Immaculata-One.com

I'm interested in opinions regarding the CONTENT, not necessarily their pro-sede stance. The author(s) have a VERY strict (dare I say 'fundamentalist'?) viewpoint, but I am actually not inclined to disagree with very much, if anything, they have to say.

The problem (as I see it) is that it is VERY, VERY frightening to imagine that there are almost (or perhaps TOTALLY) NO legitimate places to receive totally traditional Roman Catholic sacraments. Even the most seemingly hard-line independent organizations are at least flirting with violating Church Law concerning jurisdiction and governance.

Again, I am NOT coming down on one side of opinion or the other regarding the content of this website. I would just like to engender some serious, thoughtful discussion with some of the more learned on this forum (of which I confess I am not).

All I ask is that comments be kept charitable to the degree to which that is possible.

Please try to keep responses to individual issues fairly simply-worded, so those of us who are not more schooled in theological language can follow the flow of the discussion.

One last thing... I'd like to ask that each commenter select ONE issue or aspect of the web site's content to remark on at a time. That way, readers can see a point of contention or agreement and your comment regarding such all in one post. Please don't comment on entire sub-headings of doctrine all at once.

Thanks... I read a lot of things I was very impressed by on their site, and I'd like to hear some of your thoughts.

One LAST, last thing

If you're familiar with the site I mentioned, if you disagree with it or have some serious problem with it, please elaborate to some degree and don't just write one sentence like:

"@#^%$ Feenyites!"

Thank you in advance. May Almighty God's Holy Catholic Church be preserved and strengthened in this most trying time of Her history.

I read up on that site about a month ago, a lot of truth, I disagree with his stance that there's no place to go for the sacraments.

I went to that website and it was pretty blunt.  If I had to categorize it, I'd say it was a "home aloner" type website.  

I am not so quick to say or even have the opinion that Pius 12 is anti,pope.  I do believe that he was validly elected.  I do see places in his life as pope that weakness was showing, BUT that does not mean that he was weak, but I wonder if his powers were diminishing, but not on his doing.  I agree with Pius XII on serious reason for periodic abstinence in marriage where I see others are very upset and mad and disagree.  

As for anti-pope, read at Vatican I the full definition of Infallibility. Infallibility is a doctrine of the church.  In order to come to this, proof of anti-pope was also defined and very well and with reason.  Without the doctrine of Infallibility we would be in more confusion than ever and the Church was able to prove herself a True Church.  It is good reading and I must say, I learnt a lot.

Also read Chapter 12 of Daniel.  The continual sacrifice will come to an end.  The eternal sacrifice goes on forever.  The continual is the Mass and the Precious Blood, the Powers are in all the sacraments. That is why the enemy had to destroy all sacraments and the means (clergy).  We are in evil times, which is no new news to anyone.  But for those who are still in the New Order, your sacraments are nothing.

I think it would be great if the owner of that website goes up against the Dimond brothers in a debate. I wonder who would win. Usually the Dimond brothers win all the debates, but they usually debate Novus Ordo post Vatican II types, so its understandable that the Dimonds would always win in such debates.

The website to which the original post of this thread links ought to be avoided as a proximate occasion of sins against the faith by the Catholics of the present day who endeavor to resist the modernist anti-Church and have difficulty dealing with the crisis assailing Holy Mother Church.

"Recusant" (a word that I kept seeing again and again on that website) is code for "home-aloner," and one of the various manifestations of the personality problems and theological errors of Mr. Matatics and those of similar mind.

The errors found on that website regarding supplied jurisdiction and how its absence from the Denzinger "demonstrates" that it is a "myth" are enough to dismiss the author(s) of the website as a rank amateur(s) who lack(s) formal training in academic research.

Citing republications offered by traditional Catholic booksellers in order to transmogrify the truths taught therein to fit one's skewed views, and re-vomiting the errors and copying-'n-pasting the garbage of such sites as those of Pete-'n-Mike Dimond, Traditio, etc., does not at all constitute serious research worthy of consideration, much less do the claims of such people amount to a theological opinion stricte dicitur.

It is also saddening to see how Our Lady is being used as propaganda for cultists who would have everyone subscribe to their "ecclesiological aseity."

Besides their conspiracy theories and the fact that they are sedes,.. what specific material on the Dimond brothers' website, www.schismatic-home-aloner.com , do you disagree with concerning the Catholic Church's teachings? Please be specific.

Their conspiracy theories, when fallacious, are self-refuting: such as when they publicly announced that the world would end after the death of John Paul II. They wrote something to the effect that the ensuing conclave would never elect a successor in the modernist anti-Church because the world would be destroyed.

Of course, they deleted all that stuff immediately afterwards...  :shocked:

Not that they are sedevacantists, but it is their version of "sedevacantism" that is to be rejected as pernicious and obscene: it ultimately holds that some high school drop-outs who pretend to be Benedictine and those who agree to their theories are the only "true Catholics" in the world.

If they were just some crazed unschooled heretics with tin-foil habits, that would be problematic enough: but these kids are arrogating to themselves the role of being "representatives" of the anti-modernist Catholic resistance, condemning everyone and everything else, whilst making money.

Hmm, profiteering from the plight of Catholics: isn't that what the ʝʊdɛօ-Masonic synagoga satanae does?

But you asked for something specific, so here is one example:

http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/why_Mary_is_not_coredeemer.php

This basically betrays Pete-'n-Mike as false Catholics who interpret Denzinger and TAN Books (because I doubt they could read Latin and cite their own translations of the original sources) as a Protestant would twist the Sacred Scriptures to fit his heresies. They are bereft of any serious academic formation (let alone a theological formation) and just cite and accommodate those texts that suit their agendae.

It seems that the Dimonds have dared to attack this doctrine of Our Lady in order to placate the Protestants who seem to be the target of their marketing campaign.

All Catholics should eschew the Pete-n'-Mike racketeering fraud as something odious to God and His Holy Church.





The doctrine of Our Lady as Co-Redemptress has been taught by the ordinary magisterium of Holy Church, having as its foundation the teaching of the Fathers regarding the Blessed Virgin Mary as the Second Eve: please consult the following thread: http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/The-Blessed-Virgin-Mary-the-Second-Eve

It must be remembered that the role of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the Mysteries of the Redemption and in the economy of salvation is absolutely singular and unique: the Divine Maternity to which she had been predestined from all eternity, and all its the concomitant and consequent glories and graces, made her a world unto herself.

The theologians of the 19th century warmly disputed the question pertinent to this discussion, so that in the theological manuals of Fr. Pohle and Fr. Scheeben, one may detect a certain suspicion on the doctrine of Our Lady as Co-Redemptress, found in the writings of Sts. Alphonsus and Louis-Marie, amongst others. This was mostly because these theologians were afraid that a sacerdotal character would be superimposed upon the Blessed Virgin Mary, who never received, nor was capable or receiving, the Sacrament of Holy Orders, as all other women are.

However, since the reign of Pope St. Pius X, who sanctioned the devotion to Our Lady as Co-Redemptress, and with the elucidation of eminent Mariologists following the definition of the dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and corporeal Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary and various key Encyclical Letters of the Sovereign Pontiffs and the introduction of new Offices in the Roman Missal and Breviary (e.g., the Immaculate Heart, the Queenship, &c.), the general consensus of the theologians regarding this matter has changed very much.

In his work The Mother of The Savior and Our Interior Life (Part II, chap. ii., art. 3; trans. Rev. Father Bernard J. Kelley; Dublin: Golden Eagle Books, Ltd., 1948), Rev. Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange expounds upon this matter most lucidly and elegantly, and represents the general consensus of both theologians and the faithful.

This is Mike - I copied the Catholic Dogma onto Immaculata-one.com.

If any of you who are posting here want to ... leave Satan's vatican-2 heretic cult and enter the Catholic Church you must make a Formal Abjuration of heresy.

I provide the Abjuration on Section 19.1 of Immaculata-one.com ... where you will also see the Dogma that Abjuration is required after your automatic excommunication for physical participation in a heretic cult such as the vatican-2 cult.

I Abjured in November 2009 and entered the Catholic Church ... it takes about 45 minutes.

- - - -

Please make the Abjuration according to the steps on Section 2.1 of the site.

Those of you who were born after 1965 have to do a conditional re-baptism (see Section 7) ... as the Catholic Church always did conditional re-baptisms on those who were perhaps baptized in a heretic cult (such as vatican-2).