Author Topic: Question (Read 4377 times)

Trinity · « **Reply #15 on:** October 30, 2007, 05:47:15 AM »

Quit misquoting. I said association with murderers and the sworn enemies of Christ, not doctrines. Besides, the pope doesn't necessarily uphold the doctrines. I believe SSPX does, but the Vatican is suspect and you know that yourself. So keep it straight.

A fair statement would be, SSPX upholds the doctrines of the Catholic church and the popes who have made common cause with the sworn enemies of Christ and murderers of their fellow Catholics. That they also uphold the pope cuts no ice at the bargaining table. Though why the heck Catholics should have to bargain with their own leader is a mystery to me.

I'll take it a bit further. For having upheld the doctrines of the Church, those popes have treated the SSPX as the enemy, while holding dear and near the enemies of Christ and His bride.

Is this not true?

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #16 on:** November 01, 2007, 10:42:17 PM »

Quote from: Clare

I don't think they consider the various new rites invalid, necessarily.

Their so-called sacramental theology, especially where it touches upon the new so-called sacraments, is downright embarrassing.

gilbertgea · « **Reply #17 on:** November 02, 2007, 06:55:55 AM »

"A fair statement would be, SSPX upholds the doctrines of the Catholic church and the popes who have made common cause with the sworn enemies of Christ and murderers of their fellow Catholics. That they also uphold the pope cuts no ice at the bargaining table. Though why the heck Catholics should have to bargain with their own leader is a mystery to me."

Trinity, what colour is the sun on the planet you inhabit?

Dawn · « **Reply #18 on:** November 02, 2007, 05:06:46 PM »

I uphold the Papacy, I give no quarter to heretics. It is a blasphemy that a heretic holds the Chair of Peter.
Souls are being lost due to the false teachings of Ecuмenism while we stand and defend the cause for the damnation of so many. For shame.

MichaelSolimanto · « **Reply #19 on:** November 02, 2007, 05:29:21 PM »

Quote from: Dawn

I uphold the Papacy, I give no quarter to heretics. It is a blasphemy that a heretic holds the Chair of Peter.
Souls are being lost due to the false teachings of Ecuмenism while we stand and defend the cause for the damnation of so many. For shame.

It's almost humerous that you quote as your signature "when you define the sins of another, you define yourself as well" yet you just defined the sins of blasphemy, damnation of souls, and heresy.

I hope you think your quote means it applies to everyone but yourself because it seems there's hypocrisy running around. But that's what people do.

Trinity · « **Reply #20 on:** November 02, 2007, 05:40:56 PM »

Day in and day out, MS, you define the sins of others, saying over and over again that they are ignorant and should read what you have read. You ought to blush at this statement:

Quote

"when you define the sins of another, you define yourself as well"

Dawn · « **Reply #21 on:** November 02, 2007, 05:46:50 PM »

Am I a sinner, you bet. Am I a hertic that is for God to judge and not you. And, I choose that quote for some others who have appointed themselves Grand Inquisitor with no authority. Why would you believe someone even doubted the advice given by a priest in the SSPX and wanted to subject the priest to the inquisition as well. They are beginning to remind me of the members of the former "Heaven's Gate." Where all outside their little parish are doomed.

MichaelSolimanto · « **Reply #22 on:** November 02, 2007, 06:09:03 PM »

Quote from: Trinity

Day in and day out, MS, you define the sins of others, saying over and over again that they are ignorant and should read what you have read. You ought to blush at this statement:

Quote
"when you define the sins of another, you define yourself as well"

FOR THE READING IMPAIRED *** ALERT *** FOR THE READING IMPAIRED

That was her mantra, not mine. To use that as a sig line has nothing to do with me. You have to uphold yourself to the quotes you use. If not why quote it to begin with?

I don't care what you think of me Trinity, just use some logical thought once in a while, you will find a soothing relaxing sensation come to your soul. Until then get fired up because you can't understand anything.

Trinity · « **Reply #23 on:** November 05, 2007, 03:26:52 PM »

ALERT for the answering impaired. I didn't say it was your statement---I said you should blush at the statement. You talk of charity, and make the rudest, crudest remarks you can think of. You hunt out sin like a blood hound and bay about it like one, too. And if you can't find any true sin, you build something into a sin. You talk about other people's ignorance and ignore your own. Your fangs are showing again.

Nomas · « **Reply #24 on:** November 05, 2007, 04:09:56 PM »

I'd be more interested in hearing what you are trying to do without Rome.

Trinity · « **Reply #25 on:** November 05, 2007, 05:15:05 PM »

I am no more without Rome than you are. I just don't spend my time deleting the errors and trying to figure out why the "pope" is in this condition and how to get him out of it. Been there, done that, exercise in futility. I figure I pray for him in that I pray for all souls. You stick to Catholicism before Vatican II; I stick to Catholicism before Vatican II. We are in the same boat, you just won't admit it.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #26 on:** November 06, 2007, 10:17:49 PM »

Quote from: Nomas

I'd be more interested in hearing what you are trying to do without Rome.

We are simply living as Catholics have always lived - which is more than can be said for "Rome".

We should be glad to tell you any specifics, provided that you tell us how the Immaculate Spouse of Christ can be identified with the Novus Ordo Church.

You are sedevacantist in all but name; we are so in word and deed.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #27 on:** November 06, 2007, 10:38:56 PM »

Quote from: MichaelSolimanto

FOR THE READING IMPAIRED *** ALERT *** FOR THE READING IMPAIRED

A written message for the reading impaired?

BRILLIANT, Mikey!

What next? An audio message for the hearing impaired?

Trinity · « **Reply #28 on:** November 07, 2007, 04:01:53 AM »

Gladius Veritatis said:

Quote

We should be glad to tell you any specifics, provided that you tell us how the Immaculate Spouse of Christ can be identified with the Novus Ordo Church.

Now here is a moral question that each of us must answer in guiding our own journey. Can one support a person who supports evil without supporting evil in the process???

hollingsworth · « **Reply #29 on:** November 08, 2007, 02:35:08 PM »

Quote

A fair statement would be, SSPX upholds the doctrines of the Catholic church and the popes who have made common cause with the sworn enemies of Christ and murderers of their fellow Catholics. That they also uphold the pope cuts no ice at the bargaining table. Though why the heck Catholics should have to bargain with their own leader is a mystery to me.

Both the sedes and the Society look forward to a restoration of Rome and the papacy. But the former have no "bargaining table," nor do they suggest in its place, a means of improving the situation. They broke the "bargaining table" to pieces, thus declaring that they'll do no business with the post-V2 Vatican. Their only real (missionary?) function, as I see it, is to carp against and criticize the Society for its continued "association" with Rome. Their leadership doesn't really have any kind of a viable, proactive agenda, if I observe correctly. For them it's simple: the Chair is empty. The 'Rock' has vanished, and with it logically, the Church built upon that Rock. They have taken a position not unlike that of the early Protestant Reformers. They are in spiritual freefall.