How do you deal with Liberal Catholics

I think your position is called 'feeneyism'

It's called following Church Dogma. (I am well aware of the so called position). Nowhere is there any new Dogma that says you do not have to be baptized, or that you do not need water to be baptized, or there is anything other than one baptism.

It's very clear to see why Modernists want to attack this dogma though. No EENS, no church basically. Everything becomes 'optional' - no evangelization (that's what we basically have). E Michael Jones says himself that literally he got a Jew to go to Notre Dame to ask for baptism, and they literally sent the Jew back saying Jews don't have to be baptized or convert. Heard similar stories with Muslims wanting to get baptized and being told they should stay as Muslims.

If you can start playing with dogma so amazingly clear as this, there is no reason why they won't start saying gays can be married too and so on. The motivation for not believing this consistent church teaching is clear - and the fruits are clear too. Honestly this teaching is a lot more clear than what St. Athanasius had to defend during the Arian Crisis, especially pre Nicea, but even after Nicea all the Arians tried to insist that Arianism was compatible with the Nicean creed. Heretics love to try and twist things. This seems to be exactly what is going on now.

Yes, I wish I could just go around converting people to Orthodoxy full time. That would be great.

If you aren't aware the popular feenyist colony St. Benedict Center openly accepted baptism of desire so your whole religon is basically you
df9ixb8c8gy4m.cloudfront.net/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2019/01/20170307-Letter.pdf

from their doctrinal statement

Attached: bap.PNG (620x159, 91.4K)

If you read that carefully (and I have already read it) Andre Martin doesn't say they don't need baptism. He said he will not say that they do not need baptism. And the last time is literally repeating what the letter he's replying to told him to assert.

And it doesn't matter - read the whole letter, he said nothing 'unorthodox' or obviously so, but they still told them to stop calling themselves catholic. The whole thing is not in good faith - this same diocese has literally no issue with Fr. James Martin, and in fact he's heavily promoted by the Pope.

It's all word games they are playing. He literally complied to everything that they asked of him, at least in their words, but they still reject him but don't say what specifically he has to reject. Why is this so important to this diocese and not Fr James Martin or anything else. Why did Fr Feeney never have to recant any of his statements? This whole thing is a total joke.

If there is no EENS then there is no Catholic religion. NO ONE can say that gay marriage cannot be accepted in the future, cause statements can be re-interpreted any way you like. This EENS was defined over 3 times infallibly, but now they're saying all it means is -> If you believe Jesus is God -> IF you believe the Catholic Church was made a requirement by him for salvation -> And if you refuse -> Then you can't be saved.

LOL, it covers literally zero people. Tell me one human person who believes all of this and doesn't join the church. That's literally what the JP2 catechism says. There is literally no one that fits that category. They have essentially made that dogma nonsense. I can easily teach that we uphold that a man and woman is a sacramental marriage, but with new profound understanding of the dignity of man and the relation, this only refers to spiritual gender, not biological sex. Since there can be no conflict between reason and faith, as science and reason tells us, the union between a spiritual man and woman can indeed be shared fully by people of the same biological sex. There is no conflict between this understanding and previous church tradition. The church is a living institution that continues to develop doctrine.

Now once again, for the love of God, get off the internet you weirdo. Leave the internet.

Because they aren't Catholic. If you are not in communion with the Seat of St. Peter, you are not part of the Catholic Church. Period.


Because, unlike you or your sect, he is in communion with the Church. Though he is Catholic, he is a Catholic preaching false doctrine and may be judged as such, but this does not give you the authority to say whether or he is Catholic.


It's not word games, you're either canonized or not.


What is "invincible ignorance" and what of the example of St. Dismas? You ignore the things you do not like.


No, you cannot.

And that's an evil mark on Notre Dame (if it happened), but not enough to say the Seat is Vacant, or that Vatican II does not apply.

Friend, if you're actually Catholic, you sin against Charity talking like this. Knock it off.

Unironical larping about stone-hard catholicism. I switch the sh*tposting ironical attitude with serious approach. It's fun and sometimes even effective. Moreover saying all things I say in a grave manner would make me look like a complete sperg. People can chew it up better thiss way

Unrelated to the thread, but i see that you are keep spamming this and i knew that it was bullshit.
So i made a 3 seconds google search