Author Topic: Ban Romantheology (Read 2326 times)

Raoul76 · « **Reply #15 on:** November 06, 2011, 05:12:35 PM »

Congratulations Diego. You win the award for Most Spectacularly Irrelevant Use of a Cartoon Ever.

Judging someone's objective actions as being evil or wrong-headed is not "the pot calling the kettle black." It doesn't mean that the people who are complaining about Diego are also commiting evil or wrong-headed actions.

Many, many, MANY evils of our time arise from a superstitious, fearful and craven (mis)understanding of the concept "Don't judge." It is so bad that people will defend child molesters while attacking those they persecute, because they don't want to see the problem and admit to the existence of sin in their perfect little worlds; that is how twisted this false charity has become. Or in the case of some in the SSPX, they will attack sedes yet cut incredible amounts of slack for the anti-Popes.

What Jesus actually meant was that we should be aware that we are all sinners, and not condemn anyone else as if they are reprobates without hope of ever changing or attaining redemption. That may seem like it fits your cartoon but no, it doesn't, because certainly we can judge an ACTION as objectively good or evil. We just don't have final judgment over the soul; that belongs to God. We don't get to say "You're a bad person, you're condemned." We can say "You're doing the wrong thing," or "You're an enemy" ( while praying for said enemy ).

If we weren't meant to question any fellow Catholics, why does Christ talk about loving our enemies? Because he is most certainly talking about other Catholics, at least in part. We will all have enemies among the Catholics. Friends may become enemies; and enemies may become friends.

Asking for someone with little control over his mouth to be banned from the site is not calling your brother "raka." It is an act of charity, since this person most likely is committing sins of calumny and slander. At any rate he does nothing but gossip.

If people would just understand more about the various kinds of judgment, they would not be so easy to sucker for decade after decade. We are not asked to know the heart; but we are asked to be wise as serpents, and soft as doves.

Diego · « **Reply #16 on:** November 06, 2011, 11:40:26 PM »

I am in favor of discernment, but justice demands that you have evidence beyond your imagination.

Evidence. It is not a difficult concept.

Besides, you are only going after your latest victim because you are antisemitic.

[yes, I was kidding about that one]

Gregory I · « **Reply #17 on:** November 10, 2011, 12:55:13 AM »

How is s/he still here and aquinasq gone?

Telesphorus · « **Reply #18 on:** November 10, 2011, 01:18:00 AM »

Aquinasq just brushed aside the scripture verse that says the God of the pagans are devils, brushed aside tradition, argued unbaptized babies were baptized by Jesus or saints and angels before they died and started calling people "narrow" because they didn't go along with his liberalism.

He was posting here to hijack the board. He said he couldn't understand how masses could be reparation for sins. He's not a traditional Catholic, but he claims he is, because he is dishonest. I am convinced he was bad-willed, here to goad us, to promote his liberalism and to undermine the religion.

Most liberal Catholics are bad-willed to some extent. You can tell that they are because they never criticize non-Catholics beliefs, only traditional beliefs. You can't be a good-willed Catholic if you are really anti-Catholic. There's no such thing as a good-willed Modernist. There may be good-willed people with ideas they picked up from modernism, but modernism in its essence is the convoluted rejection of the Faith as Truth, it's intended to be deceptive and double-tongued.

That's why I can't accept post-conciliar Popes. They know very well they don't believe in the religion, and they arrogantly claim authority over it, arrogantly persecute those who do believe the religion, and insolently pander to false religions.

PartyIsOver221 · « **Reply #19 on:** November 10, 2011, 04:04:07 AM »

romanthelogy needs to be banned next.

He just inferred Bishop Pivarunas of the CMRI was ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ. No translation needed...blatant and clear-text for all to see.

TKGS · « **Reply #20 on:** November 10, 2011, 06:30:33 AM »

This topic alone: http://www.cathinfo.com/index.php/is-pivarunas-gαy should be enough to ban him.

It is unconscionable that any person would simply start a topic in the way about anyone, let alone a Catholic priest or bishop. It might have been acceptable if he had some evidence, but he did not even try to sound as if he is a moral being.

This creature disgusts me.