Author Topic: Evidence that Open-Rosary-Wearing was Normative in Days before the Council (Read 4834 times)

icarlytradcath · « **Reply #30 on:** June 29, 2026, 02:51:56 AM »

Quote from: icarlytradcath on June 28, 2026, 06:17:01 PM

I just think the word "scandal" is muddled in many trads' minds.
Per the 1910 Catholic DictionaryNow let's say for the sake of argument that a man sees you wearing a rosary and thinks "Oh, that guy is wearing a rosary, he must be a gang member" he's in factual error but where exactly is the sin? Being in factual error about a stranger isn't a sin.

If you say rash judgement, that's not really what that is either. That's about confidently believing the worst about someone, even when you can't know or the evidence is minimal, because of pride, fraternal hatred, unthinkingness, desire to gossip, etc.

It's not really about being in error about someone else.

So for example, if I see a stranger walking down the street and I change routes because he looks like he might be a mugger, but he isn't, that's a factual error / risk assesment, not a rash judgement. The judgement is "that guy looks like he may be a criminal, even if he isn't, I'd rather not risk it". This is not a sin. And the guy dressed like he may be a criminal isn't comitting a sin either.

A rash judgement would be someone saying "Oh you saw Jake talking with a girl at a café yesterday? He's 100% cheating on his girlfriend, I hate that guy". It's not really something that's in your control or that you can really influence. In that sense it's closer to what's called pharisaical scandal, you can't stop doing good or neutral things because of the pharisees.

I guess what I mean is I see trads throw "scandal" and "scandalous" around very casually and conflate them with the vulgar meaning whereas it has a very specific meaning in Catholicism and a very high threshold.

Simple faux-pases or things you dislike or things which might draw attention aren't scandalous in the slightest.

I'll repeat it because it's a good example, a tradcath man wearing a pink leather jacket to the mall is not being scandalous in the slightest, and even if someone thinks he's gαy, that is not scandal or sin, that is just an understandable factual error based on heuristics, cultural signifiers and information asymmetry, we all do this, it's called a working hypothesis, which crucially, is open to change given other pieces of information, there is no sin being committed.

To give an even clearer example, wearing a ski mask because it's cold and you want to protect your face might make some people change streets thinking you're a mugger, but that is not a sin for either party. We all know we have to assume the worst when it comes to strangers, even though we reserve actual final and confident judgement, because a false positive is much less risky than a false negative. It's just part of navigating the world.

And if you want to say "Well it might not be scandalous, but it's not befitting for a traditional Catholic man" that's your personal or subcultures' opinion. Don't moralize it.

For that matter, you might find a tradcath wearing this on the street tacky or cringe or "unbefitting", but it's not scandalous or sinful in the slightest.

icarlytradcath · « **Reply #31 on:** June 29, 2026, 03:30:28 AM »

Quote from: icarlytradcath on June 29, 2026, 02:51:56 AM

I guess what I mean is I see trads throw "scandal" and "scandalous" around very casually and conflate them with the vulgar meaning whereas it has a very specific meaning in Catholicism and a very high threshold.

Simple faux-pases or things you dislike or things which might draw attention aren't scandalous in the slightest.

I'll repeat it because it's a good example, a tradcath man wearing a pink leather jacket to the mall is not being scandalous in the slightest, and even if someone thinks he's gαy, that is not scandal or sin, that is just an understandable factual error based on heuristics, cultural signifiers and information asymmetry, we all do this, it's called a working hypothesis, which crucially, is open to change given other pieces of information, there is no sin being committed.

To give an even clearer example, wearing a ski mask because it's cold and you want to protect your face might make some people change streets thinking you're a mugger, but that is not a sin for either party. We all know we have to assume the worst when it comes to strangers, even though we reserve actual final and confident judgement, because a false positive is much less risky than a false negative. It's just part of navigating the world.

And if you want to say "Well it might not be scandalous, but it's not befitting for a traditional Catholic man" that's your personal or subcultures' opinion. Don't moralize it.

For that matter, you might find a tradcath wearing this on the street tacky or cringe or "unbefitting", but it's not scandalous or sinful in the slightest.

Also of note is that misusing "scandalous" in this way is deeply evil, if you tell your friend "Hey man I dislike that holographic jacket, I think it's tacky and cringe" that's fine but when you say "Hey man I think that jacket is scandalous" you're basically playing God and using him as a hammer to bully other people into submission and conformity. Basically weaponizing their own conscience and piety. It's spiritual abuse.

If anything that's one of the bigger parts of what the Second Commandment is about, not so much exclamations, but using God and His name as your own petty instrument.

By the way I acknowledge this is kinda off-topic and I don't think anyone in this thread was doing what I'm describing, I just think it's something worth saying.

TomGubbinsKimmage · « **Reply #32 on:** June 29, 2026, 05:37:44 AM »

Quote from: icarlytradcath on June 29, 2026, 03:30:28 AM

Also of note is that misusing "scandalous" in this way is deeply evil, if you tell your friend "Hey man I dislike that holographic jacket, I think it's tacky and cringe" that's fine but when you say "Hey man I think that jacket is scandalous" you're basically playing God and using him as a hammer to bully other people into submission and conformity. Basically weaponizing their own conscience and piety. It's spiritual abuse.

If anything that's one of the bigger parts of what the Second Commandment is about, not so much exclamations, but using God and His name as your own petty instrument.

By the way I acknowledge this is kinda off-topic and I don't think anyone in this thread was doing what I'm describing, I just think it's something worth saying.

This is true. But boomers and the effeminate have had a grasp on tradition for far too long.

To be fair, it is literally the worst crises the Church has ever gone under, so it is understandably traumatic. Not making excuses, but Genz and alpha have to do their part in being symapthetic, while not accepting nonsense of course.

Check out St. Benedict Labre. Homeless. Wandered about on pilgrimages everywhere. But everyone thought he was a bum and avoided him because of his appearance. Turns out he was one of the holiest men of his times.

This is not an excuse for being slovenly, but it is a lesson to be careful in judging people by their appearances.

icarlytradcath · « **Reply #33 on:** June 29, 2026, 06:08:13 AM »

Quote from: TomGubbinsKimmage on June 29, 2026, 05:37:44 AM

This is true. But boomers and the effeminate have had a grasp on tradition for far too long.

To be fair, it is literally the worst crises the Church has ever gone under, so it is understandably traumatic. Not making excuses, but Genz and alpha have to do their part in being symapthetic, while not accepting nonsense of course.

Check out St. Benedict Labre. Homeless. Wandered about on pilgrimages everywhere. But everyone thought he was a bum and avoided him because of his appearance. Turns out he was one of the holiest men of his times.

This is not an excuse for being slovenly, but it is a lesson to be careful in judging people by their appearances.

You're right, it's understandable it happens.

I love St. Labre, I have a had a devotion to him for a few years, he's one of the first saints I read about. I think in almost every "sensitive young man" there is that desire to do like Labre. Walk through Europe, begging or singing a tune for a few coins. And people would say "But what about the cold, hunger, rain, etc.", missing that that's part of the appeal, it's about being *alive* and *in a body* and like a little bird of Christ. Though it's true inmigration has made Europe way less safe.

Check out Saint Nicholas of Trani, very interesting story.

https://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2018/06/saint-nicholas-pilgrim-and-fool-for.html

TomGubbinsKimmage · « **Reply #34 on:** June 29, 2026, 12:16:57 PM »

Thanks for that! I have never heard of him.

Maybe you should do it but get an electric scooter instead to ride on. Gen z style...

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Evidence that Open-Rosary-Wearing was Normative in Days before the Council (Read 4834 times)

icarlytradcath

Re: Evidence that Open-Rosary-Wearing was Normative in Days before the Council

icarlytradcath

Re: Evidence that Open-Rosary-Wearing was Normative in Days before the Council

TomGubbinsKimmage

Re: Evidence that Open-Rosary-Wearing was Normative in Days before the Council

icarlytradcath

Re: Evidence that Open-Rosary-Wearing was Normative in Days before the Council

TomGubbinsKimmage

Re: Evidence that Open-Rosary-Wearing was Normative in Days before the Council