Posted on 10/17/2004 3:32:54 PM PDT by NYer
Again, what am I wiggling out of? If you can't even state what it is. State what it is. If you can't deliver, by all means, keep saying wiggle wiggle. It's pretty goofy and get a kick out of it.
"In #50 you eagerly butted into a conversation I was having with sevry to inform me and everyone else that "he was making complete sense"."
I like how you add the embellishment "eagerly". "Butting in" is gratuitous as well, figuring as how this a public forum and all.
"Well thanks."
You're quite welcome. Anytime. Just ask. Heck, you may not even have to.
"In the light of his subsequent posts, I want to know whether you still have the same eagerness to be his cheerleader?"
Well you see, marshmallow, I never propose to be anyone's cheerleader. Not even my own. I suppose I just don't care about things like that. I merely stated that I didn't buy your take on how sevry had lost confidence in the Holy Ghost. I still don't. I think it's a bad judgment call on your part to infer such a thing; it's bad method in conversation.
And at this point, I still see nothing wrong with anything sevry has said.
If you believe something to be wrong with it, then say what it is. If you can't, I'll be trying your "wiggle wiggle" device out right back at you.
"You voluntarily jumped on his bandwagon. Are you still on it or have you jumped off?"
I can't describe the relief I feel and discovering that it wasn't unvoluntary. Could you imagine what it would be like if it were unvoluntary? lol. At any rate, it's not a bandwagon I jumped on, imho. I just read his/her statements, and said hey, I don't see anything objectionable in them.
"It isn't a hard question. Do the posts which I've enumerated several times still make "complete sense" to you?"
I'm going to make you ask me a question about my opinion on a particular topic. You're going to state the question clearly and concisely. Then I'm going to answer the question for you, both clearly, and precisely. What more could you possibly ask for. See, I'm not really into this thing about making assumptions about people. Nor am I into leaning on other people to determine the Catholic Truth for me. Heck, I've got most all the pertinent documents of the Church at my disposal. What more do I need, eh.
Is there some way in which I, or sevry, has stated something which is in error? If so, then please state what it is, and back up your claim.
If not... well then, wiggle wiggly wiggle.
I guess the idea that ANYONE would suggest JP II, in the pantheon of Popes, might be considered by those in future as - WORST POPE EVER! - comes as a shock your 'reformed' system. You have no words. You have no . . thoughts. You are sweating, and uncomfortable, and unable to speak?
Is that why you haven't said much, since then?
I knew you couldn't give a straight answer.
Contrast your unwillingness to give an opinion on sevry's recent posts when invited, with your total willingness to jump into our conversation and give an opinion on his earlier posts when uninvited.
Next time you see what you believe to be a good opportunity to make some easy capital at the expense of someone with whom you frequently cross swords by piggy-backing onto someone else's argument, pause and think.
I know my posts make your keyboard fingers itch, but you don't really want to join the "JPII is the worst Pope in history" club, do you?
You da man.
Not to worry. pascendi will lend you an ear and bat around a few ideas with you. He's on your wavelength.
You couldn't ask a straight question.
"Contrast your unwillingness to give an opinion on sevry's recent posts when invited, with your total willingness to jump into our conversation and give an opinion on his earlier posts when uninvited."
I contrasted them. I don't see a problem. Is there one?
"Next time you see what you believe to be a good opportunity to make some easy capital at the expense of someone with whom you frequently cross swords by piggy-backing onto someone else's argument, pause and think."
I'll continue to do as I see fit. Perhaps you are taking this far too personally. At any rate, I don't piggy back. That's best left to those who approach things subjectively with their feelings doing the thinking. And stuff.
"I know my posts make your keyboard fingers itch, but you don't really want to join the "JPII is the worst Pope in history" club, do you?"
You know this? lol. You also know that sevry has lost confidence in the Holy Ghost. You know lots of stuff.
Was I offered membership?
No.
Is there such a club?
No.
Do you want me to pretend there is such a club, and an opposing club called "JPII is John Paul the Great"?
Seems like it. But that's all a subjective, useless sort of thinking. I thought you wanted me to pause and think.
Maybe you should work to get this thread back on topic.
Yeah, you just ran out of things to say. But I still say, in future, it's very likely that among all the Popes who have lived, and made mistakes, that JP II will be remembered as - WORST POPE EVER! You prefer that weren't true, for reasons you can't explain. But I suspect if you compared and contrasted the Popes of history to JP II, you might come to the same conclusion. Things today are just that lousy in the institutional church. Or - maybe - you know that, and you count it a victory against Virtue? Just a question, you know.
As a result of this I'd like to apologize to all for my part in trashing this thread.
Not one of my better days.
Sorry.
Pardon also my sharp style.
I rather enjoyed your participation on this thread. Once again, the rad trad kookiness and cowardice has been exposed. Kudos.
I'm going to need your help as to how I should best go about the process of extracting myself from my miserable condition.
How should I begin? What should I do? Where I do I go from here? I need your help.
Any suggestions?
Is the current pope the worst ever?
Is the current pope the worst ever?
I don't know.
Is this part of my therapy? Should I be laying down on the couch for this?
Excellent. You confronted a topic head-on, without the perambulations that you correctly identified as the cowardice I was refering to. My kookiness charge wasn't applicable to you....necessarily....this time. So, if you are laying on a couch, feel free to get up. Ite, missae est.
At any rate though, what I was getting at is that in the course of this particular session, I managed to get somebody to ask me a straight question. You "confronted a topic head-on", so to speak.
And I answered. Truthfully. Very interesting.
But wait, I have a new complaint: "So, if you are laying on a couch, feel free to get up. Ite, missae est.".
I'm not valid matter, so nothing happened.
He can still turn everything around. Don't give up hope.
I picked that particular link only because the picture is large enough to read the text on it; there's a different favorite supplier that I would personally go with when purchasing. But I like on the cover how it says ...for a just peace. Not for justice and peace. A little reflection makes what seems a negligible difference into a vast distinction. It's kind of like that old good will to men vs. men of good will disparity.
The book is excellent for anyone who really wants to take this whole thread seriously.
Anyways, in that book there's a prayer for the pope. It goes like this:
O God, the Shepherd and Ruler of all the faithful, look down with favor upon Thy servant, N, whom Thou hast deigned to appoint the supreme pastor of Thy Church, grant we beseech Thee that both his word and example may benefit those over whom he has been placed, so that together with the flock entrusted to him, he may attain life everlasting. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.
Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, pour in richest fullness thy blessings upon Holy Church, the Pope, and all the clergy; grant perseverance to the just, conversion to the sinners; enlighten the unbelievers; bless our relatives, friends, and benefactors; assist the dying; deliver the souls in purgatory; and extend over all hearts the gentle dominion of Thy love.
Alright. As you well know, many Catholics seem to be under the obstinate impression that the opposite of much of what's prayed for here can't actually happen. Now if that's the case... what good is the prayer for? Why ever would anyone ask for such things. But of course some people still do, and they're right in doing so. More than ever.
Sometimes I wonder what's worse as far as assumptions are concerned. Assuming the worst, such as what might be found amidst calumny and slander and so forth... or assuming holiness in someone. Anyone. At times I am inclined to believe the latter to be the far more dangerous at least in the popular arena. If you know what I mean.
I know what you mean. I do have that book around here somewhere. I will dig it out. Thanks for the idea.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.