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

Author Topic: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?  (Read 204943 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Meg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6173
  • Reputation: +3147/-2941
  • Gender: Female
Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
« Reply #375 on: April 03, 2018, 01:26:49 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • ...because we believe that his authority comes from GOD, being the succesor of St. Peter. Obedience and loyalty to Peter is the authentic and traditional Catholic attitude.

    His authority does come from God, but the pope is not God. It is Our Lord Jesus Christ who is actually the head of the Catholic Church. If the Pope is not in submission to the head of the Church, we do not have to follow him in that error. 

    I repeat...the Pope is not God. He is human. He is not automatically endowed with supernatural faith that cannot fail. He does not become like a sort of demi-god when elected pope. It is not guaranteed that the Holy Ghost will be with the Cardinals when they elect a pope. 
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29


    Offline drew

    • Supporter
    • **
    • Posts: 391
    • Reputation: +1111/-239
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #376 on: April 03, 2018, 01:36:37 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • You're entitled to your opinion.  

    Since you've decided to join in, please elaborate on the quote from Pope Leo XIII.  What is he saying in the quote below?  What does he mean?

    Why would anyone be banished from the Church by departing "from the doctrine propose by the authentic magisterium" if the authentic magisterium can err?  

    Bellator Dei,

    “Elaboration” is very easy because Pope Leo XIII does it himself in the encyclical.  The term “authentic magisterium” is more commonly translated, “authorized magisterium.”  “Authorized” is a better translation because it is more descriptive of the meaning.  The term only means that it is the pope himself who is engaging the magisterium.  It does not alone indicate what kind of magisterial power is being used. It could be the ‘authorized ordinary magisterium’ based upon his grace of state which is capable of error and has errored in the past.  Or, it could also be the ‘authorized extra-ordinary Magisterium’ or the ‘authorized ordinary and universal Magisterium’ both of which engage the Church’s Attribute of Infallibility and from which error is impossible.  Now the “authorized Magisterium” that Pope Leo is talking about in the encyclical is the Magisterium established by Jesus Christ that has the “authority” to engage the Attribute of Infallibility He gave His Church and that is clearly seen in the context of the encyclical.  

    Quote
    It was consequently provided by God that the Magisterium instituted by Jesus Christ should not end with the life of the Apostles, but that it should be perpetuated. We see it in truth propagated, and, as it were, delivered from hand to hand. For the Apostles consecrated bishops, and each one appointed those who were to succeed them immediately "in the ministry of the word."
    Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum

    The Magisterium is “provided by God,” “instituted by Jesus Christ,” and “delivered from hand to hand” to different churchmen throughout time who can engage the Magisterium.  So it is evident that without the “churchmen”, there is no access to the Magisterium.  Consequently, those who say the “magisterium is their rule of faith” really mean “churchmen” are their rule of faith, i.e.: the pope is their rule of faith.  

    Quote
    The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. Epiphanius, Augustine, Theodoret, drew up a long list of the heresies of their times. St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity. "No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic" (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n.).
    Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum

    Here you see that the “authorized Magisterium” is directly referring to condemned heresies, which only occurs with the overturning of Dogma.  And Dogma is only possible by an infallible judgment of the Magisterium.  

    Quote
    Wherefore, as appears from what has been said, Christ instituted in the Church a living, authoritative and permanent Magisterium, which by His own power He strengthened, by the Spirit of truth He taught, and by miracles confirmed. He willed and ordered, under the gravest penalties, that its teachings should be received as if they were His own. As often, therefore, as it is declared on the authority of this teaching that this or that is contained in the deposit of divine revelation, it must be believed by every one as true. If it could in any way be false, an evident contradiction follows; for then God Himself would be the author of error in man. "Lord, if we be in error, we are being deceived by Thee" (Richardus de S. Victore, De Trin., lib. i., cap. 2)………..
    For this reason the Fathers of the Vatican Council laid down nothing new, but followed divine revelation and the acknowledged and invariable teaching of the Church as to the very nature of faith, when they decreed as follows: "All those things are to be believed by divine and Catholic faith which are contained in the written or unwritten word of God, and which are proposed by the Church as divinely revealed, either by a solemn definition or in the exercise of its ordinary and universal Magisterium" (Sess. iii., cap. 3). Hence, as it is clear that God absolutely willed that there should be unity in His Church, and as it is evident what kind of unity He willed, and by means of what principle He ordained that this unity should be maintained, we may address the following words of St. Augustine to all who have not deliberately closed their minds to the truth: "When we see the great help of God, such manifest progress and such abundant fruit, shall we hesitate to take refuge in the bosom of that Church, which, as is evident to all, possesses the supreme authority of the Apostolic See through the Episcopal succession? In vain do heretics rage round it; they are condemned partly by the judgment of the people themselves, partly by the weight of councils, partly by the splendid evidence of miracles. To refuse to the Church the primacy is most impious and above measure arrogant. And if all learning, no matter how easy and common it may be, in order to be fully understood requires a teacher and master, what can be greater evidence of pride and rashness than to be unwilling to learn about the books of the divine mysteries from the proper interpreter, and to wish to condemn them unknown?" (De Unitate Credendi, cap. xvii., n. 35).
    Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum


    This confirms everything I have said.  The Magisterium is “living” in that it is engaged by living people, i.e.: the pope.  You can only have a pope if you have a papal office, i.e.: the form and the matter of the office cannot be destroyed as in sedeprivationism. It is “perpetual” in that there will always be successors to the papal office, i.e.:  for sedevacantists to lose a pope for fifty years is not “perpetual” and what makes matters worse, they have means to ever get one.  And what confirms that the “authorized Magisterium” that Pope Leo is talking about the infallible Magisterium, he says, “As often, therefore, as it is declared on the authority of this teaching that this or that is contained in the deposit of divine revelation, it must be believed by every one as true.”

    Hope this helps.

    Drew


    Offline Samuel

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 225
    • Reputation: +286/-120
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #377 on: April 03, 2018, 01:46:34 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • How do you reconcile your post with this teaching from Pope Leo XIII?

    The translation on the Vatican's website, which btw Fr. Cekada also accepts and uses as the correct translation, is this:

    Quote
    The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium.

    There is a difference between authorized and authoritative. Consulting a dictionary:

    Quote
    Authorized: having official permission or approval.
    Authoritative: able to be trusted as being accurate or true; reliable.

    So, authorized means that it comes from the true or authentic Magisterium, while authoritative means that it can be trusted as accurate, in other words, infallible and therefore binding.

    The teaching of the Authentic Magisterium is authorized, but not authoritative.

    The teaching of the Infallible Magisterium is both authorized and authoritative.

    You may want to read this lengthy article, which first appeared in the 2002 issue of SiSiNoNo: Clear Ideas on the Pope's Infallible Magisterium

    Therefore, Pope Leo was talking about the Infallible Magisterium, and not the Authentic Magisterium. Quite the opposite of what you were trying to claim.

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6173
    • Reputation: +3147/-2941
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #378 on: April 03, 2018, 01:52:27 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • Pope Leo XIII elaborates on this specific issue...

    I don't have a problem with Pope Leo Xlll and the quote you provided. Of course there will always be a succession of popes. Those of us who aren't sedes already know this.
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6173
    • Reputation: +3147/-2941
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #379 on: April 03, 2018, 02:18:34 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • That was not the point, Meg. The point of the quote is to demonstrate that Christ left in Peter and His successors, a representative of Himself on earth. Christ and the Pope are not independent from each other. As Pope Innocent III explains here:

    Sorry, Canteralla, but the Pope is not Christ. The pope is not God. He is human. Fully human. Or do you disagree?

    It's almost as if you believe that the pope is the fourth person of the trinity, which seems rather gnostic. 
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29


    Offline Samuel

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 225
    • Reputation: +286/-120
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #380 on: April 03, 2018, 02:24:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, I'm certainly not a linguist by any stretch of the means.  But the latin sure seems to indicate the word "authentic".

    Looks pretty clear to me, but maybe someone with training in Latin can chime in...

    From an online Latin dictionary:

    Quote
    authentĭcus (adjective I class)
    1. (docuмent) original, genuine, authentic
    2. that comes from the author

    Looking up the Latin word for authentic in the same dictionary:

    Quote
    authentic (adjective)
    1. verus [veră, verum]
    2. certus [certă, certum]
    The bottom line for me is this: often lay theologians will read something and understand it in a completely different way as what was intended by the one who wrote it. Put many little such mistakes together and you will arrive at a big mistake, which will be very hard to correct.

    Offline Samuel

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 225
    • Reputation: +286/-120
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #381 on: April 03, 2018, 03:10:40 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Another example from Satis Cognitum:

    From an online Latin dictionary:

    authentĭcuм
    neutral noun II declension

    1 original or authentic docuмent, the original
    2 docuмent certifying relic genuine

    ..which also is officially translated as :

    Quote
    Wherefore, as appears from what has been said, Christ instituted in the Church a living, authoritative and permanent Magisterium, which by His own power He strengthened, by the Spirit of truth He taught, and by miracles confirmed.

    Offline Samuel

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 225
    • Reputation: +286/-120
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #382 on: April 03, 2018, 03:17:48 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Well, I'm certainly not a linguist by any stretch of the means.  But the latin sure seems to indicate the word "authentic".

    Looks pretty clear to me, but maybe someone with training in Latin can chime in...

    You basically have two choices now:

    1. You stick to the official translation, which is also accepted and used by Fr. Cekada, in which case your original argument is turned against your sedevacantist position.

    2. You reject the official translation, you ignore Fr. Cekada, and you simply stick to your own translation, in order to keep propping up your sedevacantist position.

    What would an honest person be inclined to do?

    Btw, it would be an interesting exercise to try and track down where that different translation originated. I can guess the answer. Can you?


    Offline Samuel

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 225
    • Reputation: +286/-120
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #383 on: April 03, 2018, 03:53:19 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I already ignore quite a bit of what Father Cekada has to say.  He's done a lot of good research and laid a good foundation, but I don't care about what version of this or that is accepted by him...

    I'm certainly skeptical of the translation, yes.  Anything "official" that comes from the apostate church should make anyone skeptical.  Obviously, in your position, it makes sense that you would accept something "official" from the Vatican.  I get it, man...  

    I don't find it that interesting of an exercise...  Of course, I know where I got it from.  

    I did, however, find our dictionary exercise interesting as it confirmed my original assertion about the translation.

    I could pursue this a little further, but I sense it would do you no good, and thus it would be a waste of my time.

    At the end of the day, God knows us better than we know ourselves, and He told us that we must search in order to find. This also means that those who don't want to search (usually because deep down they are afraid of what they might find), will only have themselves to blame for the erroneous opinions they hold.

    Offline Samuel

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 225
    • Reputation: +286/-120
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #384 on: April 03, 2018, 04:12:46 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • I agree, I don't think that our little exercise did you any good.  People like you already think you know it all - it's obvious from this last condescending post of yours.

    By the way, Samuel, you can pursue this as far as you want to go.  Just know that I'll be here to keep you in check...  

    Ok, let's pursue it then.

    The same translation ("authoritative") is also used and accepted by the following illustrious sedevacantist mentors :

    Fr. Cekada

    Novus Ordo Watch

    The Dimond Brothers

    John Lane

    John Daly

    So, please tell me, what motivates you to ignore these illustrious authorities, generally accepted by sedevacantists as "reliable, trustworthy, honest, fair, intelligent, learned, .."? What is the authority upon which you base your own ("authentic") translation then?

    Offline Samuel

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 225
    • Reputation: +286/-120
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #385 on: April 03, 2018, 04:26:46 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • I agree, I don't think that our little exercise did you any good.  People like you already think you know it all - it's obvious from this last condescending post of yours.

    By the way, Samuel, you can pursue this as far as you want to go.  Just know that I'll be here to keep you in check...  

    By the way Bellator Dei, I certainly do not "think I know it all", on the contrary, I actually am convinced that my knowledge is far less than yours.

    But, as Drew pointed out recently in a conversation with Ladislaus, many people have a vast knowledge, but very little wisdom and understanding. And that is a lethal combination!

    I prefer a little bit of knowledge combined with a good and correct understanding, rather than a lot of knowledge without a good and correct understanding.

    Protestants fall into this latter category, as also do.. sedevacantists.


    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10305
    • Reputation: +6215/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #386 on: April 03, 2018, 05:38:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Even better than education are FACTS to support one’s views.  Most of this thread is personal opinion and facts are ignored.  

    Offline Jeremiah2v8

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 51
    • Reputation: +44/-29
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #387 on: April 03, 2018, 07:10:55 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!2
  • There's no need to apologize at all ... since Drew and his wife are actively promoting heresy.  They would have been burned at the stake by St. Pius V for trying to spread such poison.

    You're succuмbing to feminine emotions in feeling the need to apologize.

    Get over yourself already. 

    You’re such a bloviating hypocrite. You go on and on and on about the right Catholic response to the Magisterium as the “rule of faith,” but you act very differently when you disagree with its teachings. 

    The Council of Trent directed the production of a catechism for instruction of the faith, particularly with regard to the sacraments, and holy prelates, including many of the Fathers from Trent, undertook the work and produced the Roman Catechism with the approval of Pope St. Pius V, under whose authority it issued. Subsequent popes endorsed it as the model of instruction for teaching the faith. 

    Yet, I guess, according to you, the Roman Catechism does not come from the Magisterium. Wait . . . you never said that.  The only response I ever got from you on this issue was, “the Catechism doesn’t teach BoD,” not that it wasn’t a production of the “errorless” Magisterium. 

    Anyway, I’m still waiting as to your assertion that the Roman Catechism doesn’t teach BoD:

    Name a single Catholic theologian who agrees with you and reads the Catechism as not teaching BoD.  A . . . SINGLE . . . ONE. 

    But you go against the unanimity of theologians on that one, eh? How you can cite an opponent’s disagreeing with the theologians is beyond me – yet you do it repeatedly.  

    If your Catholic “rule of faith” encompasses the indefectible “teaching Church” teaching an error regarding justification such as BoD to the universal Church in its definitive Catechism, your “rule of faith” is no different from Drew’s, Stubborn’s, Pax’s etc.: it’s effectively a rule that is followed only when the “teaching Church” lines up with what you think is dogma, or what you think Trent says on justification, etc. 

    You could be a mascot for the guys who were going to stone Mary Magdelan, since the sin you commit is the same one that those you are going to stone committed. 

    You have the credibility of a Pharisee, and have the same stinking hypocrisy in charging others with heresy.  

    No one here seems to mind your hypocrisy, but I can’t help addressing it. 

    Watching you in action almost actually hurts.
    I will do to this house, in which my name is called upon, and in which you trust, and to the places which I have given you and your fathers, as I did to Silo.

    Jeremias 7:14

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10305
    • Reputation: +6215/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #388 on: April 03, 2018, 07:39:47 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Bellator, I made 1 minor error, and admitted it.  You come in and out of a 50 page thread multiple times and want people to re-post evidence they already provided or “it’s made up”.  Meanwhile the only “facts” you post are centuries-old excerpts of pope quotes along with your interpretation of what they mean and how they support your argument.  How about some real facts, like theologians or experts who DIRECTLY address the question at hand, with no interpretation necessary.  

    Further, you’ve yet to address Bellarmine’s comments on when a council is infallible (which is narrow) and the multiple quotes on the 3 levels of magisterial teaching.  You weren’t around 10-15 pages ago but you can go back and read.  

    Offline Samuel

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 225
    • Reputation: +286/-120
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #389 on: April 03, 2018, 08:16:46 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Your sarcasm indicates you're not really interested in pursuing anything...but I'll bite.

    I don't have any "illustrious sedevacantist mentors", Sam.

    Father Cekada, Novus Ordo Watch, John Lane, and John Daly all believe in the salvation of non-Catholics, so I don't pay much attention to any of them.  Occasionally I'll refer to some Father Cekada material, and Novus Ordo Watch has some good material, but to be honest, I don't know much about John Lane or John Daly...

    That being said, I believe that the Dimonds have the most comprehensive material to read through, and I refer to their material the most.  And to correct your statement above, MHFM does not use or accept the translation of "authentico" or "authenticuм" as "authoritative".  See below, from the Dimonds website:

    Thank you, that explains everything.

    All the following quotes are from the Dimond's website (emphasis mine) :

    Quote
    Papal Infallibility does not mean that a pope cannot err at all and it does not mean that a pope cannot lose his soul and be damned in Hell for grave sin.  It means that the successors of St. Peter (the popes of the Catholic Church) cannot err when authoritatively teaching on a point of Faith or morals to be held by the entire Church of Christ.  We find the promise of the unfailing faith for St. Peter and his successors referred to by Christ in Luke 22.
    ...
    Satan desired to sift all the Apostles (plural) like wheat, but Jesus prayed for Simon Peter (singular), that his faith fail not.  Jesus is saying that St. Peter and his successors (the popes of the Catholic Church) have an unfailing faith when authoritatively teaching a point of faith or morals to be held by the entire Church of Christ.
    ...
    Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, 1896:
    “… Christ instituted a living, authoritative and permanent Magisterium… If it could in any way be false, an evident contradiction follows; for then God Himself would be the author of error in man.”

    Outside of the Church there is absolutely no salvation

    Heretic – a baptized person who rejects a dogma of the Catholic Church. Heretics are automatically excommunicated from the Church (ipso facto) without any declaration for rejecting an authoritative teaching of the Faith.

    The Glossary of Terms and Principles

    And so are these quotes:

    Quote
    Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 9), June 29, 1896: “The practice of the Church has always been the same, and that with the consenting judgment [i.e. consensus] of the holy fathers who certainly were accustomed to hold as having no part of Catholic communion and as banished from the Church whoever had departed in even the least way from the doctrine proposed by the authentic magisterium.”

    Also, note here that the Church is infallible in its ‘authentic magisterium’.  Pope Leo XIII declares that to deny teaching of the ‘authentic magisterium’ is to separate oneself from the Church.  The position that the ‘authentic magisterium’ can contain error is common among false traditionalists.

    The Magisterium is Free From Error

    There are probably many more quotes that fit in either of the above boxes, but I'm sure any reasonable person will get the picture:

    The Dimond Brothers use the translation that suits their theory of the day. And today's theory may well (and often does) contradict yesterday's theory.

    1. In the first box they need to defend the Catholic Church from the arguments of Her external enemies, and so they teach that the Magisterium can indeed err, but not when authoritatively teaching.

    2. In the second box they need to "prove" sedevacantism, and so they declare that the Magisterium is always free from error (i.e. authentic Magisterium).

    It is so obvious, even after a 5 minutes look across their site, that I am indeed struggling not to become sarcastic.

    Bellator Dei, like the Eunuch, you are in need of a reliable teacher, and the Dimond brothers do not qualify for that position.

    He that walketh with the wise, shall be wise: a friend of fools shall become like to them. Proverbs 13:20