- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 10/4/25 at 11:43 pm to Tunasntigers92
quote:
don't understand the question. What's the "root" of blessing a chunk of ice? You obviously have turned a blind eye to just how far the Catholic church has fallen.
Unless the Pope is speaking ex-cathedra or an ecunemical council is declaring something as certain...then what the Pope says in public is no different than any other bishop or priest. People are flawed...the Church is not.
Posted on 10/4/25 at 11:44 pm to L.A.
quote:
It was his participation in a climate change conference, not the blessing per se. Climate change is a religion to Leftists. The pope doesn’t belong there unless he’s a Leftist too.
Do you agree that we as humans should protect God's creation?
Posted on 10/4/25 at 11:45 pm to gaetti15
quote:
performative and political blessings
At least some can look past this, such as yourself, but I can't. Our Lord and savior Jesus Christ wouldn't want a mockery made if the religion, which is exactly what's happening now, we needed a head strong conservative Pope, not some spinless coward like Leo who just wants to placate the Communists.
Posted on 10/4/25 at 11:46 pm to Tunasntigers92
quote:
Our Lord and savior Jesus Christ wouldn't want a mockery made if the religion, which is exactly what's happening now, we needed a head strong conservative Pope, not some spinless coward like Leo who just wants to placate the Communists.
Ok so what do you think of St Peter who denied Christ three times during the beginnings of his passion?
Posted on 10/4/25 at 11:47 pm to gaetti15
quote:
then what the Pope says in public is no different than any other bishop or priest.
You downplaying the role of the pope is not the route you want to take.
Posted on 10/4/25 at 11:49 pm to Tunasntigers92
quote:
You downplaying the role of the pope is not the route you want to take.
Once again the Pope is a person. He only speaks definitively for the church in certain situations, but at the core of all of these discussions is stuff that is definitively Catholic in nature. Things such as protecting God's creation, the dignity of life, etc.
Posted on 10/4/25 at 11:51 pm to gaetti15
quote:
Ok so what do you think of St Peter who denied Christ three times during the beginnings of his passion?
I'm not entertaining anymore of your logical fallacies, nor am I your enemy, I implore you to be a bit more objective and look what's happening to a once great religion, have a nice Sunday.
Posted on 10/4/25 at 11:54 pm to Tunasntigers92
quote:
implore you to be a bit more objective and look what's happening to a once great religion, have a nice Sunday.
I will at mass, which is something that you aren't currently doing and I pray for you that you return to the Church!
Posted on 10/4/25 at 11:55 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
It seems that the importance of the Pope is a something that changes
When a hard-core Anti Catholic who believes that the Pope is the Anti Christ approaches any issue regarding the RCC, that hard core Anti Catholic is going to bring his prejudice and personal animus into the equation. That's what we have with you.
You are not here to learn or argue in a good faith manner at all. You are here to exercise your personal animus against the RCC and the Pope.
You say "it seems to me that the Pope is something that changes" when it really isn't. You say such a thing merely to disparage the RCC, which is really the only reason why you are here on PT.
You say, "seems to me that Catholic Doctrine is changing all of the time" and then you cite the RCC position on the Death Penalty as your proof. Your tactic is a Distortion of the truth but you don't care. You see it as more important to Accuse and Disparage.
I explained how a Church of church leader might read the Gospel and reasonably come to the conclusion that Jesus would oppose the Death Penalty, but, you dismissed that out of hand. "The Death Penalty is Biblical, so the Catholic Church is action NON Biblically by lobbying Governments to not use the Death Penalty". You distorted the whole truth because you thought it more important to Accuse and Disparage than to engage in a thorough review and analysis.
You use the tactics of Satan when you distort and use reductionist methods, and then you Accuse your Catholic theological enemy. Satan is the accuser.
I'm not saying that you are doing the work of Satan or anything like that, but, you have a very very deep rooted personal animus against the Pope and the Catholic Faith. My position is that this personal animus makes it impossible for you to see the other side of the argument.
It's like your personal interpretation of Scripture regarding the Age of the Universe - you are convinced that it is roughly 6,000 years old and no amount of evidence to the contrary can make you consider that you are wrong. You are here to Preach. You aren't here to talk politics or policy.
Another example is your personal conviction of the Doctrine of Double Predestination. You dismiss out of hand the possibility that your interpretation could be wrong, when in fact, it is a minority theological position in all of Christendom.
You are here to Preach. That's why I say that you don't belong here. You didn't even vote in the last POTUS election.
You never talk policy or politics. You are here to Preach and to attack Catholicism. I've observed you for years and this is what I have concluded.
This post was edited on 10/4/25 at 11:58 pm
Posted on 10/4/25 at 11:57 pm to OysterPoBoy
quote:he ain’t lying
“Someone who says ‘I’m against abortion but says I am in favor of the death penalty’ is not really pro-life,”
Posted on 10/4/25 at 11:59 pm to Champagne
quote:
You never talk policy or politics. You are here to Preach and to attack Catholicism. I've observed you for years and this is what I have concluded.
That's kinda the whole point of Protestantism. To Protest the Church.
But you have to give it to him, at least he actually protests pretty well, even though like you said...it is distorted.
Posted on 10/5/25 at 1:14 am to gaetti15
Yes, of course. And I’ll wager $10,000 that I have a smaller carbon footprint than any climate change public figure not named Ed Begley Jr
Posted on 10/5/25 at 3:02 am to OysterPoBoy
The pope is out of touch. The real world is a cruel place Mr pope stop living in dream world
Posted on 10/5/25 at 5:48 am to GumboPot
quote:what is that, like .5% of abortions at best. I’m a Catholic, not hardcore but one non the less for my own reasons, but like most other institutions the hierarchy is corrupted by some twisted reasoning I don’t understand
Ectopic pregnancy is the classic example. Doctors have the good intention of saving the mother’s life but in the process the fetus is killed.
Posted on 10/5/25 at 8:23 am to gaetti15
quote:
People are flawed...the Church is not.
I will posit that the Catholic Church itself is flawed
I will also posit that virtually every other organized religious institution itself is also flawed
I wish it were not so
Posted on 10/5/25 at 9:03 am to gaetti15
The problems that I have with him are:
1) he is here to Preach his own brand of Presybeterianism. There is no room for intellectual process because he will never consider any alternative view.
2) Because he is here to Preach, he subjects us to rote talking points, over and over again. Even when a reasonable alternative is presented, he rejects that and returns to Preaching by repeating a rote talking point.
3) He holds a very strong personal animus towards the Pope and against Catholicism. He will never miss an opportunity to Preach against the RCC here on Political Talk.
4) He uses the same tactics as Satan in his attacks: he distorts facts, he is both Accuser and Judge against the Pope and the RCC. When Bible passages are presented to him that warn against distorting truth, being an Accuser, being judgmental and being vengeful, he dismisses any Bible interpretation that might apply to his behavior.
5) He has never engaged in a thoughtful discussion of secular Politics, Policy or Foreign Policy. He doesn't vote in political elections because of his religious beliefs.
I'm sure he's a great human being in his real life, but, here on PT, he just doesn't belong. People around PT have come to know me as a guy who talks about Religion a lot, but, that is only the case because I try to respond to Foo's constant and unrelenting attacks on the Catholic Church. So that takes up most of my time here on PT.
If these Religious Threads would be either Anchored or deleted that would help the problem.
We talk as much Religion around here as we talk Politics.
1) he is here to Preach his own brand of Presybeterianism. There is no room for intellectual process because he will never consider any alternative view.
2) Because he is here to Preach, he subjects us to rote talking points, over and over again. Even when a reasonable alternative is presented, he rejects that and returns to Preaching by repeating a rote talking point.
3) He holds a very strong personal animus towards the Pope and against Catholicism. He will never miss an opportunity to Preach against the RCC here on Political Talk.
4) He uses the same tactics as Satan in his attacks: he distorts facts, he is both Accuser and Judge against the Pope and the RCC. When Bible passages are presented to him that warn against distorting truth, being an Accuser, being judgmental and being vengeful, he dismisses any Bible interpretation that might apply to his behavior.
5) He has never engaged in a thoughtful discussion of secular Politics, Policy or Foreign Policy. He doesn't vote in political elections because of his religious beliefs.
I'm sure he's a great human being in his real life, but, here on PT, he just doesn't belong. People around PT have come to know me as a guy who talks about Religion a lot, but, that is only the case because I try to respond to Foo's constant and unrelenting attacks on the Catholic Church. So that takes up most of my time here on PT.
If these Religious Threads would be either Anchored or deleted that would help the problem.
We talk as much Religion around here as we talk Politics.
Posted on 10/5/25 at 9:39 am to Guntoter1
quote:The Catholic Catechism seems to teach that honor, deference, and obedience is to be given to the Pope even when he doesn't speak from the chair of Peter in an infallible way because of divine assistance.
You poor confused man.
He is both.
But he is mostly the the head of the Governing body of the church that Christ established.
You know this is true but choose to distort the truth. (Not intentionally)
You truly believe you are following Christ even as you fight against his creation.
We know this pope is a fool just like the last one. As are many of the Bishops.
"Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostles, teaching in communion with the successor of Peter, and, in a particular way, to the bishop of Rome, pastor of the whole Church, when, without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing in a “definitive manner,” they propose in the exercise of the ordinary Magisterium a teaching that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals. To this ordinary teaching the faithful “are to adhere to it with religious assent” which, though distinct from the assent of faith, is nonetheless an extension of it."
I also found this on CA's website (LINK ), but it speaks to the attitude that Catholics should have regarding the Pope.
While Catholics don't have to agree with everything the Pope says, it seems there really should be a deference to him, and a call to submit (that's where implicit faith comes in) even if you don't agree unless your conscience won't let you.
Overall, the tone is not that he's some oaf that you don't have to listen to unless he is speaking infallibly, like I get the impression of from some Catholics here.
quote:I believe the neither the Scriptures nor history support the current teaching about the office and attributes of the Pope. It is the teaching of the RCC alone that leads the laity to that position, which developed over many centuries, and was wholly absent in the first few centuries of the Church.
But we (as you) are doing our best to follow Christ as best we can.
We can not deny scripture or history.
quote:I don't believe I'm outside of the Church, since I'm part of a faithful, Bible-believing, sacrament-giving, and gospel-proclaiming body of Christ.
To be as you are(outside of the church) would terrify me.
See Saint Paul
Also see Christ Prayer for unity.
I understand that from your perspective that I'm outside, because the RCC and EOC both teach absolute exclusivity in this regard, but I seek to do as Christ commanded by submitting myself to the teaching and discipline of the courts of the church, partake in the sacraments, regard the teaching of the word, and enjoy the fellowship of the saints. I also believe that I've done what God has commanded in "coming out" of Babylon (Rev 18:1,4) by not joining myself to a body that teaches as official dogma that if I trust in nothing else but Jesus Christ alone by faith alone for my salvation, that I am damned.
Posted on 10/6/25 at 11:18 am to Champagne
quote:My personal animus is based on my belief that the RCC has rejected the gospel of Jesus Christ (through rejecting salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone) and leads many people astray. I feel the same way about Mormons that believe they are Christians but have a different Jesus than the one from Scripture.
When a hard-core Anti Catholic who believes that the Pope is the Anti Christ approaches any issue regarding the RCC, that hard core Anti Catholic is going to bring his prejudice and personal animus into the equation. That's what we have with you.
I provide reasoning for everything I say regarding disagreements with Catholic doctrine. While there are many who go right to insults and point out child abuse scandals, I try to stay away from those things and focus more on doctrine and practice.
quote:I've told you several times in the past that I'm here to discuss whatever is top of mind for the board in politics, culture, and current events but from a (Reformed) Christian worldview and perspective. I particularly enjoy discussing religion, and Christianity in particular. I call out bad teaching and practice from even other Protestant denominations. I've condemned even the PCUSA, which is a historical Reformed and Presbyterian denomination, due to its abandonment of scriptural teachings in favor of liberalism. I've had recent discussions with EOC Christians, as well.
You are not here to learn or argue in a good faith manner at all. You are here to exercise your personal animus against the RCC and the Pope.
I am here to be informed. I learn a lot on this board. Just because I don't change my mind on important matters doesn't mean I don't have my understanding further refined. For instance, in another thread recently, I learned about the "seamless thread" philosophy that results in lumping in abortion with the death penalty and immigration concerns. I may have heard about that in years past but I forgot, so it was helpful in my understanding what the RCC teaches on these things.
I also think that I actually do argue in a good faith manner. I almost always stick to the topics being discussed and when I am arguing religion, I ask questions and support my responses. I know you'll disagree with most of what I say, but I'm not trying to take anything out of context or take low-blow shots at Catholicism. I try to argue substance. If I have a misunderstanding about a particular doctrine, I'm happy to learn from it. I find it's more effective to steel-man an opponent than to straw-man them.
quote:I'm discussing the topic at hand and will use it to attack the false church of Catholicism if possible. I do the same thing with Democrats, leftists, Muslims, Mormons, and any other religious, ideological, or political group that spreads false teachings.
You say "it seems to me that the Pope is something that changes" when it really isn't. You say such a thing merely to disparage the RCC, which is really the only reason why you are here on PT.
Specifically for the change in language/teaching on the death penalty, I've supported my claims. You may disagree, but I see working in lock-step with the government to put heretics to death for 1,000 years to highlight a change in teaching and/or practice when the RCC says that the death penalty should be avoided today.
quote:Did I say it changes "all the time"? I don't recall saying that. I said it's prone to change over time, but that isn't the same thing. I do think the position on the death penalty is an example of a change over time.
You say, "seems to me that Catholic Doctrine is changing all of the time" and then you cite the RCC position on the Death Penalty as your proof. Your tactic is a Distortion of the truth but you don't care. You see it as more important to Accuse and Disparage.
quote:I'm sticking up for the truth of the Bible and God's character. If the RCC said that the DP is allowable but not ideal, I could understand that, but to say it's an attack on the dignity of a person is to attack God's allowance and command of it throughout time, as if the RCC is morally superior to even God.
I explained how a Church of church leader might read the Gospel and reasonably come to the conclusion that Jesus would oppose the Death Penalty, but, you dismissed that out of hand. "The Death Penalty is Biblical, so the Catholic Church is action NON Biblically by lobbying Governments to not use the Death Penalty". You distorted the whole truth because you thought it more important to Accuse and Disparage than to engage in a thorough review and analysis.
quote:You are making an accusation against me right in this sentence. Doesn't that mean you are aligned with Satan, by your own argument?
You use the tactics of Satan when you distort and use reductionist methods, and then you Accuse your Catholic theological enemy. Satan is the accuser.
quote:I disagree. I don't have a blind rage, but a measured righteous anger, at least in my own estimation. I can discuss disagreements biblically and rationally.
I'm not saying that you are doing the work of Satan or anything like that, but, you have a very very deep rooted personal animus against the Pope and the Catholic Faith. My position is that this personal animus makes it impossible for you to see the other side of the argument.
quote:If you would like to show me wrong based on Scripture, then I would be open to it. What you are saying is that because I believe God's word over man's word, than I'm in the wrong. That's the same thing atheists will say, because they don't regard God's word as authoritative.
It's like your personal interpretation of Scripture regarding the Age of the Universe - you are convinced that it is roughly 6,000 years old and no amount of evidence to the contrary can make you consider that you are wrong. You are here to Preach. You aren't here to talk politics or policy.
quote:I don't dismiss that I could be wrong about it. I only ask that you argue your point from Scripture. I believe the Scriptures support this view (Rom 9, in particular), so if I'm going to be persuaded to change my mind, it needs to be through Scripture.
Another example is your personal conviction of the Doctrine of Double Predestination. You dismiss out of hand the possibility that your interpretation could be wrong, when in fact, it is a minority theological position in all of Christendom.
quote:I'm OK with you saying I'm here to preach. Preaching is good, as long as it promotes the truth of God's word.
You are here to Preach. That's why I say that you don't belong here. You didn't even vote in the last POTUS election.
And, I actually did vote in the last POTUS election.
quote:Your observations must be biased. While I'm primarily engaged in the discussions relating to ethics and morality in our politics and culture, I am not only discussing Catholicism here. I'm only responding, not creating threads.
You never talk policy or politics. You are here to Preach and to attack Catholicism. I've observed you for years and this is what I have concluded.
Posted on 10/6/25 at 11:28 am to Champagne
quote:Do you preach/promote any other truth (as you see it) other than Catholicism? Do you consider alternative views to Catholicism?
1) he is here to Preach his own brand of Presybeterianism. There is no room for intellectual process because he will never consider any alternative view.
I consider alternative views all the time. Just because I always come back to the truth of God's word as faithfully summarized by the Westminster Confession of Faith, doesn't mean I don't consider other view points.
quote:Can't the same be said of you? In recent history, it seemed as though that in these discussions, all you did was quote the Catholic Catechism or an article from Catholic Answers, not even giving your own thoughts. You stick to the talking points of the RCC, repeating the same ones over and over again, because you are Catholic. I don't have a problem with you stating what you believe to be true, even if it is repetitive. I don't understand why you have a problem with me doing the same.
2) Because he is here to Preach, he subjects us to rote talking points, over and over again. Even when a reasonable alternative is presented, he rejects that and returns to Preaching by repeating a rote talking point.
quote:I'm interested in religious and moral issues. I like to comment on those types of threads, regardless of whether it is about Catholicism.
3) He holds a very strong personal animus towards the Pope and against Catholicism. He will never miss an opportunity to Preach against the RCC here on Political Talk.
quote:If you would like to show how I'm distorting anything, please do so. You have misquoted me and taken my words out of context in the past, doing exactly what you accuse me of doing. And yes, you make accusations against me. Isn't that wrong, according to your own statement here?
4) He uses the same tactics as Satan in his attacks: he distorts facts, he is both Accuser and Judge against the Pope and the RCC. When Bible passages are presented to him that warn against distorting truth, being an Accuser, being judgmental and being vengeful, he dismisses any Bible interpretation that might apply to his behavior.
quote:Have you checked my post history? I've engaged in a lot of discussion of "secular politics, policy or foreign policy". I have spoken about transgenderism, communism, gun rights, abortion, free trade, and all sorts of current events in politics over the years. I followed the Q-thread very closely several years ago and was sorely disappointed in the results of the 2020 election. I even voted for Trump twice and defended him in the past. I voted in the last election, too.
5) He has never engaged in a thoughtful discussion of secular Politics, Policy or Foreign Policy. He doesn't vote in political elections because of his religious beliefs.
I think you need to get your facts straight before you attack and accuse me.
quote:I don't create these threads. I just respond to them, as you do.
I'm sure he's a great human being in his real life, but, here on PT, he just doesn't belong. People around PT have come to know me as a guy who talks about Religion a lot, but, that is only the case because I try to respond to Foo's constant and unrelenting attacks on the Catholic Church. So that takes up most of my time here on PT.
If these Religious Threads would be either Anchored or deleted that would help the problem.
We talk as much Religion around here as we talk Politics.
This post was edited on 10/6/25 at 1:09 pm
Page 14 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News