Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Neil, don't know if anybody else will appreciate this video, but I think you'll have fun with it...

2
Not quite.  NASA reps say they can't take a photo of the entire earth.  They admit they have to photoshop their pics.  Why pretend images are true when NASA says they are not?

There are numerous ways of ascertaining the shape of the earth without recourse to photographs from deep space.
.
But any images of earth provided are ridiculed by flat-earthers as being "fake" or CGI or composite.
.
So why bother with photos?
.
3
No, you do NOT have to be 100, 000 miles away.
Last week Elon Musk showed you only have to achieve low earth orbit to photograph the entire globe.
.
Shucks. I thought you were convinced that Mr. Musk's video footage was all fake. Wow. Congratulations! 
4
Why do globalists lie?
.
Why do flat-earthers pretend the earth is "flat" when everyone knows it's not?

5
Like others here, you seem to believe that advanced science proves that the earth is a globe, and that we should not be allowed to say that science and Scripture indicate that the earth is flat, or we're probably guilty of blasphemy. Blasphemy against what? Modern science?
.
Perhaps you didn't finish reading cassini's post. He has already addressed this point:
.
But now we have a growing number of Catholics who are insisting the Scriptures do reveal a FLAT-EARTH, and calling any who disagree ... bad Catholics to say the least (as anyone can check by reading their posts on this and other forums). This [implies] that all the Fathers and popes and theologians who never defended [this] FLAT-EARTH were FAILING IN THEIR CATHOLIC DUTY TO DEFEND THE TRUTHS OF SCRIPTURE. And that is why I say it amounts to blasphemy or worse.
.
Therefore, if he were to reply to your question, cassini could well ask you the following question (if he were as little worried as I am about appearing too blunt!).
.
Question for Meg (from me, acting in cassini's place):

Do you, Meg, insist that Scripture does reveal a flat-earth, and do you subsequently imply that any Catholic who disagrees with you is therefore a bad Catholic?
.
6
What does that have to do with anything?  Matthew doesn't agree with the position of FE and has relegated it to a sub-forum.  He also doesn't agree with SVism or with Feeneyism but also allows discussion of those things.  I'm not talking about what is ALLOWED to be discussed here vs. what's prudent to promote.  Once again it seems that you're trying to link FE with the Resistance.  "This forum supports the Resistance and allows discussion of FE."

I'm also trying to distinguish between believing that the earth is flat vs. asserting it to be Church teaching.

Do you believe that the Church teaches flat earth?
.
Curiously, I know of flat-earthers who are pro-Resistance (in the broadest sense) and also some who are sedevacantist. I even know one who is Novus Ordo. But most of them are Protestant or agnostic. I have yet to meet an honest flat-earther who is atheist. I do know of a malicious faker flat-earther who is atheist but tries to hide that fact so he can get along with other flat-earthers. He seems to enjoy stirring up controversy.
.
7
SSPX Resistance News / Re: Eleison Comments - Parenting Today I (no. 553)
« Last post by opus on Today at 09:57:17 PM »
I, for one, have seen many, if not most second-generation traditional Catholics in my local SSPX chapel who don't understand the crisis and definitely will not pass on their Catholic Faith. There is no catechism class in the church, and nothing that teaches about the Crisis to the teenagers... they are the neglected group there.
How to keep the children Catholic??? ?
8
IF the flat-earthers are wrong, and the earth is indeed a globe, then yes indeed there's the risk of making religion look bad.  That is part of the meaning of Pope Leo XIII in PD and I think that there's a quote from St. Augustine along those lines.

If I say that my religion teaches a flat earth, and it turns out to be false, and the earth is in fact a globe, then this makes that religion look bad and discredits the religion in the eyes of those outside of it.  It could become a stumbling block for those who might otherwise be inclined to convert.

Now, let's say that the flat earthers are correct, and that the earth is indeed flat -- and as you know I remain undecided at this time about it -- EVEN THEN there's some risk.  It's just a fact that 99% of people out there think you're a nutjob if you think that the earth is flat.  In fact, in common parlance, the term flat-earther is actually used more broadly to connote a tinfoil-hat-wearing crazy.  So even IF they're right, I feel that they need to back down ... for the sake of PRUDENCE if nothing else ... from alleging that the Catholic Church teaches flat earth.  So, even if they happen to be correct, they have to be very careful here.

Let me give you another example.  I happen to agree completely with Bishop Williamson's position on the holocaust.  But you know what, if I were in such a high profile position, I would NEVER talk about it publicly.  Why?  Because it could make someone who might otherwise to be inclined to listen to you from a theological standpoint (arguments vs. modernism and Vatican II) perhaps dismiss you out of hand as a nutjob and not listen to another word you might have to say.  So it's a question of PRUDENCE at the very least.  Is it vital to people's salvation to know the truth about the holocaust?  Of course not.  I agree with Bishop Williamson's views, but do NOT agree with him that he should talk about it publicly.  Similarly with flat earth.

So, for the proponents of flat earth (and I do not use the term flat-earther pejoratively as many do but only because I'm lazy to type out "proponents of flat earth" each time), do you think that this truth as you see it is SO vital to people's salvation that you'd be willing to scare off untold numbers of potential converts to Traditional Catholicism by claiming that flat earth is CHURCH TEACHING?
.
Let me ask you a simple question.
.
If you were to find yourself being a first-hand eyewitness to a murder, and you got a good look at the murderer's face, and then when the case came up for trial after you had been out of the country for a while and had just returned, would you feel obliged to contact the prosecuting attorney to tell your story or would you rather contact the defense attorney first?
.
9
I told my wife 15 years ago:

"I wonder who will be the traditionalists of tomorrow? I do not think it will be the people our age and younger that we see around us, they have had it given to them. I think the future traditionalists will come from the fallen away who return from the gutters, like we did".

With every day that passes I see it unfolding as I thought it would. The SSPX schooled children who are now even up to 50 years old, have no fight in them. They prefer the drinks when they get home and playing cards with their buddies, than teach the fight to their children. 

10
More like it's a menace to modern science and NASA teachings.
.
No, flat-earthism is a menace to right reason. Full stop.
.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10