Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: Capt McQuigg

Cantarella,

What is the novus ordo stance on EENS?

What is Pope Francis view of EENS?

In brief, just follow your conscience.

Quote

This affirmation [EENS] is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church.

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation. - CCC 847

CCC 847 seems to be saying that, if moved by grace, and following their conscience, a soul may achieve eternal salvation without any need of the Catholic Church.  Did I summarize that correctly?  

I think so, but remember, the dogma affirmation is not aimed at those who are ignorant through no fault of their own.

So what percentage are ignorant through no fault of their own? - maybe less than .0000000000(add a thousand more zero's)00000001%, all the rest don't know because they don't want to know - this is who it is aimed at?

I do not know what Pope Francis beliefs on EENS actually are, given that I do not have access to the Popes' internal forum. To all appearances, he is a Cushinguite as well, at least to pretend to live in harmony with the world: he is not condemning salvific invincible ignorance nor affirming the EENS dogma as was solemnly defined and believed by all during almost 2000 years. This of course, must have political and economic pressures or reasons. (no one wants to offend or hurt Jewry's sensibilities nowadays) No one denies that the Catholic Church is infiltrated. What the JEWS WANT IS A ONE WORLD RELIGION. EENS DOES NOT FIT WITH IT.

What!   You don't know???  Why is it you know the mind of everyone on this forum that does not agree with you.   :stare:

I never once claimed epikeia justifies schism, because I have never once believed that.

I realize this is an exercise in futility, but here goes.
 
You said:

It is by the virtue of epikeia that the letter of law can be broken to maintain the essential spirit of the law. The most prominent example is baptism, and the next most common is confession (in danger of death).

In your quote above, you are claiming epikeia justifies schism, or that epikeia makes schism not schism - or, most likely, you have no idea what schism even is, or what epikeia even is - either way, epikiea does not apply.

Schuckardt and his little group had priests, had the sacraments, had the Mass, God saw to it that he and his little group had what they needed to persevere in the faith, crisis or no crisis - but no, Schuckardt willingly threw that all away, this is why you cannot claim epikeia.

You can dishonestly claim epikeia, but you cannot honestly claim epikeia justifies his schism when he already had priests and the sacraments yet he willfully rejected them so that he could become a bishop - so that he could form and ordain priests  according to what his idea of what the Church is supposed to be - remember, he did all this after separating himself from the Church and through his willful separation from the priests he had feeding him and his little group.

Let me ask you, theologically and morally....

Why doesn't receiving the Sacrament of Baptism from an Old Catholic in an emergency put one in schism?

Why doesn't receiving the Sacrament of Penance from an Old Catholic in an emergency put one in schism?

BUMP.

You are not even asking the correct questions for a proper analogy. Your entire line of thinking is completely adverse to the faith, which in and of itself bespeaks of you having lost the faith, if you ever had it at all.

FYI, if there is an Old Catholic who is able to administer the sacraments in an emergency - THEN YOU DO NOT NEED TO GET ORDAINED SO THAT YOU CAN DO IT YOURSELF. Try to always remember this, it's a good thing to know.

Further more, you do not believe the NO have valid orders yet you trust that the Orders of Old Catholics, who trace their lineage back to a bishop who was personally excommunicated by Pope St. Pius X, are valid?

These are some of the reason why I said that your entire line of thinking is completely adverse to the faith. You keep scrambling to defend error, which only leads you into more error, which leads you further from the truth, which leads you further away from the faith - which will land you in hell if you don't strive with the grace of God to correct yourself - that is how it works.

Quote from: Cantarella

Quote from: MyrnaM

Quote from: Cantarella

I do not know what Pope Francis beliefs on EENS actually are, given that I do not have access to the Popes' internal forum. To all appearances, he is a Cushinguite as well, at least to pretend to live in harmony with the world: he is not condemning salvific invincible ignorance nor affirming the EENS dogma as was solemnly defined and believed by all during almost 2000 years. This of course, must have political and economic pressures or reasons. (no one wants to offend or hurt Jewry's sensibilities nowadays) No one denies that the Catholic Church is infiltrated. What the JEWS WANT IS A ONE WORLD RELIGION. EENS DOES NOT FIT WITH IT.

What!   You don't know???  Why is it you know the mind of everyone on this forum that does not agree with you.   :stare:

Well, I have not had the opportunity to ask Pope Francis if he personally believes that a "good willed" Hindu by being a "good willed" Hindu ignorant of the Catholic Faith could actually be justified, in the state of grace, a member of the Church and a heir to Heaven via last minute "BOD". That is why I said, to all appearances, he is a Cushinguite.
 
I have asked you though and your response was yes. You believe that a non-Catholic (Hindu, Muslim, Jew) can be saved through the Church while being ignorant of the Catholic Faith. There is no CMRI member who has ever said no to this question on salvific "Invincible Ignorance". However, I have never accused you or any other member here of "formal heresy". This common Modernist error may fit into the "material heresy" category but even so, I have abstained to engage in personal accusations. But as an organization, the CMRI adheres and teaches this heresy of salvific invincible ignorance, salvation by justification alone, and salvation by implicit desire but as said before, this is not the reason why they are schismatic.    

You are doing the same thing as Mabel, Myrna. Because it is evident you have no real theological arguments to debate me either, now you have been only focusing on the personal. Please keep it objective.  

As a matter of fact, I don't think I will be replying to any more of this personal posts directed to "bad Cantarella". It is a waste of time that does not edify the discussion in any way. Only posts that are actually about the topic and not the individual poster are worthy of reading and responding to.

The above bolded is a bold faced lie, I never said, Yes.  Find it!  You can't!

The rest of your note is nothing but a cop-out!

Well, then respond the question. I'm making it again. Take this opportunity to amend.

Yes or no? Don't be evasive.

Quote from: MyrnaM

Quote from: Cantarella

I do not know what Pope Francis beliefs on EENS actually are, given that I do not have access to the Popes' internal forum. To all appearances, he is a Cushinguite as well, at least to pretend to live in harmony with the world: he is not condemning salvific invincible ignorance nor affirming the EENS dogma as was solemnly defined and believed by all during almost 2000 years. This of course, must have political and economic pressures or reasons. (no one wants to offend or hurt Jewry's sensibilities nowadays) No one denies that the Catholic Church is infiltrated. What the JEWS WANT IS A ONE WORLD RELIGION. EENS DOES NOT FIT WITH IT.

What!   You don't know???  Why is it you know the mind of everyone on this forum that does not agree with you.   :stare:

Well, I have not had the opportunity to ask Pope Francis if he personally believes that a "good willed" Hindu by being a "good willed" Hindu ignorant of the Catholic Faith could actually be justified, in the state of grace, a member of the Church and a heir to Heaven via last minute "BOD". That is why I said, to all appearances, he is a Cushinguite.
 
I have asked you though and your response was yes. You believe that a non-Catholic (Hindu, Muslim, Jew) can be saved through the Church while being ignorant of the Catholic Faith. There is no CMRI member who has ever said no to this question on salvific "Invincible Ignorance". However, I have never accused you or any other member here of "formal heresy". This common Modernist error may fit into the "material heresy" category but even so, I have abstained to engage in personal accusations. But as an organization, the CMRI adheres and teaches this heresy of salvific invincible ignorance, salvation by justification alone, and salvation by implicit desire but as said before, this is not the reason why they are schismatic.    

You are doing the same thing as Mabel, Myrna. Because it is evident you have no real theological arguments to debate me either, now you have been only focusing on the personal. Please keep it objective.  

As a matter of fact, I don't think I will be replying to any more of this personal posts directed to "bad Cantarella". It is a waste of time that does not edify the discussion in any way. Only posts that are actually about the topic and not the individual poster are worthy of reading and responding to.

Have you had the opportunity to ask Bishop Pivarunas or some other member of the CMRI who can speak in an official capacity for the CMRI if the CMRI believes that a "good willed" Hindu by being a "good willed" Hindu ignorant of the Catholic Faith could actually be justified, in the state of grace, a member of the Church and a heir to Heaven via last minute "BOD"?

If not, then I would say that to be consistent you would have to hold them in the same category as the Conciliar popes.  So if you don't hold the Conciliar popes to be heretical and/or schismatic then neither should you hold the CMRI.  Correct?

What about Monsignor Fenton, Pope Pius XII, Pope St. Pius X, Pope Pius IX, Pope St. Pius V, St. Alphonsus, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Ambrose?  Are they all guilty of at least "material heresy"?  Are they schismatic?  To be consistent, you are going to have to hold all these people in the same category because they all teach the same thing about BOD.  I know if I have to make a decision between all those men and Fr. Feeney, I'm going to choose the side of the saints.

The title of this topic should be changed because this is really not a discussion about the CMRI so much as it is a discussion about whether or not Fr. Feeney's opinion about BOD is the correct opinion.  The CMRI, the SSPX, the vast majority of independent traditional priests and bishops all agree with Pope Pius XII on this issue.  I think the CMRI is in good company and being condemned by Feeneyites is probably something that they would be pleased with.

Quote from: Cantarella

Quote from: MyrnaM

Quote from: Cantarella

Quote from: MyrnaM

Quote from: Cantarella

I do not know what Pope Francis beliefs on EENS actually are, given that I do not have access to the Popes' internal forum. To all appearances, he is a Cushinguite as well, at least to pretend to live in harmony with the world: he is not condemning salvific invincible ignorance nor affirming the EENS dogma as was solemnly defined and believed by all during almost 2000 years. This of course, must have political and economic pressures or reasons. (no one wants to offend or hurt Jewry's sensibilities nowadays) No one denies that the Catholic Church is infiltrated. What the JEWS WANT IS A ONE WORLD RELIGION. EENS DOES NOT FIT WITH IT.

What!   You don't know???  Why is it you know the mind of everyone on this forum that does not agree with you.   :stare:

Well, I have not had the opportunity to ask Pope Francis if he personally believes that a "good willed" Hindu by being a "good willed" Hindu ignorant of the Catholic Faith could actually be justified, in the state of grace, a member of the Church and a heir to Heaven via last minute "BOD". That is why I said, to all appearances, he is a Cushinguite.
 
I have asked you though and your response was yes. You believe that a non-Catholic (Hindu, Muslim, Jew) can be saved through the Church while being ignorant of the Catholic Faith. There is no CMRI member who has ever said no to this question on salvific "Invincible Ignorance". However, I have never accused you or any other member here of "formal heresy". This common Modernist error may fit into the "material heresy" category but even so, I have abstained to engage in personal accusations. But as an organization, the CMRI adheres and teaches this heresy of salvific invincible ignorance, salvation by justification alone, and salvation by implicit desire but as said before, this is not the reason why they are schismatic.  

 

You are doing the same thing as Mabel, Myrna. Because it is evident you have no real theological arguments to debate me either, now you have been only focusing on the personal. Please keep it objective.  

As a matter of fact, I don't think I will be replying to any more of this personal posts directed to "bad Cantarella". It is a waste of time that does not edify the discussion in any way. Only posts that are actually about the topic and not the individual poster are worthy of reading and responding to.

The above bolded is a bold faced lie, I never said, Yes.  Find it!  You can't!

The rest of your note is nothing but a cop-out!

Well, then respond the question. I'm making it again. Take this opportunity to amend.

Yes or no? Don't be evasive.

Evasive?  It is very easy, if you die in the State of Grace, Sanctifying grace you save your soul.  Do you agree or not?   Answer the question don't be evasive.  

So your response is yes as I thought. Because you think that this good willed Hindu can actually achieve a state of grace, Sanctifying grace, while ignorant of the Catholic Faith, and thus be saved.

My response is No. This good willed Hindu cannot be in state of grace, sanctifying grace, while being ignorant of the Catholic Faith (necessary for Justification,) and therefore cannot be saved.

Quote from: Clemens Maria

Quote from: Cantarella

Quote from: MyrnaM

Quote from: Cantarella

I do not know what Pope Francis beliefs on EENS actually are, given that I do not have access to the Popes' internal forum. To all appearances, he is a Cushinguite as well, at least to pretend to live in harmony with the world: he is not condemning salvific invincible ignorance nor affirming the EENS dogma as was solemnly defined and believed by all during almost 2000 years. This of course, must have political and economic pressures or reasons. (no one wants to offend or hurt Jewry's sensibilities nowadays) No one denies that the Catholic Church is infiltrated. What the JEWS WANT IS A ONE WORLD RELIGION. EENS DOES NOT FIT WITH IT.

What!   You don't know???  Why is it you know the mind of everyone on this forum that does not agree with you.   :stare:

Well, I have not had the opportunity to ask Pope Francis if he personally believes that a "good willed" Hindu by being a "good willed" Hindu ignorant of the Catholic Faith could actually be justified, in the state of grace, a member of the Church and a heir to Heaven via last minute "BOD". That is why I said, to all appearances, he is a Cushinguite.
 
I have asked you though and your response was yes. You believe that a non-Catholic (Hindu, Muslim, Jew) can be saved through the Church while being ignorant of the Catholic Faith. There is no CMRI member who has ever said no to this question on salvific "Invincible Ignorance". However, I have never accused you or any other member here of "formal heresy". This common Modernist error may fit into the "material heresy" category but even so, I have abstained to engage in personal accusations. But as an organization, the CMRI adheres and teaches this heresy of salvific invincible ignorance, salvation by justification alone, and salvation by implicit desire but as said before, this is not the reason why they are schismatic.    

You are doing the same thing as Mabel, Myrna. Because it is evident you have no real theological arguments to debate me either, now you have been only focusing on the personal. Please keep it objective.  

As a matter of fact, I don't think I will be replying to any more of this personal posts directed to "bad Cantarella". It is a waste of time that does not edify the discussion in any way. Only posts that are actually about the topic and not the individual poster are worthy of reading and responding to.

Have you had the opportunity to ask Bishop Pivarunas or some other member of the CMRI who can speak in an official capacity for the CMRI if the CMRI believes that a "good willed" Hindu by being a "good willed" Hindu ignorant of the Catholic Faith could actually be justified, in the state of grace, a member of the Church and a heir to Heaven via last minute "BOD"?

If not, then I would say that to be consistent you would have to hold them in the same category as the Conciliar popes.  So if you don't hold the Conciliar popes to be heretical and/or schismatic then neither should you hold the CMRI.  Correct?

What about Monsignor Fenton, Pope Pius XII, Pope St. Pius X, Pope Pius IX, Pope St. Pius V, St. Alphonsus, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Ambrose?  Are they all guilty of at least "material heresy"?  Are they schismatic?  To be consistent, you are going to have to hold all these people in the same category because they all teach the same thing about BOD.  I know if I have to make a decision between all those men and Fr. Feeney, I'm going to choose the side of the saints.

The title of this topic should be changed because this is really not a discussion about the CMRI so much as it is a discussion about whether or not Fr. Feeney's opinion about BOD is the correct opinion.  The CMRI, the SSPX, the vast majority of independent traditional priests and bishops all agree with Pope Pius XII on this issue.  I think the CMRI is in good company and being condemned by Feeneyites is probably something that they would be pleased with.

The CMRI has officially published twice an article on the Salvation of Non Catholics. Perhaps Stubborn can provide the link again. This should be enough proof of where they stand, as an organization. Everyone is aware that they adhere to and teach the heretical Suprema Haec Sacra. There is no question about that.

As for the self proclaimed bishop Piravunas, I don't know what his personal stand on EENS is, therefore I have never said he is a heretic. What I said is that he does not have jurisdiction and therefore cannot claim real Apostolic Sucession which requires communion with the Pope even if his doubious orders turn out to be valid. Therefore the CMRI is not part of the Catholic Church, lacking one of the marks.

However this is not the topic of this thread. For the thousand time, the reason why the CMRI is schismatic is not their liberal interpretation of EENS, but sedevacantism or refusal to be in communion to the Bishop of Rome.

By the way none of those Popes and saints you named believe in the pelagian version of EENS that the CMRI promotes. All of them held that knowledge of the Catholic Faith is necessary for salvation.

The article mentioned in bold is in the library right here on this forum:

http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=26486&f=16&min=0&num=5

Why not read it Cantarella, you might learn something TRUE.