Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: Last Tradhican on November 10, 2017, 06:01:54 AM
-
My thread "Why I do Not Push the Sede Position" is a perfect example of a subject of discussion turning into a food fight. Except for like 3-4 postings, everything posted in the 5 pages after my OP has nothing to do with the OP. Someone mentions baptism of desire of the catechumen, which has nothing to do with the thread and another one about the sede position in general and then from there starts a food fight about personal issues between the posters.
My OP is not a big deal, but if the OP were a really important teaching, it would have been totally obscured by the chaff that comes afterwards, ALL from unfocused minds whether purposeful to obscure, or done unknowingly.
Here’s my advice from years of experience, stay focused on the subject, ignore personal attacks against you. Do not respond to postings that have nothing to do with the subject of the OP. Do not respond to women who debate (No problem answering the ladies who ask questions sincerely). Some men debate like women, taking everything personal, do not let them get your goat, they are like children. Would you debate with a child?
-
I am interested in following the discussion on this topic. Perhaps I will have something to add later.
-
Yeah, I've been complaining about this for years. ANY question related to the crisis in the Church quickly blows up into a rehash of every single Sedevacantist vs. R&R argument ever made. EVERY thread about a specific or limited aspect of the "Feeneyite" question turns into a full-blown rehash of the entire debate. It gets old. People need to confine themselves to the specific topic raised by the OP. Not sure if there's a way to enforce this.
So, for instance, the thread about "Why so many Feeneyites on CI?" is a very narrow topic. This should NOT have blown up into a debate of all things Feeneyism. But it was inevitable.
-
So, for instance, the thread about "Why so many Feeneyites on CI?" is a very narrow topic. This should NOT have blown up into a debate of all things Feeneyism. But it was inevitable.
Yes, that is a good example, your first comment that you made on that thread answered the question posed. Actually nothing else needed to be said except maybe further elaboration on your answer for those less informed on the subject.
-
It's a fantastic example, of echo chamber construction.
-
I understand it could be annoying however it is the normal development of any conversation. Even in speaking in person, the conversation often spins off topic.
When a person joins a forum they should have a thicker skin or just remain a lurker.
Not wanting to address a woman is an example of weakness. Perhaps the person should start his topics on the men only forum if he is so afraid a woman might make a good point against his agenda.
Also, any vicious ad hominem used mainly by men is a clear sign they have no control and their logic is skewed.
In otherwords, they lost it.
-
From my long experience, scripture is right on the money with this advice:
"But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to use authority over the man: but to be in silence" (1Tim 2:12).
This is why I said: "Do not respond to women who debate (No problem answering the ladies who ask questions sincerely).
The same applies to bickering men who have nothing to offer in a discussion, if no one would respond to them, they would disappear. Like I said "Some men debate like women, taking everything personal, do not let them get your goat, they are like children. Would you debate with a child?"
-
Just for the record, I have never considered myself a teacher.
I do however, post what the Church TEACHES.
-
This is why I said: "Do not respond to women who debate (No problem answering the ladies who ask questions sincerely).
The same applies to bickering men who have nothing to offer in a discussion, if no one would respond to them, they would disappear. Like I said "Some men debate like women, taking everything personal, do not let them get your goat, they are like children. Would you debate with a child?"
There is no question that men do it too, but, like you, I associate taking things personally more with female posters.
You did not mention the flip side of this, which is to avoid making personal attacks. I try to always address the argument itself, rather than comment on the person. (I might not always succeed, but I try.)
Also, I find that learning whom one should ignore helps a lot. Certain people or certain characteristics just push my buttons too much for me to deal with properly. That's usually a situation where I should just walk away.
-
Just for the record, I have never considered myself a teacher.
I do however, post what the Church TEACHES.
Sometimes there is a fine line between them. I know that I struggle with this. I really do not want to teach men or even seem like I am teaching men, but I do like to share Church teaching.
-
Sometimes there is a fine line between them. I know that I struggle with this. I really do not want to teach men or even seem like I am teaching men, but I do like to share Church teaching.
Thus far, best I've read, you do quite well in this regard ma'am; so, please don't scruple yourself to tatters about it.
Too much is as bad as too little.
-
Sometimes there is a fine line between them. I know that I struggle with this. I really do not want to teach men or even seem like I am teaching men, but I do like to share Church teaching.
I wonder what they think of nuns teaching. I merely repeat what the nuns taught me, and I too like to share Church teachings.
-
I wonder what they think of nuns teaching. I merely repeat what the nuns taught me, and I too like to share Church teachings.
I thought that nuns taught children. Did nuns ever teach men before Vatican II?
-
What were you expecting from your first OP? Did you just want folks to agree or disagree without saying anything else? I didn't respond but I think it would be hard not to add comments about sedevacantism and EENS given that was the main thrust of the OP.
-
I thought that nuns taught children. Did nuns ever teach men before Vatican II?
They also taught high school young men or if you prefer to say, boys, so be it.
However, consider St. Catherine of Siena who played an essential part in ending the Great Western Schism when she encouraged Blessed Pope Gregory XI in 1378. Catholic history proves that many women taught the entire Church, both men, and women with their writings.
Yet, if it bothers some men here that feel threatened they could put us on ignore, I don't know how to do it, but I remember DZ Please knows how maybe he will come along and tell the men here. OR we women can just post recipes and talk in the women's forum if you are afraid of teaching a man.
I myself never felt I was teaching anyone but just sharing my views, but if I am sinning, I better just leave altogether. Never to offend God again for I have offended Him in the past too much.
Blessings to all
-
They also taught high school young men or if you prefer to say, boys, so be it.
However, consider St. Catherine of Siena who played an essential part in ending the Great Western Schism when she encouraged Blessed Pope Gregory XI in 1378. Catholic history proves that many women taught the entire Church, both men, and women with their writings.
Yet, if it bothers some men here that feel threatened they could put us on ignore, I don't know how to do it, but I remember DZ Please knows how maybe he will come along and tell the men here. OR we women can just post recipes and talk in the women's forum if you are afraid of teaching a man.
I myself never felt I was teaching anyone but just sharing my views, but if I am sinning, I better just leave altogether. Never to offend God again for I have offended Him in the past too much.
Blessings to all
It has nothing to do with anybody feeling threatened or afraid. It is about accepting traditional norms of behaviour for men and women. I do not see anything wrong with a man if he does not appreciate having women scolding and lecturing him. It seems perfectly understandable to me.
While it is true that there were extraordinary female Saints, we should imitate their virtues rather than use them as an excuse to ignore traditional women's role. And no woman was declared a Doctor of the Church until after Vatican II, so we should be cautious about claiming that women have taught the whole Church through their writings.
Of course, on a discussion forum, women can be expected to share our views. That is the point of being here. But I think it is worth taking care to watch our tone when addressing men. My first years on trad forums, I was very argumentative with everyone, including men, so I have had to put a lot of thought into how to change that.
-
While it is true that there were extraordinary female Saints, we should imitate their virtues rather than use them as an excuse to ignore traditional women's role. And no woman was declared a Doctor of the Church until after Vatican II, so we should be cautious about claiming that women have taught the whole Church through their writings.
.
Not only "until after Vat.II" but they used different criteria for the women. Traditionally to be declared a Doctor of the Church, one must have produced considerable writings expounding upon the teachings of the Church and giving the Apostolic Tradition a primary place in all those writings. When it came to St. Therese of Lisieux, she had written a few things, but not very much, and her writings were not addressed to students or to the faithful for understanding Church doctrine, but rather were autobiographical writings addressed to her own sister in letters and under obedience. St. Teresa of Avila wrote about her personal experiences. These things are beneficial for the Church but they are not what has typified writings of Church Doctors.
.
A 4th grade girl student at a parochial school was given an essay question in a test in the mid-1990's about the Doctors of the Church, and in her answer she wrote, "There are 4 Doctors of the Church and they are all women." The principal of the school (a woman) thought that was a very charming answer.
.
-
They also taught high school young men or if you prefer to say, boys, so be it.
However, consider St. Catherine of Siena who played an essential part in ending the Great Western Schism when she encouraged Blessed Pope Gregory XI in 1378. Catholic history proves that many women taught the entire Church, both men, and women with their writings.
Yet, if it bothers some men here that feel threatened they could put us on ignore, I don't know how to do it, but I remember DZ Please knows how maybe he will come along and tell the men here. OR we women can just post recipes and talk in the women's forum if you are afraid of teaching a man.
I myself never felt I was teaching anyone but just sharing my views, but if I am sinning, I better just leave altogether. Never to offend God again for I have offended Him in the past too much.
Blessings to all
Oh no, please continue ma'am; this is all very enlightening and useful information. Can't wait to see what you have to say next.
-
.
Not only "until after Vat.II" but they used different criteria for the women. Traditionally to be declared a Doctor of the Church, one must have produced considerable writings expounding upon the teachings of the Church and giving the Apostolic Tradition a primary place in all those writings. When it came to St. Therese of Lisieux, she had written a few things, but not very much, and her writings were not addressed to students or to the faithful for understanding Church doctrine, but rather were autobiographical writings addressed to her own sister in letters and under obedience. St. Teresa of Avila wrote about her personal experiences. These things are beneficial for the Church but they are not what has typified writings of Church Doctors.
.
A 4th grade girl student at a parochial school was given an essay question in a test in the mid-1990's about the Doctors of the Church, and in her answer she wrote, "There are 4 Doctors of the Church and they are all women." The principal of the school (a woman) thought that was a very charming answer.
.
That is a really good explanation about female "Doctors of the Church". Thank you.
That story about the girl student is appalling, but it captures so much of what is wrong in the post-Conciliar Church.
Charming!?! ::)
-
They (nuns)also taught high school young men or if you prefer to say, boys, so be it.
That was a modern step in the slow boiling process to Vatican II, no matter if it was in the 1940's. Traditionally, and wisely, nuns did not teach any males other than male children, if that. A young man in high school is still a man. Additionally, girls went to girls school and boys to boy school, no mixing. It appears that like the school described above was also co-ed too.
-
"He that walketh with the wise, shall be wise" (Prov 13:20 )
Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something (Plato)
-
What were you expecting from your first OP? Did you just want folks to agree or disagree without saying anything else? I didn't respond but I think it would be hard not to add comments about sedevacantism and EENS given that was the main thrust of the OP.
Maybe this didn't come off properly, but this was a sincere question.
-
What were you expecting from your first OP? Did you just want folks to agree or disagree without saying anything else? I didn't respond but I think it would be hard not to add comments about sedevacantism and EENS given that was the main thrust of the OP.
If you just read every answer I gave on my thread you will know all my thoughts and expectations. My thread "Why I do Not Push the Sede Position" https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/why-i-do-not-push-the-sede-position/
-
There was something I was thinking of posting on another thread, but I derailed it enough already. It kind of fits here as a positive example of how to post, in contrast with the topic of this thread.
I really appreciate how DZ Please is constantly encouraging me to model myself after Our Blessed Mother. And there are some women here whom I find helpful examples for that purpose. This is the sort of thing that makes forums worthwhile for me and I find it far more valuable than any of the debate topics themselves.
-
"Deo gratias, et Mariae".
-
Do not respond to women who debate (No problem answering the ladies who ask questions sincerely). Some men debate like women, taking everything personal, do not let them get your goat, they are like children. Would you debate with a child?
Your last paragraph in the OP reads like the perfect example of how to derail a thread, the very thing you are complaining about.
Ironic. Plenty of men debate like children at CI.
Here's an idea: don't treat women like second class citizens for no reason, and you won't start a food fight.