Fr. Ringrose - Accepts Sedevacantism

Deleted
Deleted Member

Posts: 0

Fr. Ringrose - Accepts Sedevacantism Apr 30, 2018 3:07:14 GMT

Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2018 3:07:14 GMT

More digging in from Mr. Chojnowski's website radtradthomist.chojnowski.me/2018/04/breaking-st-anthanasius-church-in.html

Dr. Chojnowski: Here is an announcement placed in Fr. Ringrose's St. Athanasius Church. This was just sent me by a parishioner. I don't see how you can say anything else but they are rejecting what has come to be called the "recognize and resist" position. What will Fr. Ortiz do since I know he is a "recognize and resist" Resistance priest? Things are a changin'.

Deleted
Deleted Member

Posts: 0

Fr. Ringrose - Accepts Sedevacantism Apr 30, 2018 15:37:36 GMT

Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2018 15:37:36 GMT

Apr 30, 2018 3:07:14 GMT @jonathan said:

More digging in from Mr. Chojnowski's website radtradthomist.chojnowski.me/2018/04/breaking-st-anthanasius-church-in.html

Dr. Chojnowski: Here is an announcement placed in Fr. Ringrose's St. Athanasius Church. This was just sent me by a parishioner. I don't see how you can say anything else but they are rejecting what has come to be called the "recognize and resist" position. What will Fr. Ortiz do since I know he is a "recognize and resist" Resistance priest? Things are a changin'.

Notice Fr. Ringrose is 100% supported in the fake resistance having whatever view he wants. While the rest of us want to stay with ABL having no changes -- we are rebuked by their bishops. Says it all.

The quibble of Fr. Ortiz means nothing in their overall smorgasbord. Their mission statement is ecumenical to just get alone.

As far as "things are changing" is a late observation. It has changed when BW said he views independence higher than obedience to God and His order.

The devil only laughs at such selfish egos...imitating himself.

Deleted
Deleted Member

Posts: 0

Fr. Ringrose - Accepts Sedevacantism May 6, 2018 5:05:25 GMT

Post by Deleted on May 6, 2018 5:05:25 GMT

As Fr. Ringrose digs deeper into the sedevacantist camp, his new friends are ecstatic. Nouvs ordo watch (who are dogmatic sedevacantists) also understood the meaning of Fr. Ringrose's repudiation of "recognize and resist" and added some further context.

novusordowatch.org/2018/05/fr-ronald-ringrose-abandons-recognize-and-resist-position/

Theological Earthquake at Virginia Trad Chapel: Fr. Ronald Ringrose abandons Recognize-and-Resist Position

Together with his rejection of the recognize-and-resist position, however, Fr. Ringrose also came out against Sedevacantism, which he believes to be erroneous as well. Instead, he cautiously proposes a third option which seems very similar, if not identical in all its nuances and details, to what is typically called “Sedeprivationism” (alternatively, it is referred to as the “material-formal theory” or the “Cassiciacum Thesis”), which was first enunicated by the Dominican theologian Bp. Michel-Louis Guerard des Lauriers and is today maintained by Bp. Donald J. Sanborn in the United States and Fr. Francesco Ricossa in Italy, among others.

(...)

Although Fr. Ringrose had already publicly voiced his rejection of the recognize-and-resist position before, it was not until earlier this year that he noticeably eliminated the name of Francis from his liturgical prayers (such as the Good Friday intercessory prayers and the Exsultet hymn on Holy Saturday) and dropped his usual weekly request for prayers for the intentions of the Sovereign Pontiff. He has also discarded the missalettes in his parish that had Francis’ name in them.

A question that must be asked is: Where does this leave Fr. Juan Carlos Ortiz, who is Fr. Ringrose’s subordinate and assists his work but has always been vocal in condemning public and dogmatic Sedevacantism and Sedeprivationism? Fr. Ortiz has always said that any Mass that publicly and dogmatically drops Francis’ name from the Canon cannot be attended because it is schismatic. Is he now leaving St. Athanasius to be consistent, or has he changed his position so it aligns with that of the pastor? Or is he engaging in cognitive dissonance, saying one thing while doing another?

Interestingly enough, Fr. Ringrose is joined in his repudiation of the recognize-and-resist position by other former resistance priests: Fr. Pierre Roy, Fr. Olivier Rioult, Fr. Nicolas Pinaud, and even Fr. Francois Chazal have all recently modified their theological position to where they now hold that recognize-and-resist is doctrinally erroneous and that the Vatican II “popes” do not possess the infallible and indefectible teaching authority of the Vicar of Christ

On the other hand, the former SSPX bishop Richard Williamson, a man who advocates the recognize-and-resist position ad absurdum, is still trying to defend the indefensible, as a recent post on Dr. Peter Chojnowski’s blog shows. It remains to be seen how he reacts to the recent defections from the R&R camp into a quasi-Sedevacantism.

The question regarding what Bishop Williamson thinks is easy, he says he only condemns dogmatic sedevacantism and accepts and promotes practical sedevacantism. In addition, he wrote the preface for Fr. Chazal's new book admitting the same. So all good for Bishop Williamson. It fits into his view of trad-ecumenism.

The bigger story here what those websites are not talking about is the fact prior to Frs. Ringrose and Chazal evolving into sedevacantists, they already trespassed holding independent thought against the Church within Bishop Williamson revolution. Clearly, this intern was their evident downfall digressing into sedevacantism who share the same protestant spirit to judge contrary from what the Church allows.

The more these priests make up words to hide their true intention, the fact is, sedeprivationism is the SAME thing as sedevacantism. Sedeprivationism is only a maneuver in political nuance as they in the end both dump the pope's name and authority from their conscience and masses.

The only difference between other bishops and the pope is the pope has authority over them and the universal Church. When sedeprivationists "take away" the authority from the pope, he no longer identifies as a pope. So the seat is empty = sedevacantism.

Even Bishop Sanborn is happy to hear this news:

A step in the right direction. We are told on good authority that, in St. Athanasius Chapel in Vienna, Virginia, the priest in charge there, Fr. Ringrose, posted a notice on the bulletin board that recognize and resist is contrary to the teachings of the Church and must be rejected, and that the chair of Peter may not be completely vacant, but it is certain that the Novus Ordo “popes” do not possess the authority of Peter and his successors.

Fr. Ringrose, formerly a priest of the Archdiocese of Baltimore, was conditionally re-ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1982. He has been saying the Mass in the Washington D.C. area since that time. I am naturally happy to see progress in his position regarding the new religion and the Modernist hierarchy.

(Bp. Donald J. Sanborn, Most Holy Trinity Seminary Newsletter for March 2018; bold print and italics given.)

Of course all these sedes get along having the same denominator -no pope.

That this need not threaten Catholic unity is shown, for example, by the fact that Fr. Anthony Cekada, who takes a Totalist position, teaches theology at Bp. Sanborn’s seminary, who adheres to Sedeprivationism and argues in one of his essays that in his view, Totalism “deprives the Church of the means to elect a legitimate successor of St. Peter [and] ultimately destroys its apostolicity” (“Explanation of the Thesis of Bishop Guerard des Lauriers”, p. 8).

Its all the same for them.

Last Edit: May 11, 2018 6:38:00 GMT by Deleted

Admin
Senior Member

Posts: 5,838

Fr. Ringrose - Accepts Sedevacantism May 6, 2018 16:59:32 GMT

Post by Admin on May 6, 2018 16:59:32 GMT

Interesting to point to about the above article is the very title of the Novus Ordo Watch article:

Theological Earthquake at Virginia Trad Chapel: Fr. Ronald Ringrose abandons Recognize-and-Resist Position

Sedevacantism is a theological stance. Its adaptation by more of the false resistance crowd - all allowed and blessed by Bishop Williamson - shows once again, that many errors are allowed under that false umbrella.

"So what is our attitude? It is clear that all those who are leaving us or who have left us for sedevacantism or because they want to be submitted to the present hierarchy of the Church all the while hoping to keep Tradition, we cannot have relations with them anymore. It is not possible.

Us, we say that we cannot be submitted to the ecclesiastical authority and keep Tradition. They say the opposite. They are deceiving the faithful. Despite the esteem we may have for them, there is of course no question of insulting them, but we do not want to engage in polemics and we prefer not to deal with them anymore. It is a sacrifice we have to make. But it did not start today, it has been going on for twenty years.

All those who separate from us, we are very affected by it, but we really cannot make another choice if we want to keep Tradition. We must be free from compromise as much with regard to sedevacantists as with regard to those who absolutely want to be submitted to the ecclesiastical authority.” (Archbishop Lefebvre - Conference, Flavigny, December 1988; Fideliter, March/April 1989)

"So let us be confident, let us not be unprepared, let us not be outflanked, let us be wise, vigilant, fighting against those who are trying to tear the faith out of our souls and morality out of our hearts, so that we may remain Catholics, remain united to the Blessed Virgin Mary, remain united to the Roman Catholic Church, remain faithful children of the Church."- Archbp. Lefebvre 1980

Deleted
Deleted Member

Posts: 0

Fr. Ringrose - Accepts Sedevacantism May 8, 2018 16:08:40 GMT

Post by Deleted on May 8, 2018 16:08:40 GMT

A question that must be asked is: Where does this leave Fr. Juan Carlos Ortiz, who is Fr. Ringrose’s subordinate and assists his work but has always been vocal in condemning public and dogmatic Sedevacantism and Sedeprivationism? Fr. Ortiz has always said that any Mass that publicly and dogmatically drops Francis’ name from the Canon cannot be attended because it is schismatic. Is he now leaving St. Athanasius to be consistent, or has he changed his position so it aligns with that of the pastor? Or is he engaging in cognitive dissonance, saying one thing while doing another?

Or really just words. Fr. Ortiz lives with Fr. MacMan (sp?) the third priest in the house who is an open dogmatic sedevacantist immediately after he was ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre in the 1980's.

Fr. Ortiz does what he wants to suit his advantage.

Last Edit: May 8, 2018 16:12:48 GMT by Deleted

Deleted
Deleted Member

Posts: 0

Fr. Ringrose - Accepts Sedevacantism May 11, 2018 6:40:48 GMT

Post by Deleted on May 11, 2018 6:40:48 GMT

The Catholic Church condemned the new position of Frs. Chazal and Ringrose.

If anyone thus speaks, that the Roman Pontiff has only the office of inspection or direction, but not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the universal Church, not only in things which pertain to faith and morals, but also in those which pertain to the discipline and government of the Church spread over the whole world; or, that he possesses only the more important parts, but not the whole plenitude of this supreme power; or that this power of his is not ordinary and immediate, or over the churches altogether and individually, and over the pastors and the faithful altogether and individually: let him be anathema.

(First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Pastor Aeternus, Ch. 3; Denz. 1831)

Deleted
Deleted Member

Posts: 0

Fr. Ringrose - Accepts Sedevacantism Jun 4, 2018 0:33:56 GMT

Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2018 0:33:56 GMT

Fr. Roy, one of the residing sedevacantists working inside the false resistance with its four bishops, has favorably put up on his website Fr. Ringrose's three bulletin letters stating sede-privationism to gain traction with his own sede beliefs -- the present papacy is void of authority.

Funny how sedevacantists can judge with an "authority" they do not have and say that a pope who does have authority, does not have any.

Fr. Roy's website is out of canada here.

The link in question is here in a english google translation translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fcanadafidele.com%2F2018%2F05%2F23%2Flaffaire-ringrose-1%2F

There's more. Fr. Roy requested a bio of Fr. Ringrose for his own people to understand the evolution of positions Fr. Ringrose went through. Knowing Fr. Ringrose publicly stated he was a "Recognize&Resist" (R&R) priest for years, he now stated he was otherwise. We were duped.

Hate to use the sede R&R narrative, but that is what seems to make the debate.

[Excerpt:]

"Fr. Ringrose says he has never been satisfied with the R & R theology ( Recognize the authority of the Pope, but resists it ) because he found it deficient from the doctrinal point of view, but did not know how to explain otherwise the crisis of the 'Church. This situation lasted until around 2010, when he looked at the alternative attempts to explain, which, according to him, protected the doctrines of the infallibility , indefectibility and perpetuity of the apostolic hierarchy . It was around the year 2012 that he began to educate his followers about what he sees as the "doctrinal errors" of the R & R position." (Fr. Ringrose, June 1, 2018)

translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fcanadafidele.com%2F2018%2F06%2F01%2Flaffaire-ringrose-2-introduction-qui-est-labbe-ronald-ringrose%2F

The last part of Fr. Ringrose's statement is more interesting saying it was around the year 2012 he was educating his followers toward sede-privationism. Well well. That all took place under Bishop Williamson and the other false bishops.

What kind of soup are these bishops teaching?

Moreover, Fr. Zendejas was consecrated a bishop in 2017, with all the other bishops present, under the now confirmed existing sede-privationist chapel of Fr. Ringrose since 2012 to present.

Surprise? No. Just more false on the false.

They put more emphasis on the "rule of authority", like the rest of the extreme novus ordoites and sedes, than on the foundation of the faith. So much for the infallibility and indefectability of the faith one must adhere to as they trash it off looking to blame life is bad on someone else's sins.

Last Edit: Jun 4, 2018 0:36:59 GMT by Deleted

Deleted
Deleted Member

Posts: 0

Fr. Ringrose - Accepts Sedevacantism Jul 5, 2018 5:15:18 GMT

Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2018 5:15:18 GMT

Poor Fr. Ringrose, on and on he goes in another bulletin he and his chapel chatter with catechism questions about the pope and the church trying to make an argument based on the revolution's Rule of authority he adopted; which is also the foundation of sedevacantism he forms in his people. It is so contrary to the words and promises of a Catholic baptism our Lord gave us in belief which is based on the Rule of the Faith - the Father Son and Holy Ghost; not on a rule of authority.

The rule of authority is a created agent of hierarchical form and structure to protect the faith. It is subservient to the Faith. It needs the faith to have any authority to give authority. The rule of authority is truthless without the faith to light and guide that authority. Authority alone, or as the revolution likes it, to put authority above truth, above faith, is both the french and american revolution in act smashing, pillaging, and lighting churches on fire. It is a human pride, one of despair, it is tyrannical and formed from the belly of man. Its results are fermented passions.

More and more the false resistance highlights their belief in the revolution's Rule of authority and naturally delves into the [far right] error of sedevacantism blinding the intellect and impassions the irascibles.

In a pastoral effort, Fr. Ringrose makes a rather incoherent attempt trying to attached the infallibility of the Church as if the pope is somehow infallible in everything he does. "If the pope errs, he says, the Church is in defect." So "pope cannot err, so Church won't err." This is not the teaching of the Church on infallibility and how it relates to the pope in error. Frankly, it is a mindset trying to justify the end as the means.

Fr. Ringrose wants the pope and his human scandals out of his mind to lessen the sacrifice God is asking of him as a priest to walk in faith than in comfort of the human community.

His notation in his Bulletin follows.

radtradthomist.chojnowski.me/2018/07/fr-ringrose-boldly-calls-r-heresy-see.html

“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].”

It is noted he did not say the pope is a heretic in that passage, as the link would like him to say, though it is another attempt by Fr. Ringrose to alienate his role as priest to the mystery God is effecting in His Church to purify it.

By the way, where is Fr. Oritz in all of this? Why does he not come out with a 100 page thesis against sede-vacantism/sede-privationism/ sede-impoundist/sede-pope-has-no-authority.... his rector is embracing?

Last Edit: Jul 5, 2018 5:16:22 GMT by Deleted