Author Topic: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning (Read 18187 times)

poche · « **Reply #75 on:** January 08, 2020, 10:49:36 PM »

Quote from: Incredulous on January 08, 2020, 07:47:03 PM

How did you choose he name "Poche"?

This is how I chose the name Poche;
Capt. Felix Pierre Poché must have been one of those Army rarities who could almost invariably separate a few real facts from a multitude of rumors when almost all communication was by word of mouth.
The young Confederate Army officer, 27 at the time of the 1864 cινιℓ ωαr campaigns in Louisiana, did not believe in slavery, though his family owned some slaves, did not approve of secession, but became fiercely patriotic to the Confederacy; at first would not join the Confederate Army, but later won citations for bravery in battle; was instilled with the love of the Napoleonic-type of massed infantry, cavalry and artillery tactics, but was deeply moved by the suffering of both friendly and enemy soldiers who fell on the battlefield.
He was also devoutly religious, and devoted to his young wife and his 2-year old daughter. He was one of those fourth generation South Louisiana French-Acadian aristocrats-son, grandson and great-grandson of planters-whose loyalty to his relatives friends and neighbors knew no bounds.
Capt. Poché was truly an officer and a gentleman. But to those who would remember him 100 years later, the most important characteristic of this young Confederate Army officer who would someday become an associate justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court was his obsession for keeping a diary.

http://pochefamily.org/diaryfelixppoche.htm

poche · « **Reply #76 on:** January 08, 2020, 10:50:37 PM »

Quote from: roscoe on January 08, 2020, 08:52:17 PM

This is correct Meg as the тαℓмυd is certainly on the Index for the layman & i would imagine most of the Clergy. Exceptions are made for certain qualified theologians who need to prepare for a disputation or whatever. There have been debates w/ тαℓмυdic 'scholars' in the past...

Is Mark79 one of those qualified theologians?

poche · « **Reply #77 on:** January 08, 2020, 10:51:59 PM »

Quote from: Mark 79 on January 08, 2020, 10:26:54 PM

"Certainly"? "Imagine"? Really?

Which Index? Tridentine? or Pauline?

Which edition/year of the ever-changing indices?

If forbidden, why did Pope Leo X commission publication of one of the most ornate тαℓмυd editions ever?

Sorry, Roscoe, I'd need a reliable reference substantiating that during the papacy of Pope Pius XII, the last true Pope, the тαℓмυd was listed on the Index.

For decades I have periodically researched тαℓмυd tractates and related commentary. I have never found even an unreferenced or vague statement that the тαℓмυd was on the Index. It may have been so at one time, but I need a verifiable reference, not supposition, that the тαℓмυd remained on the Index during the most recent valid papacy.

I wonder if the non-sedevacantist harpy herself understands that her "valid" Pope Pius VI eliminated the Index.

In fact, Meg's "valid" Pope Bergoglio's official newspaper recommended DAILY тαℓмυd study, a recommendation that was not restricted to "qualified theologians" or "clergy":

L’Osservatore Romano recommends Daf Yomi (Daily тαℓмυd Lessons)
http://callmejorgebergoglio.blogspot.com/2018/06/losservatore-romano-reccomends-daf-yomi.html

scroll to page 6:
L’Osservatore Romano, Anno CLIII n. 96 (46.340), venerdì 26 aprile 2013, Il тαℓмυd giorno per giorno, pagina 6.

http://www.vatican.va/news_services/or/or_quo/096q01.pdf

Could it be that it is such a contradiction to the Catholic Faith that no good Catholic would want to waste their time on it?

Mark 79 · « **Reply #78 on:** January 08, 2020, 10:56:19 PM »

Then why does your Pope's newspaper (over which he has control) recommend DAILY тαℓмυd STUDY?

Mark 79 · « **Reply #79 on:** January 08, 2020, 11:01:26 PM »

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.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning (Read 18187 times)

poche

Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning

poche

Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning

poche

Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning

Mark 79

Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning

Mark 79

Re: Condemnation of Poche Errors and Formal Warning