Author Topic: roscoe: Please provide quotes... (Read 4120 times)

gladius_veritatis · « **on:** November 22, 2009, 06:12:05 PM »

...wherein I insinuate that you are a MORAL DEGENERATE...

...and quote/s wherein I allege that the Sovereign Pontiffs were CONNED into "accepting" Rampolla. Godspeed.

roscoe · « **Reply #1 on:** November 22, 2009, 08:36:44 PM »

I cannot remember where the remarks are but your words were something like this-- I would not rely on roscoe for moral advise. This is basically the same as saying I am a moral degenerate. btw I have never claimed to be a priest or theologian.

Re: Card Rampolla-- you have said that Pope Leo unsuspectingly made him a Cardinal without knowing he was a 'secret occult Mason in the OTO': or words to that effect

roscoe · « **Reply #2 on:** November 22, 2009, 08:53:40 PM »

If I am incorrect re: your thoughts on Card Rampolla, please enlighten us.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #3 on:** November 22, 2009, 09:08:47 PM »

Quote from: roscoe

I would not rely on roscoe for moral advise. This is basically the same as saying I am a moral degenerate.

I DID say such, but unless you can locate it, speaking about it sans context is a little iffy. Quote, if you please -- in context.

Quote

btw I have never claimed to be a priest or theologian.

Neither have I, nor have I said you have done so. I suppose that makes us equals. :cheers:

Quote

Card Rampolla-- you have said that Pope Leo unsuspectingly made him a Cardinal without knowing he was a 'secret occult Mason in the OTO': or words to that effect

Which is a completely different kettle of fish from being "conned" about the whole thing. How does this involve St. Pius X being "conned", too?

Yes, I hold that Rampolla WAS a problem (I am hardly the only one), but one that was unknown as such to practically everyone. While I realize you disagree with this, even vehemently, there is no reason to think I hold either LeoXIII or St. Pius X in some kind of contempt.

Btw, what WAS the intervention in the 1903 conclave all about, in your opinion? A secular leader invoked his right of veto, to prevent Rampolla's election, for SOME reason. WHAT was it?

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #4 on:** November 22, 2009, 09:10:08 PM »

Quote from: roscoe

This is basically the same as saying I am a moral degenerate.

If this was the way you took it, I apologize. I suppose it may have been too strong a comment (although without the actual exchange, it is hard to tell).

Either way, if I offended you, I now beg your pardon.

roscoe · « **Reply #5 on:** November 22, 2009, 09:30:27 PM »

Quote from: gladius_veritatis

Quote from: roscoe
This is basically the same as saying I am a moral degenerate.

If this was the way you took it, I apologize. I suppose it may have been too strong a comment (although without the actual exchange, it is hard to tell).

Either way, if I offended you, I now beg your pardon.

An apology is not what I am looking for. I would just like to know what prompted you to reach this conclusion.

roscoe · « **Reply #6 on:** November 22, 2009, 10:14:57 PM »

The moral remark probably had something to do with the Marijuana debate and the nest of Jansenists in this forum. Are you one of them? Is that my sin?

GV is saying that Pope Leo gave Rampolla the Purple without knowing that he was a 'secret occult mason in the OTO' Also that ST Pius was unaware of this. What does one call this but being conned???

At least you are not as dumb as Raoul-- who alleges St Pius found out the truth and did nothing about it-- thus accusing him as an anti-pope.

GV is however saying that these two Popes are in fact bad Popes the likes of Alex VI or the Medici Popes. It seems to me that he does hold these Popes in contempt or is possibly is very ignorant of the true nature of the OTO.

The allegations against Card Rampolla amount to nothing.

Franz-Joseph( who opposed Infallibility and was 'surrounded by Judaics" acc to Kertzer) ) had no right to a veto. It had always been a priviledge and as that it was abolished by Pius IX. After 1903, St Pius had to issue a stronger edict inflicting ex-communication.

roscoe · « **Reply #7 on:** November 22, 2009, 10:18:10 PM »

Since the subject of Infallibility has come up possibly Classicom would like to comment on Franz-Joseph being surrounded by Judaics and oppossing 'Club Infallible'.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #8 on:** November 22, 2009, 10:25:37 PM »

Quote from: roscoe

Are you one of them? Is that my sin?

I don't believe it was about dope, but the burden of proof is upon you. If you KNEW me, you would know I am no Jansenist.

Quote

GV is however saying that these two Popes are in fact bad Popes the likes of Alex VI or the Medici Popes.

Or...not.

Quote

It seems to me that he does hold these Popes in contempt or is possibly is very ignorant of the true nature of the OTO.

Well, I don't. End of story. Are you arguing that the OTO is good?

Quote

Franz-Joseph had no right to a veto.

Apparently, everyone at the conclave thought he did.

Quote

It had always been a privilege and as that it was abolished by Pius IX.

Source?

roscoe · « **Reply #9 on:** November 22, 2009, 10:56:59 PM »

Quote from: gladius_veritatis

Quote from: roscoe
Are you one of them? Is that my sin?

I don't believe it was about dope, but the burden of proof is upon you. If you KNEW me, you would know I am no Jansenist.

Quote
GV is however saying that these two Popes are in fact bad Popes the likes of Alex VI or the Medici Popes.

Or...not.

Quote
It seems to me that he does hold these Popes in contempt or is possibly is very ignorant of the true nature of the OTO.

Well, I don't. End of story. Are you arguing that the OTO is good?

Quote
Franz-Joseph had no right to a veto.

Apparently, everyone at the conclave thought he did.

Quote
It had always been a privilege and as that it was abolished by Pius IX.

Source?

I never said anything about dope-- use caution as you are referring to a substance that God has specifically given his blessing to.

You have admitted to describing me as morally deficient in some way. It can't be very important if you can't remember what it is.

Am I arguing the OTO is good?? Thats very funny.

It is hardly true true that 'everyone' at the conclave thought that the Emp had a veto right. Just the opposite-- everyone knew that the veto did not exist. Puznya got away with it because ex-comm had not yet been attached.

At any rate, acc to Card Merry Del Val, Rampolla was probably not going to be elected anyway. The source for the abolition of the veto by Pius IX is either D'Agostino-- Risigiormento To Fascism or Frank Coppa's biography of Card Antonelli.

roscoe · « **Reply #10 on:** November 22, 2009, 10:59:09 PM »

That is if you are referring to the small amount of MJ( a green herb) that I smoke as dope

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #11 on:** November 23, 2009, 07:05:04 AM »

Quote from: roscoe

You have admitted to describing me as morally deficient in some way.

I have done nothing of the kind. I recall and admit that I said I would not be taking moral advice from you -- which is NOT the same thing as saying you are "morally deficient." Please locate the relevant quotes, or please drop it.

Quote

Am I arguing the OTO is good?? Thats very funny.

It is not meant to be. Your words about the OTO, and my own understanding of it, are unclear to me.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #12 on:** November 23, 2009, 07:08:30 AM »

Quote from: roscoe

That is if you are referring to the small amount of MJ( a green herb) that I smoke as dope

I am, in which case I am certain my words were NOT about MJ.

As I recall, you said something along the lines of it NOT being a sin to get voluntarily drunk. This is completely incorrect.

Finds the words or drop it altogether.

roscoe · « **Reply #13 on:** November 23, 2009, 12:33:22 PM »

You assailed my moral character for some offense that still is not clear. It is up to you to say what it is. I have never said anything like it is not a sin to get voluntarily drunk.

GV is also joking around with insinuations that I am a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ or something-- do I want to hold your hand?I have never seen or met GV in my life and do not know anyone that is associated with him nor am I associated with anyone he would know.

Considering the gravity of the allegations you are making re: SGG, I do not think it is very advisable to 'joke around' with this type of thing. It makes one wonder if those sloppy methods aren't being used against SGG for some reason.
If the charges are true, they are very serious. The credibility is of GV is on the line imo.

If GV doesn't know what the OTO is, then that credibility is even more in question.

It would be a good idea to brush up on history also as the veto was indeed abolished by Pius IX.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #14 on:** November 23, 2009, 01:04:32 PM »

Quote from: roscoe

You assailed my moral character for some offense that still is not clear. It is up to you to say what it is.

You brought the whole thing up, roscoe. It is YOUR baby, your burden.

Quote

GV is also joking around with insinuations that I am a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ or something-- do I want to hold your hand?

Again, this is YOUR baby. I have joked with guy friends all my life in such a way -- it is actually common among red-blooded men.

Quote

Considering the gravity of the allegations you are making re: SGG, I do not think it is very advisable to 'joke around' with this type of thing.

We disagree. You busted into the Ode thread with your pet theory nonsense, and I took a jab. Get over it.

Quote

If GV doesn't know what the OTO is, then that credibility is even more in question.

I know what it is, roscoe. End of that dig. Why are you on a mission, all of a sudden, to attack my credibility?

Quote

It would be a good idea to brush up on history also as the veto was indeed abolished by Pius IX.

So you say. Prove it and I will gladly concede.