The Church Door > General Information

Banned Members and Reasons

(1/58) > >>

Kaesekopf:
This thread will document who was banned, why, and for how long. 

Kaesekopf:
Ben has been banned for three days for a lack of charity and forum instigation.


--- Quote from: Ben on February 12, 2013, 05:15:34 PM ---
--- Quote ---"Being anti-Jewish is not an important part of Catholicism.  It is a form of bigotry and Catholicism is much better off without it."

"Being anti-Jewish is not part of Catholicism at all.  To try to add it to Catholicism is a form of syncretism."

http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php/topic,3452856.0.html
--- End quote ---

You have zero credibility.

That thread highlights your fraudulence, and Vox's as well.

Every single Church Father, Doctor and Saint is anti-Jewish.

Chutzpah.

You really are a cartoon character. It mystifies me why anyone would take you seriously.

--- End quote ---


--- Quote from: Ben on February 12, 2013, 05:28:41 PM ---She's like some ghastly character in a Dickens novel.

I'm going to be wearing diapers in a few years. Where's the charity for me?

--- End quote ---


--- Quote from: Ben on February 12, 2013, 09:15:54 PM ---JayneK's an unconverted Pharisee. Vox is a gatekeeper. Not a coincidence that she's Vox's new soul sister.

No way someone could travel in trad Catholic circles as long as she has and not know such basic things about the Faith.

--- End quote ---


--- Quote from: Ben on February 12, 2013, 11:20:19 AM ---I think of JayneK when I read the bolded part below:

The host finds that its mortgages are held by Jewish bankers, its children are being taught by Jewish teachers, its government is being administered by Jewish “advisors” or “consultants”, who, even if they hold no elective or appointive office, still make the important decisions. They turn for solace to their religion, and they find that Jewish converts, aided by appropriate gifts of money, have entered into the offices of their denominations, and have risen rapidly until the religious beliefs are altered to embrace all of the tenets of the parasitic community of Jews. What, then, does the gentile host have left? The seemingly inevitable doom of being slowly bled to death, after which the parasites will leave the body of their victim and seek another host.

Though convert should be in quotes. I would think conversions are null and void if the convert doesn't understand what they're converting to, or if they know but seek to undermine those teachings they don't like once a member.

--- End quote ---

Kaesekopf:
Der Kaiser has been banned for three days for a lack of charity and attacking others.


--- Quote from: Der Kaiser on February 15, 2013, 10:40:03 AM ---Anyone remember Baskerville? What a great guy he was. That was me.

Yup Banned Twice. First when the guy was still in charge Vox's ex husband for making fun of some asinine thing the pope did. Then after the Night of the Long Knives when all the crap went down with someone saying she was someone else that was dying or something( I was gone so I never really found out) everyones ban was lifted so I came back late summer of 2011. I got in a fight with that femnazi Lolanthe and was banned. Though she started the name calling(sorry but if a woman wants to pretend she is a man she is gonna get treated like one I don't play that cake and eat it too game with femtards) I went back this late winter under a different name got in a fight of words with the biggest prick on the internet Dr Bombay and got banned. Funny though I see the good doc(proctologist?)is still there. I asked to have my account deleted but got banned. When I first went there around 08 it was a pretty good place. Now its a psych ward.

--- End quote ---


--- Quote from: Der Kaiser on February 15, 2013, 05:41:48 PM ---No not at all. I was being nice by not stating what I really think of her. The only other thing to call her was her other name on the forum "The malignant hag"

--- End quote ---


--- Quote from: Der Kaiser on February 15, 2013, 05:44:00 PM ---Then why did she see evil men everywhere she went. Just about every post she had to say something about horrible guys and how everything is mens fault.

--- End quote ---


--- Quote from: Der Kaiser on February 15, 2013, 05:46:47 PM ---This is all I am going to say on the subject of Iolanthe. She was a little twirp and I no longer have to worry about her.

--- End quote ---


--- Quote from: Der Kaiser on February 15, 2013, 09:32:42 PM ---Don't preach to me about class. That little cry baby had more than enough time to defend herself. And like I said before she could dish it out but not take it. She would act like a big tough girl and then when she would start losing an argument it was all because of evil men. She would always bring up how evil men are then whenever a guy would defend men she would hide behind the cloak of femininity saying how we were being mean to her and bitch to the Grand Dictator Vox. She was like the angry feminist who hates men but cries to her bra burning group that chivalry is dead. I was not the only one College Catholic among many others had huge problems with her.

--- End quote ---



Kaesekopf:
Gottmitunsalex has been banned for one day because of an offensive post.



--- Quote from: Gottmitunsalex on February 15, 2013, 11:36:40 PM ---I got here late.
I was going to post a video, apt for the previous discussion.
I'll just leave it at this.


--- End quote ---

Kaesekopf:
Melkite is banned for three days for disrespect and lack of charity towards St. Pius X, Trad-bashing, and generally trolling.


--- Quote from: Melkite on February 16, 2013, 02:43:14 PM ---Apparently, Pope St. Pius X wasn't familiar with the principle of 'just because you say it's so doesn't mean it is so.'  The testimony of the early church clearly does not agree with Pius X's understanding of it.

--- End quote ---


--- Quote from: Melkite on February 16, 2013, 05:46:12 PM ---Well, the nice thing about it is, you don't have to take my word or his for it.  You can look and find it for yourself.  There clearly is no unanimous support for the idea of an ultramontanist papacy.  It's interesting, you can even find passages from the same father either professing or rejecting papal monarchy depending on whether he was at odds with the pope at a given moment (I.e., purely subjectively on the father's part in either respect).

Given the amount of time he apparently spent in studying it, did he ever acknowledge that the history does not paint a picture of papal supposrt so unanimously as he would like?  If he never mentioned it, then he was either dishonest, or not as well-read as you believe.  Which one is worse?

--- End quote ---


--- Quote from: Melkite on February 16, 2013, 05:54:05 PM ---Well, of course one would warn against trying to go back before the medieval church if the medieval church was clearly at odds with the apostolic church!   :toth:

While I agree that one shouldn't try to relive the apostolic church purely for the sake of being apostolic, it certainly is not irrelevant and is worthy of study that the early church and the medieval latin church are quite different on many things.  Frankly, I'm a little surprised to see someone who is presumably trying to preserve Latin traditions, at least in part, for the sake of tradition, arguing against a tradition that precedes even it.  It reinforces the idea that the modern trad movement is in many ways merely a medieval fan club, and it makes your point above less credible.

--- End quote ---

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version