Author Topic: Is the CMRI schismatic? (Read 64350 times)

Ladislaus · « **Reply #20 on:** November 19, 2014, 11:58:51 AM »

I can make an argument.

CMRI strongly advocates the notion that there can be salvation outside the Church. Yet all the alleged error in Vatican II derives logically from the same position on EENS that the CMRI hold. Consequently, they have no doctrinal justification for refusing to be subject to the Vatican II hierarchy. Consequently, the CMRI are schismatic.

Stubborn · « **Reply #21 on:** November 19, 2014, 01:16:49 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Charges of schism (apart from those who refer to all sedevacantism as schismatic) stem from the early association with one "Bishop" Daniel Q. Brown, from whom Shuckhardt originally received "Holy Orders". But Brown reportedly made a formal abjuration before ordaining / consecrating Shuckhardt. SSPV still pushes that angle.

Which bishop heard his abjuration?

Stubborn · « **Reply #22 on:** November 19, 2014, 01:21:15 PM »

Quote from: Nado

Quote from: Stubborn
Quote from: Stubborn
Quote from: Nado

When I said "prime support" I am referring to the reason for why one would say the association of Schuckardt has made them schismatic.

What do you mean by "association"?

Well?

That is an ordinary English word. Look it up.

In another thread you made claims they were schismatic. Present your claim and reason, if you still have it.

I have already done that - you explain what the association was.

You seem to think he was some obscure member, as if by his lowly position within the sect that he's someone CMRI has no reason to be connected too.

So please humor us and explain what this association consisted of.

MyrnaM · « **Reply #23 on:** November 19, 2014, 01:40:44 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

I can make an argument.

CMRI strongly advocates the notion that there can be salvation outside the Church. Yet all the alleged error in Vatican II derives logically from the same position on EENS that the CMRI hold. Consequently, they have no doctrinal justification for refusing to be subject to the Vatican II hierarchy. Consequently, the CMRI are schismatic.

As always the Church INCLUDING CMRI, teaches NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CHURCH, and also as always, the Church teaches that no one, not even Ladislaus or Stubborn or Cantarella can judge who exactly is outside the Church, because God give His graces to whomever He desires and whenever He desires. This is what I was taught way before Vatican II.

This grace is rare and not the norm, but it can happen because the Church says so.

Vatican II however is schismatic because the moment the
ConciLIAR "popes" have contradicted God they became a new religion. Example: I am the Lord Thy God and THOU SHALT NOT have strange gods before me. The Bible states to leave the Harlot, (interfaith).

Cantarella · « **Reply #24 on:** November 19, 2014, 02:27:17 PM »

Quote from: ascent

Catholic means universal, therefore in this Crisis of the (universal) Church, a valid clergy has jurisdiction everywhere, despite not being granted regular faculties by a (heretical / apostate) Bishop. The same goes for a traditional valid Bishop. He has jurisdiction everywhere despite not being granted faculties by (heretic / apostate) Francis. As long as a clergy is validly ordained and he's in the true Catholic Faith, then his apostolate is in effect anywhere, and at any time, during this Crisis.

Where did you get this from?

Please provide a Magisterial source (preferably from before 1962 so the sedevacacantists can be an ease too) to prove this claim.