Anglican more Catholic than Francis
#61
(06-17-2013, 09:39 PM)John Lane Wrote: "Racist" is a pretty meaningless term, invented by liberals as a way of hating ordinary people from a pretend moral high ground.

That picture of yours.  So those who love the South, fail to believe lies told against their ancestors, and display a Confederate flag are racists?   That sounds like a genuinely hateful generalisation to me.  But one is never surprised by the contradictions of liberals.

No, I wasn't making a racist joke, I was suggesting that you are a Sikh, as somebody who doesn't know any Christian doctrine.  And just in case you decide to pose as though you find that joke offensive on "race-hate" grounds, Sikh's are not a race, they are a religion.  (And generally very nice people, in my experience.)

Well, the irony of the picture is the Obama campaign sign.  :LOL:

I just wasn't sure why in the world you brought up a turban; the only reasonable explanation is some sort of racist slur against towel-heads, which I was supposing you were basing on my username (which has nothing to do with India or the Middle East, but that was the most reasonable explanation for your latest batch of filth).

I know plenty of Christian doctrine, though I could always learn more; but schismatics have little to teach, and I have looked at your writings, such as they are.  You are not a Catholic; that your ilk continue to post on this forum is a disgrace.
Reply
#62
..
Reply
#63
(06-17-2013, 09:40 AM)OldMan Wrote:
(06-16-2013, 10:37 PM)Vincentius Wrote:
(06-16-2013, 09:53 PM)OldMan Wrote:
(06-16-2013, 08:42 PM)Vincentius Wrote: OldMan, then he is not a true SV whoever you are referring to.  There are a myriad of theological theories about  who is not Pope.  The "purist" sede states that the Chair of Peter is unoccupied because he has already determined the factors that make a true pope are lacking or defective.  Or he would not be an SV.  I don't hold John Lane a true sede, at least for now, as I have known him since at least more than a few dozen years,  and that he attends the SSPX speaks a lot.  At least before you judge what I really do know check first if you are clearly in the know.  Thanks.

Who cares what you think? I know John Lane too – and quite well at that! There is no such thing as a "purist" sede. Probably only exists in your mind.

Q. Do  you consider yourself a "purist" sede? If so, where does one go to get the "purist" seal of approval?

Seems you are the only one who cares what I think.  Typical of the mentality of those who cannot contain opposition to their temperament -- attack the messenger (because the message is unassailable or indefensible).  I am not a sede, never was, and if you cared to know I don't even have the TLM where I am now in "exile," so I go to the N.O.  Satisfied or have you more ammo in that cannon of yours to launch at me?  Novus ordite?  Neo Catholic?  Nope.  I am a Catholic, brought up and raised in the years before Vatican II was even conceived, the period of time which Catholics now refer to as "traditional." 

What gives you the impression I wish to attack the messenger or care what  you think? You posted; I replied. Isn't that the point of a forum such as this? Exile?  Naughty? Frankly I don't care where you go or what you do. You sound a bit paranoid.

Happily we agree on one thing! I don't like the adjectives people place before Catholic either. So when someone asks the question, "Are you a traditionalist?" I simply answer, I am a Catholic. Adjectives, such as the term "purist", only tend to fragment Catholics of good faith. Pax.

Oh c'mon, this is getting so tiresome having to stave off thoughtless personal attacks, and always to be put on the defensive.  Typical of armchair theologians.

Tell me if the following is

Thoughtless
Insidious remark
Ad hominem

OldMan Wrote:Not all sedes believe that Pope Pius XII was the last pope or even that Paul VI wasn't validly elected and even legitimately held the papacy for some period of time. [i]Show just what you really know[/i].

Yet you don't bother to explain what you state, but instead make yourself look good with a smarty remark.  Explain "not all sedes." 

The point of a forum like this is to exchange comments, whether agreeable or contrary, and give off an intelligent discussion.  But no, you summarily dismiss the discussion with "Show just what you really know"; so you know any better?

Perhaps I should have qualified my comments by saying "these are homealoners" instead of a sede with a "purist." persuasion, which by that I mean "strict observance."

Ok, I'll let you have the last word if that would make you happy.
Reply
#64
(06-18-2013, 04:16 AM)Vincentius Wrote:
(06-17-2013, 09:40 AM)OldMan Wrote:
(06-16-2013, 10:37 PM)Vincentius Wrote:
(06-16-2013, 09:53 PM)OldMan Wrote:
(06-16-2013, 08:42 PM)Vincentius Wrote: OldMan, then he is not a true SV whoever you are referring to.  There are a myriad of theological theories about  who is not Pope.  The "purist" sede states that the Chair of Peter is unoccupied because he has already determined the factors that make a true pope are lacking or defective.  Or he would not be an SV.  I don't hold John Lane a true sede, at least for now, as I have known him since at least more than a few dozen years,  and that he attends the SSPX speaks a lot.  At least before you judge what I really do know check first if you are clearly in the know.  Thanks.

Who cares what you think? I know John Lane too – and quite well at that! There is no such thing as a "purist" sede. Probably only exists in your mind.

Q. Do  you consider yourself a "purist" sede? If so, where does one go to get the "purist" seal of approval?

Seems you are the only one who cares what I think.  Typical of the mentality of those who cannot contain opposition to their temperament -- attack the messenger (because the message is unassailable or indefensible).  I am not a sede, never was, and if you cared to know I don't even have the TLM where I am now in "exile," so I go to the N.O.  Satisfied or have you more ammo in that cannon of yours to launch at me?  Novus ordite?  Neo Catholic?  Nope.  I am a Catholic, brought up and raised in the years before Vatican II was even conceived, the period of time which Catholics now refer to as "traditional." 

What gives you the impression I wish to attack the messenger or care what  you think? You posted; I replied. Isn't that the point of a forum such as this? Exile?  Naughty? Frankly I don't care where you go or what you do. You sound a bit paranoid.

Happily we agree on one thing! I don't like the adjectives people place before Catholic either. So when someone asks the question, "Are you a traditionalist?" I simply answer, I am a Catholic. Adjectives, such as the term "purist", only tend to fragment Catholics of good faith. Pax.

Oh c'mon, this is getting so tiresome having to stave off thoughtless personal attacks, and always to be put on the defensive.  Typical of armchair theologians.

Tell me if the following is

Thoughtless
Insidious remark
Ad hominem

OldMan Wrote:Not all sedes believe that Pope Pius XII was the last pope or even that Paul VI wasn't validly elected and even legitimately held the papacy for some period of time. [i]Show just what you really know[/i].

Yet you don't bother to explain what you state, but instead make yourself look good with a smarty remark.  Explain "not all sedes." 

The point of a forum like this is to exchange comments, whether agreeable or contrary, and give off an intelligent discussion.  But no, you summarily dismiss the discussion with "Show just what you really know"; so you know any better?

Perhaps I should have qualified my comments by saying "these are homealoners" instead of a sede with a "purist." persuasion, which by that I mean "strict observance."

Ok, I'll let you have the last word if that would make you happy.

Buddy, you are a troubled soul. Enjoy exile!
Reply
#65
[OldMan]Buddy, you are a troubled soul. Enjoy exile![/quote]

Is that all you can say as having the last word?  I expected a kind of rebuke, such as "putting me in my place" kind of thing.  Thanks anyway.  No I am not a troubled soul.  But it seems you have some divine attributes to be able to read people's hearts.  I am a happy Catholic.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)