Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning  (Read 4534 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Aleah

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 574
  • Reputation: +251/-129
  • Gender: Female
Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning
« Reply #45 on: January 07, 2020, 12:59:45 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!2
  • Aleah, once again you fail to keep your eye on the ball. It is Poche himself who mocked confession.

    Dec 28:

    Poche: Matthew and Mark79 are right. I did make a mistake in quoting from Matthew. I apologize.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681100/#msg681100

    Dec 29:

    josefamenendez  called him out: Poche, that was a "mistake' with serious deliberate intention to obfuscate the true meaning of the scripture to support a larger false perception.  ("It" meaning the Church versus "you" meaning Peter). Some people would call that a lie to further an agenda.That's no mistake.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681126/#msg681126

    I asked: If you made a mistake, singular, why did you defend the "mistake" with additional "mistakes"?…
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681108/#msg681108

    I accused him and posted additional evidence in that thread of Poche piling lies upon lies.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681107/#msg681107

    Eventually, after a variety of ruses, Poche responded:
    I went to confession this morning and the priest gave me absolution.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681110/#msg681110

    I took that at face value: Then let us all keep a clean slate.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681116/#msg681116

    Perspicaciously, josefamenendez called Poche on his mockery: I see a lot feigned innocence that is atypical of an autist. Poche is insideously clever in his replies. The depth of certain posts (especially in foreign languages) belies the his childlike responses here. He tends never to answer a question and always misdirects. Hmmmmm... very good bot or serious troll
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681124/#msg681124

    So, if he hadn't lied, but only made a "mistake," why did he feign (or misdirect) that he confessed?
    He attempted to use confession as an alibi. Poche mocked confession.

    Jan 4:

    Responding to josefamenendez' Dec 29 accusation "serious deliberate intention to obfuscate the true meaning of the scripture to support a larger false perception," Poche stated: You are right. I had a larger idea that I was trying to convey.


    Jan 5:

    Poche: I see a huge difference between a deliberate lie and an honest mistake.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg682408/#msg682408

    So, BEFORE AND AFTER feigning repentance at confession (by misdirection), Poche denied (by misdirection) any LIES in his posts. His LIES were merely "mistakes" and "larger ideas." Poche is the one who mocked confession.
    Passing judgment on his confession is a mockery of the sacrament and should be admonished.
    No need to say anything to Poche as you and others are condemning him hourly but maybe you need to get that beam out of your own eye.
    I am He who is- you are she who is not.

    Offline Mark 79

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7059
    • Reputation: +4668/-896
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning
    « Reply #46 on: January 07, 2020, 01:42:41 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Again you miss the Catholic mark, Aleah.

    I made no judgment of Poche's internal forum.

    I merely observed the objective chronological sequence of Poche's objective lies and misdirection.

    In Catholic moral theology I am free to make objective observations.

    Objectively Poche insisted he only made a "mistake" because he "had a larger idea" and then claimed he confessed.

    If you are able, think clearly now. One makes a mistake by accident, not willfully because you have an agenda, "a larger idea." It is a contradiction for Poche to claim a "mistake" because he "had a larger idea." Either (1) Poche made a mistake by accident or (2) he had an agenda, so intended to lie. He cannot logically have it both ways. Objectively Poche stacked lie upon lie. That excludes possibility #1, leaving only #2, Poche had an agenda, a "larger idea,"so intended to lie.

    Poche is a liar and he mocked confession as an alibi and misdirection, feigned contrition for something he claimed repeatedly before and after his "confession," was not a sinful lie, but only a "mistake."

    Poche hoisted himself on his own petard. He, not I, made a mockery of his own confession.


    Offline Bonaventure

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1042
    • Reputation: +653/-266
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning
    « Reply #47 on: January 07, 2020, 02:07:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Poche is a liar and he mocked confession as an alibi and misdirection, feigned contrition for something he claimed repeatedly before and after his "confession," was not a sinful lie, but only a "mistake."

    I'm still trying to get my head around that one.  How does one, on the one hand, claim that only a simple mistake has occurred (and thus not sinful), but yet on the other hand assert that one has gone to confession with implication that said "sin of mistake" was confessed?  It makes no sense.

    Offline Mark 79

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7059
    • Reputation: +4668/-896
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning
    « Reply #48 on: January 07, 2020, 04:25:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I'm still trying to get my head around that one.  How does one, on the one hand, claim that only a simple mistake has occurred (and thus not sinful), but yet on the other hand assert that one has gone to confession with implication that said "sin of mistake" was confessed?  It makes no sense.

    Exactly.  It reminds me of one of the craziest and most contemptible passages in the тαℓмυd excusing “unwitting” sodomy [Sanhedrin 54b] as if such an unnatural and intrinsically difficult act could be accidental or a "mistake."

    Analogously, Poche had his "greater idea" and wanted to justify his "greater idea," so he accidentally made a "mistake" of falsifying Scripture to accomplish his goal—and then publicizes his confession of his "mistake"?

    Who is stupid enough to such a sequence of blatant manipulative lies and misdirection? Oh wait, we know who.

    Offline poche

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 16730
    • Reputation: +1217/-4688
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning
    « Reply #49 on: January 07, 2020, 10:56:31 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Aleah, once again you fail to keep your eye on the ball. It is Poche himself who mocked confession.

    Dec 28:

    Poche: Matthew and Mark79 are right. I did make a mistake in quoting from Matthew. I apologize.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681100/#msg681100

    Dec 29:

    josefamenendez  called him out: Poche, that was a "mistake' with serious deliberate intention to obfuscate the true meaning of the scripture to support a larger false perception.  ("It" meaning the Church versus "you" meaning Peter). Some people would call that a lie to further an agenda.That's no mistake.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681126/#msg681126

    I asked: If you made a mistake, singular, why did you defend the "mistake" with additional "mistakes"?…
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681108/#msg681108

    I accused him and posted additional evidence in that thread of Poche piling lies upon lies.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681107/#msg681107

    Eventually, after a variety of ruses, Poche responded:
    I went to confession this morning and the priest gave me absolution.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681110/#msg681110

    I took that at face value: Then let us all keep a clean slate.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681116/#msg681116

    Perspicaciously, josefamenendez called Poche on his mockery: I see a lot feigned innocence that is atypical of an autist. Poche is insideously clever in his replies. The depth of certain posts (especially in foreign languages) belies the his childlike responses here. He tends never to answer a question and always misdirects. Hmmmmm... very good bot or serious troll
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681124/#msg681124

    So, if he hadn't lied, but only made a "mistake," why did he feign (or misdirect) that he confessed?
    He attempted to use confession as an alibi. Poche mocked confession.

    Jan 4:

    Responding to josefamenendez' Dec 29 accusation "serious deliberate intention to obfuscate the true meaning of the scripture to support a larger false perception," Poche stated: You are right. I had a larger idea that I was trying to convey.


    Jan 5:

    Poche: I see a huge difference between a deliberate lie and an honest mistake.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg682408/#msg682408

    So, BEFORE AND AFTER feigning repentance at confession (by misdirection), Poche denied (by misdirection) any LIES in his posts. His LIES were merely "mistakes" and "larger ideas." Poche is the one who mocked confession.
    How have I mocked the Sacrament of Confession?


    Offline poche

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 16730
    • Reputation: +1217/-4688
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning
    « Reply #50 on: January 07, 2020, 11:01:07 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It's almost that time when Poche does his drive-by. At the risk of repeating myself…

    Honest mistakes are random. Your "mistakes" are not random, but are always skewed to support your Judaizing.

    An honest man does not defend honest mistakes by piling lies on top of lies.

    You falsified Scripture about 2 months ago: https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/is-francis-the-pope/msg674301/#msg674301

    You were immediately called on it.

    Instead of immediately claiming it was a mistake, it took you about 5 weeks to pile on another lie pretending you meant to make an inference, a rather tangential and contrived inference, "that those who invincibly do not know that the Catholic Church is the true Church can be saved."

    Then you claimed your lies were "prudential silence."

    Then you made your fake apology without admitting your lie.

    You even claimed you went to confession. What did you confess? "Bless me Father for I have made a mistake"???

    That sequence of behavior is NOT a "mistake."

    You have displayed the same pattern with your other lies, e.g., "preached against the тαℓмυd," "paraphrasing St. Paul," "the same view [Pope St. Pius X v. Jorge the Worst]," etc.

    An honest man called on a genuine mistake would have immediately said two months ago: "Oh, I made a mistake. Sorry."

    But you are not an honest man, you are an abject, willful, habitual, unrepentant, serial liar.
    It took me awhile to understand what you were talking about.

    Offline poche

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 16730
    • Reputation: +1217/-4688
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning
    « Reply #51 on: January 07, 2020, 11:04:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Exactly.  It reminds me of one of the craziest and most contemptible passages in the тαℓмυd excusing “unwitting” sodomy [Sanhedrin 54b] as if such an unnatural and intrinsically difficult act could be accidental or a "mistake."

    Analogously, Poche had his "greater idea" and wanted to justify his "greater idea," so he accidentally made a "mistake" of falsifying Scripture to accomplish his goal—and then publicizes his confession of his "mistake"?

    Who is stupid enough to such a sequence of blatant manipulative lies and misdirection? Oh wait, we know who.
    I am sorry but I am not familiar with the тαℓмυd. I prefer to study the Sacred Scripture and the Catechism the study of the тαℓмυd.  

    Offline poche

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 16730
    • Reputation: +1217/-4688
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning
    « Reply #52 on: January 07, 2020, 11:04:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I'm still trying to get my head around that one.  How does one, on the one hand, claim that only a simple mistake has occurred (and thus not sinful), but yet on the other hand assert that one has gone to confession with implication that said "sin of mistake" was confessed?  It makes no sense.
    I don't discuss what I said in confession.


    Offline Mark 79

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7059
    • Reputation: +4668/-896
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning
    « Reply #53 on: January 07, 2020, 11:32:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I am sorry but I am not familiar with the тαℓмυd. I prefer to study the Sacred Scripture and the Catechism the study of the тαℓмυd.  
    Let it not be lost on us that you slithered past your own "mistakes."

    Dec 28:

    Poche: Matthew and Mark79 are right. I did make a mistake in quoting from Matthew. I apologize.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681100/#msg681100

    Dec 29:

    josefamenendez  called him out: Poche, that was a "mistake' with serious deliberate intention to obfuscate the true meaning of the scripture to support a larger false perception.  ("It" meaning the Church versus "you" meaning Peter). Some people would call that a lie to further an agenda.That's no mistake.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681126/#msg681126

    I asked: If you made a mistake, singular, why did you defend the "mistake" with additional "mistakes"?…
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681108/#msg681108

    I accused him and posted additional evidence in that thread of Poche piling lies upon lies.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681107/#msg681107

    Eventually, after a variety of ruses, Poche responded:
    I went to confession this morning and the priest gave me absolution.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681110/#msg681110

    I took that at face value: Then let us all keep a clean slate.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681116/#msg681116

    Perspicaciously, josefamenendez called Poche on his mockery: I see a lot feigned innocence that is atypical of an autist. Poche is insideously clever in his replies. The depth of certain posts (especially in foreign languages) belies the his childlike responses here. He tends never to answer a question and always misdirects. Hmmmmm... very good bot or serious troll
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681124/#msg681124

    So, if he hadn't lied, but only made a "mistake," why did he feign (or misdirect) that he confessed?
    He attempted to use confession as an alibi. Poche mocked confession.

    Jan 4:

    Responding to josefamenendez' Dec 29 accusation "serious deliberate intention to obfuscate the true meaning of the scripture to support a larger false perception," Poche stated: You are right. I had a larger idea that I was trying to convey.


    Jan 5:

    Poche: I see a huge difference between a deliberate lie and an honest mistake.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg682408/#msg682408

    So, BEFORE AND AFTER feigning repentance at confession (by misdirection), Poche denied (by misdirection) any LIES in his posts. His LIES were merely "mistakes" and "larger ideas." Poche is the one who mocked confession.

    *****************

    Yet, in sneaking away from your own responsibilities, you confess unfamiliarity with the precepts of those you repeatedly rush to defend.

    Since I am familiar with the Master Race genocidal fundamentals of Judaism, I think you are not only stupid, but traitorous, to defend the most misanthropic and most organized opposition to Jesus Christ.

    Only-Jєωs-are-human and "Kill even the best of Gentiles" is what you defend.

    “You are called men, but non-Jєωs are not called men.”
    Bava Metzia 114b

    Note Rabbi Shimon ben Yohai’s ruling: “…only ‘you,’ the members of the Jєωιѕн people, are called men, but non-Jєωs are not called men.”




    “…although our Sages declared, ‘Kill even the best of the gentiles,’ and that, as mentioned above, the Rambam [Maimonides] states in Hilchot Melachim 8:10 that any gentile who does not accept the seven universal laws commanded to Noah and his descendants should be slain. These directives, however. can be interpreted to apply only in a time of war or in a time when the Jєωs have control over the gentiles.”





    Offline Mark 79

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7059
    • Reputation: +4668/-896
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning
    « Reply #54 on: January 07, 2020, 11:37:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I don't discuss what I said in confession.

    Except that you did discuss it.

    In response to incontrovertible evidence of your lies, you reported you went to confession…

    and then you continued to claim "mistakes" that were intended to bolster your "greater idea."

    You admitted that your "mistakes" were intended to support your "greater idea."

    You can't have it both ways.

    Either (1) you accidentally and without purpose made a mistake or (2) you willfully intended to serve your "greater idea" and intentionally contrived your "mistake"—an intentional lie to serve your purposes.

    Having already confessed to us that you intended to serve your "greater idea," you admitted that you lied—but continue calling your lie a "mistake," stacking, as you habitually do, lie upon lie.

    Offline poche

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 16730
    • Reputation: +1217/-4688
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning
    « Reply #55 on: January 07, 2020, 11:59:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Let it not be lost on us that you slithered past your own "mistakes."

    Dec 28:

    Poche: Matthew and Mark79 are right. I did make a mistake in quoting from Matthew. I apologize.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681100/#msg681100

    Dec 29:

    josefamenendez  called him out: Poche, that was a "mistake' with serious deliberate intention to obfuscate the true meaning of the scripture to support a larger false perception.  ("It" meaning the Church versus "you" meaning Peter). Some people would call that a lie to further an agenda.That's no mistake.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681126/#msg681126

    I asked: If you made a mistake, singular, why did you defend the "mistake" with additional "mistakes"?…
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681108/#msg681108

    I accused him and posted additional evidence in that thread of Poche piling lies upon lies.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681107/#msg681107

    Eventually, after a variety of ruses, Poche responded:
    I went to confession this morning and the priest gave me absolution.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681110/#msg681110

    I took that at face value: Then let us all keep a clean slate.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681116/#msg681116

    Perspicaciously, josefamenendez called Poche on his mockery: I see a lot feigned innocence that is atypical of an autist. Poche is insideously clever in his replies. The depth of certain posts (especially in foreign languages) belies the his childlike responses here. He tends never to answer a question and always misdirects. Hmmmmm... very good bot or serious troll
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681124/#msg681124

    So, if he hadn't lied, but only made a "mistake," why did he feign (or misdirect) that he confessed?
    He attempted to use confession as an alibi. Poche mocked confession.

    Jan 4:

    Responding to josefamenendez' Dec 29 accusation "serious deliberate intention to obfuscate the true meaning of the scripture to support a larger false perception," Poche stated: You are right. I had a larger idea that I was trying to convey.


    Jan 5:

    Poche: I see a huge difference between a deliberate lie and an honest mistake.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg682408/#msg682408

    So, BEFORE AND AFTER feigning repentance at confession (by misdirection), Poche denied (by misdirection) any LIES in his posts. His LIES were merely "mistakes" and "larger ideas." Poche is the one who mocked confession.

    *****************

    Yet, in sneaking away from your own responsibilities, you confess unfamiliarity with the precepts of those you repeatedly rush to defend.

    Since I am familiar with the Master Race genocidal fundamentals of Judaism, I think you are not only stupid, but traitorous, to defend the most misanthropic and most organized opposition to Jesus Christ.

    Only-Jєωs-are-human and "Kill even the best of Gentiles" is what you defend.

    “You are called men, but non-Jєωs are not called men.”
    Bava Metzia 114b

    Note Rabbi Shimon ben Yohai’s ruling: “…only ‘you,’ the members of the Jєωιѕн people, are called men, but non-Jєωs are not called men.”




    “…although our Sages declared, ‘Kill even the best of the gentiles,’ and that, as mentioned above, the Rambam [Maimonides] states in Hilchot Melachim 8:10 that any gentile who does not accept the seven universal laws commanded to Noah and his descendants should be slain. These directives, however. can be interpreted to apply only in a time of war or in a time when the Jєωs have control over the gentiles.”



    I am sorry but I don't recognize the authority of the тαℓмυd.


    Offline Mark 79

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7059
    • Reputation: +4668/-896
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning
    « Reply #56 on: January 08, 2020, 12:02:58 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Snake, this is about YOU.

    Dec 28:

    Poche: Matthew and Mark79 are right. I did make a mistake in quoting from Matthew. I apologize.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681100/#msg681100

    Dec 29:

    josefamenendez  called him out: Poche, that was a "mistake' with serious deliberate intention to obfuscate the true meaning of the scripture to support a larger false perception.  ("It" meaning the Church versus "you" meaning Peter). Some people would call that a lie to further an agenda.That's no mistake.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681126/#msg681126

    I asked: If you made a mistake, singular, why did you defend the "mistake" with additional "mistakes"?…
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681108/#msg681108

    I accused him and posted additional evidence in that thread of Poche piling lies upon lies.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681107/#msg681107

    Eventually, after a variety of ruses, Poche responded:
    I went to confession this morning and the priest gave me absolution.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681110/#msg681110

    I took that at face value: Then let us all keep a clean slate.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681116/#msg681116

    Perspicaciously, josefamenendez called Poche on his mockery: I see a lot feigned innocence that is atypical of an autist. Poche is insideously clever in his replies. The depth of certain posts (especially in foreign languages) belies the his childlike responses here. He tends never to answer a question and always misdirects. Hmmmmm... very good bot or serious troll
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681124/#msg681124

    So, if he hadn't lied, but only made a "mistake," why did he feign (or misdirect) that he confessed?
    He attempted to use confession as an alibi. Poche mocked confession.

    Jan 4:

    Responding to josefamenendez' Dec 29 accusation "serious deliberate intention to obfuscate the true meaning of the scripture to support a larger false perception," Poche stated: You are right. I had a larger idea that I was trying to convey.


    Jan 5:

    Poche: I see a huge difference between a deliberate lie and an honest mistake.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg682408/#msg682408

    So, BEFORE AND AFTER feigning repentance at confession (by misdirection), Poche denied (by misdirection) any LIES in his posts. His LIES were merely "mistakes" and "larger ideas." Poche is the one who mocked confession.

    Offline poche

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 16730
    • Reputation: +1217/-4688
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning
    « Reply #57 on: January 08, 2020, 01:50:19 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Snake, this is about YOU.

    Dec 28:

    Poche: Matthew and Mark79 are right. I did make a mistake in quoting from Matthew. I apologize.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681100/#msg681100

    Dec 29:

    josefamenendez  called him out: Poche, that was a "mistake' with serious deliberate intention to obfuscate the true meaning of the scripture to support a larger false perception.  ("It" meaning the Church versus "you" meaning Peter). Some people would call that a lie to further an agenda.That's no mistake.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681126/#msg681126

    I asked: If you made a mistake, singular, why did you defend the "mistake" with additional "mistakes"?…
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681108/#msg681108

    I accused him and posted additional evidence in that thread of Poche piling lies upon lies.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681107/#msg681107

    Eventually, after a variety of ruses, Poche responded:
    I went to confession this morning and the priest gave me absolution.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681110/#msg681110

    I took that at face value: Then let us all keep a clean slate.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681116/#msg681116

    Perspicaciously, josefamenendez called Poche on his mockery: I see a lot feigned innocence that is atypical of an autist. Poche is insideously clever in his replies. The depth of certain posts (especially in foreign languages) belies the his childlike responses here. He tends never to answer a question and always misdirects. Hmmmmm... very good bot or serious troll
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681124/#msg681124

    So, if he hadn't lied, but only made a "mistake," why did he feign (or misdirect) that he confessed?
    He attempted to use confession as an alibi. Poche mocked confession.

    Jan 4:

    Responding to josefamenendez' Dec 29 accusation "serious deliberate intention to obfuscate the true meaning of the scripture to support a larger false perception," Poche stated: You are right. I had a larger idea that I was trying to convey.


    Jan 5:

    Poche: I see a huge difference between a deliberate lie and an honest mistake.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg682408/#msg682408

    So, BEFORE AND AFTER feigning repentance at confession (by misdirection), Poche denied (by misdirection) any LIES in his posts. His LIES were merely "mistakes" and "larger ideas." Poche is the one who mocked confession.
    You are the one who has been quoting the тαℓмυd. 

    Offline Mark 79

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7059
    • Reputation: +4668/-896
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning
    « Reply #58 on: January 08, 2020, 02:15:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
  • AND I am writing about you, Snake.

    Dec 28:

    Poche: Matthew and Mark79 are right. I did make a mistake in quoting from Matthew. I apologize.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681100/#msg681100

    Dec 29:

    josefamenendez  called him out: Poche, that was a "mistake' with serious deliberate intention to obfuscate the true meaning of the scripture to support a larger false perception.  ("It" meaning the Church versus "you" meaning Peter). Some people would call that a lie to further an agenda.That's no mistake.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681126/#msg681126

    I asked: If you made a mistake, singular, why did you defend the "mistake" with additional "mistakes"?…
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg681108/#msg681108

    I accused him and posted additional evidence in that thread of Poche piling lies upon lies.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681107/#msg681107

    Eventually, after a variety of ruses, Poche responded:
    I went to confession this morning and the priest gave me absolution.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681110/#msg681110

    I took that at face value: Then let us all keep a clean slate.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681116/#msg681116

    Perspicaciously, josefamenendez called Poche on his mockery: I see a lot feigned innocence that is atypical of an autist. Poche is insideously clever in his replies. The depth of certain posts (especially in foreign languages) belies the his childlike responses here. He tends never to answer a question and always misdirects. Hmmmmm... very good bot or serious troll
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/poche-please-explain/msg681124/#msg681124

    So, if he hadn't lied, but only made a "mistake," why did he feign (or misdirect) that he confessed?
    Poche attempted to use confession as an alibi. Poche mocked confession.

    Jan 4:

    Responding to josefamenendez' Dec 29 accusation "serious deliberate intention to obfuscate the true meaning of the scripture to support a larger false perception," Poche stated: You are right. I had a larger idea that I was trying to convey.


    Jan 5:

    Poche: I see a huge difference between a deliberate lie and an honest mistake.
    https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/condemnation-of-poche-errors-and-formal-warning/msg682408/#msg682408

    So, BEFORE AND AFTER feigning repentance at confession (by misdirection), Poche denied (by misdirection) any LIES in his posts. His LIES were merely "mistakes" and "larger ideas." Poche is the one who mocked confession.



    Offline Mark 79

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7059
    • Reputation: +4668/-896
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning
    « Reply #59 on: January 08, 2020, 02:24:25 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • With Mark79's assistance, it has come to my attention that Poche has posted known, concrete errors on CathInfo.  This is in violation of CathInfo rules forbidding *any* falsehoods of any kind.

    1. Falsifying a Scripture quote -- in a signficant manner, which actually changes the meaning -- and not taking correction when his error was pointed out.
    2. Using quotations marks when the quote was never uttered
    3. Claiming that Pope Francis "preached against the тαℓмυd" when the allocution itself didn't mention the тαℓмυd at all. As I will mention later, quotation marks MEAN SOMETHING and intellectual honesty must be maintained on a written discussion forum. If the words weren't uttered, don't place them in quotation marks.
    4. Placing St. Pius X's stance on the тαℓмυd and the Jєωs on the same level as Pope Francis.


    So I condemn and correct Poche's errors including:

    1. Mis-quoting Scripture
    Scripture itself must NOT be twisted to win an argument, look better, save face, defend yourself, or even to defend someone else -- even someone as important as the Pope. One cannot do evil that good might come from it. That is basic Catholic moral theology.

    The official, preferred translation used by most Traditional Catholics, and therefore CathInfo as well, is the Challoner revision of the Douay-Rheims translation (also acceptable: the original Douay-Rheims). In any disputes about the material words of Scripture, recourse must be made to this slavishly-faithful-to-the-original English translation, or the Latin Vulgate itself. But nowadays, few Catholics, even within Tradition, can read Latin. So I recommend the Douay-Rheims which is just as accurate but in English. I recommend you bookmark www.drbo.org to look up Scripture quotes; it even has a handy search function.

    2. Using quotation marks to signify a direct quotation, where the quotation in question never existed.
    Just like Abraham Lincoln told me a few days ago, "That's death to any Internet forum, Matthew!"
    This can't be allowed on any written discussion forum. Quotation marks should only be used when the person in question actually uttered those words verbatim. If you wish to paraphrase or summarize, you must leave the quote marks off. And NEVER put words in anyone's mouth. That includes during arguments, where combatants are wont to quote their opponent, change their quote, and say "fixed it for you" to make a point, as a device of sorts. But it's crude and dishonest to put words into your opponent's mouth, so it's not allowed on this forum (as well as most other fora out there).

    3. Claiming Pope Francis did or said something he did not
    The truth doesn't need you to "modify", spin, or twist it. State the truth simply and let the chips fall where they may. You never know, it might open your eyes to the truth in other areas as well. Willfully deceiving yourself, or accepting a lie in place of the truth, eventually leads to a complete inability to perceive the truth. In the end, the miserable soul can even worship satan (the father of lies) in place of God (who is Truth).

    4. Claiming there is no Crisis in the Church, Pope St. Pius X had basically the same stance on the Jєωs/тαℓмυd as Pope Francis, etc.
    I allow members to deal with the Crisis in the Church according to their own lights, prudence, and conscience. However, denying the Crisis altogether puts you completely outside the Traditional Catholic movement. This is a Traditional Catholic forum. If you want to ask questions of the many well informed and educated Catholics here, be my guest. But you must respect the Traditional Catholic beliefs and position. Even many conservative Novus Ordo Catholics know that Pope Francis is a different kind of Pope (in a bad way) than good old popes like St. Pius X. Even many who choose to say in the Novus Ordo acknowledge there is a huge Crisis in the Church.

    5. Failure to acknowledge some actual errors in the modern Catholic Church, for example the post-Vatican II errors on the Jєωs ("Elder brothers in the Church", "Their covenant is still valid", "They don't need to convert") which is in direct contradiction to pre-Vatican II Popes, including St. Peter: "Therefore let all the house of Israel know most certainly, that God hath made both Lord and Christ, this same Jesus, whom you have crucified. Now when they had heard these things, they had compunction in their heart, and said to Peter, and to the rest of the apostles: What shall we do, men and brethren? But Peter said to them: Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins: and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is to you, and to your children, and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call. And with very many other words did he testify and exhort them, saying: Save yourselves from this perverse generation." (Acts 2:36-40)


    This is a formal warning for Poche, that he cease posting these errors on CathInfo and abide by the forum rules as I have described them. Failure to comply could result in further moderator action(s).

    CathInfo members are encouraged to report any violations of these rules, by Poche or any other member. Please use the "Report to Moderator" link in the lower-right corner of each post, send me a PM, or e-mail me: matthew at cathinfo dot com.
    Just as Matthew's original post was about you.