Rich, educated not necessarily less active in religion
#41
Your standard recourse.
Reply
#42
Do u have anything to add to this discussion?
Reply
#43
so fgrt just finally saw that the majority on this board know the NO that gets his little insides tickled starting way back in semenary is a bastard, protestantized service...a service fraught with so many problems that a declaration calling it the OF is silly beyond a laugh, that he is so infected with heresy that few here would consider him Catholic except in name only.

All he falls back on are worn out arguments (destroyed here time and again on many threads on that exact topic)  that the Church uses it, therefore it's OK...LOL

fghp...the NO is at odds with the Church..you can find this argument over and over here on threads dedicated to the idea...


as for the OP

I have never meet an educated liberal....NOT EVER...it is actually impossible, since educated libs are conservative of some nature, the same goes for the goofs claim about religious zealots being less educated.  Actually it is usually the opposite....from low protty types like Palin, to crazy Caths that know that the TLM and the old way are the only way...usually a more intelligent group...that's one reason they make up a minority...but a very powerful one.


And I just woke up...so that's not in any order
Reply
#44
(04-10-2010, 11:15 AM)In nomine Patris Wrote: Yeah I know all about him. Fact is that SSPX Bishop L was excommunicated. Just the facts. I dont agree with that, but thats how it currently stands, until, if, lifted. I dont prefer the NO but if thats all they have at a given date and time, I go. Still has the real presence.

LOL

You go and ...LOL

You have no idea if the real presence is there...not an inkling.

The only thing that can be said about any given NO after following the logic of the 3 elements argument...is that there is only  a possibility that any given NO is valid....


And the 3 elements argument as presented here...by me....over and over and over...has never had one itty bitty hole poked in it.  I have been waiting for over a year....not one...it is the end all discussion on the sewage that is the NO.


Hope you wear spiritual fishing boots to that fellowship.
Reply
#45
(04-10-2010, 04:51 PM)Scipio_a Wrote: so fgrt just finally saw that the majority on this board know the NO that gets his little insides tickled starting way back in semenary is a bastard, protestantized service...a service fraught with so many problems that a declaration calling it the OF is silly beyond a laugh, that he is so infected with heresy that few here would consider him Catholic except in name only.

All he falls back on are worn out arguments (destroyed here time and again on many threads on that exact topic)  that the Church uses it, therefore it's OK...LOL

fghp...the NO is at odds with the Church..you can find this argument over and over here on threads dedicated to the idea...

Just so you know, Scipio does not speak for as many people here as he claims.  There are plenty who disagree with him.  Apparently he thinks that claiming that everybody is on his side strengthens his argument.  He also apparently thinks that deliberately getting people's names wrong is a witty put down.  Of course, he also thinks that somebody who writes something that agrees with his view has destroyed the opposing argument. He does not seem to understand that just because it convinces him does not mean it is a good argument.  (Hint for Scipio: it convinces you because you already believe it.)

Reply
#46
(04-10-2010, 04:56 PM)Scipio_a Wrote:
(04-10-2010, 11:15 AM)In nomine Patris Wrote: Yeah I know all about him. Fact is that SSPX Bishop L was excommunicated. Just the facts. I dont agree with that, but thats how it currently stands, until, if, lifted. I dont prefer the NO but if thats all they have at a given date and time, I go. Still has the real presence.

LOL

You go and ...LOL

You have no idea if the real presence is there...not an inkling.

The only thing that can be said about any given NO after following the logic of the 3 elements argument...is that there is only  a possibility that any given NO is valid....


And the 3 elements argument as presented here...by me....over and over and over...has never had one itty bitty hole poked in it.   I have been waiting for over a year....not one...it is the end all discussion on the sewage that is the NO.


Hope you wear spiritual fishing boots to that fellowship.


Somewhere in my saved things I have a link to a Eucharastic Miracle that happened at the NO
Reply
#47
Your point in nomine partris?
Reply
#48
(04-09-2010, 09:01 AM)devotedknuckles Wrote: Padre!! That's not a nice thing for a priest to say. A person like me?? U r here in the tank its a community. U post articles for all including me to comment and discuss. Considering u are the one posting its only proper for me to ask u what u think.
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"?
Do tell

You know, DK, this guy used to have "father" in his profile and he removed it the minute some thorny person challenged it.  Now why would a genuine priest do that? 

He posts articles that naturally elicit lots of responses, but he doesn't actually seem interested in these subjects or in having any kind of discourse with the denizens of this board who are interested...

You know, we think of "trolls" as ugly creatures who pop out from under the bridge to ask impertinent questions of innocent people attempting to go somewhere, but then there is "trolling" like when you run a fishing boat along the river with a net that drags just to see what gets dredged up....

I often wonder about this sort of thing. 
Reply
#49
Yes
Reply
#50
(04-10-2010, 06:27 PM)littlerose Wrote: You know, DK, this guy used to have "father" in his profile and he removed it the minute some thorny person challenged it.  Now why would a genuine priest do that? 

Good catch.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)