USCCB Will Remove St. Paul from the Canon?
#31
(05-26-2011, 12:11 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: Has St. John Chrysostom "fallen out of communion with the Catholic Church"?

That's the question people who have a vested interest in maintaining the kind of Jewish hegemony and intimidation which took place at Vatican II with regard to Nostra Aetate alive.

FACT: AIPAC, the Jewish Committee, bribed and blackmailed Bishops to change the schema dealing with Jews in Nostra Aetate. 
Reply
#32
(05-26-2011, 12:10 PM)Augstine Baker Wrote: For the fourth time.... they're condemning the NORMATIVE position in favor of one YOU believe has been taught since Trent.  It hasn't.  It's a novel teaching that the Jews are not responsible for Christ's death on the Cross.

This is exactly what the treacherous Cardinal Bernardin was teaching, and this is the agenda that's being promoted.  You are increasingly appearing to be a supporter of this novelty.

Then the subject line should be something like "USCCB takes novel position on role of Jews" not something that just is not true.  Your OP is misleading to a point where it lacks integrity.  

I do not have a position on this because I have not studied it sufficiently to have an informed opinion.  Nothing posted in this thread to this point seems like compelling evidence in favour of your position.  I consider the Trent quote I produced as sufficient evidence that the matter is not as simple as you claim.
Reply
#33
(05-26-2011, 12:20 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(05-26-2011, 12:10 PM)Augstine Baker Wrote: For the fourth time.... they're condemning the NORMATIVE position in favor of one YOU believe has been taught since Trent.  It hasn't.  It's a novel teaching that the Jews are not responsible for Christ's death on the Cross.

This is exactly what the treacherous Cardinal Bernardin was teaching, and this is the agenda that's being promoted.  You are increasingly appearing to be a supporter of this novelty.

Then the subject line should be something like "USCCB takes novel position on role of Jews" not something that just is not true.  Your OP is misleading to a point where it lacks integrity.  

I do not have a position on this because I have not studied it sufficiently to have an informed opinion.  Nothing posted in this thread to this point seems like compelling evidence in favour of your position.  I consider the Trent quote I produced as sufficient evidence that the matter is not as simple as you claim.

The USCCB has CONDEMNED, in favor of a NOVEL position, a NORMATIVE, even de_fide, Catholic position and the people who hold it as not-Catholic. 

Do you know what a syllogism is, Jayne?
Reply
#34
(05-26-2011, 12:13 PM)Augstine Baker Wrote:
(05-26-2011, 12:11 PM)JayneK Wrote: This appears to be an admission that your intent was to make people angry.  If an accurate presentation of the facts does not make people angry, it is not your job to help the facts along by misrepresenting them.

Ok, I've tried several times to address your point.   You're not interested in fair argumentation aimed at the truth, you're interested in demonizing NORMATIVE teaching and defending the USCCB.

I am very much interested in the truth which is why I find the OP objectionable.  Hysteria and misrepresentations do not lead to truth.  I would like to see some calm and reasonable discussion of this question rather than wild accusations and inflammatory rhetoric.
Reply
#35
(05-26-2011, 12:24 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(05-26-2011, 12:13 PM)Augstine Baker Wrote:
(05-26-2011, 12:11 PM)JayneK Wrote: This appears to be an admission that your intent was to make people angry.  If an accurate presentation of the facts does not make people angry, it is not your job to help the facts along by misrepresenting them.

Ok, I've tried several times to address your point.   You're not interested in fair argumentation aimed  the truth, you're interested in demonizing NORMATIVE teaching and defending the USCCB.

I am very much interested in the truth which is why I find the OP objectionable.  Hysteria and misrepresentations do not lead to truth.  I would like to see some calm and reasonable discussion of this question rather than wild accusations and inflammatory rhetoric.

That's just name calling.
Reply
#36
The quotes I provided are enough evidence to condemn this new church enslaved by the Jews born of Vatican II.
Reply
#37
(05-26-2011, 12:26 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: The quotes I provided are enough evidence to condemn this new church enslaved by the Jews born of Vatican II.

It certainly demonstrates what the Normative position is that's being condemned by the USCCB.
Reply
#38
(05-26-2011, 12:23 PM)Augstine Baker Wrote:
(05-26-2011, 12:20 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(05-26-2011, 12:10 PM)Augstine Baker Wrote: For the fourth time.... they're condemning the NORMATIVE position in favor of one YOU believe has been taught since Trent.  It hasn't.  It's a novel teaching that the Jews are not responsible for Christ's death on the Cross.

This is exactly what the treacherous Cardinal Bernardin was teaching, and this is the agenda that's being promoted.  You are increasingly appearing to be a supporter of this novelty.

Then the subject line should be something like "USCCB takes novel position on role of Jews" not something that just is not true.  Your OP is misleading to a point where it lacks integrity.  

I do not have a position on this because I have not studied it sufficiently to have an informed opinion.  Nothing posted in this thread to this point seems like compelling evidence in favour of your position.  I consider the Trent quote I produced as sufficient evidence that the matter is not as simple as you claim.

The USCCB has CONDEMNED a NOVEL position on a NORMATIVE, even de_fide, Catholic position and the people who hold it as not-Catholic. 

Do you know what a syllogism is, Jayne?

I know what a syllogism is.  Do you know what "begging the question" is?  It is assuming as true the point that you need to prove.  And that is what you are doing in this thread.
The USCCB has claimed that its position has been the Catholic position all along.  If you disagree, your job is to present the evidence that it was not the normative Catholic position and that their position is novel.  
Reply
#39
(05-26-2011, 12:28 PM)Augstine Baker Wrote:
(05-26-2011, 12:26 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: The quotes I provided are enough evidence to condemn this new church enslaved by the Jews born of Vatican II.

It certainly demonstrates what the Normative position is that's being condemned by the USCCB.

Cherry picking quotes does not demonstrate anything about truth.  In a complex issue, more in depth study is needed.
Reply
#40
Thank you for being the voice of reason, JayneK.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)