G
GrzeszDeL
Guest
Name-calling does scant little to improve the quality of a discussion. :tsktsk:
- Status
H
HagiaSophia
Guest
There are two or three older threads about Masons (if you do a forum search they will come up I’m sure) and the prohibition against Catholics joinig Masonry is still in effect and the CDF published a specific document saying so. It’s contained in one of those threads.
One also must allow that the practice and knowledge of Masonry, particularly the Grand Lodges is much better known and is practiced far differently than in the US historically.
H
HagiaSophia
Guest
Can you explain why? Because someone differs and offers arguments, he is being civil and doesn’t insult us personally over his beliefs as far as I can see.
J
John_Higgins
Guest
Well, maybe his calling the Pope not Catholic is absurd. At least I think so.
John
John
H
HagiaSophia
Guest
John Higgins:
I missed that one - while I agree that John Paul has been criticized for some of his “ecumenical” moves and ceremonies - he even mentions that he hasn’t wielded his authority hard or often enough in some cases (but he forgives himself a couple of paragraphs later) he still places as the 11th commandment collegiality and preaching by example.
Well he’s an optimist as Ratzinger says - I’m afraid I lack his “optimism”.
I missed that one - while I agree that John Paul has been criticized for some of his “ecumenical” moves and ceremonies - he even mentions that he hasn’t wielded his authority hard or often enough in some cases (but he forgives himself a couple of paragraphs later) he still places as the 11th commandment collegiality and preaching by example.Well he’s an optimist as Ratzinger says - I’m afraid I lack his “optimism”.
M
Maccabees
Guest
Saint Paul called the Galatians stupid!
Jesus called teh Pahrisees Vipers!
Name calling is throughout the Bible
if the label fits I use it.
THis guy spreads lies about our beleoved Pope and all sorts of other issues and we are just to let it slide heck no.
An idiot is an idiot.
As Paul Said Oh you stupid people who has bewtiched you!
Don’t let this false propeht bewitch you my friend.
Terms like fool, idiot, stupid are used frequently in the Bible I am sorry it is not as politcally correct as you.
H
HagiaSophia
Guest
Unfortunately (or fortunately), dear friend, I don’t think all the moderators take that view of it
And I don’t want to see the thread shut down nor anyone “suspended” if you take my meaning.
I think the poster has serious questions and my experience has been that when you don’t answer a person’s questions, or at least discuss the issue, the person knows no more than when he met you and you haven’t solved the problem of getting your view across.
Well I don’t consider myself politically correct and I regret that you have seen me as such. (I am also not bewitched). I have simply seen the questions he raises in the minds of many and felt that they needed to be addressed insofar as I was able to do so.
M
Maccabees
Guest
Of course you are not bewitched Hagia I think the poster here is bewitched. I think we have two different ways of reaacting to the Galatians here. I take Saint Paul routes you are going to take the Beloeved Saint John’s route.
Different ways work for differnt people. I think I am entirely in my right here. Unless futher notified I will continue with my strong posting.
I respect differences but I think this guy has gone overboard.
You can take him on your way. I will take him on my way.
Saint Paul and Saint John were both Saints by the way they just reacted ot their detractors in very diiffernt ways.
If you want to see a guy go off check out Saint Jerome!
Whoooa that guy was not PC!
Different ways work for differnt people. I think I am entirely in my right here. Unless futher notified I will continue with my strong posting.
I respect differences but I think this guy has gone overboard.
You can take him on your way. I will take him on my way.
Saint Paul and Saint John were both Saints by the way they just reacted ot their detractors in very diiffernt ways.
If you want to see a guy go off check out Saint Jerome!
Whoooa that guy was not PC!
T
ThomasAugustine
Guest
I dont mind heated responses and debates. It doesn’t bother me. But deal with arguments. Show me why sedevacantism is false and reconcile the post-conciliar errors with the preconciliar encyclicals. I too am a big fan of St. Jerome. St. Jerome (usually) offered arguments for why opposing positions are false: just calling it stupid is not an argument.
Jay
Jay
M
Maccabees
Guest
I didn’t just call him a name I pointed out reasons why he deserved the label he didn’t know anything about photoshop and his ignorance and racism and anti-semetism went unchecked.
I think all of the above warrants as stupid.:banghead:
I think all of the above warrants as stupid.:banghead:
J
JGC
Guest
Dialogue with a Troubled Semi-Traditionalist on the “Catastrophe” of the Post-Vatican II Church
The purpose of Vatican II was neither scenario you suggest. You don’t seem to comprehend the utterly different approach to the modernist problem that the Council followed, as I tried to explain. Maybe that can resolve your “problem” and troubled heart. I hope so. In any event, I say that the Council indeed was intending to deal at least in part with modernism by making the faith more relevant and compelling to modern man, without sacrificing orthodoxy and its Tradition, or changing any of its essentials. In this it was successful, despite all the nonsense that also occurred. The world is a messy place. Things aren’t resolved in a neat little package, as they are in soap operas and fantasy movies. Maybe you think they are resolved quickly because you are in this culture and can’t see how you have been harmfully influenced by its false ideas.
Dave Armstrong
web.archive.org/web/20021021213222/http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ319.HTM
The purpose of Vatican II was neither scenario you suggest. You don’t seem to comprehend the utterly different approach to the modernist problem that the Council followed, as I tried to explain. Maybe that can resolve your “problem” and troubled heart. I hope so. In any event, I say that the Council indeed was intending to deal at least in part with modernism by making the faith more relevant and compelling to modern man, without sacrificing orthodoxy and its Tradition, or changing any of its essentials. In this it was successful, despite all the nonsense that also occurred. The world is a messy place. Things aren’t resolved in a neat little package, as they are in soap operas and fantasy movies. Maybe you think they are resolved quickly because you are in this culture and can’t see how you have been harmfully influenced by its false ideas.
Dave Armstrong
web.archive.org/web/20021021213222/http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ319.HTM
J
JGC
Guest
Do-It-Yourself Popes: the Wacky World of Sedevacantists
catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=2651
The number of Catholics who have been deceived into following radical traditionalist sects is mercifully small. The fact that these groups exist at all is perhaps a signal to us who follow the true successor of Peter to ensure that we are as well instructed in the theology of the sacraments and of Church authority as we are on more familiar Catholic topics.
© This Rock, Catholic Answers, P.O. Box 17490, San Diego, CA 92177, (619) 541-1131.
catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=2651
The number of Catholics who have been deceived into following radical traditionalist sects is mercifully small. The fact that these groups exist at all is perhaps a signal to us who follow the true successor of Peter to ensure that we are as well instructed in the theology of the sacraments and of Church authority as we are on more familiar Catholic topics.
© This Rock, Catholic Answers, P.O. Box 17490, San Diego, CA 92177, (619) 541-1131.
G
GrzeszDeL
Guest
If not knowing that Photoshop came out in 1984 makes one an “idiot,” then I know that Jay is only one idiot among many (I certainly did not know that Photoshop came out in 1984). In any case, the fact is entirely beside the point. Surely we do not mean to say that every (alledgedly) damning photo that Jay has posted is doctored, do we? Photoshop has nothing to do with it. All of those photo represent real occasions in the recent history of the Church; the onus on those of us who are not sedevacantists is to explain how these photos do not undergird the sedevacantist thesis, and calling people “idiot” for not knowing the release date of Adobe applications does little to accomplish this.
For instance, we would do well to recall that the photo of the Indian woman with John Paul II has nothing to do with syncretism; there is nothing going on there that Ven. Leo XIII would not have approved. Likewise, none of the photos of Cardinal Roncalli (John XXIII) with French socialists show him doing anything more than the photos of Cardinal Pacelli (Pius XII) show him doing with German Nationalsocialists. I, for one, am not going to try to justify the Assisi shenanigans because I think that they genuinely are wrong, but this is still a darn site less than sufficient to establish that John Paul II is an anti-pope or a heretic.
Finally, I would just like to mention how glad I am to see JGC link to Dave Armstrong’s webpage. Dave Armstrong makes many of these points much better than I ever could. I would especially recommend for anyone considering the sedevacantist case to read his book Traditional Catholic Pensées. In any case, I think that this thread’s usefulness is spent, so I am going to try to open a new thread to discuss Jay’s first objection in that list of four. I look forward to seeing the rest of you there.
M
Maccabees
Guest
GrzeszDeL your not making false claims and racist claims. Not knowing everything does not make and idiot. What makes you an idiot is claiming to know stuff you don’t and I am sorry if you are a racist you are an idiot. I am sure Saint Paul and Saint Jerome would have said the same thing. As a person who has suffered racial discrimination I can assure you those who are racist are not too smart.
H
HagiaSophia
Guest
We have a note from the management here that we are not allowed to discussed sedevacantism. I know not why as the notice was already here when I came into the forum.
H
HagiaSophia
Guest
Thank you. My POV exactly.
Yep.
G
GrzeszDeL
Guest
You know, Sophia, if we keep agreeing about everything like this, people are going to start thinking that one of us is just a sock-puppet of the other. We need to find a point of disagreement - you would not happen to be an American League ball fan or a Republican, would you? Then we could start a tuss up to prove that we are not the same person. 
H
HagiaSophia
Guest
Oh we have plenty of areas of disagreement - but on these things we do agree.We need to find a point of disagreement - you would not happen to be an American League ball fan or a Republican, would you? Then we could start a tuss up to prove that we are not the same person.
I am Republican for this election I can tell you and as for ball clubs, I can say unequivocally I am one of those illiterates who thinks Dolphins are in the water, Rams are on the farm or in Scripture, and Cubs are pretty little baby bears.
Sock puppets, multiple personalities and the “reincarnated” are avilable aplenty in the Politics forum already.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
Suspicion proves nothing - if it were a proof of being unCatholic, or whatever, St. John of the Cross, St. Teresa of Avila, Padre Pio, St. Philip Neri, St. Alphonsus Liguori, and others, would all be highly objectionable.
Sometimes people are suspicious because they are less Catholic, less Christlike, less Christian, than those they suspect, ISTM. ##
H
HagiaSophia
Guest
Gottle of Geer:
And sometimes they are suspicious because they have legitimate grounds for being so.
- Status