Quote from: Augstine Baker

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

Quote from: Augustine Baker

As far as I know, it's not in the slightest controversial to refer to someone as a material heretic for holding an error without pertinacity or malice

He wasn't a heretic because the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception was not a Dogma at the time he was alive. A heretic is someone who's beliefs contradict the Dogmas of the Church. Furthermore, the Church teaches that heretics cannot be saved.

I don't think any of your gas station attendants and future street cleaners, or whatever you guys do, is really up to the task of explaining this competently.

St. Thomas wasn't a malicious heretic, in fact, his views were condemned by the University of Paris and competent ecclesiastical authorities.

Not real interested in going round and around with someone I suspect hasn't even studied basic logic or philosophy.

You simply aren't treating people fairly here.  You don't know anything about the backgrounds of the people you are condemning; besides, many of the sedevacantists on this board have studied quite a bit of logic and philosophy, and you know it.  So, if you have to rely on knowingly spurious attacks, what does that say about your position ?  And, for one who talks about respecting and revering clerics so much, you sure do rip into the Novus Ordo hierarchy -- which you believe to be legitimate clergy -- pretty regularly on your blog.  You can't have it both ways.

Based on the kinds of typical responses I get from people, I'm thinking that there isn't a lot of formal training in the background.  Combine that with the typically bad attitude, and you've got some very trying and presumptuous people on your hands.

Where have I "ripped" into the hierarchy of the Catholic Church?

See, that's what the general problem is around here.  There are quite a few posters who shoot their mouths off half-cocked, make rash generalizations and presume to have knowledge they clearly lack.

I typically give these people more respect than they deserve.  I'll call them on their childish behavior and they'll like it.

Otherwise put me on ignore.

How about a little more humility?

Ditto.

(There's a new one for me. I wrote Lefebvre-ist  (all as one word) and it turned into ####. So, that perjorative is not allowed to even be printed!)

PS- that should say above "Let your Catholic sources postings expound for you the truths of what you want to bring forward. Resist all ad hominum attacks, and perjoratives!

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

Quote from: Augustine Baker

As far as I know, it's not in the slightest controversial to refer to someone as a material heretic for holding an error without pertinacity or malice

He wasn't a heretic because the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception was not a Dogma at the time he was alive. A heretic is someone who's beliefs contradict the Dogmas of the Church. Furthermore, the Church teaches that heretics cannot be saved.

I don't think any of your gas station attendants and future street cleaners, or whatever you guys do, is really up to the task of explaining this competently.

St. Thomas wasn't a malicious heretic, in fact, his views were condemned by the University of Paris and competent ecclesiastical authorities.

Not real interested in going round and around with someone I suspect hasn't even studied basic logic or philosophy.

My undergraduate degree did involve the study of logic and philosophy, and I have a master's degree from an ivy league school.  Are these the sort of credentials you think give my opinions weight?  

My credentialed opinion is that you are a bit arrogant.  I am probably your closest theological companion here.  I think Benedict is the pope, that my local bishop is a part of the Catholic hierarchy with whom I must maintain communion, and that the NO is okay if celebrated correctly and that VC II is an official but not infallible council, being pastoral rather than dogmatic.  We pretty much agree on this, right?  If you strike me as arrogant and condescending, what chance do you have of any kind of fruitful conversation with anyone else?

Quote from: Augstine Baker

Quote from: SpiritusSanctus

Quote from: Augustine Baker

As far as I know, it's not in the slightest controversial to refer to someone as a material heretic for holding an error without pertinacity or malice

He wasn't a heretic because the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception was not a Dogma at the time he was alive. A heretic is someone who's beliefs contradict the Dogmas of the Church. Furthermore, the Church teaches that heretics cannot be saved.

I don't think any of your gas station attendants and future street cleaners, or whatever you guys do, is really up to the task of explaining this competently.

St. Thomas wasn't a malicious heretic, in fact, his views were condemned by the University of Paris and competent ecclesiastical authorities.

Not real interested in going round and around with someone I suspect hasn't even studied basic logic or philosophy.

My undergraduate degree did involve the study of logic and philosophy, and I have a master's degree from an ivy league school.  Are these the sort of credentials you think give my opinions weight?  

My credentialed opinion is that you are a bit arrogant.  I am probably your closest theological companion here.  I think Benedict is the pope, that my local bishop is a part of the Catholic hierarchy with whom I must maintain communion, and that the NO is okay if celebrated correctly and that VC II is an official but not infallible council, being pastoral rather than dogmatic.  We pretty much agree on this, right?  If you strike me as arrogant and condescending, what chance do you have of any kind of fruitful conversation with anyone else?

Maybe you're too thin skinned?   I don't see you challenging people when they make claims contrary to what you just stated above.

Either you don't have a lot of time to comment, maybe spineless or maybe dishonest, I don't know.