Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2018 6:59:15 GMT
EM, why do you conflate everything?!! Read it again and the whole context it was written in! I did. The reference of "intention" was clearly referring to the priest's act of consecrating the Holy Eucharist to effect the sacrament whereas it is the faithful who effect the other sacraments. Proves again you like to twist and set traps for others in some strange conscience or unconscienced agenda to construe a set of words, change its context, and moralize ad nauseam over why you are an 'authority' to be reckoned with. Please take your circular arguments elsewhere. As I said, I am not interested. Hold on. What about the Sacrament of Baptism, for example? Doesn't the priest effect the sacrament as well by his "intention"? Read EM, read! Before you spout off with your moral indignation. A pagan can give the sacrament as long as it is in intention for what the Church does. Read! It is only 10 posts above your own. It is not hard...coming from the Catechism and Catholic Encyclopedia!
Calm down and read everything in complete context - first!
Can someone else help this person? He doesn't read or listen to anything!
|
|
|
Post by Fidelis on Oct 1, 2018 7:36:59 GMT
A pagan can validly baptise in danger of death, but in the case of +Williamson, the Kentucky Fathers are under no grave obligation to ordain Priests. They are also adding to the confusion since they say to avoid the false Resistance while at the same time writing to him, seeking his ministerial services instead of his conversion. God will provide a Bishop according to His Heart. The keeping of the Faith is paramount and must be sought even above the Sacraments.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2018 13:00:57 GMT
Hold on. What about the Sacrament of Baptism, for example? Doesn't the priest effect the sacrament as well by his "intention"? Read EM, read! Before you spout off with your moral indignation. A pagan can give the sacrament as long as it is in intention for what the Church does. Read! It is only 10 posts above your own. It is not hard...coming from the Catechism and Catholic Encyclopedia!
Calm down and read everything in complete context - first!
Can someone else help this person? He doesn't read or listen to anything!
Okay, then. Thank you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2018 13:12:55 GMT
EM, it is the very context of your explicit attacks. But that will not change anything in your mind what anyone else says. You will believe in nothing beyond your own nuanced revelations even if it deflects from the whole. Sad. Perhaps you can have the decency to link your assertion giving the proper context as I did for you. thecatacombs.org/post/2952/thread It is noticed you did not post your self indulgence where it belongs in the proper titled thread thus to remove its context to control your own narration. Not buying it. Please go elsewhere for your tricks, CI maybe, or did they ban you for the same tactics you do here?
Could you please end your turf war. I'd be happy to talk about the rights of God instead of your moral rights all the time?
For your information, I wrote my reply in this thread because the other thread is locked. Instead of attributing a bad motive, perhaps you should pay closer attention first. Speaking about not giving the proper context, how about you directly misquoting me. You quoted me as writing the following: 1) "The SSPX-mc priests accept the errors of Bishop Williamson to confer service from him and/or other bishops". 2) "The priests of OLMC have no "moral" obligation to start a seminary." I see that six hours ago you edited your post to remove the quotes around the two statements above. What don't you admit that you misquoted me rather than secretly editing the post?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2018 14:30:46 GMT
Poor you Em, flipping the script?! Your tactic is seen to flagrantly avoid your deliberate elephant in the body of your explicit attack against us saying something did not exist when in the very thread it does. Just like all of your other "righteous" rants over the weekend. That's what communist do. What a waste of time! Ranting about quoting you is your invention not mine to side tract your offense. It is clear I "referred" to what you said not quoted. You know that just like in the #1 was neither a "direct" quote to your exact words, yet you do not rant issue on that -do you- because it references the same thing. You seek only to attack and throw it off in stupid spin. I removed the symbol as a "highlight" what you were saying because once again, you use any distraction to make it into a "toy" and "alarm bells" of moral righteousness while the whole time avoiding your flagrant conflated attack on others in your other articles and posts. Seems to be a pattern with you.
EM, did you notice the symbol is used in english sentences many other ways to "highlight" words? So its not all about you is it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2018 14:44:41 GMT
Poor you Em, flipping the script?! Your tactic is seen to flagrantly avoid your deliberate elephant in the body of your explicit attack against us saying something did not exist when in the very thread it does. Just like all of your other "righteous" rants over the weekend. That's what communist do. What a waste of time! Ranting about quoting you is your invention not mine to side tract your offense. It is clear I "referred" to what you said not quoted. You know that just like in the #1 was neither a "direct" quote to your exact words, yet you do not rant issue on that -do you- because it references the same thing. You seek only to attack and throw it off in stupid spin. I removed the symbol as a "highlight" what you were saying because once again, you use any distraction to make it into a "toy" and "alarm bells" of moral righteousness while the whole time avoiding your flagrant conflated attack on others in your other articles and posts. Seems to be a pattern with you.
EM, did you notice the symbol is used in english sentences many other ways to "highlight" words? So its not all about you is it?
You did not highlight certain words with the open and end quotes. You used the open and end quotes on a whole statement. Your removal of them several hours ago shows that you shouldn't have done so if you didn't mean to directly quote me. But you know what? I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you quoting a whole statement was not meant to directly quote me. I still, however, have this challenge for you: Your post still states the following (and this is a direct quote from your post) that you claim forms one of points: "The SSPX-mc priests accept the errors of Bishop Williamson to confer service from him and/or other bishops." Where in my website post did I state that the SSPX-mc priests (i.e., Kentucky Fathers) accept the errors of Bishop Williamson in order to receive the sacraments from him?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2018 14:49:48 GMT
A pagan can validly baptise in danger of death, but in the case of +Williamson, the Kentucky Fathers are under no grave obligation to ordain Priests. They are also adding to the confusion since they say to avoid the false Resistance while at the same time writing to him, seeking his ministerial services instead of his conversion. God will provide a Bishop according to His Heart. The keeping of the Faith is paramount and must be sought even above the Sacraments. Fidelis, you have two subjects. Please read the catechism. Baptism is the only sacrament that can be done by anyone; not just in danger of death. If you are referring to something different to what is being said, like, where one should receive baptism, of course it is in the House of God by priests to receive the full ceremony. If if not able to, seek another catholic, if not, others can do it by request in danger of death.
Please read what is written, ministers need to do what the church does. It is the Church that is in obligation to ordain priests and priests and bishops must conform to that. OLMC is only doing what the Church does and form souls in this grave crisis. This is not a personal religion or a cult for laity looking to pick and choose what can or cannot be done in this grave crisis. This goes beyond the simple catechism...into deeper annuls of Chruch teaching. They are embodied in the very Church to survive - called Supplied jurisdiction. Anything that is not understood or not believed, please go talk to a priest.
On this topic trying to separate the priests to help build the church when bishops are not, it is noticed others use this as a way to divide the priest from their mission. Even to say there is no emergency (like modern rome) and "no need to do this". If they only looked outside of their own bias and see God for who he is and His Church is more encompassing than the limit small mortals what to believe.
For others to spout all over the internet "I do not believe" is lame. Knock, seek, and it shall be opened unless there is a pre-disposition not to believe like the pharisees but say otherwise. As you know, no one can help such individuals.
|
|
|
Post by Fidelis on Oct 1, 2018 17:15:02 GMT
Would you not be scandalised if the OLMC request Bishop Fellay to ordain the seminarians without denouncing his conciliar errors? If so, then how is Bishop Williamson any different?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2018 18:05:02 GMT
EM, to your comment about a thread being "locked" I have no idea about it and do not know why. I can only imagine it is perhaps because of all your degenerative riding having no progress. I certainly did not see it when I had called you out on it nor did you allude to any such thing. Can this tit for tat nonsense go away? This is all brought on because you choose not to read something before you shoot off to just to attack someone publicly and start a "moral fight". Do you not have anything better to do? I do.
"Challenge and more challenges"! Really? It is noticed by some all's you do is hang around on the internet looking for a moral fight. I'm not interested. Go somewhere else. Facts are you associate error to the fathers lately in every turn, because you said so, and because they do not respond to you (wonder why) you act as a pharisee needing everything to be black and white "proved" to you. Common sense and the spirit of God no longer enlighten you? Your fake title and associating the fathers, who ask BW to act like a bishop and give the church service, is drawing a conclusion they are to be "red lighted"? Please, stop the charades. Your attacks are all about equating error to someone where there is none; but based on your "authority" you said so. Alls you do is quibble! Please, do not take my good will to help others on this public forum as a weakness having to answer your constant flagrant mis-contextes because no one else is. It is always the same thing. Can it stop?
I would rather talk about the beauty of God and his sanctification in society than your squabbles.
Admin, any help for him than locking threads behind him?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2018 18:09:00 GMT
EM, to your comment about a thread being "locked" I have no idea about it and do not know why. I can only imagine it is perhaps because of all your degenerative riding having no progress. I certainly did not see it when I had called you out on it nor did you allude to any such thing. Can this tit for tat nonsense go away? This is all brought on because you choose not to read something before you shoot off to just to attack someone publicly and start a "moral fight". Do you not have anything better to do? I do.
"Challenge and more challenges"! Really? It is noticed by some all's you do is hang around on the internet looking for a moral fight. I'm not interested. Go somewhere else. Facts are you associate error to the fathers lately in every turn, because you said so, and because they do not respond to you (wonder why) you act as a pharisee needing everything to be black and white "proved" to you. Common sense and the spirit of God does no no longer enlighten you? Your attacks are all about equating error to someone where there is none; but based on your "authority" you said so. Alls you do is quibble! Please, do not take my good will to help others on this public forum as a weakness having to answer your constant flagrant mis-contextes because no one else is. It is always the same thing. Can it stop?
I would rather talk about the beauty of God and his sanctification in society than your squabbles.
Admin, any help for him than locking threads behind him?
Where in my website post did I state that the SSPX-mc priests (i.e., Kentucky Fathers) accept the errors of Bishop Williamson in order to receive the sacraments from him?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2018 18:13:45 GMT
Read again, the ink is still wet fixing the typos and editions. You follow me around like a shadow...hopefully you can learn peace as I do.
I'm done with you. I will not longer respond to your quibbles. Do not take my silence as a "moral defeat". If you feel that way, have at it, that to is wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2018 18:16:01 GMT
Read again, the ink is still wet fixing the typos and editions. You follow me around like a shadow...hopefully you can learn peace as I do. Where in my website post did I state that the SSPX-mc priests (i.e., Kentucky Fathers) accept the errors of Bishop Williamson in order to receive the sacraments from him?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2018 18:24:06 GMT
Would you not be scandalised if the OLMC request Bishop Fellay to ordain the seminarians without denouncing his conciliar errors? If so, then how is Bishop Williamson any different? Fidelis, you too are not reading anything being said. I do not know how many times we need to say the same thing. All the bishops in error must remove the error to give service to the Church. The fathers have said the same! Listen to their sermons! Better, ask the priests instead of saying the opposite. It is EM and his new friends on CM that are insighting this violence and division typical of socialist catholics who always try to ferment a wedge of anger and hostility. Loss of peace of soul is evident by want of society to loose its peace too.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 1, 2018 18:36:59 GMT
Would you not be scandalised if the OLMC request Bishop Fellay to ordain the seminarians without denouncing his conciliar errors? If so, then how is Bishop Williamson any different? Fidelis, you too are not reading anything being said. I do not know how many times we need to say the same thing. All the bishops in error must remove the error to give service to the Church. The fathers have said the same! Listen to their sermons! Better, ask the priests instead of saying the opposite. It is EM and his new friends on CM that are insighting this violence and division typical of socialist catholics who always try to ferment a wedge of anger and hostility. Loss of peace of soul is evident by want of society to loose its peace too.
Machabees, you have been rather hostile in your answers here. Please keep more charity in your posts.
|
|