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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 59 60 [61] 62 63 ... 76

Author Topic: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?  (Read 302287 times)

0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 14607
  • Reputation: +5998/-899
  • Gender: Male
Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
« Reply #900 on: May 02, 2018, 11:36:04 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on May 02, 2018, 11:11:02 AM
    Someone posted this on another thread, from John of St. Thomas (pre Vatican I theologian).

    Paying attention, Drew?   :laugh1:

    Pre-Vatican I theologian, Stubborn.   :laugh1:
    :facepalm:
    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 drew

    • Supporter
    • **
    • Posts: 399
    • Reputation: +1122/-239
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #901 on: May 02, 2018, 01:06:45 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on May 02, 2018, 08:40:42 AM
    Unbelievable.  Luther promoted dogma as the rule of faith.  Only difference between him and you is that he only held that there was one source of Revelation instead of the two you believe in.  You are also a heretic for asserting that the Magisterium and Universal Discipline of the Church can corrupt the faith and endanger souls.  [see the video from Archbishop Lefebvre below]

    So when there's no pope after one dies and before another one is elected (in the past this has sometimes gone on for years), there's no Church anymore?


    Ladislaus,

    You have at least one thing right in this post, “Unbelievable.” Another of your posts without offering any evidence or reasoned arguments. But one thing that it is not missing it your characteristic corruption of definitions.

    Luther could not have held “dogma as the rule of faith” because Dogma is the fruit of the Magisterium.  The Magisterium is the teaching authority of the Church grounded upon its divine Attributes of Infallibility and Authority.  Since it teaches by virtue of divine Attributes, the teaching is always infallibly true.  Luther rejected the pope, the papal office, the Magisterum, and the authority of all councils. Luther’s rule of faith was “sola scriptura” interpreted by each individual. Since Luther rejected the means by which Dogma is produced, he could not possibly have held dogma as his rule of faith.

    Luther’s church shares many essential qualities of your own.  You hold the “magisterium as your rule of faith,” but believe that your magisterium is “dormant.”  Unfortunately, it is not “dormant,” but dead because the means to engage the Magisterium have been destroyed.  Sedeprivationism removes the pope from office by destroying the office.  You have no pope, no magisterium, to rule of faith so you, like Luther, are stuck with “Sola Ladislaus.”

    It is only possible to believe that the “Magisterium and Universal Discipline of the Church can corrupt the faith and endanger souls” if you do not know what the Magisterium is and you do not know what is meant by “universal discipline.”  The Magisterium is always and everywhere infallibly true and those who keep dogma, the fruit of the Magisterium, as their rule of faith will never be deceived.  As for “universal discipline,” you make two common mistakes. The first is that you typically eliminate the necessary attribute of time the definition of “universal” which totally corrupts its meaning.  The second mistake is your belief in the myth of “mere ecclesiastical faith” which regards immemorial customs as matters of mere discipline rather than necessary attributes of the faith by which it can be known and communicated to others. 

    Lastly, it is a dogma, a formal object of divine and Catholic faith that the papacy will endure with perpetual successors until the consummation of the world. Your claim that your magisterium is “dormant” because you have no pope.  I am telling you that it is dead because you have no material or instrumental means to ever get one. Your church, like Luther’s, is not the Catholic Church.

    Drew
    Logged

    Offline drew

    • Supporter
    • **
    • Posts: 399
    • Reputation: +1122/-239
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #902 on: May 02, 2018, 02:02:31 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Cantarella on May 02, 2018, 11:47:17 AM
    Nothing new here. This was already addressed. I understand that you, just as Jimmy Akins from Catholic Answers, as well as the pro-Luther "Catholics" of today, believe that Exsurge Domine is only "partially" true. And the only reason you are willing to go this far is because one of the condemned errors of Martin Luther by Pope Leo X specifically applies to you, as anyone with honest integrity can see. Otherwise, you would not be questioning the veracity of this renowned Papal Bull which makes part of the Infallible Magisterium of the Church.

    If you think that my belief that Ecunemical Councils represent the Universal Church (and therefore, have the assistance of the Holy Ghost which prevents them from teaching errors, and require absolute obedience), is solely based on Exsurge Domine, you are quite mistaken, though. I have already provided many other ecclesiastical sources throughout this thread supporting this dogmatic truth. I can defend it without Exsurge Domine.

    Cantarella,

    It is Pope Leo X, the author of Exsurge Domine, who says that the articles against Luther have variable levels of authority from rank heresy to offensive to pious ears.

    What “dogmatic truth” are you defending?  Article #29 refers to all councils without distinction.  Are you claiming that it is a “dogma” that all councils at all levels are beyond criticism in all their decisions?

    You should worry more about your own error rather than the problems of others.  You are in a church that has no pope, no magisterium, no councils, no dogma and no means to ever correct these gross defects.  The church you are in cannot be the Catholic Church because it lacks necessary attributes that make the Catholic Church what she is.  These defects in your church are shared by Lutherans.

    Drew
    Logged

    Offline Theosist

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 116
    • Reputation: +59/-171
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #903 on: May 02, 2018, 03:30:12 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
    • Quote
    Are you claiming that it is a “dogma” that all councils at all levels are beyond criticism in all their decisions?
    Blah, blah, straw man.

    Condemnations by popes or general councils of propositions pertaining to faith or morals are in principle themselves teachings on faith or morals to be held by the whole Church. They are therefore exercises in infallibility. So with all of Exsurge Domine’s condemned propositions.

    Spare us the argument about Honorius you were about to parrot. Anathematisation of a particular person as a heretic is not the same thing as a condemnation of an idea itself or exercise in this kind of infallibility (though binding, my dear Jansenists) because the Church is not given the power to determine without fail what a person’s actual beliefs are. Of course such judgments can be overturned - not because of “context” or “non-universal truth” or an lifting of the condemnation of an idea, but because they are essentially fallible juridical decisions.

    And I’ll say it again: any condemnation as false of an idea by Exsurge Domine, if true at that time and place, is true today and here and will forever be true everywhere. That’s not a matter of Catholic doctrine but an analytic a priori truth of immutable logic.

    Next please.



    Logged

    Offline drew

    • Supporter
    • **
    • Posts: 399
    • Reputation: +1122/-239
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #904 on: May 02, 2018, 03:32:38 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on May 02, 2018, 01:24:01 PM
    OK, Drew, let's contrast my Church and yours.

    My Church:  sometimes there's no actively reigning pope, such as when one dies and before another one is elected
    Your Church:  there's always a pope, at every moment and instant of history, and this pope could teach all manner of heresies, endanger souls, and lead people to hell.

    I'll take "My" Church over YOURS any day.

    Ladislaus,
     
    Good post.  Now everyone knows that you and I are not in the same church.  As you say, your church has “no actively reigning pope” but don’t think of this as an interregnum.  Your church has no intention of ever getting a pope because it does not have the material or instrumental means to ever correct the defect.  Sedeprivationism destroys the office.  You have no chair to sit on.
     
    It is a dogma of the Catholic Church, that is, an article of divine and Catholic faith, that the Catholic Church will keep the papal office intact and occupied with perpetual successors until the consummation of the world.  God has promised that we would always have a pope.  He did not promise that these popes would be faithful. 

    My Church is the Catholic Church where there is a heretical pope, but, God, true to His promise, has prevented over the last sixty years heretical popes from engaging the Magisterium of the Church to bind doctrinal and/or moral errors on the faithful.  These heretical popes will, as you say, “lead people to hell” but only those people who make the pope their rule of faith.  Those who keep dogma as their rule of faith will have no problem keeping on the right road to salvation. As Jesus said, “Take heed lest any man deceive you…..  Go ye therefore not after them.” 
     
    Drew 
    Logged

    Offline Theosist

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 116
    • Reputation: +59/-171
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #905 on: May 02, 2018, 03:46:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    He did not promise that these popes would be faithful.
    Stop. Just stop.

     ‘I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren.’
    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.
    - Vatican I

    The Church has therefore explicitly taught that the Pope has the gift of unfailing faith (identified by Innocent III with his personal faith through the very citation from Luke found in the preceding text of Vatican I, so spare me the nonsense about it referring to the faith of the Church). Nothing Jesus Christ prays for is refused.
    Logged

    Offline drew

    • Supporter
    • **
    • Posts: 399
    • Reputation: +1122/-239
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #906 on: May 02, 2018, 03:57:51 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on May 02, 2018, 01:25:59 PM
    Clowns like Drew and Stubborn confuse indefectibility with mere material continuity.  But why did Our Lord found this Church and this Magisterium in the first place?  Precisely in order to keep people anchored in the truth and to help save their souls.  But if it does the OPPOSITE, lead them into error and endanger their souls, then it has FAILED IN ITS MISSION.  That is more defectibility than if some office or another remains vacant for a length of time.

    Ladislaus,
     
    It is impossible for a Catholic to confuse “indefectibility with mere material continuity.”  Why?  Because, Indefectibility is primarily an Attribute of God.  It is an Attribute of the Catholic Church because the Catholic Church is a divine institution.  Indefectibility as an Attribute is a spiritual power that cannot be confused with crass materialism.  God has promised that the papal office would be preserved with perpetual successors until the consummation of the world.  The spiritual authority cannot be lost without the destruction of the office.
     
    Indefectibility relates primarily to the proper worship of God and the sanctification of the faithful as said before.  The proof of the Indefectibility of the Church is that the true worship of God and the means of sanctification of the faithful have never been absent from the Church even with the corruptions since Vatican II.  There has always been a faithful remnant that have not accepted any Novus Ordo prevarications in doctrine, worship or morals.
     
    Furthermore, the Magisterium, the teaching authority of the Church grounded upon its Attributes of Authority and Infallibility has not at any time failed to teach the truth even on those rare occasions when engaged by heretical popes. 
     
    Those who make the pope their rule of faith will fail.  Those who keep dogma as their rule of faith will not.  
     
    Drew
    Logged

    Offline drew

    • Supporter
    • **
    • Posts: 399
    • Reputation: +1122/-239
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #907 on: May 02, 2018, 04:07:16 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Cantarella on May 02, 2018, 03:48:23 PM
    I am defending this truth:






    Ecunemical Councils represent the Universal Church and cannot err, because the Holy Ghost cannot err.

    Catarella,

    So you are claiming that everything from an ecuмenical council is infallible?  Everything without exception even when there is no intent to define doctrine or morals definitively and impose those determinations upon all the faithful as formal objects of divine and Catholic faith?  And the above evidence is your proof of this claim?

    Drew
    Logged

    Offline drew

    • Supporter
    • **
    • Posts: 399
    • Reputation: +1122/-239
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #908 on: May 02, 2018, 04:18:13 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Theosist on May 02, 2018, 03:46:53 PM
    Stop. Just stop.

    ‘I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren.’
    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.
    - Vatican I

    The Church has therefore explicitly taught that the Pope has the gift of unfailing faith (identified by Innocent III with his personal faith through the very citation from Luke found in the preceding text of Vatican I, so spare me the nonsense about it referring to the faith of the Church). Nothing Jesus Christ prays for is refused.

    Theosist,

    Go back to the beginning of the thread.  This has been covered multiple times.  You are not the first to make this claim.  It is made by everyone who holds the pope as their rule of faith.  If after reading the previous posts you have a problem then offer your objections.  There are those like Cantarella who would agree with you but not one Church Father held that a personal never-failing faith was promised to the successors of St. Peter.  The never-failing faith of the popes only means that they cannot engage the Magisterial power of the Church to bind doctrinal and/or moral error and this was dogmatically defined at Vatican I.
     
    Rev. Cornelius a Lapide addresses this directly and explicitly in his Great Commentary.

    Drew
    Logged

    Offline drew

    • Supporter
    • **
    • Posts: 399
    • Reputation: +1122/-239
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #909 on: May 02, 2018, 04:44:25 PM »
  • Thanks!3
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Cantarella on May 02, 2018, 04:12:45 PM
    I am claiming that Ecunemical Councils do not err. The fallible part of the narrative simply concerns disciplinary issues that are temporary in nature; but there are still not errors. The Holy Ghost assists Ecunemical Councils.

    What part of that don't you understand?

    Cantarella,

    This is just another claim that there is a non-infallible infallibility to go along with the infallible infallibility.  Or as Ladislaus likes to call it, the "Infallible Security."  This really means the pope is your rule of faith because it is the pope who engages the Magisterium and without the pope, there is no Magisterium.  The pope has to be the rule of faith because he personally can never err.

    This historically is untenable. And if the pope is the personal rule of faith regarding doctrine, why not morals as well? When you include area of morals to which the infallibility of the Church also extends it is easier to why the pope cannot be the rule of faith.

    Even the authority you just cited is not saying what you claim.  The quote you provided says:

    Quote
    "Secondly we note, that the holy Councils lawfully kept for determination, or clearing of doubts, or condemning of errors and Heresies, or appeasing of Schisms and troubles, or reformation of like, and such like important matters, have ever the assistance of God’s Spirit, and therefore cannot err in their sentences and determination concerning the same, because the Holy Ghost cannot err, from whom (as you see here) jointly with the Council the resolution proceedeth."
    Quote provided by Cantarella

    I agree perfectly with this quote.  But what do we call the Councils “determination, clearing of doubts, or condemning of errors and heresies, etc., etc.,?  They are called Dogmas. And it is in these determinations where the help of the Holy Ghost is always and infallibly present because the Holy Ghost is the formal and final cause of Dogma.  When there is no intent to make a “determination” on these matters of faith and morals, there is no infallibility present.

    Drew
    Logged

    Offline drew

    • Supporter
    • **
    • Posts: 399
    • Reputation: +1122/-239
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #910 on: May 02, 2018, 04:55:07 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Cantarella on May 02, 2018, 04:25:48 PM
    It is good that you bring up the "local, regional, or national Councils". Do you know what is it precisely which make these Councils passing from "fallible" to infallible, just as the General Councils?

    It is the confirmation of the Holy See. Again, the Papal Approbation.




    Cantarella,

    I agree but do not understand your point.

    My point in the initial post is that #29 article against the errors of Luther is not a dogma.  It refers to councils indiscriminately and it refers to their acts indiscriminately.  Luther rejected the authority of all councils without exception.  I do not diminish the importance of local, regional or national councils but some have contained errors in the past.  Nothing proposed by these councils is approved until it is approved by the pope.  It was a regional council that was approved by the Pope that I referenced earlier in this thread that used the term dogma and "rule of faith" as synonyms.

    Drew
    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14607
    • Reputation: +5998/-899
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #911 on: May 03, 2018, 04:21:09 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Cantarella on May 02, 2018, 05:59:02 PM
    You have your wife, Pax Vobis, and Stubborn each following you around, up - thumbing every single one of your posts while carelessly down-thumbing mine, yet no one of you are actually reading anything that has been posted.

    Did you all miss the part of the visual, which clearly indicates that General Councils are infallible? And no, it is not only when they define canons and anathemas. Lyons I did not define anything. What, do you think that the Holy Ghost only makes an entrance exclusively in the exact time of proposing such dogmatic definitions, and then leaves right after? Absurd.

    Furthermore, your allegation is not only that a General Council ratified by the Pope is NOT infallible merely; but that it has been actually harmful, teaching contra-verdades, leading souls to Hell. Even more absurd.
    The dogma of the Assumption is infallible, the dogma of the Immaculate Conception is infallible, the EENS dogma is infallible, the dogma that we must be subject to the pope in order to get to heaven is infallible, there is no dogma that general councils are infallible.  

    General councils were not held nor were they foretold during the lives of the Apostles and are not found in Scripture, as such, General Councils are not in the Deposit of Faith, are not dogma and are not automatically infallible. Seems like it should be blatantly obvious that V2 itself should more than suffice to prove that all General Councils are most certainly not automatically infallible.  

    If all councils are infallible as you keep insisting, and if you actually believed what you keep insisting, which you don't, but if you did, then regardless of your, mine or anyone's opinion in the matter, we would be bound under pain of sin to forsake the true faith for the new faith just the same as all the other NOers did who actually believe that which you keep insisting.



     
    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 JPaul

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3832
    • Reputation: +3723/-293
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #912 on: May 03, 2018, 09:18:04 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • It all comes down to whether or not you believe that Vatican II was a valid council or some thing else, masquerading as a council.
    Voluminous discussions and quoting thousands of texts and saints are only a means of nibbling around the issue. Was it a valid legitimate council?
    Logged

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6789
    • Reputation: +3467/-2999
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #913 on: May 03, 2018, 09:42:51 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Cantarella on May 02, 2018, 05:59:02 PM
    You have your wife, Pax Vobis, and Stubborn each following you around, up - thumbing every single one of your posts while carelessly down-thumbing mine, yet no one of you are actually reading anything that has been posted.

    Did you all miss the part of the visual, which clearly indicates that General Councils are infallible? And no, it is not only when they define canons and anathemas. Lyons I did not define anything. What, do you think that the Holy Ghost only makes an entrance exclusively in the exact time of proposing such dogmatic definitions, and then leaves right after? Absurd.

    Furthermore, your allegation is not only that a General Council ratified by the Pope is NOT infallible merely; but that it has been actually harmful, teaching contra-verdades, leading souls to Hell. Even more absurd.

    Do you then believe that the Vatican ll Council is infallible?
    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 Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6789
    • Reputation: +3467/-2999
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Is Father Ringrose dumping the R & R crowd?
    « Reply #914 on: May 03, 2018, 10:01:33 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on May 03, 2018, 04:21:09 AM
    If all councils are infallible as you keep insisting, and if you actually believed what you keep insisting, which you don't, but if you did, then regardless of your, mine or anyone's opinion in the matter, we would be bound under pain of sin to forsake the true faith for the new faith just the same as all the other NOers did who actually believe that which you keep insisting.

    The above makes sense. If Vatican ll was an infallible Council, then why don't the sedes accept it as infallible and follow what it taught?

    The sedes tend to focus on what non-sedes believe. Maybe the focus should be on what THEY actually believe for a change. 
    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
    Pages: 1 ... 59 60 [61] 62 63 ... 76
    « previous next »