FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: "Hardliners"
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Who on this forum considers himself/herself a "hardliner" and thinks it is "hardliners" who get banned (as opposed to people who disrespect the Pope, act nasty, etc.)? 

ETA:  Define "hardliner."
(09-27-2012, 05:46 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: [ -> ]Who on this forum considers himself/herself a "hardliner" and thinks it is "hardliners" who get banned (as opposed to people who disrespect the Pope, act nasty, etc.)? 

I have seen several "hardliners" that have not been banned so yeah I think it's an "I can't control my anger and mouth-(fingers) right now" thing. Just my .02 cents.
I would not consider myself one, and would never call myself one.  But I've been called one, if that counts.

Of course, I don't really even know what that means.  Seems pretty relative.  I'm a hardliner compared to Fr Z, I'm a soft-liner compared to Gerry Matatics. 
I just call it like I see it.  If the SSPX screw up I will slag them off as much as any other camp.  Hard, yes. Hardliner, not really.

As Mith says, it is a relative term.
Aye, the term is too relative; I don't know if I would be considered a "hardliner" in fact, but I know I have the appearance of one when compared to the average NO neo-Catholic in my area, or my uber-low church Protestant extended family and friends.

I wouldn't mind being thought of as one; I'm naturally predisposed to unyielding beliefs and stances, especially when it comes to matters of faith.
I'm still here and am always given plenty of warning if I cross the line.  That being said it does seem I bit more touchy than it was the old days - but it is also not my forum.
(09-27-2012, 09:38 PM)NorthernTrad Wrote: [ -> ]I'm still here and am always given plenty of warning if I cross the line.  That being said it does seem I bit more touchy than it was the old days - but it is also not my forum.

NT!!  You should post more often.  :tiphat:
(09-27-2012, 09:41 PM)DrBombay Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-27-2012, 09:38 PM)NorthernTrad Wrote: [ -> ]I'm still here and am always given plenty of warning if I cross the line.  That being said it does seem I bit more touchy than it was the old days - but it is also not my forum.

NT!!  You should post more often.   :tiphat:

Thanks! I'm starting to find a little time now . :)
(09-27-2012, 05:46 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: [ -> ]Who on this forum considers himself/herself a "hardliner" and thinks it is "hardliners" who get banned (as opposed to people who disrespect the Pope, act nasty, etc.)? 

ETA:   Define "hardliner."

I think some people are too political and this leads to much contention.

This blog post sums up my thoughts on that matter: http://eens-vrs.blogspot.com/2012/07/the...olics.html

I do not know who gets banned, and I have not been banned, and I consider myself to be an extremist.

I think the term is relative, too, but some here have been using that term recently to describe themselves and seem to think that I only ban "hardliners." So I'm wanting to know what they mean by the term (whereas I maintain that people don't get banned for holding a position, but for how they might express it. I mean, I have sedevacantists posting here who haven't been banned, folks who are "SSPX or bust" in their thinking who haven't been banned, etc.)

I consider myself a "hardliner" as far as that goes. I believe everything in the Creed 100% and would die defending those beliefs if I had to (at least I assume I would, and want to if I had to). I believe that "outside the Church there is no salvation" (though I also believe there are those who are a part of the Soul of the Church who might not even know the Name of Jesus, by Whom and only by Whom a man can be saved). I loathe "the spirit of Vatican II" (though I don't know if  the documents of Vatican II themselves are problematic other than being ambiguous), want a full restoration of the traditional Sacramental rites, want catechesis to be a lot more hardcore and serious, want popular devotions to make a comeback, like the SSPX (though I've not attended any of their Masses), think acting on homosexual inclinations is a sin (though I have no problem whatsover with homosexuals themselves any more than I have a problem with people who are depressed or bipolar or whatever), think it is fine to respectfully question or dislike a papal action, etc.

I don't think it's the parenthetical statements that make some think I am not a "hardliner." I think that most of the folks who'd not consider me a "hardliner" would likely agree with those parenthetical statements, at least "in theory" (except maybe the bit about Vatican II's documents, which they most likely, as a group, couldn't explain clearly as to what the exact problems are). It sort of seems that what the "hardliners" (soi-disant) really mean by the term that they're really, really mad and express it often, even if it means name-calling, lots of exaggeration,* and talking disrespectfully about the Holy Father. Another thing I've noticed is that no criticism of the SSPX is tolerable to them (it seems more okay to them to criticize the Pope than the SSPX). Then again, I could be way off in my understanding of those who've been calling themselves "hardliners" and what they truly think. Hence the questions. I am trying to figure out what the self-described "hardliners" think (and I'd be interested to know what they think I think)...


* By exaggeration, I mean things like saying, for ex., "France is making saying mother and father illegal" when the reality (which is bad enough) is that they're changing their legal documents that refer to parents to read "parent 1" and "parent 2" instead of "father" and "mother." Or getting overly concerned with the difference between saying "Communion in the hand is inherently sacrilegious and needs to be abolished" (even though that's how the early Church did it) and "Communion in the hand leads to great  sacrilege and needs to be abolished." If a person believes the latter, even if he agrees with the "hardliner" that Communion in the hand needs to be abolished, he's a "modernist" or a "follower of the new theology" or what have you.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15