patriarchs of Constantinople are deserving rather of imprecation. (Rev. Szal, Communication of Catholics with Schismatics, CUA Canon Law Studies 264, Washington, CUA 1948, p. 182.)

The Holy Office also decreed that Catholic missionaries are forbidden under pain of suspensio a divinis ipso facto [automatic suspension in divine things] to invite schismatic government officials, offer them blessed water when they enter, and to exhibit any kind of honor when some feast is celebrated. (Col., vol. I, p. 230, n. 388, 5 (1753))

And the Holy Office decreed that Catholic priests are entirely forbidden to offer Holy Mass in the private houses of and in places frequented by schismatics and heretics. (Col., vol. I, p. 230, n. 388, 1 and 2 (1753))

Finally, in 1888 the Holy Office decreed that Catholics must avoid all communicatio in sacris [communion in sacred things] with schismatics and heretics. (Col., vol. II, p. 233, n. 1696, 7 (1888))

---

In conclusion, if you believe that Bergoglio is a heretic and you are in communion with him directly (Una cuм) or indirectly (being in communion with those who offer Una cuм) then you are a heretic as well.