Author Topic: Heresies of Vatican II (Read 12894 times)

Caminus · « **Reply #30 on:** September 29, 2011, 11:11:53 AM »

Quote from: TKGS

Quote from: Caminus
Just the other evening I read something from a "traditionalist" Catholic who mocked the Little Flower, St. Therese, calling her the Little Stinkweed. Why? Because he perceived that she undermined Catholic doctrine. It was a grotesque thing to behold.

So...what has this to do with the way you've been acting of late? Because some unidentified "traditionalist" Catholic (as characterized by you) author unjustly mocked St. Therese somewhere, you think it acceptable to make bitter and unjust comments about members of this forum?

No truly traditional Catholic mocks an undoubtedly Catholic saint (she was Canonized in 1925) in such a manner. The fact that you call him a "traditionalist" indicates to me that he is more a pseudo-traditionalist than truly traditional.

Your behaviour of late has been truly shocking.

What is shocking is the inability to distinguish an idiotic comment clearly made in jest directed towards an equally idiotic and grotesque insult against my person. It's a form of "holding up the mirror." Thus, you've missed the real culprit, the man who follows people around hurling unwwarranted epithets, the one whom you should really be chastizing, but not surprisingly gets a free pass, while in turn have completely misapprehending the intent of my reply. I'm not sure what you mean by how I've "been acting of late." I hardly post anymore. So back to the topic at hand.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #31 on:** September 29, 2011, 03:18:27 PM »

Quote from: Caminus

What is shocking is the inability to distinguish an idiotic comment clearly made in jest directed towards an equally idiotic and grotesque insult against my person.

PartyIsOver made no insult against your person, he told you that you were wrong. You then responded in a slanderous way by trying to dig up dirt on him by asking him if he was a Jew, when he actually was not. Furthermore, what I find shocking is that you accused me of something I never said and attacked my reasoning skills, and now you cowardly refuse to address the issue anymore because you know you were wrong. I never said John XXIII was certainly a Mason, I said there was evidence.

Quote

Thus, you've missed the real culprit, the man who follows people around hurling unwwarranted epithets, the one whom you should really be chastizing, but not surprisingly gets a free pass, while in turn have completely misapprehending the intent of my reply.

I sure haven't seen PIO hurl "unwarranted epithets" at anyone lately. PIO and I actually used to be bitter rivals who hurled insults at one another, but I slowly began to realize how good of a Traditional Catholic he is. He in turn began liking the posts I was making, and now we're friends. Has he been known to go overboard in the past? Yes, but that was in the PAST so it's rather foolish of you to bring up something the man no longer does (and really, don't we all go overboard sometimes?). He said nothing to you that I find worthy of chastizing him for.

Quote

I'm not sure what you mean by how I've "been acting of late."

You've been acting different lately, Caminus. You were making some great posts for a while but now you're starting to act the way you did when you got into that big fight with Raoul, you're insulting people and responding with ad hominem arguments rather than addressing the contentions made. Maybe you should go back to your old profile image or something, because something about your behaviour has changed lately.

PartyIsOver221 · « **Reply #32 on:** September 29, 2011, 06:16:28 PM »

SS, may God reward you for your charity. It is an interesting past we had, and yes now we are friends. I hope maybe one day to be friends with Caminus, but seeing him on these boards for more than a year now has nearly snuffed all hope of that. With him vs Raoul, that really showed me which side Cam is on.

I realize something though, SpiritusSanctus. We are not fighting Caminus or the modernists that post here, so much as we are fighting the dark spirits and principalities which are waging war on all good souls and Holy Mother Church. St. Paul was right. The only thing we can do, once our words cease to fall on any ears of good will, is to pray continually for conversions. Further dialogue does not do anything but stress us out, waste our energy, and end up with the modernist side saying "lets agree to disagree".

"Agreeing to disagree" is perhaps one the biggest evils ever to be uttered from a human mouth. It is tantamount to relativism, thus moral relativism, and thus anti-Christ.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #33 on:** September 29, 2011, 08:53:01 PM »

Thanks, PIO.

Looks like you and I just picked up another ignore. :rolleyes:

I guess some people can't stand the Truth.

Caminus · « **Reply #34 on:** September 29, 2011, 09:23:44 PM »

You both merit a severe tongue lashing, but I suspect you wouldn't grasp anything that would be said, thus, I'll simply ignore the inane drivel, that I must admit tests my patience. So little substance do you both add to Cathinfo, so little reasoning ability and basic reading comprehension skills do you possess, so infected are you with a pervasive myopia and the inability to self-reflect coupled with a certain defective faculty of moral judgment, makes your presence here annoying at best. So you two dimwits can hug each other all day long -- it's really a good match. But by all means, do not take offense, it's just mean old, evil Caminus speaking, whose opposition to you or the mere questioning of your statements is evident proof that he is in league with the devil.

Once again, back to the issue at hand.

Gregory I · « **Reply #35 on:** September 29, 2011, 09:29:10 PM »

How did I do?

Caminus · « **Reply #36 on:** September 29, 2011, 09:37:37 PM »

Quote from: Gregory I

How did I do?

Pretty good, thanks for trying at least. I'll analyze your post soon. Thanks.

PartyIsOver221 · « **Reply #37 on:** September 30, 2011, 05:46:08 PM »

Quote from: Caminus

You both merit a severe tongue lashing, but I suspect you wouldn't grasp anything that would be said, thus, I'll simply ignore the inane drivel, that I must admit tests my patience. So little substance do you both add to Cathinfo, so little reasoning ability and basic reading comprehension skills do you possess, so infected are you with a pervasive myopia and the inability to self-reflect coupled with a certain defective faculty of moral judgment, makes your presence here annoying at best. So you two dimwits can hug each other all day long -- it's really a good match. But by all means, do not take offense, it's just mean old, evil Caminus speaking, whose opposition to you or the mere questioning of your statements is evident proof that he is in league with the devil.

Once again, back to the issue at hand.

You sound just like my spiritually-blinded "Catholic" friend whenever I bring up traditional Catholic issues regarding morality today in the world, Vatican II, et al. With the accusations, reverse psychology, hints at my inferior intelligence, etc. Irony is he is farthest from the Church as one could be, yet think they are in it.

So yes, continue in believing you are above me and SpiritusSanctus. We are so dull, so in error, so deluded and immature in thought, speech , manner, belief, and reading comprehension as you so kindly phrased.

Your humility is blinding! It is as if I see a light coming from heaven whenever you chastise me and SS!

You remind me more of the light that beacons from the netherworld; a clever, masterful sophist with a mouth that could make the greediest of men like George Soros give all their possessions up to. You don't deceive me, or any other traditional Catholics on this forum.

Daegus · « **Reply #38 on:** September 30, 2011, 09:13:12 PM »

Quote from: Caminus

You both merit a severe tongue lashing, but I suspect you wouldn't grasp anything that would be said, thus, I'll simply ignore the inane drivel, that I must admit tests my patience. So little substance do you both add to Cathinfo, so little reasoning ability and basic reading comprehension skills do you possess, so infected are you with a pervasive myopia and the inability to self-reflect coupled with a certain defective faculty of moral judgment, makes your presence here annoying at best. So you two dimwits can hug each other all day long -- it's really a good match. But by all means, do not take offense, it's just mean old, evil Caminus speaking, whose opposition to you or the mere questioning of your statements is evident proof that he is in league with the devil.

Once again, back to the issue at hand.

Hopefully no one takes this very vitriolic, satirical mess with any degree of solemnity.

Caminus speaks nothing but evil and sophistry and all of his posts prove that.

Daegus · « **Reply #39 on:** September 30, 2011, 09:14:13 PM »

Dear Caminus,

Anyone who looks back at your posts can see that you're a faithless heretic. You believe someone who obstinately denies the Faith can be a Catholic. You're a sophist of the worst kind and your tongue is tainted with the pungent smell of Hell's rotting souls. Like a ravenous wolf you roam around seeking to consume any fresh meat that comes your way, but you cannot fool everyone into becoming your prey; You cannot fool me.

I see through all of your sad attempts at intellectually denigrating everyone else. Let me take this a step further by asking this: do you even have any arguments? Going off of your embarrassing display here it would appear as though all you have is a bunch of hackneyed jargon that no longer means much of anything because you keep regurgitating this same drivel over and over and over again. When will you learn, O Caminus?

I know you for the liar and child of Satan that you are. You, Santo Subito, stevus and many others have proven yourselves to be of the Devil.

Gregory I · « **Reply #40 on:** October 01, 2011, 01:06:55 AM »

Quote from: Caminus

Just the other evening I read something from a "traditionalist" Catholic who mocked the Little Flower, St. Therese, calling her the Little Stinkweed. Why? Because he perceived that she undermined Catholic doctrine. It was a grotesque thing to behold.

Well, St. Therese WAS prone to saying things that were indicative of her belief in universal salvation...but so was St. Gregory of Nyssa.

St. Therese wrote a Christmas play for her sisters, in which the Child Jesus insists, in correction of the Angel of Vengeance, that, “every soul will find forgiveness”. On the last day, the Child Jesus will remain “the God of love” who suffered to recompense all of the sins of the entire human race.

Caminus · « **Reply #41 on:** October 02, 2011, 06:15:16 PM »

Quote

Tradition:
"The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the Devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with her..." Of Divine Faith, So defined.

Vatican II:
""The separated churches and communities as such, though we believe they suffer from the defects already mentioned, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fulness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church." (Decree on Oecuмenism Unitatis Redintegratio, paragraph 3) Formal and Gravel Heresy.

So it is your opinion then, that Vatican II contains only one heresy, strictly so-called?

Caminus · « **Reply #42 on:** October 02, 2011, 06:18:52 PM »

Quote from: Gregory I

Quote from: Caminus

Just the other evening I read something from a "traditionalist" Catholic who mocked the Little Flower, St. Therese, calling her the Little Stinkweed. Why? Because he perceived that she undermined Catholic doctrine. It was a grotesque thing to behold.

Well, St. Therese WAS prone to saying things that were indicative of her belief in universal salvation...but so was St. Gregory of Nyssa.

St. Therese wrote a Christmas play for her sisters, in which the Child Jesus insists, in correction of the Angel of Vengeance, that, “every soul will find forgiveness”. On the last day, the Child Jesus will remain “the God of love” who suffered to recompense all of the sins of the entire human race.

It appears that you know of the author and the text to which I refer. I would strongly suggest you both rephrase your sentence above and repent for partaking in the sin of another man, namely by way of defense of blasphemy against the Saints of God.

It seems you haven't yet been able to distinguish someone's thought or meaning from your own imputation of meaning to any given text. It is a very bad habit that needs addressed if you are going to engage in this type of theological commentary.

But this is a side issue that can be dealt with in private.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #43 on:** October 02, 2011, 06:23:24 PM »

The SSPX has a problem with people showing signs of what can only be called "mind-control."

Gregory I · « **Reply #44 on:** October 02, 2011, 06:32:55 PM »

Quote from: Caminus

Quote
Tradition:
"The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the Devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with her..." Of Divine Faith, So defined.

Vatican II:
""The separated churches and communities as such, though we believe they suffer from the defects already mentioned, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fulness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church." (Decree on Oecuмenism Unitatis Redintegratio, paragraph 3) Formal and Gravel Heresy.

So it is your opinion then, that Vatican II contains only one heresy, strictly so-called?

Upon a cursory examination using the definitions you provided. I intend, in the near future, to use your defintitions to take apart every phrase of every docuмent of Vatican II.

However, I intend to do so honestly; deception and embellishment help no one.

My findings are merely preliminary, and not conclusive: However, a MERELY preliminary investigation of the docuмents in a merely CURSORY manner has yielded ONE POSITIVE HERESY and several theological errors, the effects of which are MORTAL SINS to hold.

As for St. Therese: She said what shea said, I have nothing to apologize for. If she was prone to hope for universal salvation, oh well. Other Saints were also. They are no less saints.

Gregory of Nyssa, St. Gregory the Theologian, St. Maximus the Confessor, etc...They tended toward a universal reconciliation of all things in christ.

They were wrong. But they were by no means Malicious, it is more like it was their private hope. They ALL agreed you couldn't TEACH such an opinion or hope. I see St. Therese doing the same thing. She is not malicious, and it appears to be a private hope of hers. It is not as though she TAUGHT it.

I am not condemning her.