CMRI Questions and Discussion

  • Thread starter Thread starter MMLJ
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
MMLJ said:
If possible could you give the reason for this change by Pope John XXII? Since there must be a good reason why the CMRI considers the '62 missal as heretical.

Which prayers were suppressed and how is St.Joseph added to the canon?
Click to expand...
The CMRI believes that the Papacy has been vacant since the death of Ven. Pius XII in 1958, so therefore the Mass as promulgated in 1962 by Bl. John XXIII is heretical and invalid. I could not find the article I previously read by the CMRI that states the other reasons why they do not use the 1962 Missal, but I did find an article published by the Society of St. Pius V who have a similiar position as regarding the 1962 changes. They left the SSPX because Archbishop Lefebvre required that they only celebrate Mass using the 62 Missal, and not the earlier Missal of Ven. Pius XII. Here is the article:

sspv.net/flash_paper/articles/002_mass_changes.swf

It would be beneficial to note that the SSPV regards the 62 Missal as a whole another Mass. They regard the changes made by Pius XII as valid but not those of John XXIII. They regard the Pius XII Mass as the Mass of St. Pius X.
 
bpbasilphx said:
CMRI’s major error is that they are Sedevacantists, and will not allow any other view to be expressed or taught, which is why over a dozen of their sisters left to be reconciled fully with the Catholic Church.

dioceseofspokane.org/Communications/IR_2007/ir070507/sisters.htm
Click to expand...
This is awesome! One thing in the article struck me and it is important to note as even some Catholics are confused on this point.

It said…

The Sisters’ questioning was intensified with study. They found, contrary to what they had been taught, that the church in Rome has not deviated from its teaching, but that its doctrines remain the same today and throughout the ages.

Those outside of the Church and even some who claim to be inside it say that Teachings changed but as these sisters can attest to, nothing has changed.
 
SemperFidelis said:
The CMRI believes that the Papacy has been vacant since the death of Ven. Pius XII in 1958, so therefore the Mass as promulgated in 1962 by Bl. John XXIII is heretical and invalid. I could not find the article I previously read by the CMRI that states the other reasons why they do not use the 1962 Missal, but I did find an article published by the Society of St. Pius V who have a similiar position as regarding the 1962 changes. They left the SSPX because Archbishop Lefebvre required that they only celebrate Mass using the 62 Missal, and not the earlier Missal of Ven. Pius XII. Here is the article:

sspv.net/flash_paper/articles/002_mass_changes.swf

It would be beneficial to note that the SSPV regards the 62 Missal as a whole another Mass. They regard the changes made by Pius XII as valid but not those of John XXIII. They regard the Pius XII Mass as the Mass of St. Pius X.
Click to expand...
No the SSPV do not fully regard all the changes made by Pius XII to be valid even though they accept him as the Pope. They reject all the latter changes of his pontificate especially those around 1954/55 and after.

I’ve even heard (I emphasize the hearsay nature) that some of the priests don’t observe the Queenship of BVM (1954) or say the new Mass of the Assumption. That, to me, is just being silly.
 
AJV said:
No the SSPV do not fully regard all the changes made by Pius XII to be valid even though they accept him as the Pope. They reject all the latter changes of his pontificate especially those around 1954/55 and after.

I’ve even heard (I emphasize the hearsay nature) that some of the priests don’t observe the Queenship of BVM (1954) or say the new Mass of the Assumption. That, to me, is just being silly.
Click to expand...
Ah, I should have done more research on their liturgy. Funny how they accept the several changes of the Mass up until the 1900’s, then all of sudden they must stop. Kind of crazy. Anyway, the chart is still good to see why some sedevacantists regard the 1962 Mass as heretical (even though I absolutely do not agree). I believe the changes in 1962 were continuous with previous changes made to the liturgy, as the Popes have a right to do.
 
SemperFidelis said:
Ah, I should have done more research on their liturgy. Funny how they accept the several changes of the Mass up until the 1900’s, then all of sudden they must stop. Kind of crazy. Anyway, the chart is still good to see why some sedevacantists regard the 1962 Mass as heretical (even though I absolutely do not agree). I believe the changes in 1962 were continuous with previous changes made to the liturgy, as the Popes have a right to do.
Click to expand...
Nice chart indeed! Thank you.🙂
 
How is the CMRI not Catholic?
If they are not Catholic what are they?

I understand that they are not in communion with Rome but neither is the other 1000000 denominations. And this Ecumenism thing does not seem to be bothered by this fact.

Some have said since they are not Catholic they cannot minister the Sacraments, how is this so? Since non-Catholics can minister Baptism provided the matter, form and intent are genuine.
 
MMLJ said:
How is the CMRI not Catholic?
If they are not Catholic what are they?

I understand that they are not in communion with Rome but neither is the other 1000000 denominations. And this Ecumenism thing does not seem to be bothered by this fact.

Some have said since they are not Catholic they cannot minister the Sacraments, how is this so? Since non-Catholics can minister Baptism provided the matter, form and intent are genuine.
Click to expand...
Many Traditional Catholics wonder the same thing, especially regarding the SSPX. We can have buddhists and hindus pray with us but we can’t show charity to the SSPX? I see no reason why one could not attend an SSPX Mass. In fact the Church has stated as much, and many Catholics still despise them. This baffles me as well. I myself respect the SSPX and Archbisop Lefebvre very much.
 
SemperFidelis said:
Many Traditional Catholics wonder the same thing, especially regarding the SSPX. We can have buddhists and hindus pray with us but we can’t show charity to the SSPX? I see no reason why one could not attend an SSPX Mass. In fact the Church has stated as much, and many Catholics still despise them. This baffles me as well. I myself respect the SSPX and Archbisop Lefebvre very much.
Click to expand...
This what is so confusing, why is it that Hinduism and Islam are more acceptable to the Vatican than the SSPX or the CMRI?
This is the reason why I opened these 2 threads about the CMRI and the SSPX.

Thanks for your response.

I hope someone can address this:

Why is it that Hinduism and Islam are more acceptable to the Vatican than the SSPX or the CMRI?
 
MMLJ said:
This what is so confusing, why is it that Hinduism and Islam are more acceptable to the Vatican than the SSPX or the CMRI?
This is the reason why I opened these 2 threads about the CMRI and the SSPX.

Thanks for your response.

I hope someone can address this:

Why is it that Hinduism and Islam are more acceptable to the Vatican than the SSPX or the CMRI?
Click to expand...
I can see why the Holy See is not too open with the CMRI and the SSPV, because they are sedevacantists and deny the validity of the Pope. Also those two groups are very small. The SSPX should in my opinion be treated much better, as I think they are good Catholics. The SSPX has almost 720 Chapels worldwide and I believe over a million people (including Priests and laity). I would much rather use our ecumenical resources towards them, than use some false sense of ecumenicity with pagans.
 
As a former member of CMRI (for 18 years), I would like to answer your questions.

CMRI was started by Francis Schuckardt about 1967. He was ordained and made a bishop by Bishop Brown who was of the Old Catholic Church.

He told everyone Our Lady had cured him as he lay at death’s doors, and we believed him. Many parents followed him, left homes and jobs behind, to save our children as he told us he was the last bastion of the Catholic faith on earth.

For the next 20 years sex and child abuse was rampant --led by Schuckardt and many clergy and religious-- towards the children parents entrusted to their care, and to the young men who entered the seminary. We had no idea of the sex stuff.

You might be interested in reading some of the stories posted on www.RogueBishop.com and www.ex-crusader.com. Also read “Smoke of Satan”.

CMRI priests are ordained by Bishop Mark Pivarunas, stationed in Omaha.

I hear they have changed since 1984, when Schuckardt was run off, but those who remain have all been schooled by Schuckardt. So I cannot comment on their daily life at this point.

All I can state is that hundreds of lives were destroyed by Schuckardt and his group. The worse part is that they did all this terrible stuff posing as holy men and women.

So, if you had to choose between joining the CMRI group in order to have the sacraments, or just staying home and praying, my vote goes for the latter.

If anyone has other questions, I’ll be glad to answer you.
 
Very nice to hear the opinions of someone who has actually had experience with the CMRI, thanks and God Bless!
 
Semper Fi, thank you. I was afraid I’d be banned, or maybe get hate mail, so I appreciate your words.
 
MMLJ said:
This what is so confusing, why is it that Hinduism and Islam are more acceptable to the Vatican than the SSPX or the CMRI?
This is the reason why I opened these 2 threads about the CMRI and the SSPX.

Thanks for your response.

I hope someone can address this:

Why is it that Hinduism and Islam are more acceptable to the Vatican than the SSPX or the CMRI?
Click to expand...
I see how it can seem that way sometimes. But the fact is that the Church seeks to affirm the truths that other religions possess (for instance, belief in God, belief in His Oneness, etc.) in order to draw them into contemplating the fullness of the Truth which is the Catholic Church. So, the way we correspond with those faiths is trying to highlight the few (but important) things that we have in common.

On the other side with SSPX, CMRI, and SSPV they are dealing with people who are Catholic but have broken communion or gone into schism over various issues. Now, necessarily the Church must follow it’s laws and sanctions against such acts through suspensions and excommunications. But the Church can’t excommunicate or sanction Hindu’s or Muslim’s precisely because they are not Catholic.
 
cavanlass said:
Semper Fi, thank you. I was afraid I’d be banned, or maybe get hate mail, so I appreciate your words.
Click to expand...
Nah, you’re just speaking about personal experiences. Plus I don’t think there are too many CMRI advocates on this board anyway.
 
🙂 👍
And it’s all true anyway. It needs to be brought out in the open in hopes of saving others from joining them.
 
cavanlass said:
🙂 👍
And it’s all true anyway. It needs to be brought out in the open in hopes of saving others from joining them.
Click to expand...
Thank you very much for you experiences with the CMRI. I have never heard about you have mentioned and am glad you responded. May GOD Bless you.
 
You are very welcome, MMLJ–it’s taken me over 20 years to be able to speak about it.
 
MMLJ said:
What are you references?

What about these?:

Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii (# 59), Dec. 31, 1930: “Nor are those considered as acting against nature who in the married state use their right in the proper manner although on account of natural reasons either of time or of certain defects, new life cannot be brought forth. For in matrimony as well as in the use of the matrimonial right there are also secondary ends, such as mutual aid, the cultivating of mutual love, and the quieting of concupiscence which husband and wife are not forbidden to consider SO LONG AS THEY ARE SUBORDINATED TO THE PRIMARY END and so long as the intrinsic nature of the act is preserved.”

Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii (# 17), Dec. 31, 1930: “The primary end of marriage is the procreation and the education of children.”

**Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii (# 54), Dec. 31, 1930: **“Since, therefore, the conjugal act is destined primarily by nature for the begetting of children, those who in exercising it deliberately frustrate its natural powers and purpose sin against nature and commit a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious.”
Click to expand...
Yes. It does look like NFP is condemned by Pope Pius XI. But the present popes have changed the teaching and NFP is now allowed by the Catholic Church, even though it may not have been allowed in the past.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top