Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: patent
Your intention in using the word "schismatic" was very clear to me and I'm sure to most people reading this thread. You wished to insinuate that what I was saying was schismatic while hiding behind a plea that you weren't being judgemental. The implication that I was going to head off into schism if I kept asking similar questions was very clear and by implying it you wished to cut off any further debate on the issue. Perhaps you should step back a second a re-evaluate whether you are qualified to even be using such a term.
70 posted on 11/02/2001 10:16:48 AM PST by Bellarmine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]


To: Bellarmine
You wished to insinuate that what I was saying was schismatic while hiding behind a plea that you weren't being judgemental.
For someone who is so stridently against my reading anything into your post, you read an awful lot into mine. I’m not hiding behind anything, and my words are clear enough. Anyone reading it can decide what they like about me.

And what you were saying was what schismatics say. That doesn’t make you one, it just means that it is a common statement that schismatics say.

The implication that I was going to head off into schism if I kept asking similar questions was very clear and by implying it you wished to cut off any further debate on the issue.
I hardly wished to cut off debate. If you will note I have posted substance on the issue, I have posted the Church teaching. These things ordinarily further the debate if you are having a discussion with folks who are willing to debate. You have ignored them. If you wish to discuss, please do so.
Perhaps you should step back a second a re-evaluate whether you are qualified to even be using such a term.
Dear sir, to repeat myself, I am quite clearly am not qualified. As I previously said:
It is quite simply not my place.
You are picking a fight where one does not exist. You are doing your dead level best to ignore or twist my words. I am not calling you schismatic.

patent  +AMDG

79 posted on 11/02/2001 10:31:18 AM PST by patent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]

To: Bellarmine
Whoa! That was quite a response. I think you misunderstood my question though.

How about backing up to this response. Going on to personal attack does not serve anyone's interest.

I too misunderstood your question, and my gut reaction was precisely that of Patent. He beat me to it.

For anyone who has gone rounds with schismatic traditionalists, or been one themselves, they can see the schismatic errors are much more seductive and sinister than liberal or protestant errors. Furthermore, schismatic traditionalists are sometimes the most vicious and uncharitable in carrying forward their agenda.

I do not make the error of confusing schismatic traditionalists with Traditionalists. I personally attend the Indult mass as often as possible (but since it is 90 miles away, that is not often.)

But a Catholic faithful to the Magisterium and the Pope will always jump harder against perceived schismatic errors than other errors, simply because they recognize the mortal danger to the faithful these errors pose.

So lets go forward with charity and overlook what seems to you an over reaction, and what appears to us to verge on schismatic error.

80 posted on 11/02/2001 10:34:45 AM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson