The Errors Spread Here
#31
(07-14-2012, 11:24 AM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: There used to be a rule against making threads "calling out" members by name.
This is more about his errors, which do not have a specific label. If he takes on a specific label, then that is what would be used. He does not seem to fall under "Protestant" or "Gnostic" and I do not want to force a label on him.

Quote: But since some of you think it's a good idea then maybe Vox can "pin" this thread for all to see and be warned of the danger. Vetus has been back only two days.
That is not really what I had intended. I had intended for this thread to be made useless, not more useful.

Quote:He wrote in the Hello/Goodbye thread that maybe he should not post as often as he doesn't want to engage in debates that will only get him banned again.
He reduced people who reported his posts as merely having personal issues with them.

Quote: It was his FIRST POST after a two-week absence and right away, Ros, you jumped in and basically said you didn't believe him. "You're not innocent" you said. You questioned his motives AFTER he stated what his motives were...and were not. Then out came all the Grand Inquisitors. And now this thread.
I was then responding to what he wrote when he was pretending that it was just personal issues with what he wrote rather than the errors he was proposing.

It does not matter what his motives are when he is in control of his actions and understand the effects. He is not innocent like he is pretending.

Quote:No, Ros, I don't think you are "spiritually dangerous" I just think this thread is mean and tacky.
I think the Church has consistently judged heresy and being a danger to the souls of others as being worse than being mean and tacky.

Quote:I had other things to say but on second thought I'll keep them to myself.. Or maybe I'LL start a thread. I don't know.
You can start a thread about me. You have my permission if you think it is a fitting subject. You can say whatever you want about me, as long as it is true (or thought to be true).

I care, in this case, about truth. People can feel whatever they want, but the truth is being challenged and everything else does not matter because others may be lead astray.

Reply
#32
(07-14-2012, 01:11 PM)JayneK Wrote: I'm wondering if the distinction between loving the sinner and hating the sin is clearer in this situation than it often is.

Privately held heresy is something we all have the mental freedom to do. Publicly expressed heresy in order to draw others into it is a danger to others in the highest form and the person who spreads it has forsaken many things.

I love many sinners, and those who I think are harming themselves and are in danger of damnation. However, I cannot make them act nor can I do anything. I love them, but not more than God.

I get emails and PMs occasionally from people who read my posts but never actually posted. They thank me for what I wrote (not this thread obviously, this is over time) and how it helped them. It encouraged them to spiritually develop and persist with the Faith. That is humbling. People I never knew, and never will know here, benefited from the little bit of time I dedicated to study and reflection and then posting online.

The danger is not in anyone here being "converted" by Vetus Ordo. The danger is more in people being lead astray who we never know about. That is why I write the way I do sometimes, because I know I am not writing for the people active on the forum, but for everyone who may read it.

It is also why everything less important fades away when the authority of the Church and the spiritual fruits which can only be found through the Church Christ established are challenged. People may believe that. People who are looking for information, people who are confused, people we never see, can be lead away from the Church because someone for whom we had affection was able to make statements contrary to truth because we thought we were in no danger and it was a personal issue.

Reply
#33
Vetus has been banned from FE. So it looks like we can end this discussion.
Reply
#34
(07-14-2012, 01:55 PM)Rosarium Wrote:
(07-14-2012, 01:11 PM)JayneK Wrote: I'm wondering if the distinction between loving the sinner and hating the sin is clearer in this situation than it often is.

Privately held heresy is something we all have the mental freedom to do. Publicly expressed heresy in order to draw others into it is a danger to others in the highest form and the person who spreads it has forsaken many things.

I love many sinners, and those who I think are harming themselves and are in danger of damnation. However, I cannot make them act nor can I do anything. I love them, but not more than God.

I get emails and PMs occasionally from people who read my posts but never actually posted. They thank me for what I wrote (not this thread obviously, this is over time) and how it helped them. It encouraged them to spiritually develop and persist with the Faith. That is humbling. People I never knew, and never will know here, benefited from the little bit of time I dedicated to study and reflection and then posting online.

The danger is not in anyone here being "converted" by Vetus Ordo. The danger is more in people being lead astray who we never know about. That is why I write the way I do sometimes, because I know I am not writing for the people active on the forum, but for everyone who may read it.

It is also why everything less important fades away when the authority of the Church and the spiritual fruits which can only be found through the Church Christ established are challenged. People may believe that. People who are looking for information, people who are confused, people we never see, can be lead away from the Church because someone for whom we had affection was able to make statements contrary to truth because we thought we were in no danger and it was a personal issue.
Ladies, Rosarium is in the right.
Sad but true.
Rosarium called it like it is. End of story.
Reply
#35
(07-14-2012, 02:59 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: Vetus has been banned from FE. So it looks like we can end this discussion.

I thought he had just returned?

Link??!!
Reply
#36
Rosarium, you captured the important aspect.

I apologize to Vetus for a mean-spirited post I made elsewhere. When I first found this forum, a lot of his posts and those of a few others were very helpful in my understanding of some Catholic issues, and helped me in understanding and security of faith. I'm mostly a lurker, but I was especially affected by his about-face, though I shouldn't have let that give the tone to a post that it did.

Reply
#37
(07-14-2012, 03:10 PM)tmw89 Wrote:
(07-14-2012, 02:59 PM)StrictCatholicGirl Wrote: Vetus has been banned from FE. So it looks like we can end this discussion.

I thought he had just returned?

Link??!!

No link. He just emailed me.
Reply
#38
Seriously?

That's crap.
Reply
#39
Farewell, dear Vetus. God bless.

I think it would be useful to limit polemics, or what may sometimes appear to be attacks on the Catholic faith to the apologetics forum. That kind of debate is just part of what needs to go on here at FE. This is a place where people should be able to hash it out--doctrinally. But not the whole forum, perhaps that's a little disrespectful.

I'm not saying that's what Vetus did, because I don't know. I haven't had time to keep up with most of the threads lately. But just in general, maybe it's a good policy.
"Not only are we all in the same boat, but we are all seasick.” --G.K. Chesterton
Reply
#40
(07-14-2012, 04:34 PM)CollegeCatholic Wrote: Seriously?

Yes.

Quote: That's crap.

Yes.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)