CathInfo.com

All I can say... is that TGK.. knows how to take a punch.... 

You feenyites are so weird. 
Like effusive posts saying nothing mean intelligence or correctness

I asked lad WHAT the manualists are listing. He refused to answer.

The problem here is, and this is why I am actually beginning to think feenyites are actually not intelligent people, is that they are taking an APPARENT contradiction between bod and eens and without ANY theological support trying to drive a wedge between the two.

Trust me when I accuse them of being dim witted that's me being charitable , because the other choice is them being malicious.

Someone like you Godfrey, or Ladislaus or the many others are probably being malicious.. because you are not stupid people in other areas.

Root cause of this disorder is pride, most likely.

You are struggling with the difference between an apparent contradiction vs. an actual contradiction, so I will explain:  Consider the two propositions:

a. The Sacraments are necessary for salvation

b. Baptism of Desire, a non-sacrament, is sufficient for salvation

If I say that Tom died with Baptism of Desire and went to heaven, then I am actually contradicting proposition (a).  I am saying that Tom was saved without the sacraments. The conclusion does not apparently contradict proposition (a), it actually contradicts proposition (a).  The definition of Necessity is, That which cannot not be.  The conclusion denies this necessity. 

So, I find this on nearly every issue that Trads are battling it out on.

95% of the "combatants" have already made up their minds ahead of time, and when some argument is made that appears to support their position, they'll high-five one another.  Notice that I said "appears" to support their position.  They don't care if it actually does, or that it's full of so many holes that it resembles Swiss cheese.  If someone makes an argument against their position, they ignore it, or pretend it doesn't exist, and try to change the subject.  If someone refutes an argument they make, even convincingly to any objective observer, they'll ignore it, change the subject, and then after a few more cycles, they'll simply restate the original argument as if it had never been refuted.  That's one of the major reason I stopped posting as much.

I'll give one obvious example.  You'll here the BoDers claim that the Church Fathers unanimously taught BoD.  I actually used to believe this, since I heard it repeated so often ... until I actually looked into the matter.  If you actually look into it, you find that the strong majority of those who mention the issue actually reject it, with only two who supported it, and of those two, one (St. Augustine) floated the idea tenatively in his youth (after considering it over and over again, I find that ...) ... but then retracted it, and then St. Ambrose appears to be making some distinction between "washed but not crowned" that doesn't look like a straightfoward BoD by any stretch.  So you cite the sources, list the Fathers, etc.

...

Your post is ignored.

....

Perhaps a week or even a few day slater, "Church Fathers unanimously taught BoD." (simply restating the refuted position), hoping that readers either forgot about it or just as a strategy to get their opponents frustated and waste more of their time.

NOW, an HONEST person looking at the evidence wil say, "hmmm.  OK.  You know ... you're right.  I had that all wrong.  I guess can't find unanimous / dogmatic support from the Church Fathers for BoD" ... and then move along to other facets of the argument.

I HAVE NEVER RUN INTO AN HONEST BODER WHO BEHAVED WTIH THIS KIND OF INTELLECTUAL HONESTY ... except myself, since I read the Fathers and said, "wait a minute ... that isn't true.  Why does everyone keep saying this?"  I later even found a quotation from St. Robert Bellarmine that the Fathers were divided on BoD.