[vladimir998]

You wrote:

“And his “Deathbed conversion”?”

I never said that was there.

“When you find any evidence it is a fact let us know. After all you made the claim.”

I didn’t make it about the priest Fr. Z mentioned. You do realize that evidence will almost always be a man’s word because it was done along with CONFESSION and no good priest is interested in practicing sigilism. Thus, it will simply have to stand uncontested unless you have some compelling evidence to the contrary. Believe it or don’t believe it. What does it matter to you whether you believe it or not?

[OLD REGGIE]

I didn’t make it about the priest Fr. Z mentioned. You do realize that evidence will almost always be a man’s word because it was done along with CONFESSION and no good priest is interested in practicing sigilism. Thus, it will simply have to stand uncontested unless you have some compelling evidence to the contrary. Believe it or don’t believe it. What does it matter to you whether you believe it or not?

Are you suggesting the Priest violated his office by passing the information to his spy? Shame, shame!

[OLD REGGIE]

You wrote:

“And his “Deathbed conversion”?”

I never said that was there.

“When you find any evidence it is a fact let us know. After all you made the claim.”

I didn’t make it about the priest Fr. Z mentioned. You do realize that evidence will almost always be a man’s word because it was done along with CONFESSION and no good priest is interested in practicing sigilism. Thus, it will simply have to stand uncontested unless you have some compelling evidence to the contrary. Believe it or don’t believe it. What does it matter to you whether you believe it or not?

No matter. You defended the claim. (See post # 282)

The "Deathbed" reference