Vatican I directly blows away Benedict XVI

The quote you bring forward from Vatican I directly blows away Benedict XVI, who has rejected the dogma you quote by questioning whether the Bishop of Rome even possesses supreme jurisdiction in the Church! 

“Cardinal” Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology (1982), pp. 216-217: “Patriarch Athenagoras [the non-Catholic, schismatic Patriarch] spoke even more strongly when he greeted the Pope [Paul VI] in Phanar: ‘Against all expectation, the bishop of Rome is among us, the first among us in honor, ‘he who presides in love’.  It is clear that, in saying this, the Patriarch [the non-Catholic, schismatic Patriarch] did not abandon the claims of the Eastern Churches or acknowledge the primacy of the west.  Rather, he stated plainly what the East understood as the order, the rank and title, of the equal bishops in the Church – and it would be worth our while to consider whether this archaic confession, which has nothing to do with the ‘primacy of jurisdiction’ but confesses a primacy of ‘honor’ and agape, might not be recognized as a formula that adequately reflects the position that Rome occupies in the Church – ‘holy courage’ requires that prudence be combined with ‘audacity’: ‘The kingdom of God suffers violence.’”

Canon 1325.2, 1917 Code of Canon Law: “One who after baptism… rejects the authority of the Supreme Pontiff or refuses communion with the members of the Church who are subject to him, he is a schismatic.”

“I tossed my free EWTN book in the garbage”

“I grew up in a non-denomination church”

Thank you for the contact.  Yes, we will pray that you come to see the truth of the Catholic Faith, and the necessity to embrace it.  Attached is a basic Catechism for you.  I would also recommend that you begin praying the Rosary every day.  We would be happy to send you one if you would like, as well as a How to Pray the Rosary sheet.  We also have a special DVD package which includes more than 8 different programs for only a few dollars. [Update: New Special Package Here]  It's critical for you to embrace the Catholic Faith, since it is the one true Church outside of which there is no salvation.  If you have any more questions, please let us know.

The Charismatic Movement and Montanism

As many of you know, the phenomenon of “speaking in tongues” is prevalent in the Charismatic Movement.  We’ve tried to inform those involved that the Charismatic Movement is not of God.  This is proven most easily by the Charismatic Movement’s promotion and acceptance of ecumenical and heretical teachings.  The extraordinary phenomena that often occur at these meetings – which sometimes include barking like dogs, rolling around on the floor in hysteria, making sounds like pigs, etc. – are not the gifts of the Holy Ghost.  However, some refuse to believe that the devil could actually be behind the extraordinary occurrences of “speaking in tongues” that they see at these charismatic meetings.  They should know that the early Church heretic Montanus also spoke in tongues. 

“Montanism was a growing problem… This man, Montanus, began to prophesy and to ‘speak in tongues.’  He was soon followed by two women, Priscilla and Maximilla, who left their husbands to devote themselves to his mission… Montanist preachers called upon their hearers to renounce marriage, to give up their worldly goods to their spiritual leaders… to seek martyrdom wherever possible, and to repudiate all civil obligations.  Though rejected by almost all the bishops, the Montanist call struck responsive chords all over Asia Minor; the whole church of Thyatira, for example, went over to them – Thyatira’s church which the Apostle John had warned, in his letter to the seven churches of Asia in the Book of the Apocalypse, to beware of a prophetess whose teaching led to immorality.” (Warren H. Carroll, The Founding of Christendom, Vol. 1, p. 464.)

This shows us again that speaking in tongues or what appears to be “speaking in tongues” can be from demonic sources; in the case of the heretical Charismatic Movement today, it is definitely from demonic sources.

Heretical “traditional” Bishop Oravec

One of us conversed with Bishop Oravec in the past, and the issue of salvation was specifically discussed.  He believes that souls can be saved in other religions.  That is a fact.  He is not a Catholic, but a complete heretic.  He couldn’t see how the damnation of all non-Catholics was compatible with the mercy of God.  He is a false shepherd who has no Faith; and since he is an imposing heretic who is binding his false teaching on you, you should absolutely not receive the sacraments from him at all.  Regarding your children, yes you should use your authority in the house to forbid them from going to the Novus Ordo.  If your wife will attend the Novus Ordo when nothing else is available, then she is a not a true Catholic and doesn’t care about the Faith at all.  She just goes to whatever is convenient.  You should not pray with her until she becomes a true Catholic. Regarding baptism of desire, the Church’s teaching on the absolute necessity of water baptism based on an absolute understanding of John 3:5 is clear. 

Pope Paul III, The Council of Trent, Sess. 7, Can. 5 on the Sacrament of Baptism, ex cathedra: “If anyone says that baptism [the Sacrament] is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation (cf. Jn. 3:5): let him be anathema.”

Question about Escriva “Canonization”

Here it is:

Antipope John Paul II, Oct. 6, 2002, “Canonizing” Josemaria Escriva: “In honor of the Blessed Trinity, for the exaltation of the Catholic Faith and the growth of Christian life, with the authority of Our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and Our Own, after lengthy reflection, having assiduously invoked God’s assistance and taken into account the opinion of many brothers of ours in the episcopate, we declare and define Blessed Josemaria Escriva to be a Saint, and we enroll him in the Catalogue of the Saints, and we establish that in the whole Church he should be devoutly honored among the Saints.  In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.” 

Why didn’t Fr. Feeney go to Rome?

I believe he didn’t go because when the authorities in Rome handling the matter refused to give him the reason for the summons, as required by canon law, they demonstrated that they weren’t trustworthy and operating in good faith.  And the reason that the authorities in Rome handling the case didn’t give him a reason is because they were too embarrassed to say: you are being summoned to Rome because you are preaching Outside the Church There is No Salvation and that only baptized Catholics can be saved! It was on September 24, 1952 that Father Feeney addressed a long, detailed letter to Pius XII.  The letter went unanswered.  But one month later (in a letter dated Oct. 25, 1952) Cardinal Pizzardo of the Holy Office summoned him to Rome.  On October 30, 1952, Father Feeney sent a reply to Pizzardo, requesting a statement of the charges against him – as required by Canon Law.  On Nov. 22, 1952, Pizzardo replied:

“Your letter of 30th October clearly shows that you are evading the issue… You are to come to Rome immediately where you will be informed of the charges lodged against you… If you do not present yourself… before the 31st December this act of disobedience will be made public with the canonical penalties… The Apostolic Delegate has been authorized to provide for the expenses of your journey.”

“Your Eminence seems to have misconstrued my motives in replying to your letter of October 25, 1952.  I had presumed that your first letter was to serve as a canonical citation to appear before Your Sacred Tribunal.  As a citation, however, it is fatally defective under the norms of Canon 1715 especially in that it did not inform me of the charges against me.  This canon requires that the citation contain at least a general statement of the charges.  Under the norms of Canon 1723 any proceedings based on a citation so substantially defective are subject to a complaint of nullity.”