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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3]

Author Topic: Bishop Fellay and the General Council  (Read 4364 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Incredulous

Bishop Fellay and the General Council
« Reply #10 on: May 23, 2012, 08:48:32 PM »
Quote from: Ethelred
Will the SSPX general chapter (general superior's halftime) be held in June or July 2012, as announced earlier (can't remember where, however...) ?

I heard rumours it had been canceled because Bp Fellay could fear his dethronement, but other rumours say these rumours are just, well, rumours. Ahem.

What if the New-SSPX will already be part of the New-Church by then? Wouldn't that make any general chapter redundant?



I'm guessing the neoSSPX leaders will try to cancel the General Chapter
meeting and wait for the Pope's announcement.
Then hide behind the mantle of Rome.  It fits their political style, to date.
Logged

Offline Matthew

  • Mod
Bishop Fellay and the General Council
« Reply #11 on: May 24, 2012, 02:42:10 AM »
Someone on Ignis Ardens nailed this one -- he took the time to say what I was  too busy to compose. He did a very good job:
(Yes, Ite Ad Thomam posted the same thing on IA)


Quote
This has to be the most outrageous misuse of the Scholastic method I have ever seen.

Firstly, you are not arguing a doctrinal question, but a matter of policy.

Secondly, none of your objections, which you clearly manufactured, bothered to cite any authority (thus demonstrating that you manufactured them); however, authorities could easily be cited (especially Abp. Levebvre) to justify certain assertions, as Mr. Sarto made plain when he responded with laughter at some of your own nakedly gratuitous assertions.

Further, you do cite authories in your counter-argument, thus granting yourself a privilege denied to your (manufactured) opponents' objections. Mr. Sarto again makes this obvious by providing you with the arguments (quotes) from authority.

Finally, your first course of action should have been to actually state your thesis here, then wait for any objection(s) to it. This would have avoided the appearance of a fixed, biased and manufactured argument, which also insults the intelligence of your audience.

To put this bluntly, you created a straw-man, drowned him in gasoline and then burned him. Congrats! You destroyed your opponent.

M advice: Start from scratch. Poll (real!) objections first, then draft your final argument. In this manner you can learn all the opinions and not make grossly erroneous statements such as Abp. Lefebvre persecuting sedevacantists as a policy - the Society today doesn't even have a policy of doing that, which should have given you pause... but you didn't research. Now if you're not going to bother to do any research first, then why should we bother to take your arguments seriously?
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]
« previous next »