On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 06:50:14 -0500, duke <
duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>They need to sell the Vatican treasures and use the money to improve their
>>country.
>
>Mullet, you're really showing your butt now. Vatican City is a sovereign
>country, and it's would not be an annexation, but an invasion.
One just has to wonder what Earl thinks annexation is? Clearly he us
using a definition here unknown to the wider world and especially to
users of the English language.
>Now the
>treasures in the museum do not belong to the Vatican, but still owned by
>families of long dead people.
Liar, most of the treasures were gifted to the Vatican. Or does the
Vatican lie when it states this? Tough question that, is Earl or the
Vatican lying....which to believe....
=========================
"Secondly, I *never* lied to my priest." - Earl
====
Well, he told me that it was his understanding that you would not be
posting here anymore. If you didn't lie to him outright, you certainly
deceived him.
No, it was not Andy, at least not when I called Fr. Vu. And I don't
have to lie to say I am a priest in good standing, I *am* a priest in
good standing. I tried six ways from Sunday to explain to you why you
ought not post here. I tried an appeal from Christian Charity. I tried
an appeal from good manners. I tried an appeal simply from what is
*right.*
You weren't having any of it.
You embarrass me, Earl. If the Church were even halfway what your
example presents it to be, I'd have left a long time ago.
And as for that nonsense about how you "listen to priests who are in
good standing," I think we all know by now (participants and lurkers
alike) the true value of ANY statement you make.
Rob (a.k.a The Rev. Robert M. Dye, Diocese of Tulsa, Oklahoma)
=============================
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=35AD7A9D.233F%40writeme.com&output=gplain