Thursday, September 13, 2007

There's no such thing as bad publicity.

Winnipeg Catholic over at Reformed Catholic wrote an entire post about little ol' me. I'm rather flattered (seriously) that someone would take the time to think about me long enough to inspire an entire post, be it good or bad. I thought I'd return the favor.

In this newest post, he refers to our debates regarding EENS. He goes so far as to say Pope John Paul II accepted other religions as other paths to salvation, just that ours is the best. He opens with:

"Well, I have received a lot of traffic lately from a Mr. Unitas who claims I am a heretic for statements along the lines of:'There are lots of paths to God but ours is the best one.'"

Like I've said before, this particular view he holds, among others, is in direct variance with Catholic teaching. All conotations aside, that is by definition, heresy.

He then goes on to quote from JP's "'Crossing the Threshold of Hope"to try to prove his point. I must admit, none of the quoted piece substantiates his claim that JP held other religions as other paths to salvation. (Go ahead and check the post) But there is an interesting sentence which I think is worth bringing up here:

"The church has a high regard for their conduct and way of life, for those precepts and doctrines which, although differing on many points from that which the Church believes and propounds, often reflect a ray of truth that enlightens all men."

Quite pastoral and warm and fuzzy. The last sentence there is what I'm getting at, "for those precepts and doctrines . . . often reflect a ray of truth..."

If they are other legitimate paths to salvation why do they only reflect truth instead of radiating the truth? If these other faiths merely reflect some truth, what is truth's source?

1Ti 3:15 "But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. " (There's that hi-lighter again!)

So it is not that they are legitimate paths to salvation, but are merely reflecting parts of the one path to salvation; The Catholic faith.

Which I'm affraid proves his statement:

"The grand point here is that one can attain salvation according to John Paul II through other faiths. These include Hinduism, Buddhism, et cetera."


He also seems to have a thing against my "hi-lighter" (read the comments).

"Everything John Paul II discusses in that chapter comes straight from the documents that Unitas cites. Thing is, Unitas loves to use bold print to emphasize the things HE wants you to take away from the text."

My only response is, if those documents, parts of which I emphasize, don't say what they say, then why do they say it?

"Insisting on emphasizing only the exclusive bits, now that's what I call cafeteria conservativism. And you will notice Unitas has his own bold face all over any document he cites. His little cafeterianist highlighter comes out so he can squash the church's liberal/tolerant/loving side."

More like I'm using a flashlight to find the good stuff in a pile of pastoral vagueness. The truth is there, you just gotta look for it. Plus, it would be unreasonable for me to paste entire documents on here; It's far easier to just get to the point and quote the pertinent parts and move on. If any of my readers feels I have left out important context that refutes any of my claims feel free to post them.

Coming from a person who derives their identity by adhering to the Winnipeg Statement who uses "Cafeterianist" as a perjorative in reference to me is a bit like the plank pointing out the speck, isn't it?

The Truth is much more important than "squashing", don't you think? It's just that when espousing the truth of the Catholic faith, liberal cafeteria Catholics end up squashed in the process. It's not the aim but merely the double-effect. I'm sure you understand. ;)

Be sure to note the differences between what I have said on this blog and what he claims I think:

"Think deeply about what Unitas is trying to derive from the documents he cites. He seems to be tempted far more in the direction of 'All non-catholics and liberal catholics are going to hell.' Is that charitable? Is that really what the church says? "

No, WC, you're right; That's not what the Church, nor I, say. I've just finished a lengthy but comprehensive treatment on my understanding of EENS just below this post, cited with selections from sacred scripture as well as pre and post-conciliar documents. In a comment to which post you allege John Paul II didn't adhere to the Catholic dogma of Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus. That's quite an accusation. And at a Pope, no less.

"Everything John Paul II discusses in that chapter comes straight from the documents that Unitas cites. Thing is, Unitas loves to use bold print to emphasize the things HE wants you to take away from the text."

At least I emphasize what's actually written.

Your interpretation that JPII accepted other religions as paths to salvation isn't supported anywhere in your excerpt or in any of the documents I have ever cited. That's your injection into the text. That's what you wish everyone takes away from reading this, but it's just not there. Don't pee on your audience and tell them it's rain.

But WC shows that he's at least capable of behaving like a gentleman:

". . . but I can set that aside since from the looks of Unitas's blog he seems like a fairly decent fellow for a Rad-Trad."

See? He can be polite when he wants to be.


Karin said...


Why must the "truth" be sugar coated?
The "truth" is hard to hear at times but it should not be sugar coated so it is easier to hear, that only does a diservice to people!
I just can not grasp why some people feel it is a good thing to sugar coat what we should be screaming from the roof tops!

Vir Speluncae Orthodoxae said...

Did not the Lord say hard things, and did not the Apostles complain to him? Where WC misses the boat is Theosis-the whole point of being a Christian. To become what we once were which is God like. You can't attain Godliness by living in contradiction to God's manual.

Also did not Peter call temple fornicators "dogs"? Did not Elias/Elijah hurl epithets at Jezebel? Good King Josiah smash the houses and idols of the sodomites? Jeremiah, Nathan, etc etc etc?

You don't help the lavender mafia by feeling sorry for them. Actually you can't help them at all because they HATE God.

paramedicgirl said...

See? He can be polite when he wants to be.

But mostly, he is just plain rude. I sent him a comment saying,"WC, I have decided to take the Caveman's advice and leave you alone to your thirty four readers per day. I'm actually sorry that I gave you a few days of boosted readership, but I'm not sorry that the people I sent here have learned about your heresy and have offered fraternal corrections to you. Just think of it as a spiritual work of mercy. Admonish the sinner.

Which of course he didn't publish, but responded via email with this:

"Thanks for leaving. I didn't ask you to bring your schismatic views to my blog, or tell me how you think I blaspheme the HS (because you want me to burn in hell), or tell me how you want to boil me in oil as a heretic, or whatever other hate mongering you think passes as some sort of a charitable witness to sinners."

Now, what was that you said about WC being polite, Unitas?

paramedicgirl said...

Oh, in case y'all missed it, here's another example of Winnipeg Catholic's politeness.

WC said...Paramedicgirl,

I don't really care if 'Georgia Lee' is your real name, porn name, or given name. What's that got to do with the price of beans in Kansas? You post a video of Lefebvre in all your SSPX hero worship and then pretend you're not a schismatic if you like. But if you want to hang out here I'll call you out on it: You're a schismatic traddie protestant who seeks to command the magisterium and who worships liturgy as an idol.

Winnipeg Catholic, since you have engaged in name calling, let me say that you are downright sick, perverse, and deniably Catholic.

Vir Speluncae Catholicus said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Vir Speluncae Catholicus said...

Seriously bro... I got sucked (no pun intended) into Water Closet's marketing of himself as some sort of defender of Catholicism... and I ended up boosting his readership.

Like PMG pointed out, he averages something like 35 viewers or so every day, until he suckers us into debating him, then his viewership skyrockets.

Granted, this is your blog and you can run it as you see fit, but you might want to consider if you are giving an evil one a soapbox to preach his heresy.

BTW, he has admitted in the past to being in an "monogamous same sex relationship". AKA: Back Door Conquistador. Amazing how he changes his story now.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
paramedicgirl said...

Unitas, Cavey's right. WC just wants a platform from which to screech his heresy, and we have all give it to him. It's time to pull that platform out from under his heretical little feet. Don't give him any more business. He can bait us all he wants by spouting whatever poison and detraction he wants over at his blog of dissent, but I ain't biting.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Unitas said...

"Now, what was that you said about WC being polite, Unitas?"

I only said that he can be when he wants to be.

It's just too bad most of the time he chooses not to be.

In many ways cafeteria catholics only serve to further my point. Their wacky theology as well as downright rudeness does nothing but provide the rope on which they hang.

To provide a reasoned argument and have it "rebutted" with nothing much nasty ad hominems only proves they have no case at all.

The more people see that the better. I'd hate to think of how many people visit his blog and take what he says as orthodox Catholic teaching.

It's like when the Pope dared link Islam to violence they responded to his 'insult' by burning down embassies.

I'll leave the rudeness and the mental gymnastics of their posts intact for all to see; as a testament to their dissidence, and to the tuth.

Unitas said...



He wishes me to leave out the "mean" parts and only emphasize the "nice" parts because that's exactly what he does.

He ignores the hard and fast teachings and focusses on the pastoral fluff so he doesn't have to be accountable for his heresies.

He hates the bolded parts (truth) of my citings like a cockroach hates the light.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Vir Speluncae Catholicus said...

Dear future AIDS victim,

1. Pardon the hell outta me for not saving all of your homo-erotic ComBox postings you sent to me.

2. When you did send the one in question, you knew damn good and well that I was already deleting every disgusting thing you sent to me. Nice job of covering your ass, so to speak.

3. When I read your vile post about you being in a "committed, monogamous same-sex relationship", that's when I realized why you droned on and on endlessly in favor of The Sin of Sodom.

4. Of course, you'll deny this. But then again... you've lost touch with reality long ago and far away.


He hates the bolded parts (truth) of my citings like a cockroach hates the light.

You, Karin, and ParamedicGirl happen to be the million candlepower light in question.

Vir Speluncae Catholicus said...

Hey guys, Just so everyone can see what a scumbag WC really is, read what he says about my mom being diagnosed with leukemia;

Winnipeg Catholic has left a new comment on your post "Prayer Request Storm the Gates of Heaven with pray...":

My career is based, in part, in defeating AML and I know several people who have suffered with it. One can't help but to think it is ironic that you sit around telling lies about me and alleging that I am gay, and then your mother falls ill with this disease. Well, I certainly hope that all goes as well as possible for her and I will pray for her even though you are a nasty, dishonest toad.

Publish this comment.

Reject this comment.

Moderate comments for this blog.

Posted by Winnipeg Catholic to The Lair of the Catholic Cavemen at 3:59 PM

This guy seems to think that my mother dying is some sort of Divine Retribution against me. Didn't I tell you he was a sick bastard?

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Unitas said...

"Well, I don't really understand why you think Kevin and PG are so polite and how it is that I am rude. The man insists that I am a water closet homosexual (a pun on the recent senator's alleged behavior) & proceeds to lie about be being in a monogamous homosexual relationship"

If one defends the SSPX in the slightest they're a schismatic, antisemitic, SSPXer, right?

He's just taking a page out of your playbook.

By your logic, if you defend gays in the lightest you must be a raging ass-captain.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
paramedicgirl said...

Oh Yes, Georgia Lee aka Paramedic Girl also conveniently deleted her little slight on my readership levels

WC, what the heck are you talking about? I didn't delete anything. You are going over the deep end, my friend.

And when are you going to stop crying like a baby about me posting a 1976 video of an Archbishop in good standing with Rome on my blog? Get over it, for heaven's sake.

Unitas said...

"But PG did indeed place a movie of Lefebvre on her blog. Isn't that pushing it a bit? "

That video was scrolling text of a speech from before he was excommunicated, ie, still in good standing with Rome.

We grant Origen, who died excommunicate, the same courtesty.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

This whole dialog reeks of stupidity. Unitas, PG and Caveman were calling me gay the minute I defended gays in the slightest. That was long before I ever associated Radical Traditionalists with SSPX. And when I did that it hit a nerve for them, and I suspect that is because it is true. Anyway, I was enjoynig some aspect of our discussion but I don't really need the calumny and BS from PG and Kevin. I have another picture of Kevin on my blog though. I think it is one of his favorites!

And BTW - it is true that Pillowfight Tony was kicked off Cavey's blog only when he insulted SSPX.

I could almost grant your point about Origen, but lets face facts. Lefebvre is no Origen and venerating his little movie is innappropriate for any truly orthodox or ultramontane catholic. That's a schismatic thing to do.

Happy Trails! B

paramedicgirl said...

My, my! Look at all the deleted comments! Could it be that WC has embarrassed himself? Ya think???

paramedicgirl said...

WC, you haven't been dipping into the drugs at Merck and Co have you???

Vir Speluncae Catholicus said...

If you like, I can always forward you to 19 comments he sent to in a span of about a half an hour as proof of just how unbalanced this guy is.

To give you an idea of the types of comments he's sent;

Comment 1: liar
Comment 2: LIAR
Comment 3: LIAR!
Comment 4: LiarLiarLiarLiarLiarLiarLiarLiarLiarLiarLiar

It goes on like this for quite some time. Anyhow, I've saved all the e-mail notifications of the cyber-harassment he's sent via the internet. The time stamp is there, I've saved the IP notification, etc. I'm sure the good folks at Merck would be thrilled to see how he spends his time at work.

And the sickest part of all... he posted all this garbage on a post where I was asking for prayers for my cancer stricken mother.

I'm tellin' ya, this "Winnipeg Catholic" is one sick puppy.