Author Topic: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd? (Read 441993 times)

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #945 on:** May 05, 2018, 08:01:12 PM »

Quote from: drew on May 05, 2018, 07:06:05 PM

Ladislaus,

You are talking about the historical precedent of "a span of three years" between popes during which time the willful intent, the moral imperative, and the material and instrumental means to make a pope was always present.

This cannot be equated with a span of more than fifty years, give or take a few depending on whose version of S&S your dealing with, during which there exists no willful intent, no moral imperative, and no material and instrumental means to correct the defect. The defect is even worse with Sedeprivationists who have destroyed the papal office by fracturing its form and matter. It is a dogma (for whatever that is worth to you), a formal object of divine and Catholic faith, that there will be "perpetual successors" in the papal office. What do you think the word "perpetual" means? Its primary meaning in English, and the Latin from which it is derived, is "permanent." The only thing "permanent" about the S&Sers is the defect.

Your church has no pope, no magisterium, no dogma, no rule of faith, no moral compass and no way out.

I doubt not that in "your church" I am a "heretic" and "blasphemer" but I am not a member of "your church." The Jews and Mohammedans would agree with you. I am a member of the Catholic Church which can be recognized even in this age of apostasy by unmistakable Attributes. "Your church," as you said is "better off WITHOUT a Magisterium," therefore it is, without a possibility of doubt, not the Church founded by Jesus Christ.

Drew

Read again, Lad.

drew · « **Reply #946 on:** May 05, 2018, 08:04:15 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on May 05, 2018, 04:06:27 PM

So Drew claims that Vatican I teaching regarding never-failing faith applies only to when the Pope is infallibly defining dogma. Drew, using his own rule of faith, his own private judgment, explains away anything he doesn't like.

Unfortunately for him, this sentence precedes the one cited earlier. Pastor Aeternus:
Explain how, after your interpretation of what happened with Vatican II, you do not deny this teaching that "this See of St. Peter always remains unblemished by ANY ERROR." Vatican II is the mother of all blemishes on the Holy See ... from your heretical viewpoint.

Ladislaus,

Because the Magisterium, that is the "teaching authority" of the Church grounded upon the Attributes of Authority and Infallibility has only been engaged on rare occasions by the conciliar popes and in every instance, there has been no error. God has kept his promise for more than sixty years.

S&Sers corrupt everything by perverting the meaning of the Magisterium and the Pope primarily by taking the Attributes that belong primarily and essentially to the Church and making them primarily and essentially the attributes of churchmen. It is a form of idolatry because the Attributes of the Church are Attributes of God alone, and only of the Church because it is God's Church. They are Attributes of churchmen only secondarily and accidentally when specific conditions are met. When these divine Attributes are ascribed as the personal property of churchmen, there follows a litany of nonsense from S&Sers such as that the pope can never lose the virtue of faith, that everything in a general council is infallible, infallibility means the pope is infallible in everything, indefectibility means that the pope has a negative infallibility in every fallible act, obedience becomes unconditional with churchmen just as it is with God, Dogma is not divine revelation and therefore not the rule of faith, Dogma is open for reinterpretation by the magisteriuim which is the rule of faith, anyone taking Dogma literally is a "Protestant" engaging in "private interpretation," all liturgy is disciplinary and accidental to the faith, and a matter of mere ecclesiastical faith that is subject to the free, independent, and arbitrary will of the legislator, and on, and on.

But you don't have to worry about any of this non-sense. In "your church" with "no magisterium" you get to be your own rule of faith. You can believe whatever you want and nobody will care. No reason you cannot be the next S&Sers pope. Maybe someday, Ladislaus the Great.

Drew

drew · « **Reply #947 on:** May 05, 2018, 08:23:42 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on May 05, 2018, 07:51:44 PM

So, then, tell us, Drew, how long is too long? 3 years, 5 years, 7.5 years, 10 years 3 months and 15 days, 15 years 6 months and give days? Do tell us what the cutoff is.

Ladislaus,

In "your church" you can do whatever you want. You can make things up as you go alone. You are your own rule of faith.

But for the sake of argument, let's assume the average election of a new pope has occurred at period of 6 months since the death of his predecessor. And this repetition has occurred for the last two thousand years with minor variations. And this repetitive line of the successors is called "perpetual." And not only is it called "perpetual successors" but it is defined such as a Dogma, a formal object of divine and Catholic faith. Now during the last two thousand years every time a pope died, there existed a material and instrumental means to elect his successor as well as a committed will and moral imperative to do so. Then suddenly it stops and you have no pope for sixty years. And what is worse, no will, no moral imperative, no material and instrumental means to do so.

Can you give a single example historically, or in nature where the applying the word, "perpetual" becomes meaningless?

But this just dreaming. Sedeprivationism destroys the papal office by fracturing the form and matter. There is no chair for your "pope" to sit in. If you do become the pope of "your church," you just have to stand up. Then we can talk about the Lectern of Ladislaus.

Drew

drew · « **Reply #948 on:** May 05, 2018, 08:36:13 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on May 05, 2018, 08:03:37 PM

So, let's say the Church is restored and the undisputably-legitimate Pius XIII reigns on the See of Peter. Pius XIII issues an Encyclical. Immediately Drew sits back in his arm chair and begins his analysis of whether or not there might be any errors in it. What kind of bizarro-world vision of the Church you have.

Ladislaus,

In "your church" this would be a problem since heretics are, by definition, those who do not keep dogma as their rule of faith there is nothing by which any judgment could be made. As you have already said, you "have no magisterium." But for faithful Catholics who keep Dogma as their rule of faith, Dogma will continue to serve them well. You see, we rely on God, who through the Magisterium of the Church has given everyone of good will these unmistakable guidepost that illumine our paths so that even in the most difficult times we can keep our footing.

Drew

drew · « **Reply #949 on:** May 05, 2018, 08:46:25 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on May 05, 2018, 08:06:58 PM

That has to be the dumbest nonsense you've posted yet. Just because none of the popes has, according to you, engaged infallibility, "there has been no error".

Ladislaus,

When you rip a quote out of context it is just a form of lying. In "your church" is lying a sin? Since you get to make up your own doctrine I suppose that you can make up your own morality.

No one said that there has been "no error" since Vatican II. Quite the contrary, I have said many time the conciliar popes are heretics. What I said is that these heretics have never engaged the Magisterium, that is, the "teaching authority" of the Church grounded upon her Attributes of Infallibility and Authority, to bind the Catholic faithful to doctrinal or moral error.

I have already posted how the S&Sers get around this by making the pope a god, but unfortunately, a god not to their liking.

Drew

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd? (Read 441993 times)

Maria Auxiliadora

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?

drew

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

drew

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