Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: ServusSpiritusSancti on February 16, 2011, 04:36:17 PM

Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: ServusSpiritusSancti on February 16, 2011, 04:36:17 PM
Think you've seen the worst that CAF has to offer? Think again. The person who started this thread claims he is not a modernist. Yeah right. Take a look.

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=535983
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: Telesphorus on February 16, 2011, 05:09:24 PM
Reject the Faith while claiming you don't, just don't mention Freemasonry.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: Raoul76 on February 16, 2011, 05:36:13 PM
You heard people saying stuff like that long before Modernism.  That's just relativism, weak faith, humanism, whatever you want to call it.

You can't hold it agains the website that someone comes on and is a relativist.  But the scary thing is that only one person on the entire first page took him to task and corrected him.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: Telesphorus on February 16, 2011, 05:49:04 PM
Quote from: Raoul76
You heard people saying stuff like that long before Modernism.  That's just relativism, weak faith, humanism, whatever you want to call it.

You can't hold it agains the website that someone comes on and is a relativist.  But the scary thing is that only one person on the entire first page took him to task and corrected him.


The point Raoul is that they will quickly ban anyone who explains how that liberal modernists' position is in fact the position of the New "Church."

Or anyone who mentions Freemasons or Jews.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: Raoul76 on February 16, 2011, 09:17:04 PM
They are arch-conservatives there compared to some of the NOs I've met in real life, sad to say.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: Jehanne on February 16, 2011, 09:27:25 PM
Heretic.  I cannot mention what I think should happen to him if we were having this conversation 600 years ago.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: CathMomof7 on February 17, 2011, 08:31:54 AM
Sadly, this is the attitude of many young NO Catholics I know. I want to emphasize this.  We have some very good friends, Godparents to two of our children, that basically abandoned us when we left NO for SSPX.  Mind you, these people are very traditional in their way of thinking, but they are also very modernist.  It took me a long time to see that.  They have children similar in ages to our own and they are friends.  Their oldest son is 20.  He has long declared that there is really no "right" religion, that all religions are a path to God.  This family goes to Mass every Sunday.  They take the whole family to Confession.  They are daily Mass goers during Lent.  They pray a family Rosary.  Yet there oldest son believes all religions are equal, the 3rd son, who had desired to become a priest, doesn't see the necessity of the priesthood, and their two daughters are altar "servers."  

Sadly, I think this is the prevailing attitude among Catholics in the NO.  They really like it there yet they don't realize that their children will abandon it.

We know another NO family with 5 children.  These parents have sacrificed a lot to send all 5 children to Catholic schools for 12 years.  1 son has married a Prot and they don't go to Church at all.  He has no problem with that.  Another son "converted" to Presbyterian or something like that.  One daughter is a lesbian who lives with her "girl friend."  I mention this because I just spoke to the wife in the supermarket.  She and her husband are just beside themselves and they don't understand why this is so.

The only family member I have that is Catholic is my mother's cousin who is 80.  She has 8 children.  I only know of 1 who goes to Mass on a regular basis.  

Modernism is very dangerous to the souls of Catholics.  
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: JohnGrey on February 17, 2011, 08:51:42 AM
Quote from: CathMomof7

She and her husband are just beside themselves and they don't understand why this is so.


Tell her, as gently and charitably as you can, that the reason is that she and her family are part of a counterfeit religion that offers heresies, false doctrines and profane parodies of the sacraments.  Tell her that this is the fruit of indifferentism, which is precisely what is espoused by the conciliar concepts of religious freedom, freedom of conscience and the denial that the Holy Church, and she alone, is the Church of Christ outside of which there is not salvation.  When an institution rejects and rescinds the supernatural moral authority as the sole purveyor and interpreter of truth, it loses its right and its ability to correct the immoral actions of its members.  The concupiscence of man, given already to pride and rebellion in its first principle, naturally takes this supposed liberty and descends into licentiousness.  There is no mystery in the behavior of the woman's children.

Quote from: CathMomof7

Modernism is very dangerous to the souls of Catholics.


Modernism, like all heresies, has only one goal: the deification of man (in rebellion).  The result, in all cases, is the destruction of faith; the corruption of chastity, of community, of supernatural discernment, of vocation; defamation of the Holy Chuch; and, above all, blasphemy against Our Lord and His Sacrifice.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: ServusSpiritusSancti on February 17, 2011, 02:07:06 PM
Raoul pretty much hit the nail on the head. Only one person told him off. I find it rather surprising that the libs there didn't jump all over her for her comment. When I was posting there, every time that I or any other Traditionalist would make a remark speaking out against modernism and the NO the modernists would swarm in and cut us down like crazy. Though really, in this situation I CAN hold it against the web-site. CAF is owned by a neo-con and the moderators there are clowns. They usually will only ban Traditionalists. The only time they ban the NO Catholics is when they commit a big violation against the forum's rules.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: JohnGrey on February 17, 2011, 02:54:13 PM
Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
Raoul pretty much hit the nail on the head. Only one person told him off. I find it rather surprising that the libs there didn't jump all over her for her comment. When I was posting there, every time that I or any other Traditionalist would make a remark speaking out against modernism and the NO the modernists would swarm in and cut us down like crazy. Though really, in this situation I CAN hold it against the web-site. CAF is owned by a neo-con and the moderators there are clowns. They usually will only ban Traditionalists. The only time they ban the NO Catholics is when they commit a big violation against the forum's rules.


This is because as a conciliarist you can call into question any previous dogma as being open to historical revision, but show the impertinence of decrying the Apostate Council and the revolutions it engendered and you are nothing but an intolerable troublemaker.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: ServusSpiritusSancti on February 17, 2011, 04:13:41 PM
Quote from: JohnGrey
Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
Raoul pretty much hit the nail on the head. Only one person told him off. I find it rather surprising that the libs there didn't jump all over her for her comment. When I was posting there, every time that I or any other Traditionalist would make a remark speaking out against modernism and the NO the modernists would swarm in and cut us down like crazy. Though really, in this situation I CAN hold it against the web-site. CAF is owned by a neo-con and the moderators there are clowns. They usually will only ban Traditionalists. The only time they ban the NO Catholics is when they commit a big violation against the forum's rules.


This is because as a conciliarist you can call into question any previous dogma as being open to historical revision, but show the impertinence of decrying the Apostate Council and the revolutions it engendered and you are nothing but an intolerable troublemaker.


Wait, are you calling me a troublemaker or a modernist in general?
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: JohnGrey on February 17, 2011, 04:17:20 PM
Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
Quote from: JohnGrey
Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
Raoul pretty much hit the nail on the head. Only one person told him off. I find it rather surprising that the libs there didn't jump all over her for her comment. When I was posting there, every time that I or any other Traditionalist would make a remark speaking out against modernism and the NO the modernists would swarm in and cut us down like crazy. Though really, in this situation I CAN hold it against the web-site. CAF is owned by a neo-con and the moderators there are clowns. They usually will only ban Traditionalists. The only time they ban the NO Catholics is when they commit a big violation against the forum's rules.


This is because as a conciliarist you can call into question any previous dogma as being open to historical revision, but show the impertinence of decrying the Apostate Council and the revolutions it engendered and you are nothing but an intolerable troublemaker.


Wait, are you calling me a troublemaker or a modernist in general?


Er, neither.  The "you" is the abstract one.  It would've been more correct to say that "as a conciliarist one can..."
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: ServusSpiritusSancti on February 17, 2011, 04:17:59 PM
Quote from: JohnGrey
Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
Quote from: JohnGrey
Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
Raoul pretty much hit the nail on the head. Only one person told him off. I find it rather surprising that the libs there didn't jump all over her for her comment. When I was posting there, every time that I or any other Traditionalist would make a remark speaking out against modernism and the NO the modernists would swarm in and cut us down like crazy. Though really, in this situation I CAN hold it against the web-site. CAF is owned by a neo-con and the moderators there are clowns. They usually will only ban Traditionalists. The only time they ban the NO Catholics is when they commit a big violation against the forum's rules.


This is because as a conciliarist you can call into question any previous dogma as being open to historical revision, but show the impertinence of decrying the Apostate Council and the revolutions it engendered and you are nothing but an intolerable troublemaker.


Wait, are you calling me a troublemaker or a modernist in general?


Er, neither.  The "you" is the abstract one.  It would've been more correct to say that "as a conciliarist one can..."


Ok, just checking. You're good.  :wink:
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: Jehanne on February 17, 2011, 04:23:59 PM
Quote from: CathMomof7
Modernism is very dangerous to the souls of Catholics.  


Which is why Catholic society for centuries, burned such individuals, not only for the salvation of the heretic's soul, but for the salvation of others.  Of course, the heresy of religious freedom and its bastard offspring of religious indifferentism, tolerance, subjectivism, existentialism, universalism, etc., will not be obvious to all until the Last Judgment.  Until then...
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: Exilenomore on February 18, 2011, 03:59:40 AM
Let us pray that God will lead people away from such blasphemy.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: CathMomof7 on February 18, 2011, 01:40:44 PM
Quote from: Exilenomore
Let us pray that God will lead people away from such blasphemy.


Personally, I believe that in totality very few NO Catholics ever really are lead out of the fire.  
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: Elizabeth on February 18, 2011, 02:07:41 PM
There is also a hard attrition rate for traditional Catholics.

Similarly, there was a hard rate of attrition 100, 200 years ago.  

Tragically, many people refuse to co-operate with God's Grace and go to Hell.

There have always been good Catholics who had disappointing outcomes with their offspring.

If we are given the grace to seek Catholic Tradition, during a crisis, then more is expected of us.  We need to do the 9 First Fridats and 5 First Saturdays of Reparation and practice loving kindness to win souls.  When we fail, we need to beg for the holy assistance of the Saints to get us back onto the path of humility and holiness.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: LM on February 22, 2011, 12:53:56 PM
CA is what it is, a place where Truth is obscured by modernism/liberalism/heresy.

As one person plainly put it:

Quote


Quote=SaintGobban

 I'm fairly new to this site, but I find that if one has been to one internet chat board, they've pretty much been to them all. And, I've been to lots.

My sincerest hope is that people who are really seeking answers do not use this site as a source.

Much of the information that is being given out here is in error. People just say whatever they think, and it is usually wrong. There really hasn't been very much teaching going on in the Church, real formation, real hard core catechesis, for a loooonnnnggg time.

But also, I believe there is a genuine element of evil both online and in the Church. There really are people whose sole aim is to misinform, confuse, agitate, invalidate what is true. The internet is really rife with that.

The internet, including this site, attracts people who hide behind the anonymity and only seem to want to provoke. So, if you sincerely want to know about Christ and the Catholic Church, go to someplace that you can trust. Someplace that has credibility. THIS IS NOT IT.



Below is a response to the above post:   Remember the modernist "Franciscan bro/aka JReducation " from other discussions, well this modernist/wolf in sheep's clothing "Franciscan bro" is one of the "favored" at CA.

Quote

quote=ConstantineTG

Actually, my sincerest hope is that people who are seeking answers use this site. They can either go to "Ask an Apologist" or go to Catholic Answers website and read the articles there.

Also with some familiarity you will get to know the people who give good and accurate answers here. I always look to JREducation for all things Roman Catholic and Franciscan, and to Alexander Roman for all things Eastern. There are many regulars too who give great and accurate answers such as FrDavid in the Liturgy and Sacraments forum.

Being a forum, you have the same mix of people here as in the real world. When one goes foruming, one should understand that is to be the case. Unless its a highly regulated forum where only certified experts can answer, you'll always get a mix of answers no matter which forum it is, no matter what topic.
__________________
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: ServusSpiritusSancti on February 22, 2011, 02:24:42 PM
I remember JReducation. He is one of the most modernist people in the religious life I have ever seen. He never got nasty like some of the other modernists there and that's good that he kept it clean, but he didn't know the first thing about Tradition. If I remember correctly he said he wasn't even willing to fully rule out the "possibility" that Archbishop LeFebvre was not in Heaven (he was basically implying ABL was a heretic).
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: stevusmagnus on February 26, 2011, 09:56:41 AM
I was suspended yet again on CAF.

A Neo-Cath wrote:

Quote
To many people here the notion of a Mass being "illicit" means next to nothing.

I have never understood how one can claim to be on the side of the Church when they knowingly and purposely attend Masses that they know are illicit. That, coupled with the fact that sspx priests are suspended of their duties and act in disobedience every time they celebrate Mass would seem (to me, at least) to be cause for concern.

But that's just me.


I wrote:

Quote
If you've ever attended a NO Mass where the priest said one word wrong or got one rubric wrong you've attended an "illicit" Mass. If you regularly attend a Mass where Eucharistic Ministers are used but are not absolutely needed, you are attending an "illicit" Mass.


Catholic Answers Moderator then sent me a private message stating:
 
Quote

You have received an infraction at Catholic Answers Forums.

Reason: Continuous violoation of rules, despite many infractions
-------
Your statement is incorrect, to begin with.

Second, it violates the forum rules that say you may not pit one form of the mass against the other.

Third, you have violated the rules too many times and you continue to do so.

Therefore, your account is suspended for one month. You cannot be on these fora and violate rules at a rate of one a month. If you want to participate on Catholic Answers, you must comply with our rules.


The previous "violations" were just as ridiculous.

I'm not sure how he could make the claim I'm pitting one form of the Mass against the other with a straight face.

I'm going to appeal. I expect nothing, but I'll at least make the case to a third party that this is nuts, even by Neo-Cath standards.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: Telesphorus on February 26, 2011, 10:02:09 AM
Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
I remember JReducation. He is one of the most modernist people in the religious life I have ever seen. He never got nasty like some of the other modernists there and that's good that he kept it clean, but he didn't know the first thing about Tradition. If I remember correctly he said he wasn't even willing to fully rule out the "possibility" that Archbishop LeFebvre was not in Heaven (he was basically implying ABL was a heretic).


Only believing Catholics go to Hell.  That is what conciliarists would have people believe.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: stevusmagnus on February 26, 2011, 10:12:47 AM
Straight from CAF Q&A , supporting my definition of "illicit":


http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/quickquestions/keyword/Mass/page8

Quote
Masses are not valid or invalid, they are licit (in conformity with the law) or illicit (not in conformity with the law). It is the consecration of the Eucharist within the Mass that can be valid or invalid.

Whether a crucifix is present at the altar has no bearing on whether the Eucharist is valid or invalid (the absence of a crucifix will not cause the Eucharist to be invalid), but it does have a bearing on whether the Mass is licit or illicit.

The law requires that "There is to be a cross, clearly visible to the congregation, either on the altar or near it" (General Instruction of the Roman Missal [GIRM] 270). The revised General Instruction—which has not yet gone into effect—clarifies that the cross in question should have a corpus (representation of Christ’s body), meaning that it should be a crucifix rather than a bare cross.

If there were no cross by on or near the altar (or, once the new GIRM goes into effect, no crucifix) then the Mass would be illicit, or not celebrated in accord with the requirements of the law.

However, a Mass celebrated in this manner would still have a valid consecration of the Eucharist. Furthermore, it would still fulfill one’s Sunday obligation.

Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: stevusmagnus on February 26, 2011, 10:18:13 AM
If a NO is not in conformity with liturgical law it is "illicit", just as they say SSPX Masses are "illicit". Therefore how can they criticize Catholics who go to "illicit" Society Masses when 90% of all NO Masses are "illicit" due to aberrations in following the NO rubrics?

"Licitness" does not affect the Mass fulfilling one's Sunday obligation anyway, according to Catholic Answers themselves!
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: Telesphorus on February 26, 2011, 10:32:11 AM
Quote from: Raoul76
You heard people saying stuff like that long before Modernism.  That's just relativism, weak faith, humanism, whatever you want to call it.

You can't hold it agains the website that someone comes on and is a relativist.  But the scary thing is that only one person on the entire first page took him to task and corrected him.


I think it is modernism because he claims to have the Faith while rejecting the essentials of the Faith.

 "Does that mean I don't believe what the Catholic Church teaches? No"
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: LM on February 26, 2011, 11:52:45 AM
Quote from: stevusmagnus
I was suspended yet again on CAF.



I wrote:

Quote
If you've ever attended a NO Mass where the priest said one word wrong or got one rubric wrong you've attended an "illicit" Mass. If you regularly attend a Mass where Eucharistic Ministers are used but are not absolutely needed, you are attending an "illicit" Mass.


Catholic Answers Moderator then sent me a private message stating:
 
Quote

You have received an infraction at Catholic Answers Forums.

Reason: Continuous violoation of rules, despite many infractions
-------
Your statement is incorrect, to begin with.

Second, it violates the forum rules that say you may not pit one form of the mass against the other.


Third, you have violated the rules too many times and you continue to do so.

Therefore, your account is suspended for one month. You cannot be on these fora and violate rules at a rate of one a month. If you want to participate on Catholic Answers, you must comply with our rules.


The previous "violations" were just as ridiculous.

I'm not sure how he could make the claim I'm pitting one form of the Mass against the other with a straight face.

I'm going to appeal. I expect nothing, but I'll at least make the case to a third party that this is nuts, even by Neo-Cath standards.


Stevus, what do you expect from the "mod", certainly not integrity.  He is just doing his "duty" being "faithful" to CA's party line.   All anyone has to do is read CA's Liturgy and Sacraments forum, to know that illicit NOs abound.  But of course, some reason(s) had to be made up for the suspension.

 



Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: ServusSpiritusSancti on February 26, 2011, 02:42:12 PM
Nice to see you here again, stevus! That moderator is the one who is incorrect. Just out of curiosity, which mod gave you that infraction? Thomas Casey?
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: stevusmagnus on February 26, 2011, 02:58:40 PM
Thanks.

Yes, it was Casey.

At some point they need to question the very existence of a discussion forum, where the rules are interpreted so restrictively as to kill discussion. Also the rules are forced so arbitrarily and with no warning, you can't even make good faith posts without knowing whether you'll be suspended for a month. It is ridiculous.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: ServusSpiritusSancti on February 26, 2011, 05:31:03 PM
I agree with you. I was banned without warning. After being given an infraction, I politely asked why I was given one, and the mod banned me hours later. This one was Eric Hilbert. I haven't seen him post there lately, but I found him to be rather arrogant. Thomas Casey isn't much better...
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: LM on February 26, 2011, 07:22:43 PM
Quote from: stevusmagnus
Thanks.

Yes, it was Casey.

At some point they need to question the very existence of a discussion forum, where the rules are interpreted so restrictively as to kill discussion. Also the rules are forced so arbitrarily and with no warning, you can't even make good faith posts without knowing whether you'll be suspended for a month. It is ridiculous.


I question the existence of CA's Trad forum.  It serves no other purpose than to let the NO trolls run rampant.  Nothing Traditional can be discussed without the NO trolls jumping in and creating havoc.   The trolls know that with Casey (as with the prior "mods"),  they can get away with disrupting any Traditional discussion.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: ServusSpiritusSancti on February 27, 2011, 08:21:29 PM
Quote from: LM
Quote from: stevusmagnus
Thanks.

Yes, it was Casey.

At some point they need to question the very existence of a discussion forum, where the rules are interpreted so restrictively as to kill discussion. Also the rules are forced so arbitrarily and with no warning, you can't even make good faith posts without knowing whether you'll be suspended for a month. It is ridiculous.


I question the existence of CA's Trad forum.  It serves no other purpose than to let the NO trolls run rampant.  Nothing Traditional can be discussed without the NO trolls jumping in and creating havoc.   The trolls know that with Casey (as with the prior "mods"),  they can get away with disrupting any Traditional discussion.


I agree with you, LM. The NO people there can get away with nearly anything. But if a Traditionalist cuts down Vatican II just one time, they get booted. They're full of double standards.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: tlmforme on March 01, 2011, 10:00:48 AM
Quote from: stevusmagnus
I was suspended yet again on CAF.

A Neo-Cath wrote:

Quote
To many people here the notion of a Mass being "illicit" means next to nothing.

I have never understood how one can claim to be on the side of the Church when they knowingly and purposely attend Masses that they know are illicit. That, coupled with the fact that sspx priests are suspended of their duties and act in disobedience every time they celebrate Mass would seem (to me, at least) to be cause for concern.

But that's just me.


I wrote:

Quote
If you've ever attended a NO Mass where the priest said one word wrong or got one rubric wrong you've attended an "illicit" Mass. If you regularly attend a Mass where Eucharistic Ministers are used but are not absolutely needed, you are attending an "illicit" Mass.


Catholic Answers Moderator then sent me a private message stating:
 
Quote

You have received an infraction at Catholic Answers Forums.

Reason: Continuous violoation of rules, despite many infractions
-------
Your statement is incorrect, to begin with.

Second, it violates the forum rules that say you may not pit one form of the mass against the other.

Third, you have violated the rules too many times and you continue to do so.

Therefore, your account is suspended for one month. You cannot be on these fora and violate rules at a rate of one a month. If you want to participate on Catholic Answers, you must comply with our rules.


The previous "violations" were just as ridiculous.

I'm not sure how he could make the claim I'm pitting one form of the Mass against the other with a straight face.

I'm going to appeal. I expect nothing, but I'll at least make the case to a third party that this is nuts, even by Neo-Cath standards.


I think that it was God's will that I stumbled onto this thread as I needed to very badly. I, too, have been banned from CAF. & it has hurt very much. I'm a 69 yr. old Grandmother who has been Catholic all of my life.  My ban will be lifted a 9:34 this evening. I'm not going back, though. I need to share with someone, exactly what happened, but I can't get to the "evil" post that I wrote until then.

Another poster, one who seems genuinely interested & trying to re-enter her childhood faith, asked the following:
Quote
"Pope Benedict says the Mass of 1962 is perfectly valid & licit.....so can anyone tell me why it was suppressed to begin with.
She asked this question several times & no one answered it, instead it turned into a thread that questioned her identity & honesty. Finally, I answered her question:

Quote
"The Council wanted a Mass that was palatable to our Separated Brethren". It hasn't seemed to have worked."

It is very humiliating to a woman who has studied & LOVED her faith for so long, to be BANNED because she is somehow,
"comparing the two Masses".  I admire anyone who wants to bring the Protestants back into the fold, I just don't think that  writing a new Mass was the way to do it.

I am faithful to the Pope, I was 28 yrs. old when the Novus Ordo was promulgated. I tried for 10 YEARS to love it the way I loved the Tridentine Mass. After that, I simply endured. Sometimes, I became angry at Mass????  However, our city offered no indult Mass, so I just prayed.

Thanks for letting me vent.  There seems to be no place for me. :sad:
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: Telesphorus on March 01, 2011, 10:31:38 AM
Those people are servants of the devil.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: tlmforme on March 01, 2011, 11:05:03 AM
I have a question. Is it allowed by CathInfo to share the name I posted under while I spent four years at CAF.? I don't want to be banned from this site, too.  However, I would like to let some of you "former CAFers" know who I am?? I changed my screen name for this forum because I was afraid that some of the NO. Catholics would follow me here to continue their "just be kind to everyone but don't rock MY boat"type of stuff. They will tolerate anything except Traditional Catholicism.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: stevusmagnus on March 01, 2011, 12:02:49 PM
You should appeal.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: tlmforme on March 01, 2011, 12:33:12 PM
Quote from: stevusmagnus
You should appeal.


I don't want to post there anymore. The Traditional Catholics have been either banned or chased off, especially during the last 2 months.

Pop over there & take a look at the "Traditional Forum". It is now populated by JREducation, TGConstantine & Sirach2 who haven't a clue. I doubt that, though Pope Benedict has given his approval for the Latin Mass & it is once again part of Catholicism, any of them have ever attended one. In fact, many of them hate the TLM. & accuse us of being "holier than thou". Need I go one??

They bad mouth the SSPX, though our Pope is trying to reconnect with them.  They take great joy in saying that we are not REQUIRED to believe in private revelations, even those who have been approved by the Church.

I held on for 4 YEARS, so that someone could actually present the Traditional Way. I just can't do it anymore. As I said, my ban will be revoked by Mr. Casey at 9:34 this evening........but, I'm done.

All I've ever asked is that the hierarchy in this country AND the laity embrace the TLM. as they have embraced the NO.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: Telesphorus on March 01, 2011, 12:59:46 PM
Quote from: tlmforme
Quote from: stevusmagnus
You should appeal.


I don't want to post there anymore. The Traditional Catholics have been either banned or chased off, especially during the last 2 months.

Pop over there & take a look at the "Traditional Forum". It is now populated by JREducation, TGConstantine & Sirach2 who haven't a clue. I doubt that, though Pope Benedict has given his approval for the Latin Mass & it is once again part of Catholicism, any of them have ever attended one. In fact, many of them hate the TLM. & accuse us of being "holier than thou". Need I go one??

They bad mouth the SSPX, though our Pope is trying to reconnect with them.  They take great joy in saying that we are not REQUIRED to believe in private revelations, even those who have been approved by the Church.

I held on for 4 YEARS, so that someone could actually present the Traditional Way. I just can't do it anymore. As I said, my ban will be revoked by Mr. Casey at 9:34 this evening........but, I'm done.

All I've ever asked is that the hierarchy in this country AND the laity embrace the TLM. as they have embraced the NO.


Tell Casey he's an enemy of the Faith.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: ServusSpiritusSancti on March 01, 2011, 12:59:55 PM
tlmforme, you'd have to talk to Matthew about changing your screen-name, but if you're able to do so I don't think Matthew would have much of a problem with you using a screen-name from CAF as long as you are a Traditionalist, which you clearly are. I don't really blame you for not wanting to post there anymore. Not long before I was banned from there I was thinking about leaving anyway because I got tired of the modernists being allowed to do almost anything they pleased. You did pretty good to hang on for 4 years, I was only there for a month and a half!
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: ServusSpiritusSancti on March 01, 2011, 01:01:33 PM
Quote from: stevusmagnus
You should appeal.


When I was banned from there I had thought about appealing but decided against it because I knew I'd be banned again since I wasn't going to stop speaking the Truth. Her appealing wouldn't work, I don't think.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: stevusmagnus on March 01, 2011, 02:21:34 PM
Unbelievable!

My appeal of the decision of Thomas Casey was decided by....Thomas Casey!! Talk about a conflict of interest! I specifically asked in my appeal that it be decided by a third party moderator!

It looks like the strategy is to pile on ridiculous unfounded suspensions and then use the unfounded suspensions as a pattern.

I could go through each suspension and explain why each was bogus, but is it worth it?

I QUOTED CA itself AGREEING with my point! How in the world was I downing the NO by pointing out that if a rubric is violated it is illicit?

What a load of horse puckey!


Here is my appeal:

Quote
Hi,
 
I would like to appeal the 30 day infraction I received at Catholic Answers Forum by Thomas Casey at 12:06 am on 2/26.
 
I would like a moderator other than Mr. Casey to decide my appeal to avoid a conflict of interest.
 
Thank you.
 
The message from Mr. Casey stated:
 
"Dear stevusmagnus,

You have received an infraction at Catholic Answers Forums.

Reason: Continuous violoation of rules, despite many infractions
-------
Your statement is incorrect, to begin with.

Second, it violates the forum rules that say you may not pit one form of the mass against the other.

Third, you have violated the rules too many times and you continue to do so.

Therefore, your account is suspended for one month. You cannot be on these fora and violate rules at a rate of one a month. If you want to participate on Catholic Answers, you must comply with our rules.

If you wish, you may appeal my decision by writing forumadmin@catholic.com"
 
My post was as follows:
 
"If you've ever attended a NO Mass where the priest said one word wrong or got one rubric wrong you've attended an "illicit" Mass. If you regularly attend a Mass where Eucharistic Ministers are used but are not absolutely needed, you are attending an "illicit" Mass."
 
In support of this statement, I'd like to cite to Catholic Answers own Q&A.
 
 http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/quickquestions/keyword/Mass/page8
 
"Masses are not valid or invalid, they are licit (in conformity with the law) or illicit (not in conformity with the law). It is the consecration of the Eucharist within the Mass that can be valid or invalid.

Whether a crucifix is present at the altar has no bearing on whether the Eucharist is valid or invalid (the absence of a crucifix will not cause the Eucharist to be invalid), but it does have a bearing on whether the Mass is licit or illicit.

The law requires that "There is to be a cross, clearly visible to the congregation, either on the altar or near it" (General Instruction of the Roman Missal [GIRM] 270). The revised General Instruction—which has not yet gone into effect—clarifies that the cross in question should have a corpus (representation of Christ’s body), meaning that it should be a crucifix rather than a bare cross.

If there were no cross by on or near the altar (or, once the new GIRM goes into effect, no crucifix) then the Mass would be illicit, or not celebrated in accord with the requirements of the law.

However, a Mass celebrated in this manner would still have a valid consecration of the Eucharist. Furthermore, it would still fulfill one’s Sunday obligation."
 
 
According to Catholic Answers' interpretation of illicit (which is the accepted interpretation) my post said nothing incorrect.
 
To point out examples of illicit Masses is in no way pitting the OF vs. the EF. An illicit Mass is an illicit Mass whether said in the ordinary or extraordinary form.
 
I strongly disagree that the previous "infractions" that Mr. Casey mentions were truly infractions, just as this statement of mine was not truly an infraction. I disagreed with my previous one month infraction, as I thought it was based on faulty premises and, in any case, extremely severe. However, I refrained from appealing due to time connstraints. Nevertheless, I could not let this infraction go unanswered as I think it is wrong as a matter of justice.
 
I want to be able to post and be a productive member of this forum, but it seems anything I write is subject to an immediate month long suspension with no ability to respond to Mr. Casey via PM nor any opportunity given to me by Mr. Casey to explain my statement or clarify it.
 
Thank you for your time and consideration,


CAF Response:

Quote
Dear Sir:

Thank you for your inquiry regarding your current suspension.  I would like to point you to the reason for the suspension.  Please reread my message.

“you have violated the rules too many times and you continue to do so.”

Your history reflects eight violations of the rules.  Some are for the same reason.  On five of those eight occasions, you received five-point infractions.  Twice, before this, your account was suspended.  In each event, we informed you that you were violating forum rules and encouraged to familiarize yourself with them.  

Once again you violated a forum rule.  You used a snippet of a post from AAA to criticize the Ordinary Form of the Mass.   That was not the even the subject of the thread.  This kind of behavior is unacceptable.  The rules are very clear.  Both forms of the mass must be respected and posters may not pit one against the other.  This includes taking advantage of opportunities to attack one form or the other.  

I am willing to reduce the suspension to one week, if we agree that should you violate the rules again at any time, within the next 90 days, there will be another suspension or a more serious consequence proportionate to the infraction and your history of infractions.  

Please let me know if this is agreeable to you.  I am willing to work with you, but you must meet me halfway.  I hope that we can settle this and move forward.

Sincerely,

Thomas Casey
Moderator
Catholic Answers Forums

Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: tlmforme on March 01, 2011, 03:24:46 PM
Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
tlmforme, you'd have to talk to Matthew about changing your screen-name, but if you're able to do so I don't think Matthew would have much of a problem with you using a screen-name from CAF as long as you are a Traditionalist, which you clearly are. I don't really blame you for not wanting to post there anymore. Not long before I was banned from there I was thinking about leaving anyway because I got tired of the modernists being allowed to do almost anything they pleased. You did pretty good to hang on for 4 years, I was only there for a month and a half!


No, I think I like my new screen name better than the old one. It more describes who I am. One had to be very careful at CAF. A SN., such as the one I post under here....would be a red flag. So, just ignore my previous post about my SN. I like  TLMFORME.  :incense:

PS. At Trent will be the next to go.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: ServusSpiritusSancti on March 01, 2011, 04:10:18 PM
It's possible. It won't be much longer before they ban stevus either. I guess Thomas Casey is a somewhat more patient mod than the one who banned me (Eric Hilbert) who banned me just hours after I asked him why I was given an infraction.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: ServusSpiritusSancti on March 01, 2011, 04:23:07 PM
One member there, "OurLadyPerpHelp" just got banned recently. She was the only one who told off a modernist in the thread from CAF I posted here. Poor woman, she only lasted there for about a week!
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: tlmforme on March 01, 2011, 05:04:26 PM
Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
One member there, "OurLadyPerpHelp" just got banned recently. She was the only one who told off a modernist in the thread from CAF I posted here. Poor woman, she only lasted there for about a week!


OLPH. was the poster who asked me, "since the Pope has said that the TLM. is a Holy Mass.......why was it suppressed after Vatican II". It's a shame that she got banned, as she was always polite, yet rather insistent of an answer to her questions. Such a BAD CATHOLIC!!! :rolleyes:
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: Jehanne on March 01, 2011, 05:19:03 PM
Quote from: tlmforme
Quote from: SpiritusSanctus
One member there, "OurLadyPerpHelp" just got banned recently. She was the only one who told off a modernist in the thread from CAF I posted here. Poor woman, she only lasted there for about a week!


OLPH. was the poster who asked me, "since the Pope has said that the TLM. is a Holy Mass.......why was it suppressed after Vatican II". It's a shame that she got banned, as she was always polite, yet rather insistent of an answer to her questions. Such a BAD CATHOLIC!!! :rolleyes:


STOP GOING THERE!!!!  (You belong here, sweetie!!)   :dancing-banana: :rahrah: :sign-party-time: :bob-marley:
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: Xavier on March 01, 2011, 06:23:42 PM
Quote from: stevusmagnus


It looks like the strategy is to pile on ridiculous unfounded suspensions and then use the unfounded suspensions as a pattern.

I could go through each suspension and explain why each was bogus, but is it worth it?



If you could go through each suspension and post them all I think it would be a great idea?

I think if a lot of people did this, just came to a public forum like this and posted all their infractions..

It would certainly shed some light on what's crawling around in the darkness.

And be interesting reading too.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: tlmforme on March 01, 2011, 09:03:17 PM
Quote from: Raoul76
You heard people saying stuff like that long before Modernism.  That's just relativism, weak faith, humanism, whatever you want to call it.

You can't hold it agains the website that someone comes on and is a relativist.  But the scary thing is that only one person on the entire first page took him to task and corrected him.


And the scariest thing of all is that ONE person is now banned.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: gladius_veritatis on March 01, 2011, 09:08:11 PM
CAF is a complete joke and has been for a VERY long time.  Fuhgeddaboudit....
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: tlmforme on March 02, 2011, 12:12:50 AM
Quote from: Xavier
Quote from: stevusmagnus


It looks like the strategy is to pile on ridiculous unfounded suspensions and then use the unfounded suspensions as a pattern.

I could go through each suspension and explain why each was bogus, but is it worth it?



If you could go through each suspension and post them all I think it would be a great idea?

I think if a lot of people did this, just came to a public forum like this and posted all their infractions..

It would certainly shed some light on what's crawling around in the darkness.

And be interesting reading too.


Well, I just got back on CAF. (NOT going to post there, except for one steaming message to Mr. Casey's superior if I can find out who that is.) However, I thought you might like to see the post that got me banned:

Quote
Originally Posted by OurLadyPerpHelp  
I've seen the highlighted section before, but don't know what it means. If they are the same why are there two of them? If they are both as holy, confer the same graces, why did we get the new Mass in the first place?



From Me:
Quote
Because Vat. II believed that if we made the Mass more Protestant, the "Separated Brethren" would come "home". It hasn't happened.

But, You've shown yourself to be a serious Catholic who is willing to put forth an effort to understand what happened. Don't take my word for anything & don't completely base your point of view on anything said on this message board. You just keep on with your studying & you'll KNOW the truth
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: stevusmagnus on March 02, 2011, 08:09:55 AM
tlmforme,

It's absolutely ridiculous you were suspended for that.

One minor correction, though. It wasn't Vatican II that changed the Mass. That was the work of Abp. Bugnini and his Concilium a few years after the Council.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: tlmforme on March 02, 2011, 04:38:00 PM

STOP GOING THERE!!!!  (You belong here, sweetie!!)   :dancing-banana: :rahrah: :sign-party-time: :bob-marley:[/quote]

You are more than kind & don't worry, I'm done with that message forum.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: Jehanne on March 02, 2011, 06:04:59 PM
Quote from: tlmforme

STOP GOING THERE!!!!  (You belong here, sweetie!!)   :dancing-banana: :rahrah: :sign-party-time: :bob-marley:


You are more than kind & don't worry, I'm done with that message forum.[/quote]

Amen to that!!  I quit 10 years ago!  (I think that it is kind of like smoking...just takes time.)
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: tlmforme on March 05, 2011, 07:57:30 AM
Does anyone here know how to contact Mr. Casey's superior.
I would like for him/her to see the post I was banned for & to totally revamp the "Traditional Thread" at CAF.
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: Phyllo on March 05, 2011, 02:57:34 PM
Quote from: Telesphorus
Quote from: tlmforme
Quote from: stevusmagnus
You should appeal.


I don't want to post there anymore. The Traditional Catholics have been either banned or chased off, especially during the last 2 months.

Pop over there & take a look at the "Traditional Forum". It is now populated by JREducation, TGConstantine & Sirach2 who haven't a clue. I doubt that, though Pope Benedict has given his approval for the Latin Mass & it is once again part of Catholicism, any of them have ever attended one. In fact, many of them hate the TLM. & accuse us of being "holier than thou". Need I go one??

They bad mouth the SSPX, though our Pope is trying to reconnect with them.  They take great joy in saying that we are not REQUIRED to believe in private revelations, even those who have been approved by the Church.

I held on for 4 YEARS, so that someone could actually present the Traditional Way. I just can't do it anymore. As I said, my ban will be revoked by Mr. Casey at 9:34 this evening........but, I'm done.

All I've ever asked is that the hierarchy in this country AND the laity embrace the TLM. as they have embraced the NO.


Tell Casey he's an enemy of the Faith.



I am happy to have found this site.  I like you Timfore was banned FOREVER from CA for almost the same reason you were.
They don't seem to like any one questioning Vatican II and mentioning that a liberal bishop and 6 protestants revamped the mass.
I had the nerve to respond to the moderator so I was banned.
I don't think they really want to hear the truth or want any opinions.
This is my first post and I guess I should read more and search around to get to know how to post here.
I, too, have changed my screen name.
Phyllo
Title: Possibly the worst topic ever created at CAF
Post by: tlmforme on March 05, 2011, 03:33:14 PM
Quote from: Phyllo
Quote from: Telesphorus
Quote from: tlmforme
Quote from: stevusmagnus
You should appeal.


I don't want to post there anymore. The Traditional Catholics have been either banned or chased off, especially during the last 2 months.

Pop over there & take a look at the "Traditional Forum". It is now populated by JREducation, TGConstantine & Sirach2 who haven't a clue. I doubt that, though Pope Benedict has given his approval for the Latin Mass & it is once again part of Catholicism, any of them have ever attended one. In fact, many of them hate the TLM. & accuse us of being "holier than thou". Need I go one??

They bad mouth the SSPX, though our Pope is trying to reconnect with them.  They take great joy in saying that we are not REQUIRED to believe in private revelations, even those who have been approved by the Church.

I held on for 4 YEARS, so that someone could actually present the Traditional Way. I just can't do it anymore. As I said, my ban will be revoked by Mr. Casey at 9:34 this evening........but, I'm done.

All I've ever asked is that the hierarchy in this country AND the laity embrace the TLM. as they have embraced the NO.


Tell Casey he's an enemy of the Faith.



I am happy to have found this site.  I like you Timfore was banned FOREVER from CA for almost the same reason you were.
They don't seem to like any one questioning Vatican II and mentioning that a liberal bishop and 6 protestants revamped the mass.
I had the nerve to respond to the moderator so I was banned.
I don't think they really want to hear the truth or want any opinions.
This is my first post and I guess I should read more and search around to get to know how to post here.
I, too, have changed my screen name.
Phyllo


I wasn't banned FOREVER, but I might as well have been. I won't be posting there anymore because one is not allowed to tell the TRUTH about the Novus Ordo Mass or the Council.

I posted one message two days ago, to tell my friends on the prayer request board "thanks for praying for my sick brother" & that'll be it.

I would simply like to send a message about the person who is turning everyone in.....& Mr. Casey.....to someone on the forum with some power. They either need to change the name & rules on the Trad Forum or get rid of it.