As a corollary, shouldn't this sick FE thread be seen as evidence that the entire Indultarian neo-Trad hipster/dork culture that is invading Anglophone Catholic circles is from the devil ? You shall know them by their fruits. Here we have a public mortal sinner who was living in sin with a married man (committing the sin of double adultery, at least that is what we can conclude with moral confidence given cohabitation) running a forum that has come to defending the practice of perverts who identify themselves by their perversion subjecting themselves to unnecessary occasions of one of the sins that cries out to Heaven for Divine vengeance. I may need to read more about moral theology, but it seems to me that the consensus of the theologians would be that she is participating in this sin by cooperation. Thus, would her forum not also be subject to Divine vengeance, since it is the vehicle for said cooperation ?
I know that some who post there are fighting the good fight against the evil spirit that has possessed that forum, but I wonder how prudent it is to admonish the erring brother a third, fourth, or twentieth time. There is no moral obligation to correct those who are evil company. Here the effect of the evil company seems to be more subtle, namely through the inculcation of theological and philosophical error by camaraderie with the mentally and morally deranged (liberals, romantics, sentimentalists, syncretists, &c.), familiarising with them as if they are not harming the Faith and spreading poison. Dear fellow Catholics who post on that forum, I worry about you. Do not allow yourselves to be polluted by the diabolical webs of deceit and hypocritical invective that comes from this work of that forum owner. The fruits of Fisheaters are rotten -- heresy, error, public sin. Wipe the dust off your feet and move on, lest you, too, one day find yourself morally confused and heterodox in belief.
Perhaps what is being demonstrated by Divine Providence is that a woman should not run a traditional Catholic forum, especially not one that presumes to teach others about the Catholic Faith. I look at most of Vox Clamantis's speculations and I believe I see the typical thoughts of a shameless woman poking her head into the affairs of the men and the public world, things she could never adequately engage and fully understand since she is an outsider to them by her sex. "A strong man would be okay with [being manipulated and/or humiliated by his woman]." "A strong man is fine being around 'homosexuals' and even enjoys their company." "Those gender roles are so outdated/puerile/prudish/Puritanical/hypocritical/warped/etc.. Reality is so much bigger, Catholicism is about balance, maybe you should be more charitable towards me and assume against all evidence that I am of good will." Yep, systematic theology and philosophy were all just systems of control created by insecure men.
If we were to believe the general consensus that seems to inform the comments of the neo-Trad women's knitting circle, we would conclude the following : Real men (who didn't exist before we discovered the modern type) were leaders, that is why they wanted women to boss them around and manipulate them. Real men were so straight that they loved spending time around sodomites; the straighter they are, the more they enjoy the company of perverts. Real men hate ancient laws and moral philosophy and instead love an aesthetic approach to life, one of balance and spontaneity, the sort of environment that can be found on Oprah or at a woman's book club over martinis. Fighting, organising, exploring, commanding, disciplining, hunting, conquering -- these are just the product of boyish insecurity. Real men have no time for these puerile pursuits, which are worthy of being smirked at. Women have seen them in their boys at the playground. They understand the pathetic and animalistic silliness of what drives the world of men. Real men, who know what these women have intuited, want to be liberated from these arcane pressures on the mind, so that they can spend time with "homosexual" fetishists, talk about the meaning of their romantic affairs and how they make them feel over a cocktail, or allow themselves to be led by the level-headed vision of their wives.
This is the sort of insanity that seems to have captured Fisheaters; it's almost like watching a spell take people over when you watch them go along with it. People pretend that there is some substance to that whole line of thinking, but it is nothing more than rebellion against God and nature. There is no need to mysticise or poeticise it, much less encourage it. Ultimately it is the same line of thought that ends in lesbianism and witchcraft, as Bishop Williamson once said. He couldn't be more right. Ultimately, feminism and socialism and democracy and political correctness and the entire modern world are based in hatred of nature and of God the Father, as well as the image of His paternal authority which exists in men. The rebellion of the modern world -- especially feminism -- is an attempt to defeat nature, to subvert it and usurp the throne of paternal authority through artifice, to rob the world of its goods and to find security in the resulting evil peace.