Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 228

Author Topic: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?  (Read 440487 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline 2Vermont

Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
« Reply #45 on: March 11, 2018, 10:32:59 AM »
Quote from: Cantarella on March 11, 2018, 10:06:46 AM
Oh, I had not seen this.
Confederate Catholic:  In 2015, Fr. Ringrose explained to the Holy Name Society and ladies' sodality that because francis does not possess the authority of the pope that he (Fr. Ringrose) has dropped his name from the Mass.

I don't understand why, if this is true, the original post is being treated as new news. Also, if it is true, I would still be interested in knowing whether he is basing this on the fact that he doesn't have the "authority" or if he truly believes he is a false pope.  Those that believe the latter tend to associate themselves more with sedevacantists than non-sedevacantists because both are very clear that this "pope" is no pope.  Their explanations are just different (ie totalist sede vs material-formal sede).
Logged

Offline cathman7

Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
« Reply #46 on: March 11, 2018, 11:04:45 AM »
So no formal authority exists in the Church according to sedeprivationism. Am I correct?
Logged

Offline Smedley Butler

Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
« Reply #47 on: March 11, 2018, 11:22:06 AM »
Quote from: Meg on March 11, 2018, 11:14:43 AM
If I had known in advance that Fr. Ringose is a sedewhatever, I would not have donated to his school. Oh well. Live and learn.
Fr. Ringrose is not sedevacantist, as far as I know. 
Logged

Offline PG

Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
« Reply #48 on: March 11, 2018, 11:55:58 AM »
Quote from: Ladislaus on March 11, 2018, 11:19:36 AM
I personally hold that a bishop appointed by a material pope can formally exercise office so long as he does not have any impediments to it (i.e. is not a heretic or excommunicate).  
Yet you attack me.  Vatican 2, ecuŠ¼enism, religious liberty, defense of the new mass, collegiality, and loose NFP is an impediment.  I mean, the NO bishops universally are opposed to +lefebvre and the old sspx.  That is a clear sign of a heretical impediment in my opinion.  That is why I generally say remove the NO bishops(the pope remains) from the una cuŠ¼, and doubt their legitimacy.  I simply have enough conviction to put into practice.  
Logged

Offline PG

Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
« Reply #49 on: March 11, 2018, 12:10:52 PM »
Quote from: Meg on March 11, 2018, 11:35:13 AM
He was a sedevacantist. Therefore, his "views" can be easily dismissed.

If you have a problem with that, too bad.
des lauriers morality was worse.  He flip flopped becoming a full fledged sedevacantist in order to become consecrated a bishop by +Thuc.  +Thuc did not like his sedeprivationism, and required that he embrace full vacantism.  He agreed.  Then, after being consecrated, flip flopped back into privationism, which is basically just a more on the fence position that is none the less servant to vacantism.  


Logged
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 228
« previous next »