Fr. Ringrose Boldly Calls Recognize & Resist a Heresy. See the Latest Parish Posting from St. Athanasius' Chapel, Vienna, VA.



Your Excellencies, Priests, and Friends,

Here is a copy of Father Ringrose’s article that appeared in today’s Sunday Bulletin:

“An elaborate theological argument is worthless and false if it draws a conclusion that is contrary to there simple, straightforward teachings found in the Catechism. A detailed theological study can be useful in expounding these simple truths and shedding further light on them for those who have a sufficient grounding in theology, but such a study can never be used to undermine or contradict these truths.

For the average Catholic it is sufficient to know one’s Catechism well. Firmly believe the doctrines expressed there, for they are an expression of the Church’s infallible Magisterium. Reject anything, no matter how erudite it may appear, if it draws a conclusion contrary to that Catechism.

Every Catechism clearly teaches that the pope and the bishops infallibly teach us what we are to believe. This is the promise of Christ. If the pope and the bishops were to teach us any error whatsoever, it would mean that Christ has broken His promise and the Holy Ghost has abandoned the Church — which is impossible. (Baltimore Catechism # 3, [Questions 528 & 529].”
Fr
Now to another issue: it has recently been asserted by an R&R votary that Vatican II was a pastoral council and was not therefore binding, but out of the council came a "new religion with new doctrines" that if followed, would not be Catholic. So we [meaning R&R] do not follow the popes that received the Council.

If in fact a new religion and new doctrines were created at V2 [and they were], this religion / these doctrines are NOT Catholic. The Church being Indefectible and Infallible CANNOT change, CANNOT substantially alter its doctrines against Christ. Thus, NO Pope, NO council can change the Deposit of Faith left by Our Lord Jesus Christ.

R&R is the heresy that boldly dares to contradict Christ's own promise that the Church [Pope and Bishops] cannot err in teaching faith and morals.

Adversus solem ne loquitor 

W. E. Platz

Comments

  1. Dr. there is quite a discussion over at Aka Catholic on the validity of Episcopal consecrations. One argues that consecrations are valid as long as the words are said and the matter is a male. Form and matter. We are dealing with the SSPX consecrations and specifically the archbishop who founded SSPX, who was consecrated by Lienart. Lienart has been revealed to be a confirmed freemason. Now Thomas begins his discussion of Episcopal orders by stating that no one can seek the office of Bishop, that to do so is unlawful, ie. invalid. So can the infiltrators of Vatican 2 who sought the destruction of the Catholic Church and Faith, by assuming Episcopal orders be valid? Did they intend to do as the Church has always done?Or rather did they intend by episcopal contivences to be wolves in sheep"s clothing? I think we are seeing the answer unfold before us. But what about the "trad-conservative" reaction against the modernist-judeo hirelings? Are they raising up before us false opposition against the masonic judeo operation? Is it all one big one deception?

    ReplyDelete
  2. This doesn't make sense. How can it be true that 'the pope and bishops teach what is infallibly true' 'If in fact a new religion and new doctrines were created at V2 [and they were]?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because Paul VI was not a true pope?

      Delete
    2. They were not popes or bishops! They lost their authority and office through heresy/refusing to carry out the good of the society they were appointed to lead.

      Delete
  3. I'm sorry, where does Fr R call RR a heresy? Bill Platz uses the term heresy, and he is right. But Fr R says RR is "contrary to the teaching of the church." Fr R has never called RR a heresy. He has a RR priest in his parish (er, votary) so he can't call it a heresy. That would be a sin against ecumenism, hehe....

    ReplyDelete
  4. What I meant was that the statement itself doesn't make sense. How can one person say that the pope...teach(es) what is infallibly true then add that the same person creates new doctrines?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Sister Lucy's Smile: Sister Lucy I + New Teeth = Sister Lucy II. Right? Wrong. Look at the Evidence Here.

There WAS an Imposter. On the Day of the Miracle of the Sun, We Publish Our First of Many Expert Reports. A Plastic Surgeon's Judgment on the Case of the Two Sister Lucys.

The Blessed Emperor and the Tragic Fall of A Catholic Dynasty: Why Nobody Should Be Celebrating the End of World War I.

Dr. Chojnowski with the Latest on TradCat Knight!

Yawn! Nothing to See Here! The Fatima Center's Response to Reader's Inquiry About the Sister Lucy Truth Project.

Help Sister Lucy Truth Crack the Secret of the Third Secret: General Call for Writing Samples from "Sister Lucy".

Are you a Super Facial Recognizer? Take the Test and Be Involved in the Survey By the University of Greenwich