S
Sirach14
Guest
I have a copy of the CASB, and think it is excellent.
- Status
M
MrS
Guest
Melman:
Strange, they thought he and Madrid were great until differences arose, Then Sungenis was wrong… Madrid moved east… ???
As far as some of Robert’s theories… he express his findings as either factual (lots of references, lots of proof) or his opinion. So what’s wrong with that.
Read what he has written on JPII. He expresses his loyalty to the Pope, and the canon law that requires us to ask the tough questions.
Mel Gibson is a traditionalist… that’s okay.
Sungenis is a tradionalist… but he is radical right.
His detractors criticize his findings that are arrived at with the same methods as his “Not By…” series. Strange, they loved them. That is until Sungenis questioned some of the theology of Shea, Akins, Keating etc.
Find something he has written that is erroneous - after you read the discussions on it. Then be critical.
MrS
Right. And that is more of the problem. Sungenis forgets in day more than most apologists on this site know.
Strange, they thought he and Madrid were great until differences arose, Then Sungenis was wrong… Madrid moved east… ???
As far as some of Robert’s theories… he express his findings as either factual (lots of references, lots of proof) or his opinion. So what’s wrong with that.
Read what he has written on JPII. He expresses his loyalty to the Pope, and the canon law that requires us to ask the tough questions.
Mel Gibson is a traditionalist… that’s okay.
Sungenis is a tradionalist… but he is radical right.
His detractors criticize his findings that are arrived at with the same methods as his “Not By…” series. Strange, they loved them. That is until Sungenis questioned some of the theology of Shea, Akins, Keating etc.
Find something he has written that is erroneous - after you read the discussions on it. Then be critical.
MrS
M
MrS
Guest
And just how do you feel about his works on apologetics… if you have them?
A
Antonio_B
Guest
Code:
This piece of news saddens me for two reasons.
- One ought to be able to rely on an Apologetics resource, 2. Robert Sungenis did a wonderful job in his book Not by Scripture Alone: A Catholic Critique of the Protestant Doctrine of Sola Scriptura.
**
How he has deviated from orthodox Catholic teaching is beyond me!
M
MrS
Guest
Chris Burgwald:
2- starting quoting anti-semitic… no, he was quoting the Talamud, a Jewish historical document. If what he presented is something you find offensive, blame the document. Don’t kill the messenger.
3- moving far right??? no, JPII says any priest may say the TLM, (Traditional Latin Mass) if he uses the 62 Missal. Without an indult. Both that Mass ,and the current more NO are valid and licit when said within the ruberics. Those who opppose the TLM usually find the Latin offensive. They have not bothered to see the changes in the prayers (much much weaker in the NO).
Perhaps you should be aware of the growing number of orthodox newly ordained priests, and the number of strong Bishops who are moving “pretty far right”. Chaput, Bruskowitz etc. Thank God they are pretty “far right”.
Again,… don’t kill the messenger.
MrS
1- started arguing?? no, he presents the argument that… And it appears more people who bother to read the “argument” agree with his presentation than not.
2- starting quoting anti-semitic… no, he was quoting the Talamud, a Jewish historical document. If what he presented is something you find offensive, blame the document. Don’t kill the messenger.
3- moving far right??? no, JPII says any priest may say the TLM, (Traditional Latin Mass) if he uses the 62 Missal. Without an indult. Both that Mass ,and the current more NO are valid and licit when said within the ruberics. Those who opppose the TLM usually find the Latin offensive. They have not bothered to see the changes in the prayers (much much weaker in the NO).
Perhaps you should be aware of the growing number of orthodox newly ordained priests, and the number of strong Bishops who are moving “pretty far right”. Chaput, Bruskowitz etc. Thank God they are pretty “far right”.
Again,… don’t kill the messenger.
MrS
M
MrS
Guest
Antonio B:
2] and include Not By Faith Alone, and also Not By Bread Alone, and also How Can We Get To Heaven, and also the Apologetic Study Bible, and his debates etc etc. How fickle we are when one presents an argument on something we don’t understand… so they must be wrong and no longer orthodox.
How you can say what you say IS BEYOND ME… usually your posts are pretty good.
MrS
1] why… there are no apologists alive who are always right. If we rely on the Church Fathers, it is because we look at their overall contributions to understanding the Faith…and compare their writings with other Fathers. We need to do at least that much where apologists are concerned.
2] and include Not By Faith Alone, and also Not By Bread Alone, and also How Can We Get To Heaven, and also the Apologetic Study Bible, and his debates etc etc. How fickle we are when one presents an argument on something we don’t understand… so they must be wrong and no longer orthodox.
How you can say what you say IS BEYOND ME… usually your posts are pretty good.
MrS
J
JimG
Guest
I haven’t read any of his apologetics work, sorry. I just happened upon one of his debates on the web wherein he was trying to show that the irregular orbit of of an earth satellite was explainable using a non-rotating earth. He was also attempting to show that a geosynchronous satellite was just hanging motionless above a stationary earth. It just didn’t work.
I’m sorry; his apologetics work may be quite good. But if my personal physician had these types of beliefs about physics, I probably wouldn’t trust him on medical matters either.
A
Antonio_B
Guest
Code:
Antonio
M
MrS
Guest
What if he turned out to be right? My personal physican hates dogs, and I was a successful breeder of show collies for many years. He is still my doctor, and a good one. I just won’t take any of my dogs to his house.
MrShttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif
M
Marie
Guest
LOL! With Sugenis why would anyone want to take their immortal soul to his seminars. His close association with SSPX etc. is more than enough to keep a soul from listening to him I should think.
M
MrS
Guest
AntonioB:
It is beyond me why someone who is orthodox, has a tremendous power to reason things out and is close to his faith, can fall into error, even though given our limitations as human beings, we are subject to error. Thank you for saying my posts are usually “pretty good.”
I did not see any posts from you on this thread that referred to Sungenis falling into error. Are you referring to something someone else insinuated?
If one thinks he is teaching error, he had (and probably still has) a Q&A section where your questions can be asked and answered.
Personally, having met the man and spent some one-on-one time with him, I too am impressed with his knowledge and stamina. I don’t agree with all he says, but I do agree with the way he says it. He always has tons of facts, data, reference etc to explain his viewpoint.
To the question of orthoxy… let that be resolved by those more knowledgable than I. For now, I would be interested in what Catholic thought he has strayed from.
As for his “argument” that counters the “argument” of EWTN’s Colin Donovan on the wearing of veils… that is up to each person to read and decide, not disagree and start name calling.
By the way… you will not see Robert Sungenis going to other web sites to “criticize” another apologist. He presents his opinions on his own site alone. That is not true with some other apologists… including at least one from CA. That should tell you something.
MrS
It is beyond me why someone who is orthodox, has a tremendous power to reason things out and is close to his faith, can fall into error, even though given our limitations as human beings, we are subject to error. Thank you for saying my posts are usually “pretty good.”
I did not see any posts from you on this thread that referred to Sungenis falling into error. Are you referring to something someone else insinuated?
If one thinks he is teaching error, he had (and probably still has) a Q&A section where your questions can be asked and answered.
Personally, having met the man and spent some one-on-one time with him, I too am impressed with his knowledge and stamina. I don’t agree with all he says, but I do agree with the way he says it. He always has tons of facts, data, reference etc to explain his viewpoint.
To the question of orthoxy… let that be resolved by those more knowledgable than I. For now, I would be interested in what Catholic thought he has strayed from.
As for his “argument” that counters the “argument” of EWTN’s Colin Donovan on the wearing of veils… that is up to each person to read and decide, not disagree and start name calling.
By the way… you will not see Robert Sungenis going to other web sites to “criticize” another apologist. He presents his opinions on his own site alone. That is not true with some other apologists… including at least one from CA. That should tell you something.
MrS
M
MrS
Guest
You obviously don’t know him. He has no "close association with SSPX. His own writings acknowledge their schism. And his loyalty to JPII. Where do you get your info??LOL! With Sugenis why would anyone want to take their immortal soul to his seminars. His close association with SSPX etc. is more than enough to keep a soul from listening to him I should think.
J
JimG
Guest
Well, I don’t know–maybe he’ll turn out to be right in apologetics. I don’t lie awake worrying that he’ll turn out to be right about physics or cosmology!
M
MrS
Guest
Thank you, andWell, I don’t know–maybe he’ll turn out to be right in apologetics. I don’t lie awake worrying that he’ll turn out to be right about physics or cosmology!
- Status