John Paul II — The Face of Love

e3mil.com ^ | 8/6/02 | James Bemis

[Catholicguy]

the early Jesuit missionaries and their methods

Many public libraries have "The Jesuit Relations." They make fanytastic reading. Talk about Love of Christ combined with courage

[sitetest]

Dear ultima ratio,

I notice that you are still going on and on here.

I would have thought you might have the grace to desist, at least on the thread where you were found to post a quote created entirely out of thin air.

I'm wondering whether you are willing to clear up the matter regarding the "quote" that you provided from Fr. Abbott?

Here is what you posted in #392:

"Here is a recent text which makes the point I was making: 'In disobedience to the command of Paul VI, the Preliminary Note was demoted to the status of an addendum to Lumen Gentium in published editions of Council documents.' (Walter M. Abbott, S.J., ed. The Documents of Vatican II, New York, America Press, p. 98.)"

This "quote" doesn't exist on page 98 of The Documents of Vatican II, New York, America Press.

By the way, it isn't a recent book, either. It was published in 1966.

I have the book, and in post #394, I typed the text of the entire footnote from which you claim to be posting, from the same page in the same edition of the same book by the same author and the same publishing house. Your "quote" isn't taken out of context, this time. It's non-existent (at least on the page of the book that you cite).

I'm having a hard time figuring out where your quote came from. Could you enlighten us?

Thank you,

sitetest

[sitetest]

Dear Catholicguy,

Thanks, but the credit goes to our 70-year-young deacon.

Who serves exclusively at the Mass of Pope Paul VI.

sitetest

[american colleen]

Although we are not "real Catholics" according to some posting from the SSPX side, I believe we need to devote a rosary to those adhering to the SSPX and ask the Blessed Mother that the scales be removed from their eyes, with the Grace of God. It saddens me that the SSPX is no more in unison with the Catholic magesterium than the Orthodox are.

[sitetest]

Dear american colleen,

I had been remembering ultima ratio in my daily Rosary, but your suggestion has merit. I wonder how many would be interested in try to do this together in some virtual way.

sitetest

[american colleen]

I remember them as well. I'm in if we organize in a "virtual" way, but I'm off for the week starting later on today.

[ultima ratio]

Gladly. I will admit my hasty scholarship is sloppy sometimes. Meanwhile you might get up to snuff on the background to the Note--which was issued to prevent declarations opposed to the historic teachings of the Church. The Note ought not to have been published as an adendum to Lumen Gentium--since the Pope himself intended it to apply to the entire Council.

[Catholicguy]

I'm having a hard time figuring out where your quote came from.

LOL I don't think ultima likes being asked to produce evidence to back-up his many assertions. I too am amased he continues banging away as the more he talks the less credibility he has because he is repeatedly shown to have been in error - if not outright fabricating.

Perhaps I should just say his lamentations about the fall of Econe are accompanied by his mournful violin which is purfled with unsubstantiated fabrications. (I am now in my kinder and gentler stage).

[Land of the Irish]

I think the false religion of the sspx should have been invited also :)

If invited, I'm sure they would have declined.

The SSPX, IMHO, still obeys the First Commandment. Did the infallible VC II absolve you neo-cons from this or any other Commandment? Moving the tabernacle to make room for a statue of buddha, removing crucifix's, ... "Though shall not put false gods before me".

[Catholicguy]

I have the book, and in post #394, I typed the text of the entire footnote from which you claim to be posting, from the same page in the same edition of the same book by the same author and the same publishing house. Your "quote" isn't taken out of context, this time. It's non-existent (at least on the page of the book that you cite).

I'm having a hard time figuring out where your quote came from. Could you enlighten us?

Please answer sitetest's question

[Catholicguy]

I had been remembering ultima ratio in my daily Rosary, but your suggestion has merit. I wonder how many would be interested in try to do this together in some virtual way

That is also in my daily rosary intentions. You know, I keep adding so many intentions that I am thinking of just saying "My usual intentions, plus this new one..." :)

[sitetest]

Dear ultima ratio,

"Gladly. I will admit my hasty scholarship is sloppy sometimes."

Hasty scholarship? Hasty scholarship?

Ultima, the "quote" that you provided is fiction.

That isn't "hasty scholarship". It's fiction-writing.

"Meanwhile you might get up to snuff on the background to the Note..."

Oh, dear me, the poster of fiction is instructing me what to do! Whatever will I do??

"...--which was issued to prevent declarations opposed to the historic teachings of the Church. The Note ought not to have been published as an adendum to Lumen Gentium--since the Pope himself intended it to apply to the entire Council."

You keep making these assertions, but so far, the only evidence you've provided for it turned out to be false manufactured evidence.

Ultima, at this point in the discussion, you aren't any longer credible. You've been caught palming off (whether wittingly or unwittingly, I can't say) non-existent quotes to support your arguments. Your arguments are in tatters, and I, for one, no longer believe a word you say.

I doubt many others believe you much anymore, either. You are exposed as having offered false evidence in support of what you say.

The only reason why some of us are still conversing with you is because we know that a soul caught up in such tactics to defend the indefensible is in need of help. We are praying for you.

But after this, no one has any obligation to take seriously any assertion of fact that you offer. No one must do any research to find out that once again, you are misquoting, misrepresenting, or just making it up out of whole cloth.

You are in my prayers,

sitetest

[ultima ratio]

Here is the source: The Great Facade, p. 35, note 32. Check it out.

[Catholicguy]

If invited, I'm sure they would have declined.

Agreed. Refusal of the Pope is the sine qua non of a schismatic cabal

[Catholicguy]

Here is the source: The Great Facade, p. 35, note 32. Check it out

LMAO This is the book that "proves" the Pope is a Neo-Catholic blah, blah, blah. Thanks for proving it is fit for starting charcoal and not much else.

Tell us ultima, do Ferrara and Woods actually believe this total unChristian insanity?"In our view a possible future declaration of a sede vacante ('the period of time when the Apostolic See is empty, as a consequence of the heresy of the Pope,' CFN 7/2000) would take place automatically when the Church would become aware of the gravity of the present day errors and who is responsible for them." ---We Resist The Pope To His Face, V.3 Tradition in Action 2000

You have got to STOP supporting this evil

[Catholicguy]

Hasty scholarship? Hasty scholarship?

LOL You are right, but whenever I read something formulated that way, I immediately hear The Baltimore Colts Coach saying "Playoffs...Playoffs?"

Sorry..my mind is warped :)

[sitetest]

Dear ultima ratio,

So, you are quoting a book that quotes a book? That's normally thought of as poor scholarship, not hasty scholarship.

Since I'm citing my nearly-40 year old weathered original copy of the book in question, we know which one is right, and which one is wrong. Your "quote", cited by you from The Great Facade, is false. Mine comes directly from the work in question.

If you are accurately quoting The Great Facade, then we know its authors have manufactured the quote, and have defamed Fr. Abbott, as well as Secretary General Archbishop Felici.

Your testimony, of course, doesn't support the validity of the quote. It supports the falsity of The Great Facade. I hadn't yet read this book, but now that I know that the authors feel free to manufacture quotes, and to reference them!!, I don't think that I'm any longer under any obligation to take their work seriously.

sitetest

[sitetest]

Dear Catholicguy,

You know that I try to give people every benefit of the doubt. How could I, in my own sins, refuse the benefit of the doubt to another?

I'd been reserving judgement on Messrs. Ferrara and Woods, prefering to believe that they at least had good intentions, and were reasonably bright fellows, perhaps making the odd mistake here and there, but trying to do things right, at least as far as they could see the right. And even though I disagree with them as to what is right.

But, my own peculiar upbringing, which included a couple of years in grad school being beaten into submission with the rules of scholarship, gives me a special horror for the manufacture of quotes by authors.

I was taught that this is nothing less than the falsification of history, which is a crime of incalculable proportions. Look at how poor ultima ratio was sucked into their lie. Look at how this lie has led him further astray down the road of schism, into believing lies about the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, and into believing that which is antithetical to Catholic faith - that an Ecumenical Council could teach error.

There are few things as detestable in a published writer as manufacturing quotes out of whole cloth.

I am disgusted to think that these two "men" did this. I may go find a copy of the book just to verify that they committed such an enormity.

Darn. Now I'll have to add Messrs. Ferrara and Woods to my Rosary intention list, just to preserve some iota of charity towards them in my own soul.

sitetest

[Land of the Irish]

"Refusal of the Pope...". You've got a big problem with infallibility, Paul resisted Peter, yet Paul is declared a saint in the Roman Catholic Church.

Do you still believe in miracles and the wrath of God?http://www.americancatholic.org/News/earthquake/Earthquake_Photos.asp

[ultima ratio]

Here is Atila Sinke Guimaraes on the same subject (In the Murky Waters of Vatican II, pp. 87-89):

"When the schema De Ecclesia, which would come to be Lumen Gentium, was discussed, there was a serious polemic about episcopal collegiality. Many conservatives saw in it an attempt to undermine the monarchic and absolute power of the Sovereign Pontiff. So the Preliminary Note, which safeguards traditional doctrine on the matter, was written. The announcement that precedes the Preliminary Explanatory Note to Lumen Gentium says: 'Taking into account conciliar practice and the pastoral purpose of the present council, the sacred synod has defined as binding on the Church only those matters of faith and morals which it expressly put forth as such.'One could say therefore, that this pronouncement exempts Vatican II as a whole from any dogmatic responsibility and ipso facto does not oblige any faithful to accept it...Therefore, there is imprecision about the limits for applying the criteria mentioned. Is it the Council as a whole or only chapter III of Lumen Gentium? This imprecision will necessarily generate ambiguity in the interpretation of the Announcement and, consequently, in the theological qualification of Vatican II."