Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => General Discussion => Topic started by: Matthew on August 30, 2010, 12:56:42 AM
-
Upon further reflection, I have come to realize that CM has no further purpose here on CathInfo.
He has not moderated his position at all; quite the contrary.
At best, he hopes to "convert us" here, to bring the Catholic population from the current "1" to something like "3 or 4".
He is polite, especially when he's dealing with the one who banned him, but I can't let a nice face plaster over what's behind it. He is a sad young man, whose pride and despair might be more understandable if he were a more advanced age.
His apparent "good will" to save his soul, etc. just makes him the more dangerous as a heresiarch. Men like him, trusting in their own goodness, intellect and understanding, created the heresies of old, both great and small.
I gave him a second chance, because I don't want it to be said that I ban people needlessly, recklessly, or from some base motive. I only ban those who break the rules or truly don't belong here. As a home-aloner, he doesn't belong here. I have mentioned before, you have to be a serious-minded Catholic -- which usually means Traditional, to be a member here. I allow sedevacantists to be members. I do not allow home-aloners (those who do not attend Mass anywhere, for dogmatic reasons).
I don't believe CathInfo will be adversely affected by refusing membership to home aloners. They all give Catholicism a bad name, and have nothing good to offer. At best, they would exasperate, frustrate, and annoy us. At worst, they could bring us down to their level of despair and distrust, and confuse many Catholics who are unequipped to handle their rhetoric and arguments.
Farewell, CM.
May God give you the graces you need to save your soul.
Matthew
-
I think that banning David Landry/CM/Catholic Martyr is a wise and providential decision.
He was still defiantly flaunting it here after his return by continually advertising his dogmatic sedevacantism and also welcoming potential victims to his website. It was included in his signature on every post he made.
Yes, he could be polite. Polite but VERY dangerous.
Sure, seemingly he may have had apparent "good will" to save his soul, and the apparent will to help save our souls.
But the reality is that his soul is in grave danger and he is a real danger to other souls. He offered poison. Unadterated poison, disguised as an attempt at scholarship and learning.
What he proffered was sheer theological insanity.
His website is replete with pernicious errors - deadly traps for the unwary.
Even if he thought he was doing good, it does not matter. He offers deadly poison. If anyone drinks it they will die (spiritually) and be just as dead as if they drank of some deadly poison given to them on purpose.
I truly wish him well. But I agree he should be denied an audience -- for God's sake, his sake, and for the sake of others.
-
Is the jansenist Raoul back now? :wine-drinking:
-
What is jansenist? I searched the term and saw it meant follower of Jansen. Is Rauol a one?
-
Watch out Spouse - If you disagree with Roscoe you will be judged to be Jansenist too, even if you don't know what a Jansenist is!
It will be interesting to see, according to Roscoe, exactly what makes a Jansenist .
Roscoe, exactly what beliefs does one need to hold in order be judged a Jansenist- heretic?
I am asking you Rosco because you accuse so many here of being Jansenists.
-
What is jansenist? I searched the term and saw it meant follower of Jansen. Is Rauol a one?
In short: Everyone is going to Hell! Which is why CM agrees that every priest sold his soul to the devil, and we are all going to hell because we don't believe as CM does.
Raoul, seems to change daily on what he believes. He is still searching in my opinion. I would not call him a Jansenist. Not yet anyway.
-
Please add this episode as more evidence that Club Infallible leads to insanity.
Hang in there CM. The Two witnesses of the Apocalypse will come along to straighten things out. Your use of the word "every" may be a bit premature by a few days.
Instead of the CM approach of anaylysis, condemnation, I think we all need to work on the emphasis of forgiveness. We need prayers that ask that we may forgive the enemies in the Chruch that have betrayed everything that is good. Prayers for the conversion of Pope Benedict would be a good start. Prayers for Traditional Catholics to not become bitter and bring on a spirit of depression and anger.
-
Spouse -- the telltale characteristic of a Jansenist is someone who for all practical purposes, denies the existance of free will in mankind.
-
<<<<Prayers for the conversion of Pope Benedict>>>>>
Pray that we had a Pope Benedict, or any CATHOLIC pope.
-
Jansenists will sometimes refer to Jesuits as ' Pelagians' and I am surprised that I have not been referred to as such so far.
Myrna-- properly speaking it is pope Benedict not Pope Benedict-- just as I am a jesuit and not a Jesuit.
-
Spouse -- the telltale characteristic of a Jansenist is someone who for all practical purposes, denies the existance of free will in mankind.
You're right, Jansenist actually teaches, if I understand it correctly, that God, when He creates us, says, this one will be saved, this one no, this one I'll save, and this one forget him. That sort of thing. Which is why the Jansenist are so judgemental, they believe nothing can save this poor soul, so they are quick to say, "they sold their soul to the devil".
If I am wrong someone will come along and correct me, I hope!
-
This is also correct Myrna and is why Jansenists are considered a Calvinist leaning sect within the Church and why they were condemned. The Calvinist heresy is known as pre-destination and does deny free will.
-
What is jansenist? I searched the term and saw it meant follower of Jansen. Is Rauol a one?
anyone that does not agree with Roscoe and does not love Marijuana....
as to CM, well done, he is much to dangerous on here...
oh and-We do have a Pope! No P10, granted, but one......
-
I do not see how CM can be banned and the blasphemous Classicom is still with us.
-
roscoe makes a good point about Classicom. Is not the catch phrase he uses in many of his posts a blasphemy?
-
Well, I believe Matthew has done the right thing. I, personally, don't consider him to be as nice as others have been saying. He has called me a fool, ignorant, etc. His religion, whatever it is, is NOT Catholic. His religion is insane. Anyone who thinks they are Pope (which CM interestingly denies, though he probably does think he's Pope) thinks every priest in the US has sold their soul to the Devil, etc. clearly has something wrong in their head. I will pray that God shows him he went overboard when searching for Traditional Catholicism.
-
Is the jansenist Raoul back now? :wine-drinking:
No. I think Raoul has been banned for good.
-
roscoe makes a good point about Classicom. Is not the catch phrase he uses in many of his posts a blasphemy?
I don't think I've seen his catchphrase yet. What is it?
-
club infallible
-
club infallible
Oh, yeah I have seen it then. Thanks.
-
roscoe
.........................
No one has ever presented Any evidence from the Bible, a Pope, Church Council, Father, Doctor, Saint, historian, INQ, Bps Pastoral Letter, nor Catholic Encyclopedia or Dictionary that there is or ever has been such a person as a 'sede vacantist' or such a state of affairs known as 'sede vacantism' before the V2 era.
Guess what roscoe, in case you haven't noticed, not since time began has the world experienced the Great Apostasy either.
-
I agree Myrna however one cannot neglect that there have been 40 anti-popes b4 v2. Someone was elected on the 3rd or 4th ballot white smoke in 1958 and I do not believe that there is no Pope. The current occupants of Vatican City are anti-popes although it is true that they have not been formally declared so at this time.
I believe I posted ysterday that the Vatican PA system announced to St Peter's Square that a Pope had been elected. Actually it was Vatican Radio. This story hardly rests on Mr Williams alone.
-
roscoe makes a good point about Classicom. Is not the catch phrase he uses in many of his posts a blasphemy?
Yes, "Club Infallible" is brought to us by Club Insanity -- a club with a membership of one person, Classicon, who insists on pushing his madness here.
-
I agree Myrna however one cannot neglect that there have been 40 anti-popes b4 v2. Someone was elected on the 3rd or 4th ballot white smoke in 1958 and I do not believe that there is no Pope. The current occupants of Vatican City are anti-popes although it is true that they have not been formally declared so at this time.
I believe I posted ysterday that the Vatican PA system announced to St Peter's Square that a Pope had been elected. Actually it was Vatican Radio. This story hardly rests on Mr Williams alone.
And I also posted before that in 1958 I heard on the radio that a pope had been elected, with white smoke, and a short time later that it was a mistake. I remember the day well, but at that time, who would have thought something was not right, everyone believed as they said, it was a mistake.
You can believe if you want that we have a true pope somewhere TODAY, but God's Church is visible, and so is His Pope. Till this pope appears, I hold to the sede position.
Pope is Christ vicar on earth, this reminds me of that warning where we are told not to believe it when they say, there is Christ and here is Christ, not to believe them.
-
I agree Myrna however one cannot neglect that there have been 40 anti-popes b4 v2. Someone was elected on the 3rd or 4th ballot white smoke in 1958 and I do not believe that there is no Pope. The current occupants of Vatican City are anti-popes although it is true that they have not been formally declared so at this time.
I believe I posted ysterday that the Vatican PA system announced to St Peter's Square that a Pope had been elected. Actually it was Vatican Radio. This story hardly rests on Mr Williams alone.
Benedict XV was not an anti-pope. So if he was on your list of 40 anti-popes before Vatican II, then there were in fact fewer than 40.
-
also, proof Roscoe?
it has been docuŠ¼ented that someone burned the wrong colored whatever to produce the wrong colored smoke and likely, someone on radio, etc may have been given wrong info as well, as a result or in union with mishaps....
-
Upon further reflection, I have come to realize that CM has no further purpose here on CathInfo.
He has not moderated his position at all; quite the contrary.
At best, he hopes to "convert us" here, to bring the Catholic population from the current "1" to something like "3 or 4".
He is polite, especially when he's dealing with the one who banned him, but I can't let a nice face plaster over what's behind it. He is a sad young man, whose pride and despair might be more understandable if he were a more advanced age.
His apparent "good will" to save his soul, etc. just makes him the more dangerous as a heresiarch. Men like him, trusting in their own goodness, intellect and understanding, created the heresies of old, both great and small.
I gave him a second chance, because I don't want it to be said that I ban people needlessly, recklessly, or from some base motive. I only ban those who break the rules or truly don't belong here. As a home-aloner, he doesn't belong here. I have mentioned before, you have to be a serious-minded Catholic -- which usually means Traditional, to be a member here. I allow sedevacantists to be members. I do not allow home-aloners (those who do not attend Mass anywhere, for dogmatic reasons).
I don't believe CathInfo will be adversely affected by refusing membership to home aloners. They all give Catholicism a bad name, and have nothing good to offer. At best, they would exasperate, frustrate, and annoy us. At worst, they could bring us down to their level of despair and distrust, and confuse many Catholics who are unequipped to handle their rhetoric and arguments.
Farewell, CM.
May God give you the graces you need to save your soul.
Matthew
Great to hear that you still moderate here.... God bless you!
-
I agree Myrna however one cannot neglect that there have been 40 anti-popes b4 v2. Someone was elected on the 3rd or 4th ballot white smoke in 1958 and I do not believe that there is no Pope. The current occupants of Vatican City are anti-popes although it is true that they have not been formally declared so at this time.
I believe I posted ysterday that the Vatican PA system announced to St Peter's Square that a Pope had been elected. Actually it was Vatican Radio. This story hardly rests on Mr Williams alone.
Benedict XV was not an anti-pope. So if he was on your list of 40 anti-popes before Vatican II, then there were in fact fewer than 40.
I believe it likely that Benedict XV(15) will someday be declared an anti-pope.
-
I agree Myrna however one cannot neglect that there have been 40 anti-popes b4 v2. Someone was elected on the 3rd or 4th ballot white smoke in 1958 and I do not believe that there is no Pope. The current occupants of Vatican City are anti-popes although it is true that they have not been formally declared so at this time.
I believe I posted ysterday that the Vatican PA system announced to St Peter's Square that a Pope had been elected. Actually it was Vatican Radio. This story hardly rests on Mr Williams alone.
Benedict XV was not an anti-pope. So if he was on your list of 40 anti-popes before Vatican II, then there were in fact fewer than 40.
I believe it likely that Benedict XV(15) will someday be declared an anti-pope.
The Church does not need to be wasting its time declaring that good Popes were anti-popes. They need to be looking into declaring bad Popes like Paul VI anti-popes. And you never did give a valid and detailed reason on why you think Benedict XV was an anti-pope.
-
For starters( and I have posted this numerous times) I do not think his election is valid. I believe that merry Del Val was 'vetoed' as was his friend Card Rampolla in the prev conclave.
-
For starters( and I have posted this numerous times) I do not think his election is valid. I believe that merry Del Val was 'vetoed' as was his friend Card Rampolla in the prev conclave.
==================
Did you mean perv conlcave ?
-
For starters( and I have posted this numerous times) I do not think his election is valid. I believe that merry Del Val was 'vetoed' as was his friend Card Rampolla in the prev conclave.
Benedict XV(15) also does 2 things Pius X would never have done. He begins the process of the Reconcilizione( including giving up on regaining the Papal States) and he begins the process of the recognition ot the Zionista State.
-
Jansenism: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08285a.htm
As a result of Adam's sin, our nature stripped of elements essential to its integrity, is radically corrupt and depraved. Mastered by concupiscence, which in each of us properly constitutes original sin, the will is powerless to resist; it has become purely passive. It cannot escape the attraction of evil except it be aided by a movement of grace superior to and triumphant over the force of concupiscence. Our soul, henceforth obedient to no motive save that of pleasure, is at the mercy of the delectation, earthly or heavenly, which for the time being attracts it with the greatest strength. At once inevitable and irresistible, this delectation, if it come from heaven or from grace, leads man to virtue; if it come from nature or concupiscence, it determines him to sin. In the one case as in the other, the will is fatally swept on by the preponderant impulse. The two delectations says Jansenius, are like the two arms of a balance, of which the one cannot rise unless the other be lowered and vice versa. Thus man irresistibly, although voluntarily, does either good or evil, according as he is dominated by grace or by concupiscence; he never resists either the one or the other. In this system there is evidently no place for purely sufficient grace.... :reading: