I will say, without naming names, that I suspect many people who have wide-ranging knowledge of Catholic culture while mocking it are in fact giant queers, who may have grown up in the Church but have a love-hate relationship with it as adults because of its stance on homo activity.  This is surely true of many VII "priests" who most likely are non-believers who simply use their pseudo-church for its numerous cushy jobs, who have turned it into a giant gαy clubhouse, and who make a mockery of the true faith.

I thought Hobbledehoy was him for a long time also but I'm not so sure about that, so I say nothing. [...] That is why Hobbledehoy set off my alarm bells, his posts are devoid of any personal touch, but in his case, perhaps he just wants to informative rather than personal, I don't know.

Hello Michael:

Uh, how can I adequately respond to this. I could feel insulted, but I shall choose not to do so. I'll just smile it away...    :smile:

Most of the times I am enabled to consciously manipulate those neuro-chemical processes that we call "emotions" so effortlessly that I truly feel and have been so described by family, friends and acquaintance, as someone who "does not convincingly resemble a real human, nothing of a specific personality ever really comes across." You may not know me personally, but intuiting this much about me truly astounds me in a very unnerving (but pleasantly surprising) sort of way. You have a sort of gift in this regard. [By the way, I think this quote I cited a sentence ago shall be inscribed upon my tombstone, just before the one that says "Please pray for me, or else..."]

I now understand all the "Pope" comments you've been making.

Well, I hereby certify and declare that I am not this Augustine character (Deo gratias), and the reason I don't get personal in my posts is because they are meant to be informative (you're right about that, another unnervingly accurate insight). It is with the purpose of edifying myself and others as best I can that I have endeavored to participate in this forum. I was here once before as "Glastonbury" and at FE as "Glastonbury_thorn." I left the latter after a series of interesting events, and I have forgotten the password to the former, so here I am as "Hobbledehoy." It's a dumb name I think, but I've been using it elsewhere, so I thought why not here too.

I don't really chime in about Augustine though because I am aware the devil is trying to trick me and make me look stupid.  It has gotten to the point where I see Augustine almost everywhere here.  I thought Hobbledehoy was him for a long time also but I'm not so sure about that, so I say nothing.  I fear one day I'll say someone is Augustine and it will turn out to be someone who provably is not, and I'll look crazy.  The devil loves to work on paranoia.  I also thought herbert might be part of this, because his misspellings look phony.  

I know that Matto is Pope Augustine for sure.  He doesn't post much though.  The short-lived RescuedbyMary was almost surely him / them, as is Fionn.  Some of his incarnations are more obvious than others.  Sometimes he tries to blend in, and at other times he plays the clown.

But one thing that characterizes this Augustine person / group, whoever they are, is that he does not convincingly resemble a real human, nothing of a specific personality ever really comes across.  He'll usually give one piece of info -- "I go to SSPX" or something like that -- but there are never any more details, never any personal anecdotes.  He also has an enormous intellect, which is what is scary about him ( that someone who has that level of knowledge uses it solely for a joke ).  That is why Hobbledehoy set off my alarm bells, his posts are devoid of any personal touch, but in his case, perhaps he just wants to informative rather than personal, I don't know.

That's the problem with usernames - anyone can be anyone - and coincidences can fool you.

Best to just suspend judgment unless absolutely incontrovertible evidence exists for your suspicions.

Sometimes it might be good to try to lift the mask of off someone who is acting suspiciously, but in that case they better be acting very suspiciously.

I don't take Fionn seriously. He may very well be Augustine. Hey Raoul, how do you know that Matto is "Pope" Augustine? Do you have any proof aside from Matto not showing much personality?

Well, I can’t keep up this charade any longer.  It is true that “Fionn Mac cuмhaill” and the legend of Pope Miltiades are fabrications.  I was only trying to get something going with Herbert (who is for real, as far as I know, since I’ve interacted with him elsewhere on the internet, and from whom I suspect you will all get much enjoyment in the future).  What was supposed to happen was that Fionn, who was cast as a batty old ultra-conservative, was going to develop an obsessive fixation (bordering on harassment) with Herbert being a cardinal in some obscure conclavist sect (i swear i not cardial yeobrihgt fiona!!), but unfortunately it didn’t work out.  You can’t really orchestrate things with Herbert; you just have to play it straight.  I should add that Herbert was NOT in on this; it was purely a product of my own whimsy; I had a certain nostalgia for recalling how hilarious Herbert can be.  In a sense, I sort of “stalked” him here.  But lest the wrong idea be had, I am not (as Raoul has speculated) a homo.

I am not a believing Catholic (correct on that count, Raoul), and therefore I am not welcome here as per the rules, and I would have nothing much to contribute besides.  I don’t object to being banned.

I apologize for creating a trivial and meaningless diversion on the forum.  And I apologize to Exilenomore for provoking scandal by playing a prank.  I lastly apologize to Herbert, because I fear I've cast a pall on your reputation here (but hopefully not irreparably).

I think this individual is a pseudo-educated provocateur who cloaks himself behind fancy diction and "pious" sentimentalism with an ulterior motive.

Quite true!   I was actually flattered by the suspicions that I was Pope Augustine, but alas I’m not that sharp.  I read some of his posts and I can tell you that I don’t have the acuмen for that sort of ecclesio-legalistic brilliance.  That person really did his or her homework.

Interestingly, though, Fionn’s question about unity was never answered.  Instead, there was just a string of ad hominems.  It remains a provocative inquiry, though.  How is the Church headed by Pope Benedict XVI “united in public worship” if one “form” of the Roman Rite is evil and the other form is holy?  And where, furthermore, is the scenario of “two forms of the same rite” to be found in tradition?  Separate rites like the Ambosian and Gallican are more similar to each other than the Tridentine Mass is to the Novus Ordo.  Everyone knows that the Novus Ordo’s closest kin are the services of the early Protestant Reformers.  Oh well.

Certainly there are complicated and convoluted explanations to buttress the papacy amidst the post-conciliar mess, but I think the application of Occam’s Razor really provides the best solution.  Zip!

Oh darn, too slow. I was hoping to talk Fionn into posting a few papal encyclicals for us ... that should have kept him busy for awhile. : )

I would have had more respect for the individual if he would have initiated a thread wherein an open and sincere exchange upon the pertinent topics would have taken place (by the way, the more appropriate place would have been the "Crisis in the Chuch" subforum), instead of making stuff up in an attempt to provoke reactions.

I can see why it could be considered funny, but I'm not laughing. Maybe 'cos I'm not human enough, according to Mike.