He is a busy man.  You should be patient.  He runs this forum as a favour to us.

Now, how would I have guessed that you were lodging a complaint against moi?

Did you also bring your other grievance to his attention?

How much of your "toleration" of crap, Matthew, is because you get a financial kickback of advertizing from the controversial activity?

Who is going to be the winner in this ?

I get sometimes frustrated too by some of Nado's posts, but I must say that he does not throw insults around and certainly does not say such harsh and uncharitable things as Ladislaus at times throws at him. And while I mostly disagree with Nado, he does force me to think things through and do my homework. Isn't that what a forum is all about ? And likewise with Ladislaus, I appreciate his side too (apart from the uncharitable language at times).

Why don't you two show us how Catholics are to forgive each other and pray for each other's conversion instead. That way we all win.

Why don't you two show us how Catholics are to forgive each other and pray for each other's conversion instead. That way we all win.

This has nothing to do with "forgiveness", Nobody.  I am no one to forgive or not to forgive Nado.  That's not mine but God's.  But so long as Nado keeps posting his perversions of Catholic theology on this forum, I will continue to excoriate him for it.  I am not going to let his trash slide idly by and say nothing about it out of some false "charity" or in a spirit of "forgiveness".  Standing up for the truth is not contrary to charity.  Let's say someone were constantly posing offenses against Our Blessed Mother on the forum.  Should I "forgive" that and say nothing of it in a spirit of "charity" and let the continuing comments go unaddressed?  What Nado does is an analogous offense against Holy Mother Church.  Were it not for the vacuum of authority in the Church today, Nado would long have been ordered to shut up and never speak about Catholicism in public again ... if not outright excommunicated.

Quote from: Nobody

Why don't you two show us how Catholics are to forgive each other and pray for each other's conversion instead. That way we all win.

This has nothing to do with "forgiveness", Nobody.  I am no one to forgive or not to forgive Nado.  That's not mine but God's.  But so long as Nado keeps posting his perversions of Catholic theology on this forum, I will continue to excoriate him for it.  I am not going to let his trash slide idly by and say nothing about it out of some false "charity" or in a spirit of "forgiveness".  Standing up for the truth is not contrary to charity.  Let's say someone were constantly posing offenses against Our Blessed Mother on the forum.  Should I "forgive" that and say nothing of it in a spirit of "charity" and let the continuing comments go unaddressed?  What Nado does is an analogous offense against Holy Mother Church.  Were it not for the vacuum of authority in the Church today, Nado would long have been ordered to shut up and never speak about Catholicism in public again ... if not outright excommunicated.

The problem is not the fact that you make the effort to "reprove, entreat and rebuke", but that you do not do so "in all patience and doctrine." (II Timothy 4:2)

I would myself not put up with people calling me the things you have called Nado. And neither would you put up with it. You will not catch many flies with vinegar.

Quote from: Nobody

Who is going to be the winner in this ?

I get sometimes frustrated too by some of Nado's posts, but I must say that he does not throw insults around and certainly does not say such harsh and uncharitable things as Ladislaus at times throws at him. And while I mostly disagree with Nado, he does force me to think things through and do my homework. Isn't that what a forum is all about ? And likewise with Ladislaus, I appreciate his side too (apart from the uncharitable language at times).

Why don't you two show us how Catholics are to forgive each other and pray for each other's conversion instead. That way we all win.

I have been putting up with this for some time now, and this is the first time I have complained about this to the moderators right here, not in PM. It is not a matter of forgiveness because I have never shown animosity towards Ladislaus other than his wrong thinking. However, Ladislaus just dug his heals in and confirms freshly right here that I am wicked and non-Catholic filth. If there is any time to follow through with the rules, it is when someone knows he is violating them seriously and repeats his accusations.

Let's put it this way, Matthew and MaterD would not put up with this for a second. I have been seeing these repeatedly for some time, and not retaliating. Enough is enough.

Let's put it this way, Matthew and Ladislaus both spent a lot of time at the SSPX seminary - if you had an ounce of humility, you would already admit that in most instances, they know more than the rest of us, including you - and when you get corrected by Ladislaus, you should not argue UNLESS, you can prove him mistaken with indisputable Church sources - until then, you can learn and correct yourself - not argue with him, not recklessly dispute what he is telling you with your hair brained idea of Catholicism - and not go whining to Matthew to alert him to your obtuse incompetence in this crisis.

You have posted many things that are absolutely anti-Catholic while trumpeting the Church is the source. Many of us have attempted to correct you but it always ends up in an argument that involves ad hominems.

My advice to you for  the good of your soul in this crisis is to use this site to learn the Catholic faith rather than argue every aspect of it.

 

Nado is completely intolerable.  He pollutes every single theological thread on this forum, and I will no longer participate until he's gone.

Here's the standard Nado modus operandi.

1) Completely make up and gratuitously assert a theological principle that no Catholic theologian has ever held and one that no sedevacantist even holds.

2) Assert this invented principle as true unless disproven ... without even so much as bothering to provide the slightest bit of proof for it (not a single citation nor a single argument).

3) After several people thoroughly refute the principle, simply reassert it in a one-liner, without rebutting the arguments, claiming that it has never been refuted ... without ever proving it in the first place.

EXAMPLE #1

1) Claim that even occult heretics lose office in the Church, a principle that NO CATHOLIC THEOLOGIAN holds and NO SEDEVACANTIST I've ever met holds.

2) Several people point this out, cite authorities like St. Robert Bellarmine to the contrary.

3) Nado comes back, over and over again, with a one-liner claiming that it has never been refuted and therefore that it's true.

EXAMPLE #2

1) Claim that "no true pope" could EVER tolerate any evil activity to take place within the Church, a principle that NO CATHOLIC THEOLOGIAN holds and NO SEDEVACANTIST I've ever met holds.

2) Tries to "prove" this by making a citation to "passive infallibility" ... which has absolutely nothing to do with the assertion.

3) When we point it out that he completely fabricated this principle, he keeps referring to the definition of "passive infallibility" (which is nothing more than a corollary to the infallibility of the Magisterium which states that those who adhere to the Magisterium are, by virtue of that adherence, infallible).

4) Then Nado denies that he ever claimed this.

5) Nado continues to reassert this, claiming that it has never been refuted, despite never providing ANY PROOF, ANY CITATION for his gratuitous assertion.

Nado makes up principles, some of which are so preposterous that no theologian has ever held them, and then claims that the burden of proof is on those who do not accept the assertion.  He then continues to be an insufferable irritant by popping in every few posts with a one-liner asserting that it's never been refuted.

That's tantamount to my claiming that when Our Lord ascended to heaven, He then went to the moon and set up a base camp there.  Since no one can refute this, it must be true.

EXAMPLE #3

1) Nado creates a thread claiming that non-sedevacantists deny the dogma of the infallibility of the Ordinary Universal Magisterium.

2) Non-sedevacantists respond that they simply have a different understanding of OUM, but Nado refuses this and claims that his "question" was never answered.

3) In point of fact, there is NO question whatsoever in the OP, just attacks against the non-SVs.

4) Nado demands examples of things taught infallibly by the OUM.

5) When provided these examples, Nado claims that his request for examples has not been answered.

EXAMPLE #4

1) Nado continues to calumniate Nishant by referring to him as a "Feeneyite".

2) Nado refuses to take that back when called out on it.

3) Nishant's position is the same as that held by St. Thomas Aquinas.

4) Nado squirms out of this by claiming that the necessity of explicit belief in the Holy Trinity and Incarnation are simply for the purposes of when a priest can baptize someone, i.e. a necessity of precept and a pastoral consideration.

5) Nado completely makes that up.  In point of fact, Nishant had spent nearly a page thoughtfully addressing the fact that these are held to be necessary as a necessity of means by all theologians before the year 1600 and by most theologians even right up until Vatican II.  So again we have Nado completely making something up, without a single source, a single citation, and claiming it to be true until it's refuted.  Despite the fact that Nishant spent a considerable amount of time addressing Nado's points, Nado simply dismisses the thoughtful post with a waive of the hand by saying it's off-topic to the thread (after HE was the one who had gone off topic in the first place).

EXAMPLE #5

1) Citations from St. Alphonsus about how deathbed conversions are one in a million.

2) Nado gratuitously claims St. Alphonsus is only talking about "visible" cases and that unless people can prove that St. Alphonsus actually meant what he said, his interpretation is the true one.

EXAMPLE #6

1) Nado criticizes Matthew and claims that he tolerates heresy on the forum in the interests of financial gain.

2) Nado then criticizes others for making judgments about people's motives.


Nado is an insufferable baboon.  He has brought down the collective IQ of this forum by about 50% since he entered and started polluting pretty much any thread that I'd ever be interested in.  I've had serious disagreements with many others on this forum, but Nado is utterly intolerable.  There can be no rational discussion with the likes of him.

Quote

Ladislaus had all his chances during each discussion thread, and he kept bailing out and rending his garments.

Nado, I've been keeping up with just about every theological debate here, trying to better understand Church teachings.  In truth, you use variations of the quote above quite regularly when anyone points out your errors, variations include " you're not answering my question" (which the one debating you has usually done but you keep repeating it) or "______ has run away from the discussion".   It's a unique exasperating circular style of argument, but the pattern is clear for all who are following.

I do appreciate your intelligence and passion for our faith, but you are fixed in pride, making it almost impossible for you to be objective about corrections.  And now this thread, which I hate to say makes you seem sissy-ish. No offense intended, but a lot of us thought you were a woman when you joined the forum - that would explain your style, and this complaint.

Lastly, Stubborn's comment is important to note. Yes, I know you've gone toe to toe with him too, but truth is truth.

(perhaps you should PM Ladislaus directly and work out privately)

It is very hard to associate Nado's style of that of a man. Although he may be very young.... Anyway, a reminder here that true charity is saving people from Hell, and heresy which leads them to Hell. Nado is promoting across the forum a very feminmized, romantized, disordered Vatican II version of charity which is the root of the social and spiritual abyss we are in now. He does not really seem acquainted with the actual writings of the saints in their defense of Holy Mother Church. For example, St Jerome or St Augustine who were relentless against heretics and schismatic or any enemy of the Church.

Very few people appreciate the vehemence of the saints in combating against heresy, and designate it as lacking charity. But the saints know that true charity is saving people from hell, and heresy leads souls to hell. There is some insinuation of that judgment in the humorous story told of Pope Sixtus V. Looking at a picture of St. Jerome beating his chest with a stone, that pontiff said, as if addressing the saint in person, “you do well to hold that stone, for without it the Church would never have canonized you.”

 "I never spared heretics and have always done my utmost so that the enemies of the Church should also be my enemies."