Well done, good and faithful Fisheaters
#31
Sorry to see you go; I'd missed your posts of late. Also your essay on traditional Catholicism is the gold standard. Best regards.
Reply
#32
To everything their is a season. Plus you guys realize WRC, my pal, is jabbing us with his title of this ? No ?

tim
Reply
#33
My mom really liked your essay on traditional Catholics too.  Sorry to see you go, you'll be missed.  Best of luck.
Reply
#34
WRC, you've always been one of my very favorite posters.  I hope you come back at some point, or at least keep in touch with the forum.

At any rate, I'll always cherish the Beiber book.  Take care, man.  God bless you and your family.
Reply
#35
I remember in the old days when it was claimed he was a GW Bush lookalike.....
Reply
#36
Great, my only connection to Mark Walberg gone.  sad sad

Reply
#37
You all realize I was the cad that said his pic looked like "W" ?  He's one of perhaps a dozen here I seek to see what they wrote.


tim
Reply
#38
(02-26-2012, 12:42 AM)INPEFESS Wrote:
(02-26-2012, 12:07 AM)Vox Clamantis Wrote:
(02-25-2012, 11:39 PM)INPEFESS Wrote: WRC, you and I didn't always agree on everything (who ever does?), but I definitely respected you as a poster. The general silliness that has infected fisheaters (especially the "meme" responses) are very perturbing to me, but I have learned that it is just as silly to let myself become bothered by something so silly. Though you were often a contributer of these silly responses, I didn't hold it against you. I attributed my frustration more to my own failures than to you. Your apology is accepted. 

I like silliness myself. I think people need to lighten up some and have some fun once in a while.

Of course. But "once in a while" is a very different thing from one's standard and default "modus operandi," which is what I was referring to.
Quote:
(02-25-2012, 11:39 PM)INPEFESS Wrote: I have made many of the same observations as yourself, which is one of the reasons I post much less. Fighting for the "TLM only" is now a very controversial position to hold, which never used to be the case, and one finds one's self having to defend such a view now more than ever. This is not the reason we came here. We came here to get away from those people; now, even here "TLM only" people are treated as though they are enemies of the Church. (I don't want to start a debate about it here; I just want to point out that it is very disheartening to those of us who have seen this position creep into traditional Catholicism and cause division from within.) 

The definition of "traditional Catholicism" that this forum goes by, and which is linked to in the forum's introductory page, is here:  http://fisheaters.com/traditionalcatholicism.html. It says, toward the bottom:

Quote: Depending on how he understands the nature of Christian obedience, schism, and the validity of the Novus Ordo Mass, a given traditional Catholic layman might have firm opinions for or against the advisability of worshiping outside of diocesan structures, or, conversely, he might worship at more than one of the above Mass settings without qualm.


A given traditional Catholic might equally like both the F.S.S.P. and the S.S.P.X., thinking it good that there are those fighting for (at least) some level of Tradition both inside and outside of ordinary diocesan structures, while another may think one group superior to the other or even that one group is unacceptable for some reason.


Some refuse to attend Novus Ordo Masses (except for funerals and weddings of family and friends), thinking it invalid or believing it "morally impossible" to do so because they see it -- not because of what it is, inherently, but because of what it isn't, what it lacks -- as too dangerous to the Faith to support, even if valid. If they have no access to the traditional Mass, some of these traditional Catholics become "home-aloners" making do like our forbears during various persecutions. Other traditionalists may attend Novus Ordo Masses out of their understanding of the requirements of obedience if the traditional Mass is unavailable in their area, while doing all in their power to find a traditional Mass.


Trads can and obviously do disagree about the validity of the N.O. Mass, the wisdom of attending it if that's all that's available, and so on. I don't see what the big deal is, especially since, right below that section quoted above, there is a section that lists what all trads agree on. I don't see why it'd be so upsetting for someone who refuses to attend a N.O. Mass to hear that another trad does when that's all there is, or why a trad who might attend a N.O. Mass thinks that another trad who wouldn't, under any circumstances, is wrong. So they disagree. I also say on the forum's rules page:

Quote: And, please, for the love of all that's holy, cushion personal opinions and conclusions about where and how to worship, etc., in phrases such as "in my opinion" or "it seems to me" or "this is what my family has decided to do" -- and don't pretend to be speaking authoritatively unless you are known all over the world as Pope Benedict XVI. Don't generalize your personal experiences, callings, preferences, and sense of aesthetics such that what you've decided is right for you and your family with regard to worship, penance, devotions, how to dress modestly, which music to listen to, whether or not to watch TV, etc., is a must for all Catholics everywhere. The old "I live on Communion Hosts and water like St. So-and-So. Everyone should! No, everyone must! It's Church teaching! Anyone who doesn't do that isn't a 'real Catholic' or a 'real trad'!" routine won't fly here. Purveyors of such arrogance and judgmentalism will get gone.


Each trad has to consider Church teaching, the nature of the TLM and NO Masses, what's available to him where he lives, the requirements of obedience and what that means in his own particular life --- and shouldn't judge others for thinking differently. I don't see why people just can't cope with that and be cool with people who disagree. And if there's a thread where such a discussion is going on and a poster doesn't like it, there are other threads around to engage in. Some people like to debate such things; others (like me) don't. The forum's big enough for all of us if people would just chill and not pretend to be the Pope or to know other people's hearts, minds, and circumstances. KWIM?

Again, of course. It isn't that they aren't allowed here. It is simply that there are much more of them (as regular posters) now. They routinely take TLM-only traditionalists to task for voicing their opinion that one should not attend the new liturgy. It isn't that this opinion isn't allowed here; rather, it is that their sheer numbers have the effect of making traditional Catholics apprehensive about saying what they are members of this forum to be able to say.

INPEFESS - I guess this goes to show that even Traditional Catholicism can be infiltrated - and a one-time more trad friendly site can be as well.  IMHO, what passes as Traditional Catholicism by many on this board is just simply wrong and an affront to all that true Traditionalism is.  Without the hard stance of the "TLM only crowd," namely the SSPX, then these types wouldn't even know what Traditional Catholicism was because it would have never existed, thus they would never have been able to infect it to begin with.  It is all really sad to me.  It all comes down to lack of courage and conviction.  I know people make the journey to the proper position, but it seems these days that the journey has ended with a re-defined "Traditionalism."

And WRC, I am sure that we as well haven't seen eye-to-eye on several occasions, but you are a long-timer here and it is a damn shame to see you leave.
Reply
#39
(02-26-2012, 08:58 PM)DrBombay Wrote: Bah.  This just isn't done.  No sir, this just isn't done.

If I have to spend the next 76 days plowing through a bunch of dry-as-desert-dust Church Fathers, then you have to be here reading all these 20 something women hating habitual masturbators.  It's only fair.  Consider it helping me carry my cross for the good of the Church and the future of Renaissance priestliness.  Ecclesiology...it's not just for clerics.  The layman has to do his part too.  You hear me?

Reset.  Try again, Joe.

Again, you have keen insight.  I'm down to just doing occasional "drive-by's" on FE anymore.  I just don't have the patience necessary to tolerate the clique of 20-somethings with a narcissistic attitude who boast of their alcohol consumption and not only defend, but glorify the use of profanity as if it were a virtue.
Reply
#40
Many a diamond in the rough here. Ides, many a diamond in the rough.
"Not only are we all in the same boat, but we are all seasick.” --G.K. Chesterton
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)