I now know that you are not a dogmatic sedevacantist.
Do you believe that there are
Catholics in the Novus Ordo who pray to John Paul II?
The only thing that my words should convey to you is that I do not generally presume anybody to be Catholic.
To be specific, I see that you hold the correct position of sedevacante, without which you would not be Catholic, not be united to Christ as one of His members.
As for the remainder of your beliefs, which either make or break your Catholicity, I have seen no profession one way or the other, thus have refrained from coming to any conclusion at all.
You are or you aren't Catholic, and I simply have no way of knowing (unless I scour your forum posts, but why on earth would I do that?).
What you are doing CM is entirely unCatholic. Nowhere does the Church, or the Saints, say that you should, by default, consider people who profess to be Catholic, to be non-Catholic until you have heard enough of their beliefs. That is an unCatholic invention. Jansenistic non-sense. You won't find anything but the opposite of that in Church history, teaching and practice. Your mind-frame on this opposes Scripture and the Saints who believed heartily people were Catholic who said they were, and who still believed people were Catholic even when they per chance were mistaken on something doctrinal. Martin Luther was considered a Catholic right up until his final and official condemnation by Rome. You entirely ignore the whole concept of pertinacity and how it is only determined by opposition to living Church authority alone. To find what you think is an opposing Church quote to what someone believes doesn't make one pertinacious and a non-Catholic.
All invention. Novelty. Modernists love that sort of thing.
Luther was called a heretic by members of the clergy long before he was excommunicated.
You entirely ignore the whole concept of pertinacity and how it is only determined by opposition to living Church authority alone.
So a person can be in a false sect, and as long as he think they are Catholic, then even if the sect is full of heresies and is NOT the Catholic Church, he is still a Catholic while adhering to it, as long as he does not oppose the living Church authority? And by living authority, you mean the hierarchy, priests and bishops, correct? And that unless such a person were to be admonished by the authoritative clergy, we could never know who is pertinacious and who isn't? Do you believe that layman may never admonish others? That a person may not be admonished by salutary precepts? Also please present to me the Catholic teaching which you believe defines pertinacity.
Thank you.
To find what you think is an opposing Church quote to what someone believes doesn't make one pertinacious and a non-Catholic.
Correct. A person may be a Catholic while believing a material heresy. Certain dogmas, however, must be know by all for them to be said to hold the Catholic Faith and in the way of salvation, and I believe you know which dogmas those are. (cf. Athanasian Creed)
All invention. Novelty. Modernists love that sort of thing.
A heretic has no authority or even membership in the Catholic Church, so how can a person who adheres to a heretical religious superior be in the Catholic Church? Such a person is outside the pale of the Church and cannot be saved (cf.
Mirari Vos,
Graves Ac Diuturnae)
He is in a sect. This is not novelty, unless you accuse Pope Gregory XVI and Pope Pius IX of inventing novelties in the two encyclicals I just mentioned.
Mirari Vos[/i]]Now We consider another abundant source of the evils with which the Church is afflicted at present: indifferentism. This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained.
Is the Novus Ordo the Catholic religion???
Surely, in so clear a matter, you will drive this deadly error far from the people committed to your care. With the admonition of the apostle that "there is one God, one faith, one baptism" 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," 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."
Let them hear Jerome who, while the Church was torn into three parts by schism, tells us that whenever someone tried to persuade him to join his group he always exclaimed: "He who is for the See of Peter is for me." A schismatic flatters himself falsely if he asserts that he, too, has been washed in the waters of regeneration. Indeed Augustine would reply to such a man: "The branch has the same form when it has been cut off from the vine; but of what profit for it is the form, if it does not live from the root?"
Who is a schismatic but he who refuses communion with or subjection to the Roman Pontiff and those Catholics who profess subjection to him?
Graves Ac Diuturnae[/i]]In order to spread their teachings more widely, We know that some of them have been appointed to teach sacred theology in the University of Bern, hoping to be able in this way to gain new followers from the Catholic youth for their wicked faction. However, We have already reproved and condemned this deplorable sect which has produced from the old store of the heretics so many errors opposed to the principal tenets of the Catholic faith. This sect overthrows the foundations of the Catholic religion, shamelessly rejects the dogmatic definitions of the Ecuмenical Vatican Council, and devotes itself to the ruin of souls in so many ways. We have decreed and declared in Our letter of 21 November 1873 that those unfortunate men who belong to, adhere to, and support that sect should be considered as schismatics and separated from communion with the Church.
He calls them unfortunate, not pertinacious, and
schismatic.
We think it is Our duty to repeat this public declaration now and to request you to preserve the unity of faith among your faithful by every possible means in accordance with your eminent zeal and your renowned virtue. For you have given notable examples of this virtue in bearing tribulations for the cause of God. You should remind them to beware of these treacherous enemies of the flock of Christ and their poisoned foods. They should totally shun their religious celebrations, their buildings, and their chairs of pestilence which they have with impunity established to transmit the sacred teachings. They should shun their writings and all contact with them. They should not have any dealings or meetings with usurping priests and apostates from the faith who dare to exercise the duties of an ecclesiastical minister without possessing a legitimate mission or any jurisdiction. They should avoid them as strangers and thieves who come only to steal, slay, and destroy. For the Church's children should consider the proper action to preserve the most precious treasure of faith, without which it is impossible to please God, as well as action calculated to achieve the goal of faith, that is the salvation of their souls, by following the straight road of justice.
And you would tell me to presume that everyone is a Catholic who claims to be, especially in this age of the
Great APOSTASY, when such necessary dogmas as Christ's Divinity, for example, are explicitly denied by many claiming to be Catholics?
No. The prudent course is to prove all things and hold to that which is good, to test the spirits, and before uniting in spiritual matters with others, discuss the Faith with them and see if they truly hold it whole and inviolate.
Anybody who refuses to answer questions about what they believe has something to hide, and that is not the Catholic way. It would not be unjust to withhold communion with a person who refused to answer such questions.
If you disagree, you better have a good argument, because the Church certainly seems to teach otherwise.