Ambrose, you completely ignored the essential points.

The Church is a body consisting of the same supernatural faith.

The SSPX believes that Francis is in that body and the CMRI believes that the SSPX is in that body - what a mess.

You don't know for certain that the entire Catholic world professed that Paul VI was pope.

And another point, the SSPX wasn't even authorized by the Catholic Church. Neither was the CMRI for that matter.

I have never noticed Ambrose ignoring essential points.  The entire Catholic world did think he was Pope including the few remaining traditional Bishops, perhaps one or two had doubts.  I know Monsignor Fenton was wondering what in the heck was going on when he was on the V2 commission.  Could you accept this if he said 1965 before V2 ended?  But generally speaking, almost without exception the whole Catholic world accepted, the worst anti-Pope in history as being a valid Pope.  He hadn't destroyed the sacraments or completely destroyed the Mass yet but he was indeed a false Pope and the most destructive in history.

Now you say that the SSPX and CMRI was not authorized by the Catholic Church.  Does this mean you believe the Novus Ordo is the Catholic Church?  If not, what is your point?  We should stay home?

As soon as Mike Cain of Daily Catholic announced on Twitter that his wife died Father Cekeda swooped in showing where spiritual bouquets could be bought.  I'm supposing the condolences for Mike's loss was done in private.   It is heartening to see how concerned Father was for Cyndi's soul, no doubt the spiritual bouquets were of infinite value.  None of us are all bad.  

BTW - Mike could use some help.  The funeral costs are killing him.  Death should be free shouldn't it?  Where does all our tax money go?  Basic burials without all the extra stuff they use to boost the price should not cost that much.  

http://www.dailycatholic.org/issue/14Jun/index.htm

     Again, I ask your indulgence in my continuing plea for your charity. As I indicated in the past editions, I ask your prayers and support since we are definitely in the red in endeavoring to somehow pay our just debts on past medical expenses, not to mention my bride Cyndi's funeral costs, where the aggregate has now reached over $7,000. and climbing because of late charges. I ask your help in remembering Cyndi by donating whatever you can afford to help alleviate the debts she accrued through no fault of her own. I humbly ask you to open your heart to Cyndi's Angels.

 In her memory, and to help cover the funeral costs as well as past medical expenses she incurred over her many years of illness and the fact that the $515.00 she received monthly in Social Security benefits she had paid into over the years stopped with her death, and now I'll have that much less coming in just to be able to pay the monthly bills and mortgage, I have no choice but to humbly and respectfully request donations to Cyndi's Angels, a bonafide non-profit arm of SANCTUS and the DailyCatholic. Just earmark in the comments section of your donation that it is to go to Cyndi's Angels. We are presently over $7,500.00 in the red and, with interest rates and late charge, that climbs rapidly.

   In addition, as a daily reader (Cyndi had just been reading reflections on Passion Week and the liturgy the night before she passed) of the renowned Benedictine Abbot Dom Prosper Gueranger's masterpiece 15-volume The Liturgical Year, she specifically asked in her will to have Thirty Gregorian Masses said for her soul. It was her only request. Therefore, I need to raise an additional $750.00 to cover those thirty Masses said consecutively by one priest exclusively over a month's time. It was Cyndi's only written request, but it meant the world to her in realizing how vital the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is to a soul in reaching Heaven sooner, rather than later. And, if she's already in Heaven, as I truly believe for the way she lived her Faith, than those Masses will go to another needy soul in Purgatory.

or you can send your tax-deductible contribution (check, cash or M.0.) by mail to:

Cyndi's Angels
% SANCTUS/DailyCatholic
2750 Wheatstone #111
San Diego, CA 92111

We thank you in advance for your generosity to remember Cyndi as well as helping us keep this apostolate growing and bringing the truths of the holy Catholic Faith to more souls so lost in the Great Apostasy caused by the counterfeit church of conciliarism. Those giving $100.00 or more will receive a personal reply for your tax records. May our Lord and our Lady richly bless you for your charity.

    You can contribute by either clicking on the button to the right above or you may send a check of any amount you choose to Cyndi's Angels % SANCTUS, 2750 Wheatstone #111, San Diego, CA 92111. We thank you in advance for your caring and sharing, and the kind notes that have been flooding in for this true victim soul who is finally free of suffering, having completed her mission on earth with the salutation of our Lord in St. Matthew 25: 21,"Well done, good and faithful servant."

Here is a worthy cause with no agenda's.  Mike is not in this thing for the profit.  He doesn't profit in a worldly sense.  He can't even break even.  Mike, CMRI and good independent Priests are worthy causes or places to send your 10% or whatever you donate to worthy charities each year.  Political things should be off the radar.  We are not going to change the world through politics.  Good solid Catholics in word and action clergy and people like Mike Cain are most worthy.

Quote from: Hermenegild

Quote from: Ambrose

Quote from: Hermenegild

Quote from: Ambrose

Quote from: Hermenegild

Isn't the CMRI in communion with the SSPX?

Yes.

Catholics are required by divine law to remain in communion with other Catholics.  To do otherwise is to fall into schism.

That doesn't make sense. The SSPX are in communion with Francis and the other heretics of the modernist hierarchy.

That would put the CMRI in communion with Francis and the other heretics of the modernist hierarchy as well.

To remain in communion with an undeclared heretic, if one is unsure of his status, is not a schismatic act.  

The voice of authority has not yet spoken, the matter remains authoritatively unresolved.  

A question for you:  which undeclared heretic was the entire Catholic world in communion with in 1966?

In 1966 most Catholics were certain of the popes status. If fact, the SSPX is also certain of the pope's status today.

That doesn't change the fact that the CMRI are in communion with the SSPX and the SSPX are in communion with Francis and the other heretics of the modernist hierarchy. Therefore, the CMRI are in communion with Francis and the other heretics of the modernist hierarchy.

The Church is one body and one faith.

What do you mean when you say "in communion with".  Ambrose is giving you the technically sound response but you both might be talking about two different things.  CMRI is not affiliated with SSPX and is not in union with Francis.

LoT,  

You are correct, the CMRI and SSPX are in no way affiliated, and to the best of my knowledge do not even have any regular contact with each other, maybe even none at all.

But, this does not appear to be Hermenegild's point.  The CMRI along with every Catholic is duty bound under Divine law to remain in communion with other Catholics.  To sever communion with other Catholics is a schismatic act.  

Hermengild appears to be arguing that "sedevacantists" must sever themselves from those who still profess the Catholic Faith, but erroneously adhere to the antipope.  

Quote

The SSPV greatly scandalized a friend of mine, and others that knew how they treated my friend, he was a potential convert that knew more about the faith than many Catholics, but he got in alot of trouble with them for taping their sermons and putting them online. They wanted to charge for them. He could not believe this. He could not understand why the truth could not be spread for free. They also put off baptizing him and he still has not been baptized yet over four years later. He came from a Moorman background. Also refusing to baptize an infant because the daddy writes for Daily Catholic and The Four Marks is nothing to sneeze at. I was not surprised, I was hoping the baptism could be done before they found out, but you should see how scandalized my wife was. Good Catholics or potential Catholics can lose the faith over these things. Unrepentant Priests guilty of the above will burn in Hell for it.

I am sorry for the scandal caused to your friend and your wife.  These stories are horrible and these events should never have happened.  

I know many stories myself regarding dangerous groups and priests.  Catholics must be very careful who they place their trust in during these times, especially those with children.

Some Catholics may even have to deny themselves a place to go to mass and receive the sacraments to shield their families from scandal.  Also, for those with children, extreme caution should be used, as the place where you go to mass, will often be the place your children will pursue their vocation.  

IMO, the only group that I would ever entrust a child's vocation with at this time in Church history is CMRI.  

Children especially.  You bet!!!  Single Catholics and those who can keep a low profile could go IMO if it is their only option, so long as they are not poisened by the sermons, and admittedly, as far as I know, the sermons at SSPV and SGG are not poisonous.  

Quote from: Hermenegild

Ambrose, you completely ignored the essential points.

The Church is a body consisting of the same supernatural faith.

The SSPX believes that Francis is in that body and the CMRI believes that the SSPX is in that body - what a mess.

You don't know for certain that the entire Catholic world professed that Paul VI was pope.

And another point, the SSPX wasn't even authorized by the Catholic Church. Neither was the CMRI for that matter.

I am not ignoring your points, I just don't think you have thought this through.  Let's take Francis out of the equation for a minute and stick with principles.

None of the post Vatican II heretics have been authoritatively judged by the Church.  This means that any judgment about them or whether they have an office in the Church is an unauthoritative private judgment of individual Catholics.  

Many of us want to give a dope slap to the SSPX for not seeing the obvious, but that is beside the point.  Catholics are bound to the authoritative judgments of the Holy See, not private individuals, no matter how obvious it may be.  

The SSPX as a group has not defected from the Faith.  If you think otherwise, state the heresy that they have adopted, along with proof from their own words.

Regarding CMRI and SSPX, they are the only two large traditional groups that have any canonical claim.  The CMRI was given canonical approval in 1969, by a legitimate diocesan bishop, and the SSPX in 1970, although the SSPX was only approved for a six year experimental basis.

Well stated Ambrose.  Do you post on Bellarmine forums?  I'd be curious to know your name if you do.  You can PM me if you like.

Again, I'm saying Cekada plays fast and loose with the facts

I don't doubt this for a second.  I was a bit scandalized when I realized this some years ago.  I believe his main focus is self-serving.  I hope to God I am wrong.  Pray for him.  Pray for me.  I really looked up to him for some years.  

Would you agree that he in fact does have some good sound orthodox articles that are informative?  

Lover of Truth - I appreciate you sticking your neck out there defending Cekada about the Shiavo case.  I agree with you/Cekada.

Quote from: 2Vermont

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: Ambrose

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: Ambrose

Footnote 71 used to support Fr. Cekada's assertion ...

I'm not sure this is an actual decision made by the Holy Office.

He cited his source.  It comes from a respected pre-Conciliar canonist.  It appears to me to be a quote from the Holy Office or a description of the decision from Fr. Regatillo.

Fr. Regatillo is either quoting from the decision, or is attesting to the fact of the decision of the Holy Office.  Are you arguing that he misrepresented or failed to understand the decision of the Holy Office?  If so, what evidence are you relying on?

The fact is that it isn't an actual decision of the Holy Office, and Cekada represents it as "a final nail in the coffin," which if it was, would be all that is needed. In other words, I'm saying Cekada plays fast and loose with the facts, including the relating of the entire question to a single priest from a "backwater diocese," when it appears to be a letter written to Fr. Dolan, and signed by nine priests with whom he had relatively close ties.

Do you have proof that it isn't an actual decision of the Holy Office?

I think the reference itself doesn't cite any specific actual decision of the Holy Office.

Again, I'm saying Cekada plays fast and loose with the facts, including the relating of the entire question to a single priest from a "backwater diocese," when it appears to be a letter written to Fr. Dolan, and signed by nine priests with whom he had relatively close ties.

It appears to be a letter written to Fr. Dolan?  If you want to  assert that Fr Cekada is lying about the decision of the Holy Office (aka playing fast and loose with the facts), you had better prove it.  Otherwise, you're no better.