Author Topic: A Formal Open Plea for the Banning of Poche and Roscoe  (Read 971 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BTNYC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2772
  • Reputation: +3112/-95
  • Gender: Male
A Formal Open Plea for the Banning of Poche and Roscoe
« on: August 15, 2015, 10:10:50 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I've never before started a "ban so-and-so" thread. I have mentioned in threads where open, manifest trolling is occurring, or where heresy is being proclaimed, that the guilty party ought to be banned, and I've PM'ed Matthew in such cases. But I have never seen the need to publicly ask for a banning.

    Now I see the need to do so.

    Roscoe, with his marijuana and Beatles boostering, made it clear from the outset that he was not a Traditional Catholic in any meaningful practical sense, but I suppose he was seen as a humorous novelty, like some dope stoner friend in a teen comedy film. Fine. Not my cup of tea, but fine.

    Now, however, that Roscoe has openly spoken heresy on the forum:

    Quote from: roscoe
    The Bible is wrong when claiming that E is fixed in position.  The Bible was written by a man( or men) who are capable of being mistaken.

    Roman Catholic Bible is not infallible like the book of Mormon claims to be.

    It is the Sola Scriptura Lunatics  such as  Luther, Calvin, James, Bacon, DeVere etc who demand a dogmatic geo-eccenticism  :fryingpan:

    AND pertinaciously confirmed his attachment to that heretical statement (and slanderously smeared faithful Catholics who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture as "Prots"):

    Quote from: roscoe
    And I stand by my post in opposition to the Sola Sriptura Prots that follow Luther, Calvin, James, Bacon and DeVere....  :fryingpan:

    ...I submit that he ought to be banned.

    Poche's record here speaks for itself. Over his 8,000+ posting history on CI (!) he has made it absolutely manifest that he has no interest whatsoever in learning about Catholic Tradition, but rather that he wishes to proselytize on behalf of Conciliarism / Modernism. True, he's never openly called us "heretics" whose "conversion" is his bounden duty and mission, but his post history makes it undeniably clear that that is what he believes.

    I therefore submit that Poche ought to be treated like any other non-Trad looking to convert the forum away from the Faith of our Fathers, and banned.

    This is not my forum, so I will not attempt to push my weight around, nor will I ask for "votes," recognizing as I do that the forum is not a democracy (and that democracy itself is a sham). I simply wish to state my case and make my plea here. I accept whatever Matthew decides to do (or not do), and afterwards, I will say no more on the matter.

    Offline claudel

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1469
    • Reputation: +1074/-250
    • Gender: Male
    A Formal Open Plea for the Banning of Poche and Roscoe
    « Reply #1 on: August 15, 2015, 02:20:55 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • BTNYC makes a sober charge. It merits a sober reply.

    Accusing roscoe of heresy is morally premature and for that reason alone, ill advised. Rather, accuse him of maladroitness of expression if he must be accused of something; of that charge he is certainly guilty. But it is not a hanging offense—in this life or the next. Whether it's a banning offense is the Moderator's call.

    The primary objection toward the quote placed in evidence as the prosecution's exhibit A ought to be, not that it is plainly heretical, but that it clumsily misrepresents Sacred Scripture in stating that the Bible claims "that [the earth] is fixed in position." It does nothing of the sort; rather, it takes the earth's fixity for granted—at least with respect to the objects in the celestial sphere and the creatures that move on the earth's surface. To go beyond that claim is to read into the text one's own predilections—theological, scientific, philosophical, or otherwise.

    I have objected in the past to the offhand equating of "inerrancy" with "literalness," however well meaning it may be. I object to this equation once again. First and foremost, determination of what constitutes true "biblical inerrancy" is a matter that should continue to be reserved to the judgment of authentic Scripture scholars in the service of the Church and, particularly, to the judgment of those within the Church who are divinely ordained to write, speak, and teach with authority about inerrancy and to decide to what precisely that term may be said to apply.*

    In the past two or three years, I have seen geocentrism bid fair to become for self-styled Trads a mandated institution, a litmus test, perhaps even a metaphorical equivalent of an institution that secular post-Christian Western society has made a monstre sacré: homosexual marriage. Swear allegiance to it, or face banning from the public square and denunciation as a heretic and leper. As there is no credible doctrinal or magisterial ground for regarding heliocentrism as dangerous to the Faith, let alone a condemned position,** this crescendo of insistence on geocentric purity is certainly testimony to the crisis of catechesis in the postconciliar world and may yet serve as a fruitful shaft in our enemies' quiver—indeed, in the Enemy's quiver.

    Sedevacantist fantasies, the wilder the better, can always count on a respectful hearing hereabouts. Speak the name of Copernicus or Galileo without spitting, however, and brace yourself for a veritable Superstorm Sandy of down thumbs to descend.

    If the statements above win me banning in addition to or instead of roscoe, so be it. I've already written that comment 999 would be my last one anyway.

    As for poche's banning, I have no objection, Your Honor.

    * One of the things I wrote several years ago was that the very meaning of "literalness" is far from the simple matter that many of CI's denizens take it for. (As entire books, long ones, have been written on this term's meaning and implications, I shall not attempt to provide an overview suitable for members of a generation that goes for information and instruction to YouTube as a first resort.) At the simplest level, recall that every language, including those of the human authors of Scripture, has idioms and other structural and narrative forms that are largely or entirely invisible to the native-born speaker but may represent huge stumbling blocks for the later learner or the student. A homely, quotidian, but apt example is the way the French language styles the matters of sunrise and sunset. Do even French-speaking geocentrist Traditionalists think that the sun wakes up in the morning and goes to bed at night? To pose the question is to answer it.

    ** Rather than ban roscoe, I propose banning cassini, who has—either from pertinaciously stubborn ignorance or conscious malice—insisted for years that Pope Paul V infallibly condemned heliocentrism, damned those who held it, and declared those who merely entertained it theoretically excommunicate. This is a blatant falsehood and a vile slander on Pope Paul and on every orthodox pope and prelate in the 350 years between 1616 and the Vatican II-orchestrated attack on the Church and its immemorial teachings. Yet cassini is in good odor hereabouts, isn't he? No one calls for his banning—even less for his retreat from scandalous ignorance for the good of his soul and the souls of innocent others his perjuries may poison.

    Offline MrYeZe

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 298
    • Reputation: +80/-8
    • Gender: Male
    A Formal Open Plea for the Banning of Poche and Roscoe
    « Reply #2 on: August 15, 2015, 02:34:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Wait, is he saying that the English translations of the Bible are not infallible, or that the transmitted textual copies of the Bible are not infallible, or that original copies are not infallible, as if he's saying the latter, then yes, that's heresy true and true, but the former I really don't see a problem with.
    Better to illuminate than merely to shine, to deliver to others contemplated truths than merely to contemplate.

       -Thomas Aquinas

    "Even if my own father were a heretic, I would gather the wood to burn him"

    -Pope Paul IV

    Offline RomanCatholic1953

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7400
    • Reputation: +2500/-90
    • Gender: Male
    • I will not respond to any posts from Poche.
    A Formal Open Plea for the Banning of Poche and Roscoe
    « Reply #3 on: August 15, 2015, 02:41:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Why can we have a Poll and vote on the Banning's.

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 23958
    • Reputation: +20946/-420
    • Gender: Male
    A Formal Open Plea for the Banning of Poche and Roscoe
    « Reply #4 on: August 15, 2015, 02:58:43 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I dealt with Roscoe's issue with Holy Scripture. I believe it best to address those particular posts.

    As for Poche, he doesn't seem hostile to Tradition at all, or I would have banned him by now. He seems like a bit of a dupe for the New religion, like someone hopelessly optimistic -- but even if it's foolish, it's not a crime. He sometimes surprises me by being on-target with a Catholic attitude on many topics.

    I don't want this thread to degenerate into a "complain fest" with dozens of names being thrown out there for banning.

    Please leave moderating the forum to me. I can handle it.

    Actually, if you have an honest concern, you can always PM me with issues you observe. This has served CathInfo well in the past, and will continue to do so in the future. By doing this, we can avoid threads like this which degenerate into a circus, or worse -- a lynch mob or witch hunt.

    Start your session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!


    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16