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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 76

Author Topic: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?  (Read 204417 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Jeremiah2v8

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 51
  • Reputation: +44/-29
  • Gender: Male
Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
« Reply #390 on: April 03, 2018, 08:59:20 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on April 03, 2018, 08:04:47 PM
    I'm not going to digress onto the subject of BoD here (this thread is long enough already), but it suffices to say that AT NO POINT have I ever asserted that there can be no error whatsoever in any proposition ever to have emanated from the Magisterium.  What I have stated is that the Magisterium is infallibly safe, i.e., that no one can in submitting to an authoritative teaching made to the Universal Church on a substantial point proposed as being normative for the faithful endanger their faith (as Msgr. Fenton articulated it).  BoD, conceding for the sake of argument that the Church has taught this, as held by St. Thomas et al., does no substantial harm to the faith.  It's a speculative theory that can be understood in such a way as to bring no harm to Catholic doctrine.  Saying that the Magisterium is the "rule of faith" is not the same as saying that it's absolutely inerrant ... you ignorant baboon.  I've explained this to you several times already, but you are too dense to absorb this ... that and too blinded by your own heretical depravity.

    Yeah, you went into your bit about a Thomsistic distinction between substance and accidents. The problem is, here's what the popes you quoted said about the your "indefectible" Magisterium (as I reminded you before):

    Quote
    Why don't you go back and look at your quotes from the popes. Here's some of the phrases they used: "unable to be mistaken," "without danger of error," "could by no means commit itself to erroneous teaching." That is far more than "cannot, on the whole, be subtantially corrupted." Nice try, though, with that Thomist stuff. Impressive.

    Now let's look at what you say:

    Quote
    Saying that the Magisterium is the "rule of faith" is not the same as saying that it's absolutely inerrant ... you ignorant baboon.  I've explained this to you several times already, but you are too dense to absorb this ... that and too blinded by your own heretical depravity.


    They didn't say, the Magisterium "can't do substantial harm to the faith," "can't endanger the faith," or, my favorite, "can't be, on the whole, substantially corrupted [maybe just a teeny bit? lol)" . . . They said quite clearly it can't err or be mistaken; they said, well, "absolutely inerrant." Like you said to Pax, "you make this stuff up."

    Face it, Ladislaus, you say BoD is "error." So much for the Magisterium being "unable to be mistaken," and teaching "without danger of error."

    You reject your indefectible teaching Magisterium on BoD. You reject your popes on the indefectible Magisterium being "unable to be mistaken" and "without danger of error," etc.

    I can make distinctions, just not your distinctions.

    Deo gratias.
    Logged
    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 Jeremiah2v8

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 51
    • Reputation: +44/-29
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #391 on: April 03, 2018, 09:33:22 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on April 03, 2018, 09:21:05 PM
    No I don't, moron.  I have consistently characterized BoD as an opinion of speculative theology with which I happen to disagree at this time.

    You have no recourse but to lie in a futile attempt to win this debate, out of spite.

    So who is right and who is wrong between you and the Magisterium when you "disagree" with its speculatively theologizing about BoD?

    The wrong one is in "error" - which is why I imagine you "disagree" with it. Or do you "disagree" with truth much?

    If it's the Magisterium in error, don't go doing any carpentry with your "rule of faith." lol
    Logged
    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 Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13817
    • Reputation: +5566/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #392 on: April 04, 2018, 05:43:02 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Jeremiah2v8 on April 03, 2018, 09:33:22 PM
    So who is right and who is wrong between you and the Magisterium when you "disagree" with its speculatively theologizing about BoD?

    The wrong one is in "error" - which is why I imagine you "disagree" with it. Or do you "disagree" with truth much?

    If it's the Magisterium in error, don't go doing any carpentry with your "rule of faith." lol
    Since his magisterium can be wrong on inconsequential matters, he is naturally free to decide which matters are inconsequential and which matters they got wrong. He is also forced to decide who is actually the real vs fraudulent magisterium and find out where the real magisterium aka Church is hiding.  

    What does this actually amount to? It amounts to the whole idea being wholly iniquitous. It's only aim is to spread iniquity, which  causes doubt, division, confusion and the loss of faith among the people. The NO knew exactly what they were doing when they convinced the masses that the magisterium is the rule of faith.

    As per Last Tradhican's sig - the whole idea has been "Assisting Souls to Hell Since 1962."

    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10299
    • Reputation: +6212/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #393 on: April 04, 2018, 08:53:41 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    Interestingly enough, my first post on this thread was on page 12 - It was a post correcting your false assertion that "the foundation of the Church are its teachings..."
    The Church = teachings + pope.  It's both.  However, teachings came first, because Christ was teaching the Apostles the Truth (which came from both the Old Testament and Christ's new testament) before the Church even existed.  Christ's public life and time before the Ascension were done before Pentacost (birthday of the Church).  So, teachings are the foundation of the Church, with the pope being the guardian of the teachings.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10299
    • Reputation: +6212/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #394 on: April 04, 2018, 08:56:03 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!2
    • Quote
    As for the Bellarmine quote from the SSPX article you posted, I believe Cantarella and Ladislaus addressed this.
    Why don't YOU address it?  They read plain english and then apply verbal/mental gymnastics to say that it doesn't say what it says.  I guess you go along with their lack of integrity?  Suit yourself.
    Logged

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6173
    • Reputation: +3147/-2941
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #395 on: April 04, 2018, 11:04:34 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Cantarella on April 04, 2018, 10:57:38 AM
    The Pope is human indeed; but as time progresses, I am more and more convinced that his Faith indeed cannot fail. Until someone is able to prove otherwise; I am now endorsing the 4th proposition explained by St. Bellarmine here:


    As I had said before, the evidence of Popes not falling into heresy is overwhelming. R&R just can't really defend its position on this matter. Most of their sources do not even have enough theological weight whatsoever. For example, this quote attributed to Pope Adrian VI:


    First, this is a false assertion, given that it is easily proven by ecclesiastical docuмents that not "MANY" Roman pontiffs were heretics. Second, it turns out that this quote was not written by POPE Adrian VI, but by "Adriano Florenzio" before being elected pontiff. Therefore, this work does not even belong to the Magisterium whatsoever.

    Do you believe that the pope is also divine? I have to ask, because you said that the pope and Christ are not independent of each other. 

    Logged
    "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 Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13817
    • Reputation: +5566/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #396 on: April 04, 2018, 11:58:46 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Cantarella on April 04, 2018, 11:37:39 AM
    I will go further and say that I don't even think you can safely believe a Pope can become a heretic after the dogmatic definition of Papal infallibility from Vatican I Council.

    So 1) when, exactly, does the pope exercise this infallibility, 2) what is the criteria for the pope's infallibility per V1, also 3) when, exactly do all the bishops of the world exercise their infallibility according to the First Vatican Council?
    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10299
    • Reputation: +6212/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #397 on: April 04, 2018, 01:34:08 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote
    I am now endorsing the 4th proposition explained by St. Bellarmine here:
    Ha ha.
    1) Who cares what you endorse?  
    2) The first phrase out of St Bellarmine's mouth is:  "...it is probable..."
    3) So what are you endorsing, a probability?
    4) So, from a probability (and your scriptural annotations...let's not forget those), you infer a DOGMATIC view that the papacy is "unfailing", IN ALL MATTERS, even when not infallible?  (And you obviously don't understand V1, if you think this council supports your view).

    This is just laughable.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10299
    • Reputation: +6212/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #398 on: April 04, 2018, 01:36:30 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    He's referring to the simple fact that the existence of the alleged quotation cannot be verified.
    St Bellarmine was quoted 4-5x saying that 1) councils are only infallible in their decrees/canons/definitons and 2) decrees/canons/definitions are the ONLY parts which are 'of the faith' and must be held for salvation. 
    Logged

    Offline Samuel

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 225
    • Reputation: +286/-120
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #399 on: April 04, 2018, 02:35:22 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Cantarella on April 04, 2018, 02:03:06 PM
    A single reading of Dogmatic Constitution Pastor Aeternus is all is needed to arrive to my conclusions:

    7. This gift of truth and never-failing faith was therefore divinely conferred on Peter and his successors in this See so that they might discharge their exalted office for the salvation of all, and so that the whole flock of Christ might be kept away by them from the poisonous food of error and be nourished with the sustenance of heavenly doctrine. Thus the tendency to schism is removed and the whole Church is preserved in unity, and, resting on its foundation, can stand firm against the gates of hell.

    Catarella, PLEASE use some common sense.

    Q. What is the gift that was conferred on Peter and his successors?
    A. It is the "gift of truth and never-failing faith".

    Q. Why was this gift conferred on them?
    A. It was given "so that they might discharge their exalted office for the salvation of all and so that the whole flock of Christ might be kept away by them from the poisonous food of error and be nourished with the sustenance of heavenly doctrine".

    Q. And what would be the result of having such a gift?
    A. It would "remove the tendency to schism and the whole Church would preserved in unity, and, resting on its foundation, can stand firm against the gates of hell."

    Now look outside your window, and what do you see?

    The modern popes started spouting error, they handed out poisonous food, we have schismatic rites, etc... But wait a minute, what about that gift they received? Was that gift not supposed to prevent just the kind of situation we're in now?

    1. The pope certainly does not seem to have (or at least use) that gift any longer.
    2. He is no longer nourishing us with heavenly doctrine.
    3. There is no longer unity, but schisms everywhere.

    So, was that gift useful to have then? Did it work?

    According to the sedevacantive narrative, God's gift is utterly useless. The only use they have for this gift is as a tool to reject whichever pope they would like to reject. Exactly the opposite of what the gift was given for: to preserve unity and avoid schism!!

    According to Traditional Catholics with understanding, the gift was given for a certain purpose, but not forced upon the ones receiving this gift. IF they make use of it, they will be guaranteed to achieve the promised result. IF they refuse to make use of this gift, they will not be guaranteed to achieve the promised results. Just like when you are given a ruler: IF you use the ruler to draw lines, your lines will be straight, but IF you refuse to use that ruler your lines will be crooked.

    In the sedevacantist narrative, this gift of never failing-faith would have made St. Peter and his successors impeccable, invincible, perfect, etc.. and it would have taken away their free will.

    Let's try another way:

    If you believe that a pope can fall into heresy and lose the faith, then you must admit that at that point he also loses this gift of "never failing faith". So he can lose that gift, ok? But if he can lose this gift, could it also not be possible that he can simply choose not to use this gift, while still retaining it for future use? Was the gift forced upon him? And when he refuses to use the gift, will he be deposed because of such refusal? In that case I would say it is no longer a gift but a curse, like the sword of Damocles: "you can be pope, and here's you're welcome gift, but if you step out of line you're no longer pope and I will take your gift off". I would certainly never want to be a pope under such conditions!

    I think this whole sede things just defies logic.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10299
    • Reputation: +6212/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #400 on: April 04, 2018, 03:00:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
    • Quote
    7. This gift of truth and never-failing faith was therefore divinely conferred on Peter and his successors in this See so that (1) they might discharge their exalted office for the salvation of all, and so that (2) the whole flock of Christ might be kept away by them from the poisonous food of error and (3) be nourished with the sustenance of heavenly doctrine. Thus the (4) tendency to schism is removed and the whole Church is preserved in unity, and, resting on its foundation, can stand firm against the gates of hell.

    Here's another view of the above. 

    1.  What is the "exalted office for the salvation of all"? 
      Answer:  It is the OFFICIAL TEACHING office of the magisterium. 
      Problem:  The V2 church does not make use of its official teaching office, because she does not teach AUTHORITATIVELY, which binds us to believe, as a matter of salvation.

    2.  How does the Church keep the flock away from the "poisonous food of error"? 
      Answer:  By AUTHORITATIVELY teaching that x, y or z is ANATHEMA and FORCING the faithful to reject these errors UNDER PAIN OF SIN.
      Problem:  V2 did not do this and the post-V2 Church has not done this, except for Paul VI condemning birth control and JPII condeming women-priests and also euthanasia and abortion.

    3.  How does the Church "nourish with the substance of heavenly doctrine"? 
      Answer:  By AUTHORITATIVELY teaching that a, b and c MUST be believed WITH CERTAINTY OF FAITH. 
      Problem:  Outside of the positive teachings of Paul VI on family/natural law and JPII on the importance of life, the pope's actions are non-existent.

    4.  How does the Church remove schism and preserve unity?
      Answer:  By teaching AUTHORITATIVELY and BINDING THE WHOLE CHURCH to believe a, b and c.
      Problem:  V2 did not do so, and the post-V2 Church hasn't done so outside of the few cases listed above concerning contraception, euthanasia and abortion.

    Your interpretation of the above passage is wholly inadequate, theologically empty and illogical.  Your lack of reading comprehension is astounding.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10299
    • Reputation: +6212/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #401 on: April 04, 2018, 03:02:47 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    And those I have already explained to you.
    You ignored 1/2 of the quotes.  I'm not surprised.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10299
    • Reputation: +6212/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #402 on: April 04, 2018, 03:07:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    Your argument is not with me, Pax, but with the Vicar of Christ.  
    The pope is the foundation of the Church, but not the ONLY foundation. 
    Logged

    Offline Samuel

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 225
    • Reputation: +286/-120
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #403 on: April 04, 2018, 03:10:45 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Cantarella on April 04, 2018, 02:50:44 PM
    That is just because you do not understand it. If, in fact, the conciliar "popes" have done all you describe above against the Church, then that is a public indication that they are NOT the legitimate successors of St. Peter to begin with. That is the sign, because we know that popes do not fall into heresy.

    Vatican I told us that the pope received a gift for a very specific purpose. Sedevacantists completely ignore that purpose and have inserted their own purpose:

    According to Vatican I the purpose of this gift is: to enable the pope to nourish the Church with heavenly doctrine, and to keep the Church united.

    According to sedevacantists the purpose of this gift is to give Catholics a litmus test for the validity of a given pope.

    Can you not see that this is a gross distortion?
    Logged

    Offline Samuel

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 225
    • Reputation: +286/-120
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #404 on: April 04, 2018, 03:17:51 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on April 04, 2018, 03:12:54 PM
    Do tell.  This ought to be good.

    [Insert R&R distortion of Vatican I right here].

    Ladislaus, it is stupid and useless remarks like these that undermine everything else you may possibly have to say. I normally skip straight over your posts.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 76
    « previous next »