[Ladislaus]

St. John Chrystostome, Church Father and Doctor of the Church (4th Century): Panegyric on St. Lucianus, "Do not be surprised that I should equate martyrdom with baptism; for here too the spirit blows with much fruitfulness, and a marvellous and astonishing remission of sins and cleansing of the soul is effected; and just as those who are baptized by water, so, too, those who suffer martyrdom are cleansed with their own blood."

 Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles, Homily I: "But why does Christ say, "Ye shall be baptized," when in fact there was no water in the upper room? Because the more essential part of Baptism is the Spirit, through Whom indeed the water has its operation; in the same manner our Lord also is said to be anointed, not that He had ever been anointed with oil, but because He had received the Spirit. Besides, we do in fact find them receiving a baptism with water [and a baptism with the Spirit], and these at different moments. In our case both take place under one act, but then they were divided."

Case and point illustration right here.  He pastes a generic quote about Baptism of Blood into a thread in order to derail it.  This man is deranged and has obvious psychological problems.

[Ladislaus]

**This entire sub-sub-forum is of very little interest to either Matthew or myself, so those who find this topic a worthwhile use of their time hopefully by now have figured out that it is very light on moderator activity of any sort. Take it or leave it; it is what it is.

Indeed, LoT's behavior only caught Matthew's attention after the culprit started to pollute the Crisis section with sedevacantist spam.

Sadly, the fact that this forum is of little interest to you is a commentary on the fact that neither of you has any earthly clue about what's truly at the heart of the V2 crisis, theologically speaking.  It's all about ecclesiology; every V2 error is about ecclesiology and about membership in the Church.  Period.  Evidently you and Matthew think it's more about making sure you have the correct size of lavabo cloth at Mass.

[DZ PLEASE]

AND Matthew limited him to starting one spam post per day.  He would pollute every thread on the subject of BoD by pasting in 20-page articles from one of his favorite sites.  He would create 10 of these threads every single day to the point that all the other threads got pushed off the bottom of the page.

Most recently, he has started polluting other people's threads by spamming quotes into them to disrupt any discussion of the subject.  It's contrary to all forum etiquette to go in and sabotage other people's threads by spamming quotes in that do not even pertain to the subject under discussion.  That would be like his going into the Resistance Forum and spamming random sedevacantist quotes into every Resistance thread.  He does the same thing here and he needs to be stopped.  If he started the thread, then he can do what he wants, but he crosses the line by spamming his stuff into other people's threads.

In fact, if LoT continues with this behavior, I might just to into the R&R forum and start spamming quotes into other people's threads until it gets Matthew's attention.

With all due sir, you seem better than one who adopts another's error. I loathe R&R, but wrong is wrong. Venting?

I'll take a hike now. Hopefully not too annoying a butt-in.

Out.

[Lover of Truth]

St. Victor of Braga, (4th Century): From the Roman Martyrology: "Saint Victor: At Braga in Portugal, of Saint Victor, Martyr, who while still a catechumen refused to worship an idol, and confessed Christ Jesus with great constancy; wherefore after many torments, he merited to be baptized in his own blood, his head being cut off. Victor of Braga Martyr (Red Martyr): Died c. 300. In his chronicle, Vasaeus records that Saint Victor was baptized by blood. The catechumen was beheaded at Braga, Portugal, under Diocletian for refusing to sacrifice to idols (Benedictines, Husenbeth)."

[Last Tradhican]

This spamming non-answers are typical of people who believe that anyone of "good"  will is saved even if they are Jews, Mohamedans, Hindus, Buddhist... etc. , they are afraid of sincerely revealing what they believe. 

We who believe that dogma is the final word on a subject that was previously in doubt, spill our every thought here, while those who believe that all people of "good" will are saved, never sincerely reveal their beliefs directly.

A perfect example is LOT, he's posted more on this sub-forum ghetto than practically everyone else put together, and yet to this day no one knows precisely what he believes.

[Lover of Truth]

St. Pope Siricius (4th Century): Letter to Himerius, 385: "As we maintain that the observance of the holy Paschal time should in no way be relaxed, in the same way we desire that infants who, on account of their age, cannot yet speak, or those who, in any necessity, are in want of the water of holy baptism, be succored with all possible speed, for fear that, if those who leave this world should be deprived of the life of the Kingdom for having been refused the source of salvation which they desired, this may lead to the ruin of our souls. If those threatened with shipwreck, or the attack of enemies, or the uncertainties of a siege, or those put in a hopeless condition due to some bodily sickness, ask for what in their faith is their only help, let them receive at the very moment of their request the reward of regeneration they beg for. Enough of past mistakes! From now on, let all the priests observe the aforesaid rule if they do not want to be separated from the solid apostolic rock on which Christ has built his universal Church."

[Last Tradhican]

All he is doing is posting quotes about BOD of the catechumen and BOB, one at a time, none of which apply to what he believes and is trying to convert others to believe; that Jews, Mohamedans, Hindus, Buddhists etc can be saved. If he posted quotes that taught Jews, Mohamedans, Hindus, Buddhists etc can be saved, he would have nothing to post but the mental gymnastics of modern theologians.

Let me add, that he is posting quotes about BOD of the catechumen and BOB, one at a time, when he does not believe the quotes he is posting, for he believes that people can be saved who have no desire to die for the faith (BOB) or to be catechumen or to be a Catholic and even despise the Church.

[Lover of Truth]

St. Ambrose, Church Father and Doctor of the Church (4th Century): From his writing "De obitu Valentiniani consolatio": "But I hear that you are distressed because he did not receive the sacrament of baptism. Tell me, what attribute do we have besides our will, our intention? Yet, a short time ago he had this desire that before he came to Italy he should be initiated [baptized], and he indicated that he wanted to be baptized as soon as possible by myself. Did he not, therefore, have that grace which he desired? Did he not have what he asked for? Undoubtedly because he asked for it he received it."

[Neil Obstat]

See how many posts there are this way? LoT returns after each reply, every few minutes if necessary, giving the thread the crypto-impression that a conversation is taking place even though there is no such content. Appearances are everything.
.
Lots of "hits" means lots of traffic stats in favor of the website! The more controversy there is over whether a particular member should or should not be allowed to pepper various threads with copy-and-paste quotes from the same sources -- perhaps with one or two characters changed so they're not "exactly the same" -- the more "hits" are credited to the website. Trad Cat Knight would be impressed, I'm sure. It's so much cheaper than purchasing fake hits from a computer mill in China or Indonesia.

[Lover of Truth]

St. Prosper of Aquitaine (5th century): Sentent. Ex S. Aug. n. exlix. col 564 (Quoted in "The Faith of Catholics" (Berington and Kirk) 1846): "They who, without even having received the laver of regeneration, die for the confession of Christ, it avails them as much for the doing away of sins, as if they were washed in the font of baptism."

[Neil Obstat]

I do not think anyone reads any of LOT's threads or for that matter, that anyone goes into the "Feeneyite" section precisely because it is practically all composed of his threads and postings. He had long ago now worn out his welcome here and has established himself as a nut case. Without LOT there would be no "Feeneyite" sub-forum. Nobody on CI reads what he writes except a few people who see the strict interpretation of the dogmas on EENS as a rebuke to their belief that all people of "good" will are saved. I think that amounts to LOT and just two other persons.  

In air warfare they have a material called chaff, a radar countermeasure in which aircraft spread a cloud of small thin pieces of aluminum which swamps the radar screen with many false targets, thereby hiding the real plane. LOT is just spreading chaff on this EENS forum. Let him drown in his own chaff.  In the end, anyone that reads what he writes will know less than when they began, so there is not as much harm done as one would think, as they didn't know anything to begin with. Anyone that seeks truth will see right through his chaff.

The entire site wouldn't suffer at all if LoT's posts were simply deleted. It would only take a few keystrokes. 

Nobody's reading them anyway. There probably would be no complaints, either. Like last issue of The Recusant, Greg Taylor bemoaned that he didn't get a single letter of complaint when Taylor had taken a holiday (skipped an issue) calling it "a musical interlude." 

LoT wasn't posting for a long time recently, and nobody missed it. Unlike Taylor who was honest enough to say he was disappointed, LoT pretends not to notice that nobody cares. 

That's what's going on here.

The earlier platform had a feature whereby any member could "Ignore" any other member. It was a simple way of quickly improving the readability of the index pages and the threads.  It was interesting to see that when some members were ignored, it didn't change the conversation in some threads. That's the way it is here with LoT's posts, in this thread. Imagine they were all missing. How would it change anything? They're all off-topic and nobody is replying to them and they're not in response to any other posts, so they have no bearing or relevance here at all. So delete them! 

[Lover of Truth]

St. Bernard of Clairvaux, Doctor of the Church (12th century): Letter No.77, Letter to Hugh of St. Victor, On Baptism: “If an adult...wish and seek to be baptized, but is unable to obtain it because death intervenes, then where there is no lack of right faith, devout hope, sincere charity, may God be gracious to me, because I cannot completely despair of salvation for such a one solely on account of water, if it be lacking, and cannot believe that faith will be rendered empty, hope confounded and charity lost, provided only that he is not contemptuous of the water, but as I said merely kept from it by lack of opportunity..." 

[DZ PLEASE]

LoL, the little Pagan that could…

[Lover of Truth]

Pope Innocent II (12th Century): From his letter "Apostolicam Sedem" to the Bishop of Cremona, "We assert without hesitation (on the authority of the holy Fathers Augustine and Ambrose) that the 'priest' whom you indicated (in your letter) had died without the water of baptism, because he persevered in the Faith of Holy Mother Church and in the confession of the name of Christ, was freed from original sin and attained the joys of the heavenly fatherland. Read [brother] in the eighth book of Augustine's City of God where among other things it is written: 'Baptism is administered invisibly to one whom not contempt of religion, but death excludes.' Read again the book also of the blessed Ambrose concerning the death of Valentinian where he says the same thing. Therefore, to questions concerning the dead, you should hold the opinions of the learned Fathers, and in your church you should join in prayers and you should have sacrifices offered to God for the 'priest' mentioned." (Denzinger 388)

[Neil Obstat]

By the way, many of LoT's posts are the same thing, in different threads. 

Example:

In
Baptism of Desire and Feeneyism / Re: What BODers do NOT Believe

Council of Trent (16^th century): Decree on Justification, Session VI, Chapter 4: "And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God."

 Session VII, Concerning the Sacraments in General, Canon 4 (Denz 847): "If anyone shall say that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation, but are superfluous, and that, although all are not necessary for every individual, without them or without the desire of them, through faith alone men obtain from God the grace of justification; let him be anathema."

In 
Baptism of Desire and Feeneyism / Re: Why Feeneyites Hate Catholic Teaching

Quote from: Lover of Truth on Tue Aug 15 2017 4:58:11 GMT-0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)

Council of Trent (16^th century): Decree on Justification, Session VI, Chapter 4: "And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God."

 Session VII, Concerning the Sacraments in General, Canon 4 (Denz 847): "If anyone shall say that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation, but are superfluous, and that, although all are not necessary for every individual, without them or without the desire of them, through faith alone men obtain from God the grace of justification; let him be anathema."

The REASON you don't get reports like this, Matthew, is because they are very time consuming to build. This took me about 15 minutes to put together and frankly it's a waste of time, because you're not going to pay attention to it, or, are you?

"But they're not exactly the same" you could say. True, they're not exactly the same - and what difference is there? The only difference is the last 15 words are in italics in the second version, and the words "of them" are in bold just before those 15 words. But ALL the words are exactly the same. Only bold and italics are different, and that's in less than 15% of these two posts. 

Oh, one other difference: the "D" in the word, Decree (first line, 6th word) is in italics in the first post but it's not in italics in the second post. Wow. Big difference! I'm so happy to see that LoT is not posting "exactly the same thing" in multiple threads. It's so impressive.