|
Post by Pacelli on Jun 7, 2017 13:54:16 GMT -5
Great new book. I should know, I wrote the forward. Yes after having read it. link
I strongly warn Catholics to use great caution when reading from the writings of Mr. Ruby. He holds dangerous errors against the Faith, on the matter of the apostolicity of mission, of what constitutes an apostolic successor, and generally speaking errors regarding the Divine Constitution of the Church. His errors, and I would go so far as saying heresy, have been pointed out to him, sources have been presented, but he remains obstinate. Read his book at your own peril.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Jun 7, 2017 15:23:21 GMT -5
Great new book. I should know, I wrote the forward. Yes after having read it. link
dead link
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Dec 2, 2017 18:37:40 GMT -5
Great new book. I should know, I wrote the forward. Yes after having read it. link
I strongly warn Catholics to use great caution when reading from the writings of Mr. Ruby. He holds dangerous errors against the Faith, on the matter of the apostolicity of mission, of what constitutes an apostolic successor, and generally speaking errors regarding the Divine Constitution of the Church. His errors, and I would go so far as saying heresy, have been pointed out to him, sources have been presented, but he remains obstinate. Read his book at your own peril. This is getting peddled on Facebook again...didnt we have a run in with Mr Ruby? And what were the specifics of his errors
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Dec 2, 2017 21:37:22 GMT -5
I strongly warn Catholics to use great caution when reading from the writings of Mr. Ruby. He holds dangerous errors against the Faith, on the matter of the apostolicity of mission, of what constitutes an apostolic successor, and generally speaking errors regarding the Divine Constitution of the Church. His errors, and I would go so far as saying heresy, have been pointed out to him, sources have been presented, but he remains obstinate. Read his book at your own peril. This is getting peddled on Facebook again...didnt we have a run in with Mr Ruby? And what were the specifics of his errors On the Te Deum forum he espoused the following views: 1. He believes that traditional bishops are part of the hierrachy of the Church. 2. He believes they have the right and power to gather the flock of Christ and rule over them. 3. He believes that jurisdiction is not necessary for one to be a legitimate successor of the Apostles. 4. He believes that a mission from the Church can be self-generated merely by a bishop with valid orders asserting such a mission, or that it (the mission) is inherent with orders. 5. He believes that diocesan structures, bishops with jurisdiction ruling over a defined area designated by the Pope, are no longer the structure in place in the Church today, and that a new structure based on traditionalist model is the new structure of the Church for our times. 6. He thinks that the traditional bishops can act as lawful electors of a Pope. These are some of my recollections from my dealings with him on Te Deum. I am going from memory, I don't have a transcript of the thread. I am not saying that these are the only errors he holds, just the ones that come to mind. If Mr. Ruby thinks any of my assertions about his views are wrong, I invite him to correct the record.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Dec 3, 2017 0:23:43 GMT -5
This is getting peddled on Facebook again...didnt we have a run in with Mr Ruby? And what were the specifics of his errors On the Te Deum forum he espoused the following views: 1. He believes that traditional bishops are part of the hierrachy of the Church. 2. He believes they have the right and power to gather the flock of Christ and rule over them. 3. He believes that jurisdiction is not necessary for one to be a legitimate successor of the Apostles. 4. He believes that a mission from the Church can be self-generated merely by a bishop with valid orders asserting such a mission, or that it (the mission) is inherent with orders. 5. He believes that diocesan structures, bishops with jurisdiction ruling over a defined area designated by the Pope, are no longer the structure in place in the Church today, and that a new structure based on traditionalist model is the new structure of the Church for our times. 6. He thinks that the traditional bishops can act as lawful electors of a Pope. These are some of my recollections from my dealings with him on Te Deum. I am going from memory, I don't have a transcript of the thread. I am not saying that these are the only errors he holds, just the ones that come to mind. If Mr. Ruby thinks any of my assertions about his views are wrong, I invite him to correct the record. Thanks Pac....are you sure he didnt post a thread here once in the beginnng...I sware I remeber banning him....maybe I was still admin at TD?
|
|
|
Post by carloscamejo on Dec 3, 2017 2:16:24 GMT -5
This is getting peddled on Facebook again...didnt we have a run in with Mr Ruby? And what were the specifics of his errors On the Te Deum forum he espoused the following views: 1. He believes that traditional bishops are part of the hierrachy of the Church. 2. He believes they have the right and power to gather the flock of Christ and rule over them. 3. He believes that jurisdiction is not necessary for one to be a legitimate successor of the Apostles. 4. He believes that a mission from the Church can be self-generated merely by a bishop with valid orders asserting such a mission, or that it (the mission) is inherent with orders. 5. He believes that diocesan structures, bishops with jurisdiction ruling over a defined area designated by the Pope, are no longer the structure in place in the Church today, and that a new structure based on traditionalist model is the new structure of the Church for our times. 6. He thinks that the traditional bishops can act as lawful electors of a Pope. These are some of my recollections from my dealings with him on Te Deum. I am going from memory, I don't have a transcript of the thread. I am not saying that these are the only errors he holds, just the ones that come to mind. If Mr. Ruby thinks any of my assertions about his views are wrong, I invite him to correct the record. That's all hogwash and teetering on conclavism.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Dec 3, 2017 12:38:34 GMT -5
On the Te Deum forum he espoused the following views: 1. He believes that traditional bishops are part of the hierrachy of the Church. 2. He believes they have the right and power to gather the flock of Christ and rule over them. 3. He believes that jurisdiction is not necessary for one to be a legitimate successor of the Apostles. 4. He believes that a mission from the Church can be self-generated merely by a bishop with valid orders asserting such a mission, or that it (the mission) is inherent with orders. 5. He believes that diocesan structures, bishops with jurisdiction ruling over a defined area designated by the Pope, are no longer the structure in place in the Church today, and that a new structure based on traditionalist model is the new structure of the Church for our times. 6. He thinks that the traditional bishops can act as lawful electors of a Pope. These are some of my recollections from my dealings with him on Te Deum. I am going from memory, I don't have a transcript of the thread. I am not saying that these are the only errors he holds, just the ones that come to mind. If Mr. Ruby thinks any of my assertions about his views are wrong, I invite him to correct the record. Thanks Pac....are you sure he didnt post a thread here once in the beginnng...I sware I remeber banning him....maybe I was still admin at TD? He was banned at TD, but he was not on this forum. He and his friend that was banned here are actively promoting his new book on other forums.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Dec 3, 2017 15:14:20 GMT -5
Thanks Pac....are you sure he didnt post a thread here once in the beginnng...I sware I remeber banning him....maybe I was still admin at TD? He was banned at TD, but he was not on this forum. He and his friend that was banned here are actively promoting his new book on other forums. Thats right it was his side kick. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Mar 7, 2023 19:44:59 GMT -5
Thanks Pac....are you sure he didnt post a thread here once in the beginnng...I sware I remeber banning him....maybe I was still admin at TD? He was banned at TD, but he was not on this forum. He and his friend that was banned here are actively promoting his new book on other forums. There is a guy in the Telegram group, he sent me this book, he told me to read it, but he is looking for the truth, he seems quite convinced and I invited him to post here for the discussion. I do not know the work of this gentleman, but it would be interesting to read the reasons or counterarguments that he exposes. Did you save that thread somewhere?
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Mar 8, 2023 9:50:37 GMT -5
He was banned at TD, but he was not on this forum. He and his friend that was banned here are actively promoting his new book on other forums. There is a guy in the Telegram group, he sent me this book, he told me to read it, but he is looking for the truth, he seems quite convinced and I invited him to post here for the discussion. I do not know the work of this gentleman, but it would be interesting to read the reasons or counterarguments that he exposes. Did you save that thread somewhere? Those threads were on Te Deum which closed. It might be on archive.org, I'm not sure.
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Mar 8, 2023 15:37:52 GMT -5
There is a guy in the Telegram group, he sent me this book, he told me to read it, but he is looking for the truth, he seems quite convinced and I invited him to post here for the discussion. I do not know the work of this gentleman, but it would be interesting to read the reasons or counterarguments that he exposes. Did you save that thread somewhere? Those threads were on Te Deum which closed. It might be on archive.org, I'm not sure. What are the opposing points? I'm not interested in reading it, but to be aware of its false principles and not fall for its arguments, since conclavists play a lot with dialectic...
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Mar 8, 2023 18:29:48 GMT -5
Those threads were on Te Deum which closed. It might be on archive.org, I'm not sure. What are the opposing points? I'm not interested in reading it, but to be aware of its false principles and not fall for its arguments, since conclavists play a lot with dialectic... I have tried repeatedly for years to combat these errors and wake Catholics up that they are really spreading among traditionalists. These are two recent threads dedicated to two of these errors: tradcath.proboards.com/thread/2371/heresy-changing-meaning-apostolic-successortradcath.proboards.com/thread/2362/new-heresy-denial-apostolic-successionThere are many other posts in the resources section dedicated to these new heresies with approved sources. Mr. Ruby was confronted with some of these sources on the Te Deum forum but refused to recant his ideas.
|
|