Removal of EF "vs" SSPX subforum
#11
LoL clearly that's it
LOL
Reply
#12
(01-30-2010, 12:48 PM)Clare Wrote:
(01-30-2010, 04:57 AM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: Vox and I have decided to end the EF "vs" SSPX subforum.  It has been moved to the archives and is now read only.

It doesn't appear to be "read only" at the moment!

That's because I'm an idiot and clicked the wrong thing.  Fixed.
Reply
#13
Probably for the best. We need unity not division.
Reply
#14
(01-30-2010, 11:00 AM)JayneK Wrote: Could I have more clarification please?  I'm not sure that I understand which type of discussions are not allowed.  Is it anything about SSPX or just comparing them to other sources of the TLM?

We will not attack SSPX, FSSP, ICK, OP, SJ, CMRI, ABC, or DEFG. :)

We will treat each other as equivalently Catholic, for the purposes of the forum at least (what you do in real-life or think is your business, just don't post it), no matter where we go to Mass.

If we are talking about, say, the SSPX vs FSSP approach to dealing with the crisis, it needs to be done in a civil manner without namecalling, etc.  Especially the charges of being "unCatholic"

If a letter by +W is posted and people want to critique it, fine, just as if a letter by Cdl. Mahony were posted and people want to critique it.  News reports are fine.

This is about warring factions not legitimate criticisms.  The "Inter-Nicean feuding" has gone from the ridiculous to the bizarre IMO.  Obviously, as with everything else on the forum, what's allowed or not comes down to my and Vox's subjective opinions.  That's an unfortunate reality.  But, the goal is not to stomp discussion - the goal is to stomp the nonsense, venom, hatred of others, etc. that seems to be pouring out around these discussions and in real life lately.

It saddens me because maybe now SSPX "vs" EF makes sense, but after the SSPX and Rome reconcile with each other, the SSPX will have to work along side the ICK, FSSP, etc.  The more animosity between factions that grows until then, the more difficult it will become.

We should beat on the Modernists and Liberals - not each other.
Reply
#15
(01-30-2010, 06:22 PM)BrevisVir55 Wrote: Probably for the best. We need unity not division.

Yes.  I think most of the disputes are unfounded anyway because on closer examination they are not always accurately representing one side or the other.   I have no problem being extremely Traditional about the Liturgy and thus a full supporter of SSPX while at the same time being very liberal ( in the Isaic sense of the word) and bohemian in my social life without considering it sinful because there is a lot more love and freedom in the Traditional Church than people expect until they actually practice Traditional Catholicism!

Reply
#16
(01-30-2010, 02:27 PM)Jacafamala Wrote:
(01-30-2010, 01:49 PM)salome Wrote:
(01-30-2010, 11:00 AM)JayneK Wrote: Could I have more clarification please?  I'm not sure that I understand which type of discussions are not allowed.  Is it anything about SSPX or just comparing them to other sources of the TLM?

I need clarification too.  My current thread my be violating this new rule.  I apologize if it is and you can lock the thread if need be.

I should think that pertains to the kinds of "us and them" discussions that could motivate animosity between SSPX and other trads.

Exactly right.  The net result is that those types of threads will be locked (in the past they were moved to the vs forum) and people who have a continual problem learning the new system will be sent on vacations or banned.
Reply
#17
(01-30-2010, 01:51 PM)devotedknuckles Wrote: Oh pls before u even think I'm against mexicans I can assure u I've spent enough time In mexico and have gotton enough parasites and e coli for good measure that I love the place and the people. I was even married there. And so thatg gives me the funnybones to say
Crazy Mexicans with no strings attached!
Sip

Did you have a piñata shaped like a wedding cake and when you pulled the string lots of little bottles of tequila fell out?
Reply
#18
(01-30-2010, 08:28 PM)Magnificat Wrote:
(01-30-2010, 01:51 PM)devotedknuckles Wrote: Oh pls before u even think I'm against mexicans I can assure u I've spent enough time In mexico and have gotton enough parasites and e coli for good measure that I love the place and the people. I was even married there. And so thatg gives me the funnybones to say
Crazy Mexicans with no strings attached!
Sip

Did you have a piñata shaped like a wedding cake and when you pulled the string lots of little bottles of tequila fell out?

:laughing:
Reply
#19
(01-30-2010, 01:51 PM)devotedknuckles Wrote: Oh pls before u even think I'm against mexicans I can assure u I've spent enough time In mexico and have gotton enough parasites and e coli for good measure that I love the place and the people. I was even married there. And so thatg gives me the funnybones to say
Crazy Mexicans with no strings attached!
Sip

Yeah, the Mexicans are passionate like the crazy Italians.  DK and I are proof of that.

If only there were a simple way to harness that passion and get them to throw out the Freemasons and make Mexico the Catholic state it was destined to be.
Reply
#20
Texas is right next door to Mexico and our governor's election is ridiing pretty heavily on the question of secession/nullification, from what I can see....   The new bishop in my diocese is a native Texan of Mexican extraction and in spite of my frustration at times with all the Spanish language I do think we will see something good happen because the Mexican-Americans do  not fall for the &*^%$#@ lib-theo that the Franciscans are trying to shove at everyone.

Those well-scrubbed gringo socialist Catholics who think they are leading a Mexican revolution in Texas just because they are managing the food pantries are in for a very rude awakening when Texas starts seceding and they discover that the Mexican-Americans with strong Catholic culture are our allies and in general much more likely to support Traditionalism than to  continue selling their souls for Obama's food stamps! 
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)