Author Topic: The Recusant: (Read 19671 times)

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #20 on:** April 09, 2014, 12:33:54 PM »

Quote from: SeanJohnson

Thanks for admitting that as of this moment, no such issue exists.

Talk about pulling teeth!.

Next question: Does the Recusant intend to publish a newsletter in the future?

Where did I say that no such issue exists?

Have you somehow still not read sea leopard's post? Oh, right, you don't trust usernames. But then why do you trust me? I'm just another sea-leopard-esque username. Oh, right. You don't trust me.

Okay, so feelings are not mutual. I trust you, but you don't trust me. I suppose that's my fault, not yours. Sorry again.

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #21 on:** April 09, 2014, 12:53:22 PM »

.

Maybe THIS is the problem. There is another typo, this time it's sea leopard's fault and then it's also my fault for having repeated it.

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

It should say 11 2-sided pages, before folding, not 22 pages.

Quote from: I

.

FYI: sea leopard's post:

Quote from: sea leopard

We put together a couple hundred this past weekend

Issue #15, March/April, 44 pages
(22 [11pp, 2-sided, before folding!])

Check your postman

bye and GB

I made it a larger font so maybe it's easier to read, for you.

All of The Recusant issues have been double the pages (4 x the leaves) after folding.

(Issue #5 for example, was 8 leaves, 2-sided, folded, thus 32 pp.)

I know this for a fact because I have also folded them, and unfolded them.

I have shared them with friends and I have made about 30 people aware of them.

And I remain perplexed as to how I could be the only one telling them these things.

But you won't find any mention of my activities anywhere on the Internet, either,
that is, until this present post right here, where I mention them.

Of course, you are at liberty to presume I'm lying too, since there is nowhere to verify what I have said here to you, SeanJohnson.

Alternatively, you could simply read it, and take it at face value, if that's not too much to ask of you.

Quote from: SeanJohnson
I dont [sic] see a reference to a March/April 2014 edition of The Recusant anywhere on the internet (including EM's website).

This implies to me there is no such edition.

This post by sea leopard, BTW, is "on the Internet."

Sorry, I don't know what else to say.

.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #22 on:** April 09, 2014, 01:13:02 PM »

Quote from: SeanJohnson

Can you please quote for me any content from this phantom March/April edition?

Can you name me one person who has received this alleged March/April Recusant edition (anonymous internet monikers don't cut it)?

Can you explain why nobody on the planet has referenced any content from this allegedly existing issue?

Oh! Oh! I know!

Nobody on the planet has referenced any content from this allegedly existing issue because it's the same thing that happened the other day when I spent 3 months copying Issue #12 in a thread here on CI and the bulk of the posts have not a single comment from any CI members, INCLUDING SEANJOHNSON, BTW.

The reason is...................(drum roll).............DIABOLICAL DISORIENTATION!! That's why.

It's the thing that +F relies on so as to evoke disinterest from pew-sitters whenever they encounter the objective reasons that they ought to question every word that comes out from between his Swiss lips.

Quote

Can you prove such an edition exists?

Why not?

Because it doesn't?

Or is it now an underground periodical, only distributed to approved persons, and then, only on the condition they not distribute it or quote from it?

What's this, more non-thinking drivel from a mind full of mush?

TheRecusant is not, nor has it ever been, nor will it ever be an "underground periodical," a.k.a., publication.

It is not, has not been, nor will it ever be distributed to approved persons only.

It is not likewise prohibited for anyone to distribute it or quote from it.

Where Are You Getting These Fantasies?

Are you reading the same fiction in the afternoon that +Fellay is????????

Quote

Unlikely.

This heavily implies there is no such edition, and The Recusant is no longer publishing since the February edition.

TheRecusant cannot stop publishing, Sean. That would be utterly impossible. And I can prove it. (So could you, too, actually, but then you'd have to t-h-i-n-k.)

(Let's see if you pay attention this time, when I address you by your first name.)

.

Sienna629 · « **Reply #23 on:** April 09, 2014, 01:57:05 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

.

Most of the loyal regulars, when you present them with facts, they don't want to hear it, and they look for ways of blaming YOU for the message. "You must be anti-Fellay."

.

Interesting that that is how the average Novus Ordo person reacts when you try to explain to them that something bad happened to the Church in the last 40-50 years. In their case, they might substitute something like "anti-Pope xxxx", but they shoot the messenger just the same.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #24 on:** April 09, 2014, 01:57:36 PM »

Update...

Just got a call from a friend who says he is currently printing the latest (as yet undistributed) issue of The Recusant.

Apparently, it is a bit late, but alive and well.