SSPX says no to Rome
#81
(07-16-2012, 04:01 PM)Stubborn Wrote:
(07-16-2012, 03:45 PM)Joshua Wrote:
(07-16-2012, 07:21 AM)JayneK Wrote:
(07-16-2012, 05:33 AM)Stubborn Wrote: Refusing to admit being wrong is a sign you have too much pride in you.

Refusing to admit that one is wrong is part of being stubborn.

Jayne, Jayne! Don't question Stubborn's veracity! He's never wrong and if one says otherwise, get thee to a confessional!

Seriously, Stubborn. Only internet anonymity could allow you to persist in your irrationality.

Yes, I am irrational to all NOers everywhere

:LOL: Thanks for that.
Reply
#82
Bp. Fellay just went to town on the CDF http://tinyurl.com/84l8pwv
Reply
#83
(07-16-2012, 04:49 PM)Allan Wrote: Bp. Fellay just went to town on the CDF http://tinyurl.com/84l8pwv

Fantastic. Bishop Fellay's calm demeanor, lack of polemics and straightforwardness is a breath of fresh air.
Reply
#84
(07-16-2012, 03:45 PM)Joshua Wrote:
(07-16-2012, 07:21 AM)JayneK Wrote:
(07-16-2012, 05:33 AM)Stubborn Wrote: Refusing to admit being wrong is a sign you have too much pride in you.

Refusing to admit that one is wrong is part of being stubborn.

Jayne, Jayne! Don't question Stubborn's veracity! He's never wrong and if one says otherwise, get thee to a confessional!

Seriously, Stubborn. Only internet anonymity could allow you to persist in your irrationality.

I disagree with Stubborn a lot, but in his defense, he has admitted he's been wrong before on this forum.  I can't remember when, but he has (I think it was a discussion of valid vs sacramental marriage?).
Reply
#85
(07-16-2012, 03:58 PM)DeiMateralma Wrote:
(07-16-2012, 03:16 AM)GottmitunsAlex Wrote: The actual words of Adeodatus01 were: "You and Dying Flutchman sound like you're headed for Hell. Shape up and become Catholic before it's too late."
I don't understand why. That is all. And still we get no answers from him. Only from you.  I know you are his buddy and all, but, if hes man enough to say something like that, then he is man enough to explain it. Jawohl.

Okay, so, Mrs. Adeodatus01 here. The reason you've not heard from him is because he went to bed because he had to, y'know, actually work today.

Now, he may have been a bit harsh, but, to me that only speaks to how out of line the posts he was responding to were--one of the few things that makes his (and my) blood boil is attacks against the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, headed by the successor of St. Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

Y'know, the one that Christ Himself promised that "the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it". I read those posts, and they sounded to me like they were just about calling Our Lord a liar.

So, yes, in the spirit of fraternal charity, maybe Adeodatus01 used harsh words, perhaps as a means to shock (the collective) you into thinking before posting such accusations, "The Roman Church of Satan" etc. on a forum that is visible to literally the entire world. After all, did he say that you were actually going to Hell (which would, of course be uncharitable)? No, he merely observed that your words made it look like you were on your way there (and aren't many of us, barring the grace of the Most High?)

Unrelated to all that, I love Giovanni Guareschi and I love seeing his book in your sig.
Reply
#86
(07-16-2012, 05:01 PM)newyorkcatholic Wrote: Unrelated to all that, I love Giovanni Guareschi and I love seeing his book in your sig.

Awesome! I grew up reading Don Camillo!
Reply
#87
(07-16-2012, 12:15 PM)Dellery Wrote: Enabling rouges who wish to destroy Our Lord's Church is though, a crime you coincidentally happen to take pride in committing.
HR was indeed using protestant like vitriol, however, this fact doesn't absolve you from hypocrisy.

Not at all..just keeping it Biblical and engaging in some verbal Anathematization

Gal 1:8

  "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. [Galatians 1:8] [Latin] [9] As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema."
Reply
#88
(07-17-2012, 10:59 AM)Habitual_Ritual Wrote:
(07-16-2012, 12:15 PM)Dellery Wrote: [...]
HR was indeed using protestant like vitriol, however, this fact doesn't absolve you from hypocrisy.

Not at all..just keeping it Biblical and engaging in some verbal Anathematization

Gal 1:8

  "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. [Galatians 1:8] [Latin] [9] As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema."

And this is remarkably like the Protestant justification for saying such things.  The resemblance is uncanny.
Reply
#89
(07-16-2012, 04:55 PM)Joshua Wrote:
(07-16-2012, 04:49 PM)Allan Wrote: Bp. Fellay just went to town on the CDF http://tinyurl.com/84l8pwv

Fantastic. Bishop Fellay's calm demeanor, lack of polemics and straightforwardness is a breath of fresh air.
:scratchinghead:

Calm demeanor, yes.

Straightforwardness?!  I guess one man's straighforwardness is another man's ambiguity.  I've seen various comments on this interview, and this is the first time anyone has used the word "straightforwardness" to describe it.  (First time I've seen that word used to describe anything out of Bishop Fellay perhaps in years.)  Our own Jayne K said, "This is a reliable source but it does not seem to say anything definite."  (emphasis mine)  On other forums I've seen the word "Prevaricating" (definition: Speak or act in an evasive way), and I've seen others lament the soft language used to describe Mueller's heresies as "questionable, to say the least!"  Yes, to say the least.  Definitely not the strong, unambiguous straightforwardness of Archbishop Lefebvre.  But I guess, we all have our varying opinions.
Reply
#90
So, it's very obvious the Church is supposedly teaching this "different" gospel... 3 Popes in, and pretty much all the Bishops in the world save those not in communion with Rome. The ones who are in communion with Rome, but have issues with aspects of the Council, and just interpret in light of Tradition, taking exception to "the spirit of Vatican II", are still in communion with Rome. A heavy lesson there for some.

Either the gates of hell prevailed or there is a spirit of Protestantism coursing through the veins of many here, in total misunderstanding of what is acceptable in terms of obedience to Rome.

I see not only a corollary to Protestantism, but also the Pharisees and Sadducees, wrapped up in insular worlds, pontificating and going against Christ and St. Peter, et al.

The Church is Israel, and boy oh boy, don't we play the part.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)