Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Is the CMRI schismatic?  (Read 64352 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Is the CMRI schismatic?
« Reply #65 on: November 24, 2014, 10:13:24 AM »
Quote from: Stubborn



Assuming that two of the "three remaining priests" are Chicoine and Pivarunas,
aside from making a joke of the whole thing, what's the point of them making an abjuration "ad cautelam"?

I've never heard of any abjuration or profession of faith made ad cautelam. Absolution ad cautelam or conditionally administering of sacraments ad cautelam yes, certainly that makes sense, but making an abjuration / profession of faith ad cautelam does not make even a shred of sense to me - someone will need to explain that one.



Bishop Pivarunas was never ordained by Schuckardt, he already told on the Youtube from the last thread I posted, shows what you want to remember and what you don't want to know.  

I already told you why they were conditionally ordained with caution, what is wrong with that?  God knowing there would be doubters like you, now you will have to answer to Him for your stubbornness of which you so desire.

Look at how many priest your Bishop Fellay has conditionally re-ordained ad cautelam, with caution. Your problem is you can't find a loop hole in your stubbornness to justify your stubborn attitude when it comes to CMRI.

Why do you think anyone was ever re-ordained?

That is also the reason people take an abjuration of faith, I took it when I left the Novus Ordo.  I wanted to take it, not that it was forced on me.  I wanted to make sure I understood the evil that I was led into.  Not to say every lay person must take the abjuration of faith coming out of the novus ordo, but I wanted to as my promise that I would never, ever set foot within the devils "church" again.  Unlike you who think nothing is really wrong there.  You who points the finger at an ORDER KNOWN AS CMRI, who has taken precautionary measures to make sure everything is in order, in the eyes of God.  CMRI does not compromise unlike some SSPX these days.

Your seem to deny the FACT that we are living in the Great Apostasy, and certain measures had to be taken to assure the Faith prevails.  It is always better to err on the side of CAUTION.  Meaning << to be especially careful rather than taking a risk or making a mistake>>

I can't even imagine God's disappointment about being cautious, during these times of confusion of those who saw the Great Apostasy in the very early days of the this crisis.

Beware these Modernist traits of your pope are starting to show its ugly face on your face.    Not calling you a Modernist yet, but you are starting to sound like one.  

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Is the CMRI schismatic?
« Reply #66 on: November 24, 2014, 11:27:52 AM »
Quote from: MyrnaM
Quote from: Stubborn



Assuming that two of the "three remaining priests" are Chicoine and Pivarunas,
aside from making a joke of the whole thing, what's the point of them making an abjuration "ad cautelam"?

I've never heard of any abjuration or profession of faith made ad cautelam. Absolution ad cautelam or conditionally administering of sacraments ad cautelam yes, certainly that makes sense, but making an abjuration / profession of faith ad cautelam does not make even a shred of sense to me - someone will need to explain that one.



Bishop Pivarunas was never ordained by Schuckardt, he already told on the Youtube from the last thread I posted, shows what you want to remember and what you don't want to know.


Did I say Pivarunas was ordained by Schuckardt? - No, I did not. Shows you need new glasses - I just got some a month or two back and they make a difference - you should get yourself some so you can see what is written.


Quote from: MyrnaM

I already told you why they were conditionally ordained with caution, what is wrong with that?  God knowing there would be doubters like you, now you will have to answer to Him for your stubbornness of which you so desire.

Look at how many priest your Bishop Fellay has conditionally re-ordained ad cautelam, with caution. Your problem is you can't find a loop hole in your stubbornness to justify your stubborn attitude when it comes to CMRI.

Why do you think anyone was ever re-ordained?


Again, you need glasses I never said anything at all against conditional ordinations ad cautelam - re-read and try to make a reply addressing something I actually said.


Quote from: MyrnaM

That is also the reason people take an abjuration of faith, I took it when I left the Novus Ordo.  I wanted to take it, not that it was forced on me.  I wanted to make sure I understood the evil that I was led into.  Not to say every lay person must take the abjuration of faith coming out of the novus ordo, but I wanted to as my promise that I would never, ever set foot within the devils "church" again.  Unlike you who think nothing is really wrong there.  You who points the finger at an ORDER KNOWN AS CMRI, who has taken precautionary measures to make sure everything is in order, in the eyes of God.  CMRI does not compromise unlike some SSPX these days.


Re-read this:
Have you ever heard of anyone making an abjuration or profession of faith ad cautelam? Absolution ad cautelam or conditionally administering of sacraments ad cautelam yes, certainly that makes sense, but making an abjuration / profession of faith ad cautelam does not make even a shred of sense to me - someone will need to explain that one.

I understand "ad cautelam" to basically mean "just in case" - if I am wrong, then I look for someone to correct me on that - as it is, how can someone make an abjuration of error  - but they make it just in case they were in error. By that reasoning, for all they know, the error they thought they were in was not error at all, but the new faith they claim to profess actually is error.

How can someone make a profession of faith - but make it just in case the faith they held previously was in error? Are they sure about it this time?

I wouldn't be surprised if it did, but does that actually makes sense to you CMRIers?




Is the CMRI schismatic?
« Reply #67 on: November 24, 2014, 11:54:18 AM »
Quote from: Stubborn
How can someone make a profession of faith - but make it just in case the faith they held previously was in error? Are they sure about it this time?

I wouldn't be surprised if it did, but does that actually makes sense to you CMRIers?



In my way of thinking, I would surmise, that perhaps, the person felt at the time they were doing what was necessary, but now that the circuмstances changed they want to make sure they were not mistaken EVER.  It took humility to do what they did, something you might want to imitate by admitting, maybe you are wrong with your conclusion about CMRI.  

Is that a sin, there actions at the time, if not why the fuss.  If yes, explain!

While your at it, answer Nado's last note too, or did you not see it, can't find your new glasses perhaps.   :detective:

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Is the CMRI schismatic?
« Reply #68 on: November 24, 2014, 11:59:16 AM »
Quote from: Nado


Okay, so you say Schuckardt was schismatic because of his ordination/consecration, and that it extended to Fr. Chicoine for attempting to be ordained by the same man.

Do you extend being schismatic to the others who approved and participated? Why, or why not?


Schuckardt was certainly in schism because first, he left the Church - second, after he left the Church, he then started his own "Religious Community" as the CMRI website describes it.

Schuckardt, who already started his Religious Community, started to grow his Religious Community after he was ordained and consecrated by a schismatic bishop (Daniel Brown) whose episcopal lineage is traced back to a bishop that was excommunicated by Pope Pius X himself. Correct me if I'm wrong but that being the case, everyone that is ordained/consecrated from that entire lineage is also excommunicated, therefore in schism.

There is a lot more to it, but no sense in proceeding any further until the above is understood.

 

 

 

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Is the CMRI schismatic?
« Reply #69 on: November 24, 2014, 12:13:08 PM »
Quote from: MyrnaM
Quote from: Stubborn
How can someone make a profession of faith - but make it just in case the faith they held previously was in error? Are they sure about it this time?

I wouldn't be surprised if it did, but does that actually makes sense to you CMRIers?



In my way of thinking, I would surmise, that perhaps, the person felt at the time they were doing what was necessary, but now that the circuмstances changed they want to make sure they were not mistaken EVER.  It took humility to do what they did, something you might want to imitate by admitting, maybe you are wrong with your conclusion about CMRI.  

Is that a sin, there actions at the time, if not why the fuss.  If yes, explain!

While your at it, answer Nado's last note too, or did you not see it, can't find your new glasses perhaps.   :detective:


That makes no sense at all.

When a person abjures their errors and makes a profession of faith, they do it fully cognizant that in so doing, they are vowing to renounce the errors they held previously, not that they are abjuring just in case they actually were in error - that is absurd.
Perhaps the CMRI promote the abjuration of error "just in case", if they do, it could only be because they do not know what truth and error even is - that is what you are saying.

Does the below abjuration / profession sound like there is room for any doubt? If you think there is, then please point out where in the abjuration / profession of faith room is allowed for error?

Quote
"I,________________ having before me the holy
Gospels, which I touch with my hand, and knowing
that no one can be saved without that faith
which the Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Roman
Church holds, believes, and teaches, against which
I grieve that I have greatly erred, inasmuch as I
have held and believed doctrines opposed to her
teaching.

"I now with sorrow and contrition for my past
errors, profess that I believe the Holy, Catholic,
Apostolic Roman Church to be the only and true
Church established on earth by Jesus Christ, to
which I submit myself with my whole soul. I believe
all the articles of Faith that she proposes to my
belief, and I reject and condemn all that she rejects
and condemns, and I am ready to observe all that
she commands me. And I make the following profession
of Faith:

(There follows the profession.)

'And, I believe in everything else that has been
defined and declared by the sacred Canons and by
the General Councils, and particularly by the holy
Council of Trent, and delivered, defined, and declared
by the General Council of the Vatican, especially
concerning the Primacy of the Roman Pontiff, and
his infallible teaching authority.

"With a sincere heart, therefore, and with unfeigned
faith, I detest and abjure every error, heresy,
and sect opposed to the said Holy, Catholic, and
Apostolic Roman Church. So help me God, and
these His holy Gospels, which I touch with my
hand."