Author Topic: Is the CMRI schismatic? (Read 46228 times)

MyrnaM · « **Reply #180 on:** December 09, 2014, 06:10:47 PM »

Quote from: Cantarella

Ah ha!. It is not easy, but it IS possible according to Myrna.

However Our Lord said:

"I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.

Ah ha! to you! Sounds like you deny or haven't thought it out, that everyone in Sanctifying grace, and I mean everyone has in their soul this said grace because of the merits of Jesus Christ, through the precious BLOOD that God the Father WILLED TO BE APPEASED BY.

<<<And the Catholic Church declared infallibly:>>>> NOT TO JUDGE THE SOUL OF OTHERS

Binechi · « **Reply #181 on:** December 09, 2014, 08:14:44 PM »

Cantarella....In following this discussion , I fail to see the word , "Anti-Pope" used. Is this Person occupying the Chair considered and "Anti pope". If not how do you describe the position he now holds, verses an "Anti-Pope ?

Second Q. You mentioned in few pages Back on this thread that , "I no longer attend the SSPX Chapels", Would you elaborate on where you practice your Religion , and what Church you might attend at this time ..

Cantarella · « **Reply #182 on:** December 09, 2014, 08:43:12 PM »

Quote from: Director

Cantarella....In following this discussion , I fail to see the word , "Anti-Pope" used. Is this Person occupying the Chair considered and "Anti pope". If not how do you describe the position he now holds, verses an "Anti-Pope ?

Second Q. You mentioned in few pages Back on this thread that , "I no longer attend the SSPX Chapels", Would you elaborate on where you practice your Religion , and what Church you might attend at this time ..

1. Pope Francis has not been declared an Anti-Pope by competent authority. I would describe his apparent position as progressive, political correct, "Cushinguite", which most sedevacantists CMRI happen to be as well.

2. Byzantine Eastern Rite

Clemens Maria · « **Reply #183 on:** December 09, 2014, 08:43:30 PM »

Can the Feeneyites site any theology manual or any other Catholic source prior to 1940 which specifically condemns the notion of Baptism of Desire and/or Baptism of Blood? I would think that someone would have complained about Pope Pius IX or Pope St. Pius X teaching heresy. But as far as I know Fr. Feeney was the first dissenter from this teaching in all of the Church's history.

Siting the EENS formula is not going to cut it because no traditional Catholic has ever objected to that. It is only the novel teaching of Fr. Feeney concerning BOD/BOB that Catholics are condemning. You are going to have to find a Catholic source for the specific condemnation of BOD. I think I'm familiar enough with Fr. Feeney to know that this type of source does not exist. If it did exist I'm sure it would have been pushed front and center by the Feeneyites.

Cantarella · « **Reply #184 on:** December 09, 2014, 08:54:44 PM »

Quote from: Clemens Maria

Can the Feeneyites site any theology manual or any other Catholic source prior to 1940 which specifically condemns the notion of Baptism of Desire and/or Baptism of Blood? I would think that someone would have complained about Pope Pius IX or Pope St. Pius X teaching heresy. But as far as I know Fr. Feeney was the first dissenter from this teaching in all of the Church's history.

Siting the EENS formula is not going to cut it because no traditional Catholic has ever objected to that. It is only the novel teaching of Fr. Feeney concerning BOD/BOB that Catholics are condemning. You are going to have to find a Catholic source for the specific condemnation of BOD. I think I'm familiar enough with Fr. Feeney to know that this type of source does not exist. If it did exist I'm sure it would have been pushed front and center by the Feeneyites.

Authentic Feeneyites do not "condemn" Baptism of Desire of Baptism of Blood as a heresy. You may have a distorted version of Feeneyism, Dimonds,- style. At SBC (founded by Fr. Feeney himself), the belief is that Baptism of Desire is NOT a dogma and mots importantly, that nobody can be saved without the Catholic Faith. BOD historically has been a theological speculation concerning pious catechumens that already held the Catholic Faith but died before the water Sacrament.

Read the Neumann's Catechism, 1884 (written by a Saint, St. John Neumann). Not a mention of Baptism of Desire.

Cantarella · « **Reply #185 on:** December 09, 2014, 09:03:23 PM »

Double Post

Cantarella · « **Reply #186 on:** December 09, 2014, 09:05:04 PM »

Quote from: Clemens Maria

I think I'm familiar enough with Fr. Feeney to know that this type of source does not exist.

If you are still asking this type of questions, then it is because you are not familiar enough with Fr. Feeney.

Cantarella · « **Reply #187 on:** December 09, 2014, 09:08:49 PM »

Quote from: MyrnaM

Quote from: Cantarella
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.

Thanks for the resource.

Cantarella · « **Reply #188 on:** December 09, 2014, 09:16:47 PM »

From the article:

Quote from: CMRI

In the face of this, must one belief that anyone, without exception, that does not belong officially to the Church by means of the reception of Baptism and the public profession of the Faith is damned? Not at all!

Yet Holy Mother Church says:

Quote

"We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff." (Pope Boniface VIII, in the bull, Unam Sanctam, 1302)

"The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes, and teaches, that none of those who are not within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but Jews, heretics and schismatics, can ever be partakers of eternal life, but are to go into the eternal fire 'prepared for the devil, and his angels' (Mt. 25:41)., unless before the close of their lives they shall have entered into that Church; also that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is such that the Church's sacraments avail only those abiding in that Church, and that fasts, almsdeeds, and other works of piety which play their part in the Christian combat are in her alone productive of eternal rewards; moreover, that no one, no matter what alms he may have given, not even if he were to shed his blood for Christ's sake, can be saved unless he abide in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." (Mansi, Concilia, xxxi, 1739; Pope Eugene IV, in the bull, Cantate Domino, 1441).

And

The Catholic Faith is necessary for salvation!

Quote

Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Nov. 18, 1302, ex cathedra said: “With Faith urging us we are forced to believe and to hold the one, holy, Catholic Church and that, apostolic, and we firmly believe and simply confess this Church outside of which there is no salvation nor remission of sin… Furthermore, we declare, say, define, and proclaim to every human creature that they by absolute necessity for salvation are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff.”

Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, Decree # 30, 1311-1312, ex cathedra [/u]said:

“Since however there is for both regulars and seculars, for superiors and subjects, for exempt and non-exempt, one universal Church, outside of which there is no salvation, for all of whom there is one Lord, one faith, and one baptism…”

Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (# 13), Aug. 15, 1832: “With the admonition of the apostle, that ‘there is one God, one faith, one baptism’ (Eph. 4:5), may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that ‘those who are not with Christ are against Him,’ (Lk. 11:23) and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore, ‘without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate (Athanasian Creed).”

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, The Athanasian Creed, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra:

“Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.” (Decrees of the Ecuмenical Councils, Vol. 1, pp. 550-553; Denzinger 39-40.)

Pope Gregory XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio (# 2), May 27, 1832:“Finally some of these misguided people attempt to persuade themselves and others that men are not saved only in the Catholic religion, but that even heretics may attain eternal life.”

Cantarella · « **Reply #189 on:** December 09, 2014, 09:24:00 PM »

From the article:

Quote from: CMRI

Necessary conditions that must be fulfilled for non-Catholics to be part of the Soul of the Church:...Invincible Ignorance...

The Soul of the Church is the Holy Ghost, but the Church has a visible body. The Soul of the Church is not composed of non-Catholics!

The emerging conclusion from this is that affiliation with the Church can be in desire and invisible, or why not?... even unconscious!. Therefore, the good willed Hindu can actually be a member of the Church without knowing it! Liberalism and false "traditionalism" in the personification of the CMRI are both faces of the same liberal progressive mask. Rahner would be very proud.

Invisible Church Theory Condemned

Quote from: Pius XII

The Church is visible because she has a body. Therefore they are straying from divine truth who imagine the Church to be something which can neither be touched or seen, something merely "spiritual" as they say, a Church in which many Christian communities, although separated from one another by faith, could be joined by some kind of bond invisible to the senses, How grievously are they mistaken who have imagined a hidden and invisible Church according to their own devices!

Quote from: Leo XIII

Those who arbitrary conjure up and picture to themselves a hidden and invisible Church are in grievous and pernicious error.

Mabel · « **Reply #190 on:** December 09, 2014, 09:46:52 PM »

Quote from: Director

Cantarella....In following this discussion , I fail to see the word , "Anti-Pope" used. Is this Person occupying the Chair considered and "Anti pope". If not how do you describe the position he now holds, verses an "Anti-Pope ?

Second Q. You mentioned in few pages Back on this thread that , "I no longer attend the SSPX Chapels", Would you elaborate on where you practice your Religion , and what Church you might attend at this time ..

I thought she attended the FSSP and the Eastern Rite. Ask her if she still attends at the FSSP.

It's funny though because many Sedevacantists also attend the Eastern rites, maybe I've even sat next to her at Divine Liturgy, who knows?

(I myself, attend CMRI, Ukrainian rite, Independent, and SSPX, depending on what is necessary)

Cantarella · « **Reply #191 on:** December 09, 2014, 09:58:05 PM »

Quote from: Mabel

Quote from: Director
Cantarella....In following this discussion , I fail to see the word , "Anti-Pope" used. Is this Person occupying the Chair considered and "Anti pope". If not how do you describe the position he now holds, verses an "Anti-Pope ?

Second Q. You mentioned in few pages Back on this thread that , "I no longer attend the SSPX Chapels", Would you elaborate on where you practice your Religion , and what Church you might attend at this time ..

I thought she attended the FSSP and the Eastern Rite. Ask her if she still attends at the FSSP.

It's funny though because many Sedevacantists also attend the Eastern rites, maybe I've even sat next to her at Divine Liturgy, who knows?

(I myself, attend CMRI, Ukrainian rite, Independent, and SSPX, depending on what is necessary)

You thought so wrong. I regularly attend Divine Liturgy at a Byzantine Eastern Rite Chapel now; but I have many SSPX friends still because I used to attend a SSPX Chapel before. I would attend a FSSP Mass without a problem though, if the priest is really orthodox, and in case of necessity.

If were a sedevacantist, I would be consistent and stay home alone on Sundays. It would be more true to my word.

Cantarella · « **Reply #192 on:** December 09, 2014, 10:28:13 PM »

Quote from: Cantarella

Quote from: Mabel
Quote from: Director
Cantarella....In following this discussion , I fail to see the word , "Anti-Pope" used. Is this Person occupying the Chair considered and "Anti pope". If not how do you describe the position he now holds, verses an "Anti-Pope ?

Second Q. You mentioned in few pages Back on this thread that , "I no longer attend the SSPX Chapels", Would you elaborate on where you practice your Religion , and what Church you might attend at this time ..

I thought she attended the FSSP and the Eastern Rite. Ask her if she still attends at the FSSP.

It's funny though because many Sedevacantists also attend the Eastern rites, maybe I've even sat next to her at Divine Liturgy, who knows?

(I myself, attend CMRI, Ukrainian rite, Independent, and SSPX, depending on what is necessary)

You thought so wrong. I regularly attend Divine Liturgy at a Byzantine Eastern Rite Chapel now; but I have many SSPX friends still because I used to attend a SSPX Chapel before. I would attend a FSSP Mass without a problem though, if the priest is really orthodox, and in case of necessity.

If were a sedevacantist, I would be consistent and stay home alone on Sundays. It would be more true to my word.

And of course if I was so fortunate to live in or around New Hampshire (or whenever I go to), then I attend Mass at Saint Benedict Center. :smile:

Stubborn · « **Reply #193 on:** December 10, 2014, 04:47:29 AM »

Quote from: MyrnaM

Quote from: Cantarella

Ah ha!. It is not easy, but it IS possible according to Myrna.

However Our Lord said:

"I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.

Ah ha! to you! Sounds like you deny or haven't thought it out, that everyone in Sanctifying grace, and I mean everyone has in their soul this said grace because of the merits of Jesus Christ, through the precious BLOOD that God the Father WILLED TO BE APPEASED BY.

<<<And the Catholic Church declared infallibly:>>>> NOT TO JUDGE THE SOUL OF OTHERS

In his Bull Unam Sanctam, Pope Boniface VIII declared to the Universal Church that "We believe in her firmly and we confess with simplicity that outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins."

So contrary to the above de fide decree, you appear to believe like the protestants that "everyone has in their soul this said grace because of the merits of Jesus Christ" when it is de fide that outside the Church there is no forgiveness of sins.

Please explain how anyone outside the Church can possibly be in the state of sanctifying grace without the forgiveness of sins?

It is not us who judge the souls of others by adhering to the de fide teaching, rather those who claim sanctifying grace can be had outside the Church so that those who die outside the Church go to heaven are guilty of judging that non-Catholics go, or have a chance of going to heaven.

Stubborn · « **Reply #194 on:** December 10, 2014, 02:33:17 PM »

Quote from: Nado

Stubborn, you delayed, and then evaded answering the questions, and then you pretend to answer them. Just like a modernist. You didn't really answer.

The Church says that if a Catholic in danger of death receives the Sacrament of Baptism, and the Sacrament of Penance, from the hands of a valid Old Catholic bishop, the Catholic does well. It doesn't make schism not schism. It simply means the Catholic does a good and necessary thing.

This is what the Church teaches.

You tell us, philosophically, why would receiving the Sacrament of Holy Orders in an emergency from that same bishop, make the recipient in schism?

I knew replying to you was an exercise in futility. Now read below and try to think like a Catholic. Understand that the way you are thinking now will certainly lead you to perdition.

First off, baptism may be administered by literally anyone -but ONLY if the danger of death is imminent, otherwise, the infant MUST be baptized by a Catholic priest.

Second off, when it comes to going to a schismatic Old Catholic for the sacrament of Penance, you are NOT permitted to do any such a thing, if you do, you commit sacrilege! First off, the Old Catholics do not say the proper words of absolution, second off, you are better of trusting a V2 ordained priest than one officially excommunicated by Pope Pius X to have valid orders.

In your bewildered state, what you are doing is referencing Canon 844, the NO new code of canon law which is in place for the purpose of promoting false ecuмenism.
As the SSPX puts it, "This ecuмenism condemned by Catholic morality and law, now goes so far as to permit the reception of the Sacraments of Penance, Holy Eucharist and Extreme Unction from ‘non-Catholic ministers’ (canon 844, CIC 1983), and encourages ‘ecuмenical hospitality’ by authorizing Catholic ministers to give the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist to non-Catholics….”

Third off, the only time we are permitted (not encouraged) to accept another sacrament from an Old Catholic or other schismatic priest is the sacrament of Extreme Unction and even then, ONLY IF the danger our of death is imminent and there is no Catholic priest available - not under any other circuмstance is it permitted.

Fourth off, ordinations and consecrations from schismatics Old Catholic bishops are not permitted, not ever, not under any circuмstances, not even in your wildest hallucinations are they ever permitted. I already told you why you cannot plead epikeia.........
"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."

Now try to start thinking like a Roman Catholic and stop trying to defend schism. Catholics do not defend schism, schismatics defend schism!