10 Misconceptions of the RCC

[Eliyahu]

Briona gloriana...

Originally Posted by Revmitchell


They worship Mary. Period.
---------------------------------------------

You responded....



No, venerating is NOT worship. One may ONLY worship the Lord God!!

Me----

The Catholic church ABSOLTUELY...CONSISTENTLY... AND DELIBERATLY engage in pure..undeluted...deliberite GODDESS. worship.

They can not slither out of it, no matter how they may try.

God have mercy

AMEN ! A Short and Powerful Truth for the miserable Catholics!

RCC prays to Mary from millions of places of the world. She cannot respond to them unless she became a Goddess.

 

[saturneptune]

I would also add that Anglicans and Lutherans and many other Protestants have the same view on baptism that Catholics have.

And that makes them unified in false doctrine.

 

[Walter]

Please answer the question I posed before Walter......has Trent been rescinded & if so who, when & why. Thanks

I have read that the canonical penalty of 'Anathema' was dis-continued under the new 1983 Code of Canon Law but can't find that source at the moment. However, if that is so, in light of the new Code of Canon Law, should the anathematizations now be interpreted as simply excommunications? I understand that the penalty for 'anathema' was a form of excommunication.

 

[mont974x4]

Has the Unum Sanctum been rescinded? It states that salvation only comes to those in submission to the Pope.

 

[OldRegular]

Has the Unum Sanctum been rescinded? It states that salvation only comes to those in submission to the Pope.

The following seems to indicate that it has not been rescinded. If the RCC ever starts rescinding any of their decrees their house of cards falls!

From: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15126a.htm

(Latin the One Holy, i.e. Church), the Bull on papal supremacy issued 18 November, 1302, by Boniface VIII during the dispute with Philip the Fair, King of France. It is named from its opening words (see BONIFACE VIII). The Bull was promulgated in connection with the Roman Council of October, 1302, at which it had probably been discussed. it is not impossible that Boniface VIII himself revised the Bull; still it also appears that Aegidius Colonna, Archibishop of Bourges, who had come to the council at Rome notwithstanding the royal prohibition, influenced the text. The original of the Bull is no longer in existence; the oldest text is to be found in the registers of Boniface VIII in the Vatican archives ["Reg. Vatic.", L, fol. 387]. It was also incorporated in the "Corpus juris canonici" ("Extravag. Comm.", I, vii, 1; ed. Friedberg, II, 1245). The genuineness of the Bull is absolutely established by the entry of it in the official registers of the papal Briefs, and its incorporation in the canon law. The objections to its genuineness raised by such scholars as Damberger, Mury, and Verlaque are fully removed by this external testimony. At a later date Mury withdrew his opinion.

The Bull lays down dogmatic propositions on the unity of the Church, the necessity of belonging to it for eternal salvation, the position of the pope as supreme head of the Church, and the duty thence arising of submission to the pope in order to belong to the Church and thus to attain salvation. The pope further emphasizes the higher position of the spiritual in comparison with the secular order. From these premises he then draws conclusions concerning the relation between the spiritual power of the Church and secular authority. The main propositions of the Bull are the following: First, the unity of the Church and its necessity for salvation are declared and established by various passages from the Bible and by reference to the one Ark of the Flood, and to the seamless garment of Christ. The pope then affirms that, as the unity of the body of the Church so is the unity of its head established in Peter and his successors. Consequently, all who wish to belong to the fold of Christ are placed under the dominion of Peter and his successors. When, therefore, the Greeks and others say they are not subject to the authority of Peter and his successors, they thus acknowledge that they do not belong to Christ's sheep.

Then follow some principles and conclusions concerning the spiritual and the secular power:

Under the control of the Church are two swords, that is two powers, the expression referring to the medieval theory of the two swords, the spiritual and the secular. This is substantiated by the customary reference to the swords of the Apostles at the arrest of Christ (Luke 22:38; Matthew 26:52).

Both swords are in the power of the Church; the spiritual is wielded in the Church by the hand of the clergy; the secular is to be employed for the Church by the hand of the civil authority, but under the direction of the spiritual power.

The one sword must be subordinate to the other: the earthly power must submit to the spiritual authority, as this has precedence of the secular on account of its greatness and sublimity; for the spiritual power has the right to establish and guide the secular power, and also to judge it when it does not act rightly. When, however, the earthly power goes astray, it is judged by the spiritual power; a lower spiritual power is judged by a higher, the highest spiritual power is judged by God.

This authority, although granted to man, and exercised by man, is not a human authority, but rather a Divine one, granted to Peter by Divine commission and confirmed in him and his successors. Consequently, whoever opposes this power ordained of God opposes the law of God and seems, like a Manichaean, to accept two principles.​

"Now, therefore, we declare, say, determine and pronounce that for every human creature it is necessary for salvation to be subject to the authority of the Roman pontiff" (Porro subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanae creaturae declaramus, dicimus, definimus, et pronuntiamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis).

The Bull is universal in character. As its content shows, a careful distinction is made between the fundamental principles concerning the Roman primacy and the declarations as to the application of these to the secular power and its representatives. In the registers, on the margin of the text of the record, the last sentence is noted as its real definition: "Declaratio quod subesse Romano Pontifici est omni humanae creaturae de necessitate salutis" (It is here stated that for salvation it is necessary that every human creature be subject to the authority of the Roman pontiff). This definition, the meaning and importance of which are clearly evident from the connection with the first part on the necessity of the one Church for salvation, and on the pope as the one supreme head of the Church, expresses the necessity for everyone who wishes to attain salvation of belonging to the Church, and therefore of being subject to the authority of the pope in all religious matters. This has been the constant teaching of the Church, and it was declared in the same sense by the Fifth Ecumenical Council of the Lateran, in 1516: "De necessitate esse salutis omnes Christi fideles Romano Pontifici subesse" (That it is of the necessity of salvation for all Christ's faithful to be subject to the Roman pontiff). The translation by Berchtold of the expression humanae creaturae by "temporal authorities" is absolutely wrong. The Bull also proclaims the subjection of the secular power to the spiritual as the one higher in rank, and draws from it the conclusion that the representatives of the spiritual power can install the possessors of secular authority and exercise judgment over their administration, should it be contrary to Christian law.

This is a fundamental principle which had grown out of the entire development in the early Middle Ages of the central position of the papacy in the Christian national family of Western Europe. It had been expressed from the eleventh century by theologians like Bernard of Clairvaux and John of Salisbury, and by popes like Nicholas II and Leo IX. Boniface VIII gave it precise expression in opposing the procedure of the French king. The main propositions are drawn from the writings of St. Bernard, Hugh of St. Victor, St. Thomas Aquinas, and letters of Innocent III. Both from these authorities and from declarations made by Boniface VIII himself, it is also evident that the jurisdiction of the spiritual power over the secular has for its basis the concept of the Church as guardian of the Christian law of morals, hence her jurisdiction extends as far as this law is concerned. Consequently, when King Philip protested, Clement V was able, in his Brief "Meruit", of 1 February, 1306, to declare that the French king and France were to suffer no disadvantage on account of the Bull "Unam Sanctam", and that the issuing of this Bull had not made them subject to the authority of the Roman Church in any other manner than formerly. In this way, Clement V was able to give France and its ruler a guarantee of security from the ecclesiastico-political results of the opinions elaborated in the Bull, while its dogmatic decision suffered no detriment of any kind. In the struggles of the Gallican party against the authority of the Roman See, and also in the writings of non-Catholic authors against the definition of Papal Infallibility, the Bull "Unam Sanctam" was used against Boniface VIII as well as against the papal primacy in a manner not justified by its content. The statements concerning the relations between the spiritual and the secular power are of a purely historical character, so far as they do not refer to the nature of the spiritual power, and are based on the actual conditions of medieval Western Europe.

 

[OldRegular]

Then there is this:

From: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/vatican/vatican_holyinquisition01.htm

See bottom of link!

Rome – Always the same

1300 AD Unum Sanctum… Consequently we declare assert define and pronounce that to be subject to the Roman Pontiff is to every creature necessary to Salvation… promulgated November 18, 1302

2000 AD Dominus Iesus: On the Unity and Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church. IV. Unicity and Unity of the Church

16. “The Catholic faithful are required to profess (italics Rome’s) that there is an historical continuity – rooted in the apostolic succession – between the Church founded by Christ and the Catholic Church: This is the single Church of Christ … (which) … continues to exist fully only in the (Roman) Catholic Church … This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in (subsistit in) the (Roman) Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him.”

17. “Therefore there exists a single Church of Christ which subsists in the (Roman) Catholic Church governed by the successor of Peter … The (Eastern Orthodox) Churches while not existing in perfect communion with the (Roman) Catholic Church remain united … by apostolic succession a valid Eucharist (Mass) and are true particular (disobedient) Churches … since they do not accept the (Roman) Catholic doctrine of the Primacy (of the Pope of Rome) which according to the will of God the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church.​

“On the other hand the ecclesial communities (Protestant heretics) which have not preserved the valid Episcopate and genuine and integral substance of the eucharistic mystery (Mass) are not churches in the proper sense …”​

Conclusion

23. The intention of the present declaration, in reiterating and clarifying certain truths of the faith, has been to follow the example of the Apostle Paul, who wrote to the faithful of Corinth: “I handed on to you as of first importance what I myself received” (I Cor 15:3). Faced with certain problematic and even erroneous propositions, theological reflection is called to reconfirm the Church’s faith and to give reasons for her hope in a way that is convincing and effective.

In treating the question of the true religion, the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council taught: We believe that this one true religion continues to exist in the Catholic and Apostolic Church, to which the Lord Jesus entrusted the task of spreading it among all people. Thus, He said to the Apostles: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you”. (Mt 28:19-20) Especially in those things that concern God and His Church, all persons are required to seek the truth, and when they come to know it, to embrace it and hold fast to it.

The revelation of Christ will continue to be the true lodestar in history for all humanity: The truth, which is Christ, imposes itself as an all-embracing authority. The Christian mystery, in fact, overcomes all barriers of time and space, and accomplishes the unity of the human family: From their different locations and traditions all are called in Christ to share in the unity of the family of God’s children.... Jesus destroys the walls of division and creates unity in a new and unsurpassed way through our sharing in His mystery.

This unity is so deep that the Church can say with Saint Paul: “You are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are saints and members of the household of God". (Eph 2:19)​

The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, at the audience of June 16, 2000, granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, with sure knowledge and by his apostolic authority, ratified and confirmed this declaration, adopted in plenary session and ordered its publication.​

Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
August 6, 2000
the Feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord

Joseph Card. Ratzinger
Prefect

It would appear that "Unum Sanctum" has been reaffirmed!

 

[DHK]

Have you read the catechism on the subject?

1992 Justification has been merited for us by the Passion of Christ who offered himself on the cross as a living victim, holy and pleasing to God, and whose blood has become the instrument of atonement for the sins of all men. Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith. It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just by the power of his mercy. Its purpose is the glory of God and of Christ, and the gift of eternal life:40

Justification has never been "conferred in baptism, the sacrament of faith." That statement in and of itself is heresy, not taught in the Bible, nor can be supported by the Bible.

The teaching of justification is very simple.
"Being justified by FAITH, we have peace with God." (Romans 5:1)
One is justified by faith and faith alone. Baptism has nothing to do with it.
Baptism gets you wet, and that is all. It is a symbolic ordinance to be obeyed after one trusts the Lord as their Savior. It has nothing to do with the new birth whatsoever.

 

[Alive in Christ]

DHK posted...

Justification has never been "conferred in baptism, the sacrament of faith." That statement in and of itself is heresy, not taught in the Bible, nor can be supported by the Bible.

The teaching of justification is very simple.
"Being justified by FAITH, we have peace with God." (Romans 5:1)
One is justified by faith and faith alone. Baptism has nothing to do with it.
Baptism gets you wet, and that is all. It is a symbolic ordinance to be obeyed after one trusts the Lord as their Savior. It has nothing to do with the new birth whatsoever

The problem, in a nut shell, is that we heed what the scriptures teach, while they heed the teachings of mere men.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Justification very basis is that Jesus was the propiation for your sin! You receive that Grace FULLY when faith is placed in Him, and at THAT moment God saves you, seals with the Holy Spirit, and declares that you are now in Christ, and that you are JUST as rightious before God as Jesus was!

THAT message was scandelous to Rome!

The gift to me is free. I recieve it freely. But the Gift cost Jesus his life so it wasn't free for him. That was my point.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Thinking stuff...

It appears you have been fully indocrinated by the "Holy Mother Church" Gestapo Society (Catholic false church)


To turn from truth is not good.

To turn from truth to hellish doctrines is exceedingly dangerous

I sincerely hope you come to your senses.

God bless and help you

Alive in Christ, thank you for your consern for me. Though I believe I have come to my senses but your sentiment is apreciated. Even though I don't believe in the least that the Catholic Church is a Gestapo society.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Catholics do not teach that a person is justified by faith alone.

Where your problem lies is that you equate this saying

by grace through faith, and not of works

is equal to faith alone. When in fact it is not. Its saying that by faith one is saved and not by works. Its says nothing to the effect that Faith must result in works which is what that canon you quote is teaching. and note that passage you quoted from Paul does not say

--Justified by faith alone.

It just doesn't say it. Its saying works cannot saved. However, we see in Romans that Paul certainly believed that Faith must result in works or like James says your faith is dead.

According to the Council of Trent, I am cursed.

No, again bad translation. According to Trent you are excommunicated from the Catholic Church.


[

B]Isaiah 64:6[/B] But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
--Your works can do nothing for you until you are justified by faith and faith alone. They are as filthy rags, only to be thrown away. God doesn't even consider them.

He considers them when you live in faith. Because as Jesus said

Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do

and

If you love me, you will keep my commandments

and

Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me

and

If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. 24 Whoever does not love me does not keep my words.

Which is refutes your entire post. So I only put the essential part of your argument here.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I guess I will have to spend more time on some Catholic boards....that way I will get back up to speed.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

All that I need to do is observe what the Catholic does and compare that practice to what the Bible says. It is the Bible that is my only rule of faith and doctrine, not councils.

The truth DHK it isn't really the bible that is your ONLY RULE OF FAITH AND DOCTRINE. No. In reality its how you interpret the bible from the man made teaching that you are saved by faith alone where no where in the bible does it exclude faith from the fruits of faith. Which is why when the bible combines those two words together faith and alone ie faith alone it says you are not saved by faith alone. Faith first and primary yes. Exclude the fruits of faith (works of love) then you have dead faith just as James says.

When you have images of Christ, Mary, saints, etc., bow down in front of them, pray in front of them, then the Bible calls that idolatry.

Oh so when you kneel in front of your bed or bed frame or when an alter call has people kneeling in front of the podium you are worshiping your bed or your congregants are worshiping either the podium or the man who is pastor? This logic doesn't add up. Statues aren't the people themselves they are a representation to remind us of their obedience and faithfulness to God. Just like with the alter call we are not woshiping the thing in front of us but it is God and those images remind us how we should ourselves behave.

Are you a Jew? Do you practice Judaism?

I'm grafted in are you not?

Have you ever been transported into heaven as John was?

No. But I believe I will be at the resurrection.

Then those things don't apply to you. They weren't in the early churches. They weren't a part of the worship of the early church.

Oh come on. So now you pick and choose what the bible tells us? Thats not being bible alone. It certainly is dependent on your ability to interpret it and choose what you want to believe from it. Like a homosexual I know uses the bible to tell him what he wants to hear and dutifully ignores passages about homosexuality being wrong because its no longer "culturally relevant.

It comes from paganism.

It does not.

The eastern religions: Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism all use incense in many of their ritualis. Why copy them if you claim to be Christian? Hinduism existed long before Christianity did.

That is a riduculous argument! Those same people use wood, stone, steel to build their temples are we then not to use the same materials? Your logic doesn't follow.

Is that so??
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Mariolatry
--The dictionaries disagree with you.

Ok so there is a word Mariolatry that was probably newly placed in there however the Church teaches not to to be excessive in veneration of Mary. Not to treat her like God. The fact that some do is a direct opposition to Catholic Teaching. However, we do venerate her for her role in the incarnation and her continuing role praying for those of us still here.

You simply quoted a passage of Scripture that describes the instructions for the Israelites in building the tabernacle. What is your point?

You know exactly my point. That just because you make a statue to remind you of Heaven, Scriptures, or people doesn't mean you are woshiping those dead pieces of art. Any more than God was expecting the Israelites to worship the Cheribum on the Mercy seat. And since it was God's instruction to make an image after creatures in heaven that it isn't the making of the images that is wrong or even using those images on items tat are holy or venerated but treating those creatures like they are God. That is my point. And you know it is. The sheer fact that making an image is not wrong or all art work would be banned by God and he would contradict himself. Not God isn't saying art work is wrong. But making something for the specific purpose to hold that Item to be equal with God. Therefore money which is made by man fall under this catagory. God could just have easily said any paper you make with the intention of worshiping it is forbiden. But that wasn't the issue back then. Today it is the issue. Thus Money can fall under that commandment.

“You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

Not at all because you leave out the last part of that commandment

“You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me,
(Exodus 20:4-5 ESV)

jEmphasis bolded. Bowing and serving shows the intent of buiding these things as does the statement "for I am a Jelous God" The issue isn't making art work but replacing God with it. Some people today do exactly that place their art before God. Actresses allow themselves to fornicate on screen for all to watch. Painters give up their families for their work and placing their families in poverty not willing to give up their art to support their childrens or spouses needs. And the item themselves cannot provide anything. So if you have art work dipicting anything mentioned in this commandment then you have broken it if your interpretation is correct. I don't know about you but I don't choose to believe that God would contradict himself in the orders to make the Mercy Seat with carven images of angles on it.

That verse really bothers you doesn't it?

No as I just explained.

BTW, I have a copy of the Ten Commandments that I learned as a Catholic. They are quite different than the ones printed in Protestant literature, and as found in the Bible. You can tell me why can't you?

They aren't "quite different". They are numbered differently. They are the same ones And also know this both Catholic and Protestant order of 10 Commandments are ordered differently from how the Jews Order them. let me give you an example Catholic

1. I, the Lord, am your God. You shall not have other gods besides me.
2. You shall not take the name of the Lord God in vain (the create images falls as a subcatagory under this heading becaues the issue really is about serving God alone and not other man made things.
3. Remember to keep holy the Lord's Day
4. Honor your father and your mother
5. You shall not kill
6. You shall not commit adultery
7. You shall not steal
8. You shall not bear false witness
9. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife(though I personally agree both 9 and 10 are the same thing which is covetness but catholics want people to behave morally so the emphasis on this.
10. You shall not covet your neighbor's goods

Protestant commandments

1You shall have no other gods but me.
2You shall not make unto you any graven images.(because you guys hate anything Catholic! Just kidding. Because protestants in holding to the reformers found this a seperation point from Catholics because this was an issue for them. The fact is as you will see this isn't how the Jews divide the 10 commandments. I prefer the Jewish way of numbering the commandments btw.)
3.You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
4.You shall remember the Sabbath and keep it Holy.
5.Honor your mother and father.
6.You shall not murder.
7.You shall not commit adultery.
8.You shall not steal.
9.You shall not bear false witness.
10.You shall not covet anything that belongs to your neighbor.

The Jewish Commandments

1.I am the Lord your G-d who has taken you out of the land of Egypt.
2.You shall have no other gods but me. (Interesting to note the Jews but making images as a subcatagory as well and not like the protestants. Huh they must have the same view that the point wasn't making images but rather who you worshiped!)
3.You shall not take the name of the Lord your G-d in vain.
4.You shall remember the Sabbath and keep it Holy
5.Honor your mother and father.
6.You shall not murder.
7.You shall not commit adultery.
8.You shall not steal.
9.You shall not bear false witness.
10.You shall not covet anything that belongs to your neighbor.

So yes I do know why.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I guess I will have to spend more time on some Catholic boards....that way I will get back up to speed.

Cool........ Because I miss the 70's when saying cool was ... well... cool.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Cool........ Because I miss the 70's when saying cool was ... well... cool.

That started in the 60's "Dude" .... everything old is new again!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Which Forums do you recommend? & should I go in as who I am or Tony The Catlik?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Guess I should get into learnin Spanish too.....whats the best dialect for these "Illegal" on the street types?

 

[Thinkingstuff]

It seems to me that some of what Roman Catholics, and perhaps the Orthodox, have done in their communions is to reestablish to a degree the temple worship of the Old Testament.

To some degree this is correct. Because he don't dichotomize the OT from the NT but that they are unified telling the whole of Salvation history. And Christianity spead out from Judaism. And we see in Acts that the Apostles continued in temple worship and litrugical prayers and practices to a degree as well.

They maintain the incense, the candles, the priesthood, and the attire reminiscent of OT priests.

Well not the same attire as it is quite different. But the Clergy does have a special administrative roll.

They have replaced the blood offerings of the temple [the bulls and goats] with the Eucharist, the blood and body offering of Jesus Christ. Cannibalism??????

Well first of all the sacrifice we refer to is that one on Calvary not new sacrifices like new bulls etc...Second of all there is a union with God at communion. He joins himself to us even though he is always with us. And its based on Jesus' teaching about it. Lets note some interesting things. The first sin was by a meal. The Jews were fed by bread from heaven. in the Temple was the bread of the presentation. Jews communed with each other and God by eating the slain lamb. Jesus was born at Bethlehem which is translated place of bread. He was laid in a manger which is a feeding trough. He says that we must eat his flesh and drink his blood. And at the last supper he says this is my body and this is my blood. John the Baptist calls Jesus the lamb of God referring to the passover lamb which was eaten.

The pope is the high priest and much, much more, being the voice of God when speaking from Peter's chair, whatever that is! Just as Israel was guilty of doing Roman Catholicism has brought pagan practices into their communion.

God didn't get angry with Israel for having a high priest. And what he did get on them for was replacing God entirely for other gods.

Time and time again God brought Israel back from apostasy until finally he washed His hands of the dissident Northern Kingdom saying: Ephraim is joined to idols: let him alone. [Hosea 4:17]

Because they worshiped something other than God. And their high places were filled with Baals. Today some preachers do the samething. Money has become God for them. We can see it by loosening the morality of the Gospel and teaching that abortion is ok. Or that homosexual practices are ok. Or hell doesn't exist. So on and so forth.

Some came out: The great protestant Reformation. Sadly they did not come quite far enough and all retained some remnants of Rome.

Scripture also says there will be a great apostasy a falling away. Though I don't place this on protestants I could say that protestantsim is the sign of the great falling away. See what you can do when you rely on your own interpretation?

But God has never left Himself without a faithful witness on earth. Throughout the history of the Church those who are faithful to the Bible as the Word of God have constituted that witness. I believe that since the formation of Roman Catholicism there have always been the dissenters, faithful the Word of God, persecuted, slaughtered, but never destroyed and there still are.

BTW it wasn't the faithfulness to the bible that the Jews had an issue with but faithfulness to God himself. That is always the issue. Even when they were "following the Law" in Jesus' day they weren't following God.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Guess I should get into learnin Spanish too.....whats the best dialect for these "Illegal" on the street types?

Mexican I suspect........................

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Which Forums do you recommend? & should I go in as who I am or Tony The Catlik?

I always suggest being yourself.................