Author Topic: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd? (Read 441679 times)

drew · « **Reply #965 on:** May 06, 2018, 09:36:14 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on May 06, 2018, 05:41:28 PM

I dare you to come over here and say that to my face.

Ladislaus,

Since you are two faced, which one should I talk to?

Any church that is not founded by Jesus Christ is a metaphorical whore. "Your church" is not the Catholic Church. It has no pope, no magisterium, no dogma, no moral compass. It furthermore has no means to ever get these essential Attributes that are marks of the Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ that make her knowable, that make her what she is. "Your church" is not the Catholic Church. But I suppose when they make you the S&Sers pope you can call "your church" whatever you want but a whore is a whore by any other name.

Drew

drew · « **Reply #966 on:** May 06, 2018, 09:55:40 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on May 06, 2018, 05:48:24 PM

You need to stop immediately. It is not the OFFICE that is in potency, but the office-holder. Bergoglio, for instance, has been designated to be the office-holder, while God imposes the form of the papacy on him. This is taught clearly by Bellarmine. Sedeprivationism simply states that this designated man has an impediment to receiving the form from God, despite being put into potency to receive it by the Church's designation. You have no clue what we're talking about and yet you pontificate about it being heresy and claim that +Guerard was a moron when it comes to philosophy and theology, where he couldn't get the basics right.

Ladislaus,

The papacy is a substantial being composed of form and matter. To be in "Potency" to the office is not to possess it at all. That is a fact. If the papacy is possessed in Act, it is necessarily possessed both formally and materially. To claim that the office can be possessed in potency formally and in act materially is to divide the form and the matter of the office. To separate the form and matter of a material being necessarily causes a substantial change in that being. It no longer is what it was. We know by divine and Catholic Faith this cannot happen. We know that the papacy will exist with "perpetual successors" until the "consummation of the world."

Those who keep dogma as their rule of faith will be spared of this gross error. My best guess is your emoticon means you like to keep your eyes closed to the truth of Catholic dogma.

Drew

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #967 on:** May 06, 2018, 10:08:07 PM »

Quote

He could easily interrupt the insane thread and put it out of its misery.

Why do you care so much?

drew · « **Reply #968 on:** May 06, 2018, 10:11:52 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on May 06, 2018, 05:52:24 PM

Bergogio is Drew's moral compass. Vatican II is Drew's Council. Montini, Wojtyla, and Bergoglio exercise Drew's Magisterium.

Ladialaus,

You have no pope, no magisterium, no dogma, no rule of faith, no moral compass and no means to ever correct this gross defect in "your church." There is no possibility of salvation in "your church." This is not really a laughing matter. The consequences are for eternity.

Those that keep Dogma as the rule of faith have no problems with heretical popes. The faithful Catholic is no more tainted by a heretical pope than Jesus Christ was by worshiping under the high priest Caiaphas. Those who make the pope their rule of faith will have problems. They will either follow the pope into heresy or they will join "your church." Either way it will not end well.

Drew

drew · « **Reply #969 on:** May 06, 2018, 10:35:28 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on May 06, 2018, 05:54:24 PM

you embarrass yourself with every post, Drew. It is you who have no clue about what supernatural faith is because you don't acknowledge the existence of its formal motive.

No, I despise you precisely for the reasons I stated ... you blaspheme and deride Holy Mother Church at every turn, and this seems to be your calling and your vocation in life.

Ladislaus,

Are trying to impress someone with this post? The definition of supernatural faith is believing what God has revealed on the authority of God the revealer. The "formal motive" is in the definition, "God the revealer." It is this definition that you denied. You want me to repost you denial? Happy to oblige, but if I were you, I would let it drop because someone is going to think that if you do not know what supernatural faith is, you cannot be relied upon to know anything worth passing on.

You do not belong to the Catholic Church. You have made that absolutely clear by describing the attributes of "your church." It is not possible to "blaspheme" "your church" because God has no part in it.

Drew

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd? (Read 441679 times)

drew

Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?

drew

Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?

Pax Vobis

Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?

drew

Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?

drew

Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?