Raoul76
Reputation: 1962
(Likers: 0 / Critics: 0)
Posts: 5,439
|
Thanks for the reformulation, Matthew. This is the only part that I have a problem with.
ChantCD said:
| Quote: | | I will not impose (i.e., require as as prerequisite for membership in the Catholic Church) dogmas that do not exist: including, but not limited to, positions regarding: past popes, Baptism of Desire, Baptism of Blood, Natural Family Planning, and Fatima. |
I can't impose anything in the public sphere because I'm not an authority in the Church. But I do impose what you are saying mentally. For them to be what I'd consider Catholic I don't believe that they can accept Natural Family Planning. It contradicts the Ordinary Magisterium and what Catholics have always known, that the primary and secondary ends cannot be severed, so I can't say that those who believe in it are free of material heresy. Nor can I say that this is a "dogma that doesn't exist."
I also believe that all those who believe in salvation in false religions are at least material heretics.
But basically I am aware that in case of the majority on this website, not being able to see into their hearts, no matter how suspicious they are, that it is counterproductive to call them heretics, which I don't really do. I like to think my vocabulary is more creative.
I hope that this is a fair compromise. From what I can tell, the gist of these New Rules is that you don't want invective and lack of charity -- this was also your Old Rule.
*****
I'm disturbed about one other thing. Matthew, will you please reinstate Fkpagnanelli? I have agreed with your other choices of banishment but this one leaves me with a queasy feeling. Fk struck me as having a good heart beneath a crusty exterior. He also had some valid points to make. I think he contributed to the dynamic of the site.
I looked up his name on the Internet and read about a case he was involved in where he was arrested for stonewalling an abortion clinic ( by tying himself together with someone else via a kryptonite lock and blocking a stairwell, ha ha ). Can you honestly say that isn't a redeeming factor?
Banish roscoe instead. This man is like a boll weevil that eats through threads and turns them into gibberish, as you can see below.
|
.........................
A general rule is that all my posts before 2011 are dangerous to read. At the time I was nothing short of a frothing Pharisee. Please ignore my old posts against NFP and implicit faith, both of which are true teachings, as well as Fatima and Lucy's later revelations, which I now see are of continuing paramount importance in the history of the Church.
I also apologize for my lack of prudence when speaking about clergy in the past, I didn't know where the line was and often judged intentions instead of actions and words. My deepest apologies to Pius XII especially, who I judged in the harshest light and accused of being a communist infiltrator. This was not intentional slander but my true belief at the time. I still have problems with his pontificate, but no proof of any intentional malice. I even insulted the Church itself by questioning his Holy Week reforms, for which I am, again, bitterly sorry. I also spoke unforgivably about Pius XI, suggesting or saying outright that he was also an infiltrator who was in effect working towards Vatican II.
I also apologize with profoundest regret to Abp. Lefebvre and Bp. Fellay, the nuns who left CMRI, for assuming malign intentions about all or some of them, and for saying the nuns were witches; Father Cekada and the SSPX priest Fr. Boulet for suggesting or saying they were deliberately intellectually dishonest, Bp. Vezelis for spreading a rumor about him that is not verified; I also apologize to Fr. Martin Stepanich, Mgr. Fenton, Father Brian Harrison, Cardinal Newman, De Lugo, Suarez, Erasmus, and anyone else I have forgotten, for saying or suggesting they were heretics and/or infiltrators due to my former errors. I was also very harsh on Dietrich von Hildebrand and Cardinal Gibbons due to my beliefs at the time, however, in their case, there was reason for concern, I just would not call them heretics, perhaps some of their ideas would have the theological note of "ill-sounding." During all this time, I was under the influence of major scruples, probably without even knowing what that meant, and had a distorted, extreme view of the Crisis.
|
| Posted Feb 8, 2010, 8:46 pm |
|
Ignored by: 0
|
|
|
Jamie
Reputation: 6
(Likers: 0 / Critics: 0)
Posts: 526
|
| Raoul76 said: | | I'm disturbed about one other thing. Matthew, will you please reinstate Fkpagnanelli? I have agreed with your other choices of banishment but this one leaves me with a queasy feeling. Fk struck me as having a good heart beneath a crusty exterior. He also had some valid points to make. I think he contributed to the dynamic of the site. |
While I agree about banishing Roscoe, I absolutely do not agree with what you are saying here about Fkpagnanelli. He was the main reason for my initial request to Matthew to do something about the mess and, frankly, if he was allowed to stay here I, for one, would be seriously considering leaving. I am sure I am not the only one. He was simply unable to say anything in charity - he constantly spewed vitriol. He was damaging and disturbing.
|
|
| Posted Feb 8, 2010, 8:51 pm |
|
Ignored by: 0
|
|
|
Raoul76
Reputation: 1962
(Likers: 0 / Critics: 0)
Posts: 5,439
|
On second thought fkpagnanelli is pretty abrasive. I just read his Pope Augustine thread and it seems he was indulging in suicidal behavior, trying to get himself banned.
He might have been provoked into it by the New Rule though. After reading that I'd have to mentally believe everyone here was Catholic, I was about to leave the website. I am still ready to leave if that is the case, although I don't feel the need to go down with guns blazing.
|
.........................
A general rule is that all my posts before 2011 are dangerous to read. At the time I was nothing short of a frothing Pharisee. Please ignore my old posts against NFP and implicit faith, both of which are true teachings, as well as Fatima and Lucy's later revelations, which I now see are of continuing paramount importance in the history of the Church.
I also apologize for my lack of prudence when speaking about clergy in the past, I didn't know where the line was and often judged intentions instead of actions and words. My deepest apologies to Pius XII especially, who I judged in the harshest light and accused of being a communist infiltrator. This was not intentional slander but my true belief at the time. I still have problems with his pontificate, but no proof of any intentional malice. I even insulted the Church itself by questioning his Holy Week reforms, for which I am, again, bitterly sorry. I also spoke unforgivably about Pius XI, suggesting or saying outright that he was also an infiltrator who was in effect working towards Vatican II.
I also apologize with profoundest regret to Abp. Lefebvre and Bp. Fellay, the nuns who left CMRI, for assuming malign intentions about all or some of them, and for saying the nuns were witches; Father Cekada and the SSPX priest Fr. Boulet for suggesting or saying they were deliberately intellectually dishonest, Bp. Vezelis for spreading a rumor about him that is not verified; I also apologize to Fr. Martin Stepanich, Mgr. Fenton, Father Brian Harrison, Cardinal Newman, De Lugo, Suarez, Erasmus, and anyone else I have forgotten, for saying or suggesting they were heretics and/or infiltrators due to my former errors. I was also very harsh on Dietrich von Hildebrand and Cardinal Gibbons due to my beliefs at the time, however, in their case, there was reason for concern, I just would not call them heretics, perhaps some of their ideas would have the theological note of "ill-sounding." During all this time, I was under the influence of major scruples, probably without even knowing what that meant, and had a distorted, extreme view of the Crisis.
|
| Posted Feb 8, 2010, 8:53 pm |
|
Ignored by: 0
|
|
|
