Feel free to attack my mental capacity, the inner workings of my mind, my motives, as others have, or respond civilly as you typically do according to what you know God would have you do simply avoiding personal aspersions and argue to the point. Do I try your patience (because I just don’t get it or some other reason or because it appears I don’t want the truth and argue for arguments sake)? Then do what I do to others that try my patience and ignore me. Do you think I have the capacity to grasp the points you make? The let’s discuss, or let it go yourself. Does my bringing it up while admitting my ignorance on the topic somehow cause grave scandal to the mystical body of Christ? Is anybody who is reading this losing the faith?
You do not try my patience. You would be surprised if you knew me in real life. The things I deal with make this look very minor. My patience is regularly tried in the fire, so no, my friend, I am happy to continue this with you so long as it takes.
All heresy and error is grave, and all of it has consequences. Oftentimes when an error begins, it starts small, and the gravity of its consequences are not readily observable. This is why on this forum with hundreds of Catholics, very few detect the danger of Mr. Ruby's position, and most likely even he does not see the extreme danger to it.
I'm not sure how bringing it up and trying to get to the bottom of the issue can harm others as has been suggested, especially regarding my side of the controversy; particularly when considering that I have pointed out my ignorance. I know my postings won't make people getting the Sacraments under our Traditional Bishops stop going, but those who take the contrary stance give home-aloners fodder and those not sure what to do reason to stay-home and away from the Sacraments we all need. I post objections in good conscience. Decent Catholic individuals should be able to carry on a civil discussion on the topic without personal insults or simply let it go. I do not condemn the contrary position or those who hold it. I am even open to the plausibility of it. But now it should not be raised? Regarding my shutting up and never speaking to the issue again depends on various contingencies which I may not even be aware of right now such as whether the issue is brought up by someone else again or not, or if I am called out again as you have just done, or not, or if I get fully convinced one way or the other or not. I'm not sure what is wrong with discussing controversial issues here. It seems to be done quite frequently. Hopefully between good willed people who only want truth. I don't doubt you are good willed and only want truth. After reading your above post I’m not sure what you think of me. A bad willed troll perhaps. Let me know a legitimate flaw of mine and it will be duly noted. Or is the flaw the mere bringing up of the topic?
This issue may not affect Catholics partaking in the sacraments, but it could lead to other forms of harm. It is imperative that Catholics correctly understand who the hierarchy are, as only the hierarchy can receive the submission of Catholics on matters of Faith, morals, and law. There are no other authorized leaders of Catholics than the hierarchy.
In my opinion, formed from observing Catholics who attend traditional chapels either in person or on Internet forums over the years, I believe that many no longer grasp this basic truth any longer. Many Catholics now look to unauthorized leaders whether it is Bp. Fellay, the Dimond Brothers, Fr. Cekada, Bp. Kelly, Bp. Sanborn and others to form their conscience. The plain truth is that none of these men have even a grain of authority in the Church.
Their opinions on whatever matters they speak on, is only as strong as any authorities they use to support their view. They are not authorities, they, like us, must look to authorities to back themselves up, and they have not one ounce of authority to command any Catholic to do anything or listen to them.
Regarding the home-aloners, they are not all united, and there are various factions and nuances to their position. Are you ready to dismiss everything they say? Do you understand their arguments? So long as they have have the Faith, and submit themselves to the lawful authority of the Church, and have not severed communion with other Catholics, they remain Catholic.
I'm not sure why this is made into a personal thing when I'm just seeking objective facts and responses to my objections. I lay down my arms and get shot. I’m willing to agree to disagree or continue the discussion, minus any personal attacks. I thought we had an open discussion on another thread that I could get back to. Is that wrong now?
Please don't be offended, angry are hurl personal accusations (not that you have, except slightly in the opening quote on this post), not sure why you would make this something personal now, nothing personal intended but here is the article from the Four Marks whose articles are vetted by CMRI clergy which was posted by Griff Ruby:
This is not personal, it is about the truth, the Faith. Regarding CMRI's involvement in this, I would like to see proof that they support Mr. Ruby's position or believe it is a tolerable position. Hobbledehoy asked you to provide this, and to be honest, I am certain that it does not exist. If you believe otherwise, I welcome you to prove me wrong. A letter from CMRI would suffice.
Do you have a response to this apart from whether I should raise the issue or not. I want the topic to be more about jurisdiction than it is about me if possible. When we last left off you implied I needed to prove the old Novus Ordo Bishops are heretics and I replied that I do not need to prove anything than what is obvious on its face which is they are united to a false sect.
What say you?
I have read Mr. Ruby's article. He classifies only four categories of possibilities of where the hierarchy exists. His article does not address the fact that the hierarchy has not been invisible, just obscured. They are obscured from sight because they are mixed in with heretics, who they have not identified.
The solution is to trust the Church. Every point is answered already by authority. The theologians and the canonists all discuss how offices are lost, resignations, how to determine if one is a heretic, the necessity of a mission, etc.
The hierarchy exists in all of the bishops who are sent by the Church, and who still have the Faith. They are not invisible. Their names are known, and have been known throughout this crisis. They are only obscured due to their perceived adherence to the antipope. Like all Catholics who have kept the Faith throughout this crisis, however, any adherence to these heretics is not true adherence, as true adherence means submission to their teaching authority, which no Catholic who has the Faith is able to do.