Author Topic: Razing the Bastions Von Balthasar (Read 2256 times)

Mortalium · « **on:** April 20, 2013, 02:01:57 PM »

I recently debated with a Novus Ordo uber-modernist "theology professor" (although he doesn't even have a "formal" theology title, he is allowed to teach theology) and I showed him how Ratzinger says the Church must "raze her bastions" and showed him what he says against the Syllabus and how this all contradicts Church teaching and makes him a modernist.

I basically showed him what this article says: http://www.traditioninaction.org/ProgressivistDoc/A_029_RatzingerRazeBastions.htm

The modernist proceeded to tell me that "razing the bastions" had nothing to do with what the article says, at all. He implied there was no contradiction of Church teaching at all anywhere in that.

He then asked me if i had even read Razing the bastions by Balthasar. I said no and that i didn't need to read that garbage to know that it is against what the Church has always taught since the quotes were bad enough. Even though i know that Balthasar is an outrageous heretic/modernist, i actually didn't really know what the worst things about him are, like i do know about others, so i couldn't really say anything to him against Balthasar.

So i ended up "losing" this argument because i never thought he would actually defend this or think it was fine, but i will speak with him again some day and i wanted to see what could i tell him about this.

s2srea · « **Reply #1 on:** April 20, 2013, 03:02:30 PM »

Quote from: Mortalium

He implied there was no contradiction of Church teaching at all anywhere in that.

And how is that, if you don't mind?

TKGS · « **Reply #2 on:** April 20, 2013, 03:07:57 PM »

I think arguing with Modernists on the fine points of Modernism is a useless endeavor and could even be dangerous for your soul. He is trying to get you to question the Faith by getting you to read the works that are against the Faith--something that would be on the Index of Forbidden Books if it still existed.

He has asserted a fact; it is his responsibility to prove it. I submit that he cannot, because the Ratzinger comment about "razing the bastions" and his comments against the Syllabus are, in fact, direct contradictions of Church teachings.

Instead, counter with a query about whether he has ever read Pascendi, though make sure you read Pascendi and understand it first. If he answers in the negative, then you must wonder how he can make such a comment to begin with because Pope St. Pius X has already given detailed instructions in how to detect the methods of the Modernists. If he has, then, my dear fellow, he is an anti-Christ and is hell bent (literally) upon destroying the Church and the faith of any who would be saved. He will not be converted by showing arguing with him some fine points of Modernism and demonstrating how he has been mistaken on this point or that. He will only be converted by Grace and that, my friend, will probably only be possible through prayer and fasting.

Mortalium · « **Reply #3 on:** April 20, 2013, 03:21:32 PM »

Quote from: s2srea

Quote from: Mortalium
He implied there was no contradiction of Church teaching at all anywhere in that.

And how is that, if you don't mind?

I don't remember word for word exactly what i told him and what he told me about this because it was maybe more than a month ago, but i was basically telling him how "razing the bastions" of the Church, according to what Ratzinger and Balthasar say, obviously meant taking down or changing/adapting unchangeable teachings and positions the Church has always had. I think what he meant was that to raze the bastions does not mean to raze the bastions (lol) or compromise Church teachings at all, pure modernist babble and double-talk of course.

After the encounter i thought to myself that I should have asked him, just to see what he would say, "well what is Balthasar talking about here then, according to you?". Not to give him the least credence of course, but just to know what he would say.

Mortalium · « **Reply #4 on:** April 20, 2013, 03:40:21 PM »

Quote from: TKGS

I think arguing with Modernists on the fine points of Modernism is a useless endeavor and could even be dangerous for your soul. He is trying to get you to question the Faith by getting you to read the works that are against the Faith--something that would be on the Index of Forbidden Books if it still existed.

I don't think that may be his real intention, because this guy is so far off that he probably thinks he's just recommending me Catholic teaching.

This guy was, i think, first Jєωιѕн, then protestant, and then finally "converted" to the Novus Ordo. I'm not 100% sure if first he was Jєωιѕн but protestant yes, he said so himself.

He's an unbelievable and abominable modernist apostate antichrist, he's just a heresy-spewing machine, it's truly incredible. And he actually think he's going to purgatory! It's a done deal he's going there, according to him.

Quote from: TKGS

He has asserted a fact; it is his responsibility to prove it. I submit that he cannot, because the Ratzinger comment about "razing the bastions" and his comments against the Syllabus are, in fact, direct contradictions of Church teachings.

Instead, counter with a query about whether he has ever read Pascendi, though make sure you read Pascendi and understand it first. If he answers in the negative, then you must wonder how he can make such a comment to begin with because Pope St. Pius X has already given detailed instructions in how to detect the methods of the Modernists. If he has, then, my dear fellow, he is an anti-Christ and is hell bent (literally) upon destroying the Church and the faith of any who would be saved. He will not be converted by showing arguing with him some fine points of Modernism and demonstrating how he has been mistaken on this point or that. He will only be converted by Grace and that, my friend, will probably only be possible through prayer and fasting.

I have read parts of Pascendi but not all of it; i will really finish it as soon as i can. I have read Lamentabili and the Oath and i actually brought the book "The Popes against Modern Errors" with me to this encounter to show him but we actually did not touch on the subject of modernism somehow. In round 2 i will make sure to get into modernism.

This guy was saying that the Syllabus was not infallible or binding, even though i proved it was. He doesn't like it obviously. He idolizes Newman. He doesn't even really know how infallibility works or when does it apply.

He's totally pro-Luther too. I mentioned how the 1999 Joint Declaration was an example of total heresy and you should have seen how worked up and angry he got. He boldly defended the Joint and said it wasn't heretical AT ALL. I told him how Luther came up with sola fides in the privy and he said that was blatantly false and that my sources were wrong. He asked if i had read all of Luther's works and if i knew german or latin, implying that i have to read all that apostate's garbage to know whether it's true or false.

I didn't say it at the moment, but later i thought i should have said: "THE CHURCH exposed all his heresies and the COUNCIL of Trent condemned them all and he was excommunicated and all his writings were ordered to be burned, so i don't need to read all his writings you flaming modernist!"

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #5 on:** April 20, 2013, 04:13:55 PM »

Mortalium, add him to your list of rosary intentions and move on. You're wasting your time. It takes an act of God, not human interaction, to take a mind that is mush and make it work again.

Mortalium · « **Reply #6 on:** April 20, 2013, 04:46:45 PM »

Talking with him a mere second time won't do any harm, plus he said many things which, had i had the evidence on hand, he would have had to accept or think about something.

Now i have a lot of printed evidence concerning things which he said were false, didn't know about etc.

TKGS · « **Reply #7 on:** April 20, 2013, 05:40:57 PM »

Quote from: Mortalium

I don't think that may be his real intention, because this guy is so far off that he probably thinks he's just recommending me Catholic teaching.

Most heretics believe that they are "correcting" misunderstanding in prior doctrine. Heresiarchs believe the Church has had it wrong for so long, we need them to tell them what the "true" teachings are.

That's why Ratzinger said we must raze the bastions and why Vatican II was a counter-syllabus.

You think you will "prove" to him something. I pray you are correct, but don't be too disappointed when you find that he is really uninterested in hearing true doctrine.

Mortalium · « **Reply #8 on:** April 20, 2013, 09:27:12 PM »

Quote from: TKGS

Quote from: Mortalium
I don't think that may be his real intention, because this guy is so far off that he probably thinks he's just recommending me Catholic teaching.

Most heretics believe that they are "correcting" misunderstanding in prior doctrine. Heresiarchs believe the Church has had it wrong for so long, we need them to tell them what the "true" teachings are.

That's why Ratzinger said we must raze the bastions and why Vatican II was a counter-syllabus.

You think you will "prove" to him something. I pray you are correct, but don't be too disappointed when you find that he is really uninterested in hearing true doctrine.

Well he wanted to continue speaking another day anyways, because it got late and we couldn't finish talking.

I told him the Vatican II sect officially teaches that the "Orthodox" schismatics don't need to be converted and return to the Church. I told him this is official. He didn't believe it and he didn't know about it, so I left him the link to the Balamand Statement where they say this. He said he would read it.

I also told him they say the same thing about Jєωs, protestants, and pretty much anyone else (except real Catholics!) and he didn't believe it/didn't know about it either. So I prepared a file specifically about the Jєωs to show it to him later.

I will tell him he's a modernist, and if he remains obstinate, then I will shake the dust off from my feet and leave him alone. But i still want to tell him many things i couldnt tell him the first time.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #9 on:** April 21, 2013, 09:23:11 PM »

Mortalium (animos??), you are trying to do a good work, a spiritual work
of mercy, instructing the ignorant. Ironically, he is the "professor" and you
are the "student." The principle of ABL comes to mind, "The superiors form
the subjects; the subjects do not form the superiors."

Therefore, the more you persist in this good work, the more danger there
is to your own faith, merely by dint of his position of authority, which he
will no doubt attempt to use to influence your thinking, even if it is in very
small ways at first.

The advice of TKGS above, and on the first page are very good. You are
well advised to read them several times. Especially Pascendi: you not
only must merely READ it, you must STUDY it. It takes more than one
read. There is an excellent book, called A CATECHISM OF MODERNISM,
by Fr. Lemius, available at TAN Books. It is a tremendous teaching aid
for anyone who wants to A) understand Pascendi very well, B) use the
principles and treasury of Pascendi to help them identify what Modernism
is in our daily lives, C) take our own comprehension of this important
reality and be able to help someone else to see the reality of Modernism
in their own life and subjective concept of their "faith."

One thing I took out of this great book is, that Modernism is a disease of
the spirit to which we are all subject due to the fact that we live in the
age that we do. But since we are IN IT, we cannot SEE IT. It seems
"normal" to us "because everyone's doing it." But still, it is a spiritual
malady, and one of its symptoms is, you do not know you are infected.

In other words, properly understood, not finding yourself suspect of any
"infection" with this spiritual malady is no assurance that you are not
infected, because your own abiding ignorance of your infection is one
of the symptoms of the disease!

You can reformulate that doctrine and keep it at hand when you speak to
this guy, and just drop in various permutations of the principle at different
moments, in the event that at some point perhaps it will click in him. You
cannot get ANGRY or PASSIONATE or DISRESPECTFUL at any time,
because then he'll write you off as a "Bible thumper" or a "wacko."

But I would be careful not to give him too much of your time. Come
well prepared and just give him a few minutes.. for as Fr. Pfeiffer says
so compellingly, when it comes to Modernists in positions of power, it
is useless to argue with them. It is like arguing with a woman.. you will
never win. Keep it simple, keep it firm, drop your message, and leave.

The example I'm thinking about is at about minute 10 of his Laetare
Sunday sermon (over an hour duration!) and is quipped on the back
pages of the most recent The Recusant (Issue 6), page 30 actually.

If you don't have it, I can copy it here for you. It's called "Fr. Joseph
Pfeiffer on Bishop Fellay and the Preamble" (he means "his Response to
the Preamble," or "his Doctrinal Declaration of April 15th, 2012").

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #10 on:** April 24, 2013, 07:19:48 PM »

This is not an unusual story.

We live in an age when more and more education makes more and
more worldly people want more and more to be able to "better" the
next guy in astonishment regarding any topic whatsoever, and
usually that excludes things regarding the Faith of Catholics.

But one of the new trends that developed with Modernism is the
one where those who would study the Church and what She teaches
would also start doing this, competing with others to make them
confused or to give them a question they can't handle, and that
became its own goal - obfuscation. A new virute, as it were.

And as such, it effected an attack on virtue, in itself. What it means
to be virtuous was gradually forgotten. A new saying took its place
in popular useage: "Must be doing something right!!"

Whenever someone was noticed with a newfound affluence or a
much better paying job or a new car or better social life or
fancier clothes, when he passed by or his name was mentioned,
someone would say, "Must be doing something right!"

When Ratzinger said "razing the bastions" and Mortalium's friend
heard that and "took it in," he was thinking something different
than what you or I might expect he was thinking. He was
presuming that the bastions were a thing that needed to be razed,
that they were like old sheets in the linen closet or a sagging
headliner on your collectible antique car, or barnacles on the
hull of your boat, or weeds, stumps and stupid chunks of broken
concrete and rusty old pipes on and in the soil of your building
lot. The "bastions" were in the way of "progress."

Mortalium · « **Reply #11 on:** April 24, 2013, 11:07:36 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Mortalium (animos??), you are trying to do a good work, a spiritual work
of mercy, instructing the ignorant. Ironically, he is the "professor" and you
are the "student." The principle of ABL comes to mind, "The superiors form
the subjects; the subjects do not form the superiors."

Therefore, the more you persist in this good work, the more danger there
is to your own faith, merely by dint of his position of authority, which he
will no doubt attempt to use to influence your thinking, even if it is in very
small ways at first.

Trust me, there is no way this man can influence me in the slightest; he is a flaming modernist apostate and i will refute several of the things he said when we talked because he clearly had no idea what he was talking about but i didn't have the papers on hand and i ran out of time.

Quote from: Neil Obstat

The advice of TKGS above, and on the first page are very good. You are
well advised to read them several times. Especially Pascendi: you not
only must merely READ it, you must STUDY it. It takes more than one
read. There is an excellent book, called A CATECHISM OF MODERNISM,
by Fr. Lemius, available at TAN Books. It is a tremendous teaching aid
for anyone who wants to A) understand Pascendi very well, B) use the
principles and treasury of Pascendi to help them identify what Modernism
is in our daily lives, C) take our own comprehension of this important
reality and be able to help someone else to see the reality of Modernism
in their own life and subjective concept of their "faith."

One thing I took out of this great book is, that Modernism is a disease of
the spirit to which we are all subject due to the fact that we live in the
age that we do. But since we are IN IT, we cannot SEE IT. It seems
"normal" to us "because everyone's doing it." But still, it is a spiritual
malady, and one of its symptoms is, you do not know you are infected.

In other words, properly understood, not finding yourself suspect of any
"infection" with this spiritual malady is no assurance that you are not
infected, because your own abiding ignorance of your infection is one
of the symptoms of the disease!

I had never heard about that book. I found it in archive.org and will definitely read it. Looks good.

Quote from: Neil Obstat

You can reformulate that doctrine and keep it at hand when you speak to
this guy, and just drop in various permutations of the principle at different
moments, in the event that at some point perhaps it will click in him. You
cannot get ANGRY or PASSIONATE or DISRESPECTFUL at any time,
because then he'll write you off as a "Bible thumper" or a "wacko."

I always remain calm but it's the other person who always get emotional and irrational, upset etc.

Like i said, this guy got upset when i was speaking against Luther! He then told himself, "Calm down! Calm down!"

We'll see how it goes. I won't waste too much time with him though.

There's actually a novus ordo non-priest i have been chatting on the phone with back and forth for several days now. I went to speak to him once and he's just another modernist.

His only defense to all i would tell him was "I will follow Ratzinger because he's a superb theologian and I will follow Wojtyla because he was a giant man of the faith"!

Talk about a religion of man.

Mortalium · « **Reply #12 on:** April 24, 2013, 11:23:36 PM »

Also, a definition of what exactly the "bastions" are would make it easier.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #13 on:** April 25, 2013, 12:53:51 AM »

Quote from: Mortalium

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Mortalium (animos??), you are trying to do a good work, a spiritual work
of mercy, instructing the ignorant. Ironically, he is the "professor" and you
are the "student." The principle of ABL comes to mind, "The superiors form
the subjects; the subjects do not form the superiors."

Therefore, the more you persist in this good work, the more danger there
is to your own faith, merely by dint of his position of authority, which he
will no doubt attempt to use to influence your thinking, even if it is in very
small ways at first.

Trust me, there is no way this man can influence me in the slightest; he is a flaming modernist apostate and i will refute several of the things he said when we talked because he clearly had no idea what he was talking about but i didn't have the papers on hand and i ran out of time.

Please get the Lemius book and read it carefully first, before you try to
go toe-to toe with this guy. You can always hold back later, but if you go
in unprepared it can only give him a weakness of yours that he will not
ever forget. It would come to the point of having to admit that you had
not studied enough when you had said something earlier on a previous
meeting, and then he'll throw that back at you as if nothing you say is
reliable. Don't give him the chance!

Read this book and QUIZ YOURSELF! Keep a copy of Pascendi on hand
and try to find the answer in there before you look to see what Fr. Lemus'
answer is to each question. All the answers are in Pascendi, but some of
them are not so obvious!! You won't be able to find them!! Only after you
read his answer will you then realize the problem was that you had not
adequately comprehended that part of Pascendi. You will feel very much
on top of the world when you finish your work with it!!

Quote

Quote from: Neil Obstat

The advice of TKGS above, and on the first page are very good. You are
well advised to read them several times. Especially Pascendi: you not
only must merely READ it, you must STUDY it. It takes more than one
read. There is an excellent book, called A CATECHISM OF MODERNISM,
by Fr. Lemius, available at TAN Books. It is a tremendous teaching aid
for anyone who wants to A) understand Pascendi very well, B) use the
principles and treasury of Pascendi to help them identify what Modernism
is in our daily lives, C) take our own comprehension of this important
reality and be able to help someone else to see the reality of Modernism
in their own life and subjective concept of their "faith."

One thing I took out of this great book is, that Modernism is a disease of
the spirit to which we are all subject due to the fact that we live in the
age that we do. But since we are IN IT, we cannot SEE IT. It seems
"normal" to us "because everyone's doing it." But still, it is a spiritual
malady, and one of its symptoms is, you do not know you are infected.

In other words, properly understood, not finding yourself suspect of any
"infection" with this spiritual malady is no assurance that you are not
infected, because your own abiding ignorance of your infection is one
of the symptoms of the disease!

I had never heard about that book. I found it in archive.org and will definitely read it. Looks good.

I'm not at all surprised. I've only met two people in my lifetime who knew
about it before I told them. So it's extremely common, unfortunately.

For someone like you, this book is a goldmine. And it's only $6.00! If you
find it online for free, whatever, but for me, it's a bit more difficult to work
through two books using post-its and taking my notes when there are no
physical papers to stick the post-its on. I use them for bookmarks because
they don't fall out!!!! HAHAHAHAHA

Quote

Quote from: Neil Obstat

You can reformulate that doctrine and keep it at hand when you speak to
this guy, and just drop in various permutations of the principle at different
moments, in the event that at some point perhaps it will click in him. You
cannot get ANGRY or PASSIONATE or DISRESPECTFUL at any time,
because then he'll write you off as a "Bible thumper" or a "wacko."

I always remain calm but it's the other person who always get emotional and irrational, upset etc.

Like i said, this guy got upset when i was speaking against Luther! He then told himself, "Calm down! Calm down!"

We'll see how it goes. I won't waste too much time with him though.

There's actually a novus ordo non-priest i have been chatting on the phone with back and forth for several days now. I went to speak to him once and he's just another modernist.

I'm really surprised how many priests of any description there are who
do not seem to be able to perceive the Modernism in their own behavior
and answers to questions. It's truly appalling. Pope St. Pius X was
absolutely correct in his assessment that Modernism, left unchecked, would
become the wreck and ruin of all religion. For it is not only the Catholic
Faith that it attacks, but religion itself, EVEN FALSE RELIGIONS are
attacked by this 7-headed Beast of Chapter 13 of the Apocalypse!!

All religion would be destroyed so as to be replaced with the new, false
religion of the anti-Christ.

Quote

His only defense to all i would tell him was "I will follow Ratzinger because he's a superb theologian and I will follow Wojtyla because he was a giant man of the faith"!

Talk about a religion of man.

Sister Mariana de Jesus Torres said that she would much prefer to have
been given to live in our age because there would be many more ways
to become a saint today. That was 400 years ago. Evangelizing now is
far more challenging with the example of several popes in succession who
have given such scandalous examples. If you hope to convince him of
sedevacantism, all I can tell you is "good luck."

Furthermore, I find it curious that sede priests are not too eager to have
their faithful studying Pascendi. From what I can tell, they're afraid of it,
because it makes you THINK too much. And when that happens, you might
well see the problems with being sede.

Quote from: Mortalium

Also, a definition of what exactly the "bastions" are would make it easier.

If there is any one thing that Modernists abhor it's definition. It is like
Kryptonite to them. Is there any wonder that John XXIII abandoned
any and all definition, and condemnation of error (which is a kind of
definition)?

They do not want to define anything because then their options are
limited -- and you know how much they love to have options!!

Mortalium · « **Reply #14 on:** April 25, 2013, 02:06:43 AM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Please get the Lemius book and read it carefully first, before you try to
go toe-to toe with this guy. You can always hold back later, but if you go
in unprepared it can only give him a weakness of yours that he will not
ever forget. It would come to the point of having to admit that you had
not studied enough when you had said something earlier on a previous
meeting, and then he'll throw that back at you as if nothing you say is
reliable. Don't give him the chance!

Read this book and QUIZ YOURSELF! Keep a copy of Pascendi on hand
and try to find the answer in there before you look to see what Fr. Lemus'
answer is to each question. All the answers are in Pascendi, but some of
them are not so obvious!! You won't be able to find them!! Only after you
read his answer will you then realize the problem was that you had not
adequately comprehended that part of Pascendi. You will feel very much
on top of the world when you finish your work with it!!

Indeed, this is what i deciced to do; i decided that i should read Pascendi and now the catechism to fully be prepared before going to see him again because it all boils down to modernism.

He boasts of "loving St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine" and he supposedly knows a lot about them and their writings, but when i was about to quote what St. Thomas and St. Augustine said about salvation, which obviously contradicts his heretical doctrine of devils (he believes Protestants can definitely be saved and completely denies the dogma etc.), he immediately changed the subject and didn't allow me to quote them. Ha! He probably sensed he was about to be exposed and wasted no time in changing the subject.

Quote from: Neil Obstat

I'm not at all surprised. I've only met two people in my lifetime who knew
about it before I told them. So it's extremely common, unfortunately.

For someone like you, this book is a goldmine. And it's only $6.00! If you
find it online for free, whatever, but for me, it's a bit more difficult to work
through two books using post-its and taking my notes when there are no
physical papers to stick the post-its on. I use them for bookmarks because
they don't fall out!!!! HAHAHAHAHA

I will definitely buy it but in the meantime i will read it in pdf.

Quote from: Neil Obstat

I'm really surprised how many priests of any description there are who
do not seem to be able to perceive the Modernism in their own behavior
and answers to questions. It's truly appalling. Pope St. Pius X was
absolutely correct in his assessment that Modernism, left unchecked, would
become the wreck and ruin of all religion. For it is not only the Catholic
Faith that it attacks, but religion itself, EVEN FALSE RELIGIONS are
attacked by this 7-headed Beast of Chapter 13 of the Apocalypse!!

All religion would be destroyed so as to be replaced with the new, false
religion of the anti-Christ.

Yes. I already told him several times he's a total modernist and his answer was that all the "novelties" and all the heresies and errors they are teaching now are actually not at all innovations or negations of any dogma at all. He told me "you need to study theology with a tutor". I said "well the pre vatican ii theologians condemn all they are teaching right now and i have read what they say on, say, the ecclesiology of the Church" and then he said "oh we have to go by the Magisterium", and then i said "well the Magisterium before Vatican ii condemns vatican ii and all that they are saying right now" and then he said again "oh we have to go by what the theologians teach, they explain the dogmas for us" hahaha. It was ridiculous and he contradicted himself all over the place.

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Sister Mariana de Jesus Torres said that she would much prefer to have
been given to live in our age because there would be many more ways
to become a saint today. That was 400 years ago.

Where did she say that?

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Evangelizing now is far more challenging with the example of several popes in succession who have given such scandalous examples. If you hope to convince him of
sedevacantism, all I can tell you is "good luck."

Yes, which is why you cannot even defend the Catholic Faith consistently today if you regard these antipopes as real Popes, for they blatantly teach that no one has to be Catholic or come into the Church at all. You cannot even convert a Protestant if you regard them as real popes because they say protestants don't need to become Catholic. "Hey, your own pope says i don't need to become Catholic to be saved. 'Absolutely not!' he says, so how can you tell me i have to convert?" they would tell you. You cannot convert a schismatic "orthodox" if you regard the last 6 imposters as real Popes for they say 'uniatism' is "outdated ecclesiology". And on and on.

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Furthermore, I find it curious that sede priests are not too eager to have
their faithful studying Pascendi. From what I can tell, they're afraid of it,
because it makes you THINK too much. And when that happens, you might
well see the problems with being sede.

What are the problems with being sede?

Quote from: Neil Obstat

If there is any one thing that Modernists abhor it's definition. It is like
Kryptonite to them. Is there any wonder that John XXIII abandoned
any and all definition, and condemnation of error (which is a kind of
definition)?

They do not want to define anything because then their options are
limited -- and you know how much they love to have options!!

Absolutely.