[InfiniteFaith]

In response to the original post...

I have met Catholics who believe that 1) ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is genetic for some 2) in the case that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is genetic...ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is OK.

This was a priest who told me this. I have also met regular "Catholics" who say this as well. The diocese that I am in right now has evidently dealt with many Catholics who hold and speak about these views. Apparently, Rome dispatched an auxiliary Bishop to keep an eye on the matter. He has been here for 10 years, and I still hear people talking about how they think ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is OK.

I really think they should be excommunicated.

[Dellery]

The quotes you provide from Vetus only prove that he was behaving the way I described. You just proved my own argument without realizing it.

By the way, I don't mean the entire moderating team approves of Vetus.

He certainly did.
KK, one can not be blamed for thinking it's particularly bizarre that Protestants are allowed to engage in sophistry against Catholics on a Catholic forum. Moreover, that's not even mentioning this insult that the aforementioned apostate sophist (vetus ordo) is apparently allowed to level against your fellow Catholic: "Properly speaking, yours is not a Catholic mindset. It's more of a cultic mindset based on fear and self-reclusion.". Whatever perceived indiscretion SSS may have committed on your forum should be qualified with the expected indignation any Catholic would feel after being assaulted by Christ's enemies on a forum that calls itself 'Traditionally Catholic'.

What are you too afraid of being a 'big meany' to properly conduct yourself and your forum in a just and manful manner?

Thankfully SSS, we have a forum like Cathinfo, which is not administrated by a sissy, and therefore silences heretics and apostates in the tradition of our fathers, consequently letting Catholics discuss the pressing matters of the day, instead of having to divert their time defending themselves from every insolent renegade with an opinion.

[Spork]

Did not KK say that Vetus Ordo's posts were deleted? Furthermore, KK detailed quite clearly that authentic Catholic teaching is not to be insulted and if so, the authors of such are to be admonished. Let this go already. You want perfect? Get to Heaven.

[Dellery]

Did not KK say that Vetus Ordo's posts were deleted? Furthermore, KK detailed quite clearly that authentic Catholic teaching is not to be insulted and if so, the authors of such are to be admonished. Let this go already. You want perfect? Get to Heaven.

Select quotes were, others not, did you follow the link KK posted?
He allows Proddies to comment on the nature of the Church, engage in sophistry and insult against his fellow Catholics, and goes so far as to allow said Proddie, Vetus Ordo, to defend his perverted theology: " As for the Protestant Church promoting the idea that both parents "should work even without necessity," that's just one of those unsubstantiated claims that float around ready to be regurgitated at the most convenient occasion by zealous ultramontanes."

My above post stands...

[ServusSpiritusSancti]

Spork, the posts KK posted were NOT deleted. He said that previous posts from Vetus had been deleted.

Dellery is correct, Vetus posted rubbish and nothing was done about it.

[OHCA]

I have been back on FE recently and it has a different feel to it than a year or so ago.  Seems very passive--since when has Catholicism been excessively passive.  The fαɢɢօt term "big meany" [I can't hardly even type this without a lisp] is a common "slur" found there these days too.

[Kaesekopf]

Dellery:
When I read Vetus's post that said "Properly speaking, yours is not a Catholic mindset. It's more of a cultic mindset based on fear and self-reclusion," it sounded to me (and it still sounds that way) that Vetus was attacking the sedevacantist thesis and other trends in SSS's posts.  His statement of "fear and self-reclusion" seems to be spot-on.  SSS continually admonishes people to avoid universities because they are allegedly cesspools of sin and that if a degree must be obtained, best to do it online so one is not infected by the spirit of worldliness.  Sounds like "fear and self-reclusion" by definition to me.  

I am not sure what the personal attacks are doing in your post, Dellery.  Are they becoming of a traditional Catholic man?  

And, yes, CathInfo silences heretics and apostates, but in the past permitted such pernicious opinions as those of the Ibranyi-type home-aloners and Feenyites.  That Matthew banned the persons responsible for those posts is commendable, but it occurred after the posts were made.  However, the current promotion on this forum of 'race-mixing' as a mortal sin and grave matter is a scandal to the Catholic men and women produced in Catholic Mexico and around the world hundreds of years before WASPs attached to it the stigma of taboo.  I don't see how a Catholic could ever say or tolerate that "race-mixing" is grave matter.  And yet it's published and permitted here at CathInfo without a word against it by you two.

Besides, a Catholic on the Internet should have a thick enough skin and sufficient brains to not be emotionally wounded by someone in error calling them a name.  

Spork:
Vetus Ordo's questionable (anti-Catholic posts) were removed.  The posts in the long post I made on page 24 remain.

[Telesphorus]

There was one, maybe two posters who argued that interracial marriage was a mortal sin.

What's certain is that that person did not have much sympathy or agreement.  He is someone who considers himself Catholic who had an odd idea.  Not a Protestant who is favored while criticizing other Catholics.

[ServusSpiritusSancti]

it sounded to me (and it still sounds that way) that Vetus was attacking the sedevacantist thesis and other trends in SSS's posts.

I never even mentioned sedevacantism in that thread.

SSS continually admonishes people to avoid universities because they are allegedly cesspools of sin and that if a degree must be obtained, best to do it online so one is not infected by the spirit of worldliness.  Sounds like "fear and self-reclusion" by definition to me.

Wow, you're quite "of the world", aren't you? You seem to buy into secularism, your mindset is not Traditional at all. I recall you making fun of a picture of some modestly-dressed women on here several months back.

Don't tell me my position is "fear and self-reclusion". College IS full of sin. I did not even discuss college degrees with Vetus, he made those remarks to me because I said a woman with kids shouldn't work outside the home. It appears that you agree with him, because you don't seem to object to it. The Church, however, disagrees with you.

The way you're acting is disgraceful, KK. Instead of putting the blame on a Protestant for accusing me of "heresy", you put the blame on me. I'm amazed that you allow something like that yet dare to call you forum a "Traditional Catholic forum".

However, the current promotion on this forum of 'race-mixing' as a mortal sin and grave matter is a scandal to the Catholic men and women produced in Catholic Mexico and around the world hundreds of years before WASPs attached to it the stigma of taboo.  I don't see how a Catholic could ever say or tolerate that "race-mixing" is grave matter.  And yet it's published and permitted here at CathInfo without a word against it by you two.

I hardly read the racial threads here, I have no interest in discussing the subject.

Allowing promotion of "race-mixing", however, is not as bad as allowing a Protestant to insult other Trads. I think it's sad that you can't take responsibility for your actions and admit that allowing something like that is wrong.

Besides, a Catholic on the Internet should have a thick enough skin and sufficient brains to not be emotionally wounded by someone in error calling them a name.

It's not about me being called a name, KK. You should never allow a Protesant to get away with accusing other Trads of "heresy" and attempting to lead souls astray. If I were you, I'd put an end to that, because you're going to be held accountable on Judgement Day for it.

[Spork]

There was one, maybe two posters who argued that interracial marriage was a mortal sin.

What's certain is that that person did not have much sympathy or agreement.  He is someone who considers himself Catholic who had an odd idea.  Not a Protestant who is favored while criticizing other Catholics.

I don't think Vetus is favored at SD. That he is allowed be a member is one thing, but to say that he is favored is ridiculous. It appears that some here completely throw objectivity out the window and revel in the burning the candles at both ends. And there is without a doubt a preponderance of racialist-type posting here. Why don't the best Catholics in the world to have ever lived, i.e. the posters at Cathinfo, substitute the accomplishments of non Anglo/Western European saints instead of focusing base energies on race.

[Dellery]

Dellery:
When I read Vetus's post that said "Properly speaking, yours is not a Catholic mindset. It's more of a cultic mindset based on fear and self-reclusion," it sounded to me (and it still sounds that way) that Vetus was attacking the sedevacantist thesis and other trends in SSS's posts.  His statement of "fear and self-reclusion" seems to be spot-on.  SSS continually admonishes people to avoid universities because they are allegedly cesspools of sin and that if a degree must be obtained, best to do it online so one is not infected by the spirit of worldliness.  Sounds like "fear and self-reclusion" by definition to me.  

I am not sure what the personal attacks are doing in your post, Dellery.  Are they becoming of a traditional Catholic man?  

And, yes, CathInfo silences heretics and apostates, but in the past permitted such pernicious opinions as those of the Ibranyi-type home-aloners and Feenyites.  That Matthew banned the persons responsible for those posts is commendable, but it occurred after the posts were made.  However, the current promotion on this forum of 'race-mixing' as a mortal sin and grave matter is a scandal to the Catholic men and women produced in Catholic Mexico and around the world hundreds of years before WASPs attached to it the stigma of taboo.  I don't see how a Catholic could ever say or tolerate that "race-mixing" is grave matter.  And yet it's published and permitted here at CathInfo without a word against it by you two.

Besides, a Catholic on the Internet should have a thick enough skin and sufficient brains to not be emotionally wounded by someone in error calling them a name.  

Spork:
Vetus Ordo's questionable (anti-Catholic posts) were removed.  The posts in the long post I made on page 24 remain.

SSS was insulted by an apostate on your forum, your opinion is not a factor, he took offense to what was said about him, and I do too for that matter. The fact you actually let a Protestant attack Sedevacantists on your forum is all the testimony needed to condemn your blatantly IRRESPONSIBLE management of what is supposed to be a Catholic forum. Forum owners need to understand the responsibility they have to properly convey the Faith without scandal.
In all honesty the fact you would allow an apostate to attack Sedevacantism is nothing short of despicable.

Also in regard to this comment: " I don't see how a Catholic could ever say or tolerate that "race-mixing" is grave matter.  And yet it's published and permitted here at CathInfo without a word against it by you two." due diligence would keep you out of these embarrassing situations...

Dellery Said:

Sometimes the greatest punishment is getting exactly what we want, the Hebrews were punished this way in the past, who's to say their impersonators will not meet the same fate? God works through His Church, by making your ridiculous claims of divinely abominable ethnically mixed marriages, you give the impression that you believe the Church has been lacking in Her maternal guidance, and feel the need to fill a supposed void with your own personal judgements.  
---
At this point in our discussion this isn't even about non-miscegenation, for which there can be noble reasons, but your insistence that ethnic mixing is an abomination before Our Lord, and that when choosing a spouse one should prioritize genetics and ethnicity above the faith.
---
This does not grant you the authority to personally interpret Scripture, and condemn a valid Catholic marriage between people of mixed ethnicity as being abominable. So in other words: You have no authority. If you haven't received your authority from the Church, from who God works through, any authority you perceive to have comes from your own pride of discernment.

You can search my post history for other posts of mine pertaining to this matter.

[Telesphorus]

I don't think Vetus is favored at SD. That he is allowed be a member is one thing, but to say that he is favored is ridiculous. It appears that some here completely throw objectivity out the window and revel in the burning the candles at both ends. And there is without a doubt a preponderance of racialist-type posting here. Why don't the best Catholics in the world to have ever lived, i.e. the posters at Cathinfo, substitute the accomplishments of non Anglo/Western European saints instead of focusing base energies on race.

Well, I'm not defending allowing those posts to stand here.  I have asked for bans of posters who I consider to have a non-Catholic agenda.  I'm not tolerant of something just because it's politically incorrect.

I haven't been on the site but it does appear from what's been recounted here that the poster in question was being shown some favor by mods there.

The real threat on nearly all trad boards is creeping liberalism, that is apparent everywhere.

The danger of allowing some slightly crazy racists on this board is that their posts are used to discredit the rest of us.  That being said, it's hard to draw the line without acting like a liberal.  I think calling miscegenation a mortal sin is crossing the line though.

[Telesphorus]

The real threat to Catholic tradition is liberalism, not any sort of rigorism.

Now it's true that rigorists can cause problems.  However, trads in general are not rigorists no matter what anyone says.

The three main problems facing Tradition seem to be:

1) liberalism (feminism, laxism, suburban bourgeois values)
2) sectarianism (excessive concern with particulars)
3) authoritarianism (excessive submission to the will that suggests a lack of knowledge and self-assuredness with regard to Faith)

These three taken together amplify the discord in the Traditional Catholic movement.

So far the Resistance is still relatively free of these problems.  It's very fortunate.

All three need to be vigilantly guarded against.

[ServusSpiritusSancti]

There was one, maybe two posters who argued that interracial marriage was a mortal sin.

What's certain is that that person did not have much sympathy or agreement.  He is someone who considers himself Catholic who had an odd idea.  Not a Protestant who is favored while criticizing other Catholics.

I don't think Vetus is favored at SD. That he is allowed be a member is one thing, but to say that he is favored is ridiculous. It appears that some here completely throw objectivity out the window and revel in the burning the candles at both ends. And there is without a doubt a preponderance of racialist-type posting here. Why don't the best Catholics in the world to have ever lived, i.e. the posters at Cathinfo, substitute the accomplishments of non Anglo/Western European saints instead of focusing base energies on race.

Only two other members on SD sided with me and against Vetus. That should give you a general idea of what people over there think of him.

[Spork]

The real threat to Catholic tradition is liberalism, not any sort of rigorism.

Now it's true that rigorists can cause problems.  However, trads in general are not rigorists no matter what anyone says.

The three main problems facing Tradition seem to be:

1) liberalism (feminism, laxism, suburban bourgeois values)
2) sectarianism (excessive concern with particulars)
3) authoritarianism (excessive submission to the will that suggests a lack of knowledge and self-assuredness with regard to Faith)

These three taken together amplify the discord in the Traditional Catholic movement.

So far the Resistance is still relatively free of these problems.  It's very fortunate.

All three need to be vigilantly guarded against.

#1: I agree 100%
#2: seems to be the rule of the day here.
#3: cf. #1.

In regards to #2, that is evident within the Society in regards to +Williamson. In regards to the liberalism/modernism that exists at FE, the comments by members there in regards to +Williamson's 2/10 EC is all the proof one needs to the fact that FE is to be avoided due to its aforesaid designations. A certain poster called the Bishop "odious", but he attends Society Masses. The 2/10/13 EC would be well received at SD(and here too).