Author Topic: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd? (Read 440459 times)

cathman7 · « **Reply #70 on:** March 11, 2018, 10:02:43 PM »

Quote from: Centroamerica on March 11, 2018, 09:47:09 PM

Sedevacantists (of which I am not) and other similar groups did not found a new church anymore than Bishop de Castro Mayer did when his priests were expelled from their churches by Bishop Navarro and built new churches to offer the true Mass right near or beside the diocesan churches! They all run off of the same concept: the papal claimant cannot be obeyed because to do such would be to disobey Divine law.
Only a true conciliar apologist would make such a statement. Total newchurch speak. Let me quote Bishop Tissier from the 2012 Winona priestly ordinations when he said "this newchurch is no church but a poison poisoning the Church!".
Nice try to derail the thread and bury everything in ten tons of pages running circles around the EENS dogma and feenyism.

Yes but the Campos priests at that time operated under the principle that they must avoid the Conciliarists at all costs. They didn't question whether they had any authority. Can we somehow now claim that there is no longer any operating authority in the Church? I mean we are trying to keep principles here and avoidance seems imperative and Bishop Fellay and the like don't seem to understand that anymore. But it doesn't mean "R&R" is somehow illogical.

cathman7 · « **Reply #71 on:** March 11, 2018, 10:08:53 PM »

Quote from: PG on March 11, 2018, 09:52:34 PM

I know, I just saw you post how +Sanborn believes the opposite, and wanted to respond to that part. And, to add to my last post, I don't think what I posted is in disagreement with dogma as the rule of faith. Because, I am aware of how the past probably 1200 years has placed increasing emphasis on the papacy to the point where I am not surprised that there are people who think as +Sanborn. And, the papacy is important. It is a significant element concerning what we might say are "living" elements of the faith. However, when the pope is a heretic, and the college we might say of bishops are heretics, what are we to think? Well, firstly, as drew said, it is dogma that is our rule of faith. But, secondly, for our crisis, it would be I think the "living" examples I gave. Because, there must always be hiarchical authority in the church. And, I contend that there still is. It is just not the pope and the college of bishops. It would be st paul an and the two or more who gather in Christ's name. Those are somewhat masked terms, but that may be the best way to say it.

I don't quite understand the parts I put in bold.

PG · « **Reply #72 on:** March 11, 2018, 10:37:28 PM »

Quote from: obscurus on March 11, 2018, 10:08:53 PM

I don't quite understand the parts I put in bold.

Well, for the most part heresy and error comes from the pope and the NO college of bishops. And, those are the two channels traditionally associated with the magisterium. So, in our time of crisis, those are really not representing the magisterium in action. And, I don't know about you, but I wouldn't be a traditional catholic if it weren't for +Lefebvre, and now +Williamson. I certainly wouldn't be one if I relied on the pope and the college for direction. They(+lefebvre) are a manifestation of what I would call the office of st. paul in action. Which is the bishop that can successfully resist the pope. And, he can successfully resist the pope because dogma is his rule of faith. The other "two" I would be guessing about. Perhaps it is some combination of the monk and the nun. I do not know. But, I don't think it is a husband and wife.

Centroamerica · « **Reply #73 on:** March 11, 2018, 10:40:48 PM »

Quote from: obscurus on March 11, 2018, 10:02:43 PM

Yes but the Campos priests at that time operated under the principle that they must avoid the Conciliarists at all costs. They didn't question whether they had any authority. Can we somehow now claim that there is no longer any operating authority in the Church? I mean we are trying to keep principles here and avoidance seems imperative and Bishop Fellay and the like don't seem to understand that anymore. But it doesn't mean "R&R" is somehow illogical.

Actually, they made a deal with the Vatican and explained in their letter in great detail how they made that deal because they no longer wanted to question whether the vatican 2 church had any authority and were afraid that if they continued that they would have to openly accept sedevacantism. They even explain how they wrote to Bishop Fellay and explained the same.
http://brasildogmadafe.blogspot.com.br/p/docuмento-perdido-dos-padres-de-campos.html

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #74 on:** March 11, 2018, 10:47:46 PM »

Quote

The Rule of Faith is the Magisterium or teaching Church. There is no doubt on that.

Correct, Canterella, but what are the teachings of the magisterium but doctrine and the catechism? And what is doctrine and the catechism but the re-teaching of “what has always been taught” for 1,900 years. Thus, the magisterium’s job is to safeguard and teach doctrine, which is the rule of faith.

If the current magisterium/hierarchy fails to do their job, then Catholics must turn to historical, orthodox teachings (ie doctors of the church and previous saintly popes) to help them learn the faith, which is exactly what trads have done.

The question of the status of the non-orthodox magisterium is largely academic, as it's none of our jobs to come to any conclusions about their future or punishments, etc. Our job is to know, love and serve God, and we have 1,900 yrs of consistent Church Teaching on how to do this. Everything else, including the status of the pope, is largely a distraction - especially for we laity.

As +W has been pointing out the past 3 weeks in his newsletters, our families are in crisis, young trads are leaving Church altogether, families are being ripped apart by immorality and many trad priests/bishops are STILL (after 20+ years?!) spending their time arguing about the status of the pope? REALLY? Is this the most pressing matter of the day? Hardly. The battle for souls has moved from the streets into the home and many priests have their heads stuck in theology books - too busy to notice and too worried about which “group” (ie sspx vs sede) is “winning”. What an insane world we live in.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd? (Read 440459 times)

cathman7

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

cathman7

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

PG

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

Centroamerica

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

Pax Vobis

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