Author Topic: Thirty Days in the Boston Seminary (Read 97094 times)

ManuelChavez · « **Reply #420 on:** November 16, 2015, 08:49:00 PM »

Quote from: OHCA

Quote from: Viva Cristo Rey
Quote from: ManuelChavez
Quote from: Viva Cristo Rey
Why Mr. Rogers as profile picture? He wasn't Catholic.

He was a good man, and his calm demeanor, even temper and charitable outlook is rare these days.
. So was St Francis de Sales.

Mr Rodgers was a Protestant minister who never talked about God on his children's program. A lot of the children who watched his program grew up to be atheists and pagans.

St. Francis de Sales is the Catholic patron saint of journalists and writers.

I don't get how Manuel dismisses the notion that the program was a cog in furthering the jew agenda by encouraging passivity and effeminacy--traits in the goyim which make it easier to advance freemason/jew radicalism.

I have seen no evidence to suggest such a hypothesis, nor do I indulge in such unfounded, conspiratorial notions. It is a waste of time and resources.

Chiara · « **Reply #421 on:** November 16, 2015, 09:33:08 PM »

Quote from: ManuelChavez

I will ask as soon as Father Pfeiffer returns.

Manuel, may I ask where Fr. Pfeiffer is/was this past weekend. It seems you mention Fr. Hewko going on mission these past two weeks, but no mention if Fr. Pfeiffer was on a mission circuit, only about him returning later in the week. Is he visiting outside of the US?

Also, the statement coming out of OLMC regarding Ambrose mentions 9 seminarians and brothers, but you mention 7 seminarians and 1 brother. Did someone leave or was this a typo?

SERE · « **Reply #422 on:** November 16, 2015, 09:41:45 PM »

Quote from: Chiara

Quote from: ManuelChavez

I will ask as soon as Father Pfeiffer returns.

Also, the statement coming out of OLMC regarding Ambrose mentions 9 seminarians and brothers, but you mention 7 seminarians and 1 brother. Did someone leave or was this a typo?

Does a 1 or 2 difference really matter, Chiara?

ManuelChavez · « **Reply #423 on:** November 16, 2015, 09:51:23 PM »

Quote from: Chiara

Quote from: ManuelChavez

I will ask as soon as Father Pfeiffer returns.

Manuel, may I ask where Fr. Pfeiffer is/was this past weekend. It seems you mention Fr. Hewko going on mission these past two weeks, but no mention if Fr. Pfeiffer was on a mission circuit, only about him returning later in the week. Is he visiting outside of the US?

Also, the statement coming out of OLMC regarding Ambrose mentions 9 seminarians and brothers, but you mention 7 seminarians and 1 brother. Did someone leave or was this a typo?

The nine included the brother. One seminarian left, which leaves seven seminarians and one brother, for a total of eight.

OHCA · « **Reply #424 on:** November 16, 2015, 10:17:48 PM »

Quote from: ManuelChavez

Quote from: OHCA
Quote from: Viva Cristo Rey
Quote from: ManuelChavez
Quote from: Viva Cristo Rey
Why Mr. Rogers as profile picture? He wasn't Catholic.

He was a good man, and his calm demeanor, even temper and charitable outlook is rare these days.
. So was St Francis de Sales.

Mr Rodgers was a Protestant minister who never talked about God on his children's program. A lot of the children who watched his program grew up to be atheists and pagans.

St. Francis de Sales is the Catholic patron saint of journalists and writers.

I don't get how Manuel dismisses the notion that the program was a cog in furthering the jew agenda by encouraging passivity and effeminacy--traits in the goyim which make it easier to advance freemason/jew radicalism.

I have seen no evidence to suggest such a hypothesis, nor do I indulge in such unfounded, conspiratorial notions. It is a waste of time and resources.

Keep your head up your ass. I'm sure the smell isn't great, but it's safer there in light of your naïveté.

ManuelChavez · « **Reply #425 on:** November 16, 2015, 10:27:56 PM »

Quote from: OHCA

Quote from: ManuelChavez
Quote from: OHCA
Quote from: Viva Cristo Rey
Quote from: ManuelChavez
Quote from: Viva Cristo Rey
Why Mr. Rogers as profile picture? He wasn't Catholic.

He was a good man, and his calm demeanor, even temper and charitable outlook is rare these days.
. So was St Francis de Sales.

Mr Rodgers was a Protestant minister who never talked about God on his children's program. A lot of the children who watched his program grew up to be atheists and pagans.

St. Francis de Sales is the Catholic patron saint of journalists and writers.

I don't get how Manuel dismisses the notion that the program was a cog in furthering the jew agenda by encouraging passivity and effeminacy--traits in the goyim which make it easier to advance freemason/jew radicalism.

I have seen no evidence to suggest such a hypothesis, nor do I indulge in such unfounded, conspiratorial notions. It is a waste of time and resources.

Keep your head up your ass. I'm sure the smell isn't great, but it's safer there in light of your naïveté.

Ad hominem attacks are not legitimate debate tactics. These words exhibit an immaturity which is unbecoming of a traditional Catholic.

Above all, charity.

Viva Cristo Rey · « **Reply #426 on:** November 16, 2015, 10:50:31 PM »

St. Francis de Sales is a Catholic Saint who was holy and gentle. He is also patron saint of journalists and writers.

What is so unbecoming is that?

ManuelChavez · « **Reply #427 on:** November 16, 2015, 10:58:22 PM »

Quote from: Viva Cristo Rey

St. Francis de Sales is a Catholic Saint who was holy and gentle. He is also patron saint of journalists and writers.

What is so unbecoming is that?

What is unbecoming is OHCA's uncharitable and vulgar writing.

Saint Francis de Sales is a good Saint.

Centroamerica · « **Reply #428 on:** November 17, 2015, 06:46:10 AM »

Quote from: Chiara

Quote from: ManuelChavez

I will ask as soon as Father Pfeiffer returns.

Manuel, may I ask where Fr. Pfeiffer is/was this past weekend. It seems you mention Fr. Hewko going on mission these past two weeks, but no mention if Fr. Pfeiffer was on a mission circuit, only about him returning later in the week. Is he visiting outside of the US?

Also, the statement coming out of OLMC regarding Ambrose mentions 9 seminarians and brothers, but you mention 7 seminarians and 1 brother. Did someone leave or was this a typo?

This is a valid question. I don't see why anybody would down-thumb it. Where has Fr. Pfeiffer been? A good follow up question is if he still communicates with Ambrose. I find it extremely hard to believe that he hasn't communicated with him since stating that they will not have him in Boston.

ultrarigorist · « **Reply #429 on:** November 17, 2015, 07:00:40 AM »

Quote from: Centroamerica

Quote from: Chiara
Quote from: ManuelChavez

I will ask as soon as Father Pfeiffer returns.

Manuel, may I ask where Fr. Pfeiffer is/was this past weekend. It seems you mention Fr. Hewko going on mission these past two weeks, but no mention if Fr. Pfeiffer was on a mission circuit, only about him returning later in the week. Is he visiting outside of the US?

Also, the statement coming out of OLMC regarding Ambrose mentions 9 seminarians and brothers, but you mention 7 seminarians and 1 brother. Did someone leave or was this a typo?

This is a valid question. I don't see why anybody would down-thumb it. Where has Fr. Pfeiffer been? A good follow up question is if he still communicates with Ambrose. I find it extremely hard to believe that he hasn't communicated with him since stating that they will not have him in Boston.

Yes, very good questions which Manuel should have answered promptly. Fr. Pfeiffer himself has said he does everything in the open, so Manuel should understand by this that he needs to be responding to all without hesitation, and without "clearing it first".

OHCA · « **Reply #430 on:** November 17, 2015, 11:28:51 AM »

Quote from: ManuelChavez

Quote from: OHCA
Quote from: ManuelChavez
Quote from: OHCA
Quote from: Viva Cristo Rey
Quote from: ManuelChavez
Quote from: Viva Cristo Rey
Why Mr. Rogers as profile picture? He wasn't Catholic.

He was a good man, and his calm demeanor, even temper and charitable outlook is rare these days.
. So was St Francis de Sales.

Mr Rodgers was a Protestant minister who never talked about God on his children's program. A lot of the children who watched his program grew up to be atheists and pagans.

St. Francis de Sales is the Catholic patron saint of journalists and writers.

I don't get how Manuel dismisses the notion that the program was a cog in furthering the jew agenda by encouraging passivity and effeminacy--traits in the goyim which make it easier to advance freemason/jew radicalism.

I have seen no evidence to suggest such a hypothesis, nor do I indulge in such unfounded, conspiratorial notions. It is a waste of time and resources.

Keep your head up your ass. I'm sure the smell isn't great, but it's safer there in light of your naïveté.

Ad hominem attacks are not legitimate debate tactics. These words exhibit an immaturity which is unbecoming of a traditional Catholic.

Above all, charity.

I WILL NOT BE RESTRAINED BY YOUR JEW-TAUGHT "LEGITIMATE DEBATE TACTICS!!!" AD HOMINEM = CONSIDER THE SOURCE--THE LAST THING PIECE OF $#!+ WEASELS SUCH AS YOU WANT ANYBODY TO DO!!!

ManuelChavez · « **Reply #431 on:** November 17, 2015, 11:49:55 AM »

Quote from: OHCA

Quote from: ManuelChavez
Quote from: OHCA
Quote from: ManuelChavez
Quote from: OHCA
Quote from: Viva Cristo Rey
Quote from: ManuelChavez
Quote from: Viva Cristo Rey
Why Mr. Rogers as profile picture? He wasn't Catholic.

He was a good man, and his calm demeanor, even temper and charitable outlook is rare these days.
. So was St Francis de Sales.

Mr Rodgers was a Protestant minister who never talked about God on his children's program. A lot of the children who watched his program grew up to be atheists and pagans.

St. Francis de Sales is the Catholic patron saint of journalists and writers.

I don't get how Manuel dismisses the notion that the program was a cog in furthering the jew agenda by encouraging passivity and effeminacy--traits in the goyim which make it easier to advance freemason/jew radicalism.

I have seen no evidence to suggest such a hypothesis, nor do I indulge in such unfounded, conspiratorial notions. It is a waste of time and resources.

Keep your head up your ass. I'm sure the smell isn't great, but it's safer there in light of your naïveté.

Ad hominem attacks are not legitimate debate tactics. These words exhibit an immaturity which is unbecoming of a traditional Catholic.

Above all, charity.

I WILL NOT BE RESTRAINED BY YOUR JEW-TAUGHT "LEGITIMATE DEBATE TACTICS!!!" AD HOMINEM = CONSIDER THE SOURCE--THE LAST THING PIECE OF $#!+ WEASELS SUCH AS YOU WANT ANYBODY TO DO!!!

Please calm down. This is unnecessary.

Centroamerica · « **Reply #432 on:** November 17, 2015, 12:06:52 PM »

I think people should take it easy on manuel. Don't misunderstand me, but some of the comments are drifting off from the focus, preserving the Faith. Being overly antagonistic with Manuel is only going to confirm him further in his blind support for the two priests in Kentucky. Listen to Fr. Pfeiffer speak: They are attacking us and that is how we know that we are right. We are doing what God wants and the devil attacks us. (paraphrase)

My opinion is that the best thing to do is let it pass. Pray for them. And try as best as possible to be charitable to them. True charity is instructing the ignorant, but aggressively it isn't working. Give Manuel a break, and hope that God gives him the light to see his way out of Kentucky.

Croixalist · « **Reply #433 on:** November 17, 2015, 04:34:56 PM »

On his twenty-fourth day at Boston, Manuel did send to me...

Twenty-four cheesy curds,
Twenty-three french fries,
Twenty-two layer cakes,
Twenty-one crumbs in a fudge tray!
Twenty twitching eyelids,
Nineteen nervous gnashers,
Eighteen failed exorcisms,
Seventeen sordid scandals,
Sixteen shortchanged students,
Fifteen fractious confreres,
Fourteen faked photo albums,
Thirteen thwarted theories,
Twelve devils delving,
Eleven Pablos preaching,
Ten leaps of logic,
Nine loan sharks leering,
Eight minds a-melting,
Seven shills a-shilling,
Six priests vacating,
Five folding chairs!
Four scolding words,
Three henchmen,
Two troubled tweets,
and a Pfeiffer in a fig tree!

OHCA · « **Reply #434 on:** November 17, 2015, 04:51:45 PM »

Quote from: ManuelChavez

Quote from: OHCA
I don't get how Manuel dismisses the notion that the program was a cog in furthering the jew agenda by encouraging passivity and effeminacy--traits in the goyim which make it easier to advance freemason/jew radicalism.

I have seen no evidence to suggest such a hypothesis, nor do I indulge in such unfounded, conspiratorial notions. It is a waste of time and resources.

Keep your head up your ass. I'm sure the smell isn't great, but it's safer there in light of your naïveté.[/quote]

Ad hominem attacks are not legitimate debate tactics. These words exhibit an immaturity which is unbecoming of a traditional Catholic.

Above all, charity.[/quote]

I WILL NOT BE RESTRAINED BY YOUR JEW-TAUGHT "LEGITIMATE DEBATE TACTICS!!!" AD HOMINEM = CONSIDER THE SOURCE--THE LAST THING PIECE OF $#!+ WEASELS SUCH AS YOU WANT ANYBODY TO DO!!![/quote]

Please calm down. This is unnecessary. [/quote]

Whatever you say Mr. Rogers.