Rich, educated not necessarily less active in religion
#11
(04-09-2010, 09:22 AM)JayneK Wrote:
(04-09-2010, 09:01 AM)devotedknuckles Wrote: People like me? R reffering to my race? My sex? My religion? Where I go to mass? My nationality? What exactly does a priest such as yourself mean by "a person like you"?

For what it is worth, I understood him to mean a person who apparently sets out to be deliberately offensive.  It seems to me that he believes you to be a troll.  If so, his decision not to engage you in conversation is a reasonable course of action.  I find this an understandable conclusion to draw from your posts.

Bingo!  he brags that he's a troll with over 9000 posts, forgetting that about 8000 of them say "LOL" or "sip sip" or both and nothing else.  he should be ignored.

Reply
#12
i brag im a troll? ipi have you been smokin that ecopot again?
show where i have bragged.
bugger off and hug a tree or unrepentant sodomite will you and leave us catholics alone
you crack me up
Reply
#13
(04-09-2010, 09:28 AM)devotedknuckles Wrote: lol i'm a troll with over 9000 posts.

Nobody is questioning the quantity of your posts, just the quality.  You have adopted the online persona of a virtual town drunk and a belligerent one at that.  Personally, I find that this makes it harder to take you seriously, even when you make good points.  Some people react negatively to you as a consequence of your own choices.  I do not see you as an unjustly aggrieved party in this.

I do, however, agree with you, that fcgv needs to post more personal content rather than reposting numerous articles.  It is reasonable enough to use an article as conversation starter, but one also needs to present one's own opinions.  So, yes, you were asking a valid question.  Nevertheless I cannot blame fcgv for having been so put off by your style as to not recognize that.  The way we express ourselves matters.

And I encourage you, fcgv, to post fewer of other's words and more of your own. 
Reply
#14
i'm curious as to the style of my question to the libtard padre in this thread jane?
can you analyze it for me?
pretty ls
rest assured if i was a troll id been banned ages ago. yes indeed quality matters but the quality of your posts re the bastard prod NO leaves allot to be desired ol jane
just saying. u know cast the first stone and all that


Reply
#15
(04-09-2010, 10:04 AM)devotedknuckles Wrote: ithe bastard prod NO leaves allot to be desired
I am going to reply to this. Not so much for your benefit but in truth how tired I am of reading this here. People, when you write like this you are talking about the OF of the Mass as practiced by the Roman Catholic Church. When you call it into validity, you actually question and second-guess the magisterium of the Church. You are free not to care for the NOM. You are free to not attend parishes which employ the OF of the Liturgy, but you can not claim to be such good Catholics when you directly attack the NOM with such ridiculous statements. When you do so, you suggest the Church is in error.
Reply
#16
(04-09-2010, 09:28 AM)devotedknuckles Wrote: lol i'm a troll with over 9000 posts.

What, nine thousand? There's no way!

Reply
#17
padre the issue with the No is not its validity. though most wouldn't meet the criteria of being valid some do. the plm with the No and there are many is formost one of sacrilege. and its theology not being catholic but protestant.
hence its a protestant mass. it is a bastard mass as well as like a bastard it has no father but instead was made up on the spot banal fabrication
Reply
#18
(04-09-2010, 10:22 AM)fcgv Wrote:
(04-09-2010, 10:04 AM)devotedknuckles Wrote: ithe bastard prod NO leaves allot to be desired
I am going to reply to this. Not so much for your benefit but in truth how tired I am of reading this here. People, when you write like this you are talking about the OF of the Mass as practiced by the Roman Catholic Church. When you call it into validity, you actually question and second-guess the magisterium of the Church. You are free not to care for the NOM. You are free to not attend parishes which employ the OF of the Liturgy, but you can not claim to be such good Catholics when you directly attack the NOM with such ridiculous statements. When you do so, you suggest the Church is in error.

The sentence you are quoting here is not necessarily questioning the validity of the NO Mass.  While the style is inflammatory, the content very well may be reasonable.  If by calling it "bastard" he refers to the fact that the NO Mass did not develop organically, he is right.  If his claim that it is "prod" refers to Protestant influences on the NO, he is right about that too.  The NO Mass, especially as commonly practiced, does leave a lot to be desired.  There are many just criticisms that loyal Catholics can make concerning the NO Mass.

If this topic interest you, you may like to like to read the thread he refers to: http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/inde...939.0.html
Reply
#19
We now return to the actual thread...

I'm glad to see that at least someone is pointing out that being educated doesn't mean being an atheist.  Sadly, when people like Gov. Palin are the public face of religion in America, the faithful get made fun of.
Reply
#20
(04-09-2010, 10:46 AM)Pilgrim Wrote: I'm glad to see that at least someone is pointing out that being educated doesn't mean being an atheist.  Sadly, when people like Gov. Palin are the public face of religion in America, the faithful get made fun of.

I supported Sarah Palin over everyone else but Ron Paul in '08, but conservative politicians are shooting themselves in the foot by not sponsoring a major presidential candidate who's media-savvy, cosmopolitan, and at least appears to be an intellectual; pretty much everything that ensured Barack Obama's slam dunk election. Elections are won by appearances, and the soccer mom/pseudo-country thing that Palin is going for is what's going to ensure she never gets elected to the Presidency.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)