CDF Müller: Catholics ought to avoid extremes
#21
(12-19-2012, 07:30 PM)The Dying Flutchman Wrote: Excuse me Smurf, he isn't a Catholic. He denies the Virgin birth and the bodily resurrection. That is heresy. A heretic can not be a Catholic. He is a clown, at best.

Oh and another thing Smurfy I don't even go to the the SSPX. The society was wrong by playing footsie with the modernists. Catholicism can not reconcile with Rome as long as Rome remains in its modernist heresy.

Do ever wonder if you are being prideful and presumptuous? You are very loose with your words. At the least detraction. I've pointed this out to you before. You've become part of the small band of hecklers on this forum who do little to aid the discussion, much to pull it down. Your behavior on this forum is despicable. I would be very careful about your words here, since they do not merely exist in the confines of your mind, but are open to the whole world. And like some karmic wave that goes out, it can't be taken back. Please, my friend, think about your contributions here.
Reply
#22
Has he ever cared to mention what "errors" the SSPX are in?  Old Salt, how does the SSPX tell the faithful to break the first precept of the Church (going to Mass on Sundays and HDOs)?

Dying Flutchman, this argument of "he said this, which is heresy, so he's a heretic, so he can't be Catholic, etc." is the same schismatic way of thinking used by sedevacantists to defend their position.  Speak respectfully about Church prelates, even if you disagree however strongly with things they say.
Reply
#23
(12-19-2012, 07:36 PM)The Dying Flutchman Wrote: No, what hits close to the heart is the fact that here is a supposed Bishop who denies the resurrection and Virgin Birth telling Catholics they need to except the fullness of the Catholic Faith. Give me a flipping break. Scriptorium and Smurf are you serious? He is the head of the CDF and he rejects basic tenets of the Faith not just Catholicism but of all Christianity. If you guys can't see what a crisis there is when a man who rejects basic Christian truths is promoted to be head of the CDF and he has the tenacity to tell those who are genuinely Catholic that they need to accept the fullness of truth what will convince you. Ultramontanists are so silly.

I imagine you have done ZERO first hand research on his teachings. So you're essentially a clanging cymbal. Wikipedia and CFN don't count.

And ultramontanism is a red herring, since I do not hold that the Pope is always right, but I recognize the Pope for what he is. I don't believe in a paper tiger Pope.
Reply
#24
(12-19-2012, 07:30 PM)The Dying Flutchman Wrote: Excuse me Smurf, he isn't a Catholic.

Yes he is.

Quote:He denies the Virgin birth and the bodily resurrection.

He denies neither the Virgin Birth nor the bodily resurrection of Our Lord.  In fact he has affirmed both to be true and the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Quote:That is heresy.

True.  To deny either is heresy.  But he does not deny them.

Quote:A heretic can not be a Catholic.

Very true.

Quote:He is a clown, at best.

Not true.

Quote:Oh and another thing Smurfy I don't even go to the the SSPX.

Then your soul is in even graver peril that I imagined. :(( I will pray for your conversion.

Quote:Catholicism can not reconcile with Rome as long as Rome remains in its modernist heresy.

To state that Rome is not Catholic and that Rome has fallen into heresy is itself heresy.  A heretic can not be a Catholic.  You are a heretic.  You can not be a Catholic.  Please pray for God's grace to be reconciled to His Holy Church and be converted to the True Faith.  Otherwise, whilst you wallow in the filth of heresy, your soul lingers ever-longer on the road to infernal perdition.  Please I beg of you, for the sake of your immortal soul, abandon your evil and heretical beliefs.
Reply
#25
(12-19-2012, 07:37 PM)Scriptorium Wrote:
(12-19-2012, 07:30 PM)The Dying Flutchman Wrote: Excuse me Smurf, he isn't a Catholic. He denies the Virgin birth and the bodily resurrection. That is heresy. A heretic can not be a Catholic. He is a clown, at best. If you don't like that take it up with St Charles Borromeo one of those mean Church guys.

Oh and another thing Smurfy I don't even go to the the SSPX. The society was wrong by playing footsie with the modernists. Catholicism can not reconcile with Rome as long as Rome remains in its modernist heresy.

Do ever wonder if you are being prideful and presumptuous? You are very loose with your words. At the least detraction. I've pointed this out to you before. You've become part of the small band of hecklers on this forum who do little to aid the discussion, much to pull it down. Your behavior on this forum is despicable. I would be very careful about your words here, since they do not merely exist in the confines of your mind, but are open to the whole world. And like some karmic wave that goes out, it can't be taken back. Please, my friend, think about your contributions here.

As i said if you don't like the fact that a heretic can't be Catholic take it up with St Charles Borromeo.  And what does your putting your head in the sand add to the discussion. Do you ever think there are some things worth fighting for and not just PRETENDING everything is ok.
Reply
#26
(12-19-2012, 07:42 PM)Scriptorium Wrote:
(12-19-2012, 07:36 PM)The Dying Flutchman Wrote: No, what hits close to the heart is the fact that here is a supposed Bishop who denies the resurrection and Virgin Birth telling Catholics they need to except the fullness of the Catholic Faith. Give me a flipping break. Scriptorium and Smurf are you serious? He is the head of the CDF and he rejects basic tenets of the Faith not just Catholicism but of all Christianity. If you guys can't see what a crisis there is when a man who rejects basic Christian truths is promoted to be head of the CDF and he has the tenacity to tell those who are genuinely Catholic that they need to accept the fullness of truth what will convince you. Ultramontanists are so silly.

I imagine you have done ZERO first hand research on his teachings. So you're essentially a clanging cymbal. Wikipedia and CFN don't count.

Actually YES I have. He changed his position on those two issues depending on who he talks to. he uses Vatican II speak. Lots of words that mean nothing and can be taken either way.
Reply
#27
(12-19-2012, 07:37 PM)Scriptorium Wrote: You've become part of the small band of hecklers on this forum who do little to aid the discussion, much to pull it down.

Small band of Hecklers  ???

I am not "heckling" anything this crisis is not funny to me. And I don't think any of us "Hecklers" are trying to pull anything down, just take of some peoples rose colored glasses.
Reply
#28
(12-19-2012, 07:43 PM)The Dying Flutchman Wrote: As i said if you don't like the fact that a heretic can't be Catholic take it up with St Charles Borromeo.  And what does your putting your head in the sand add to the discussion. Do you ever think there are some things worth fighting for and not just PRETENDING everything is ok.

I attempt to judge others how I want to be judged. I have been charitable to you, especially when you asked for advice, for whatever that was worth. I am very aware that not everything is okay, but that doesn't lead me to conclude that everything is not okay. Furthermore, after first hand research into teachings which I thought were from the pit of hell, with prayer and supplication, I changed my mind about many claims of the SSPX and similar traditionalists. So far from pretending, I am engaging and learning. I've seen it all. I was a rigorist. I was an extreme traditionalists. I held almost all the view you write except for sedevacantism. So it isn't like I just took the kool-aid. I read the other side, and they made sense.
Reply
#29
Flutch, you've been a traddy for like a year or two. And int hat time you've hit warp speed into sede or cypto-sede teachings. Forgive me, but you should be in a position of learning not teaching at this point. I think you're running aground and think you've got everything figured out. I'm not using this as a point in argument, just pointing out that many a new/young traddy is headstrong and on fire in the beginning. There needs to be maturation.
Reply
#30
(12-19-2012, 07:52 PM)Scriptorium Wrote:
(12-19-2012, 07:43 PM)The Dying Flutchman Wrote: As i said if you don't like the fact that a heretic can't be Catholic take it up with St Charles Borromeo.  And what does your putting your head in the sand add to the discussion. Do you ever think there are some things worth fighting for and not just PRETENDING everything is ok.

I attempt to judge others how I want to be judged. I have been charitable to you, especially when you asked for advice, for whatever that was worth. I am very aware that not everything is okay, but that doesn't lead me to conclude that everything is not okay. Furthermore, after first hand research into teachings which I thought were from the pit of hell, with prayer and supplication, I changed my mind about many claims of the SSPX and similar traditionalists. So far from pretending, I am engaging and learning. I've seen it all. I was a rigorist. I was an extreme traditionalists. I held almost all the view you write except for sedevacantism. So it isn't like I just took the kool-aid. I read the other side, and they made sense.
Okay. Except I am not a sedevacantist and I have read the other side too and grew up in it and they are full of it.  But to each his own. I wouldn't want to be rigorist or anything.

If I come on too strong or angry its because this crisis and the people who pretend if we just "tweak" heresy a tad and look at it through a more smell and bells style hermeneutic everything will be dandy gets to me.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)