He was banned for being a duplicate account, and for heresy.

He is the same man as "Heitanen" whom I banned a long time ago.

Let's see -- AllMonks was a member for a week or two, and racked up 100+ VERY LONG posts on NFP.

The man is OBSESSED WITH SEX. To be more precise, he is obsessed with puritanism and prudishness with regards to sex. It's like he sits there all day sɛҳuąƖly frustrated and puts all his energy into posting. Or something.


To sum up his heresy in a nutshell: Under his previous account, he expressed the belief that a lawfully married couple had to "take care of business" as expeditiously as possible, with the lights off, etc. and make sure to "think unpleasurable thoughts" during the whole 60-second encounter. He said that a couple must resist any pleasure that might arise, and/or pray during the experience.

Sorry, but I've studied enough Catholic theology and Church History to know blatant heresy when I see it. I am aware of the heresies of Puritanism, the Manicheanism, etc.

Now you see why I banned him, his second account, and took the time to delete all 100+ of his posts.

I honestly feel like I'm dealing with a Protestant heretic preacher of some sort -- I feel like I'm fighting error as I delete each post.

Wait a minute -- he WAS protestant, just a few years ago. That explains a lot.
While a convert's zeal is to be commended, it's also true that a man must learn before he should presume to teach others.

P.S. I'm a bit disappointed that no one told me about his prolific posting of error.

Some people thought he was from the Dimonds monastery, I asked him, and he said he was not, and that he doesn't agree with everything the Dimonds say.

His opinions about marriage... is he being accused of being a Jansenist?
He told me that he was a monk by himself at home, perhaps it was just his way of living out that lifestyle, through constant mortification.
He seemed very knowledgeable and I'm sorry he is gone. I could have conversed with him about living as a religious while not attached to a group.

If I'm not mistaken, you are rather new to Traditional Catholicism. You're the LAST person that should be talking with a man with such grave errors as this Heitanen/AllMonks.

Have you read the Gospel? Our Lord speaks of "the blind leading the blind, they will both fall into the pit."

That is EXACTLY what would happen if you followed him in any way.

You need to learn from those who KNOW their Faith -- not those who are in error. It takes the Truth to get to heaven.

If you were visiting New York City, would you ask for directions from a local, or from a tourist?

Spiritual matters are just as objectively TRUE or FALSE as "the location of the Mariott Hotel". Why do people think spiritual matters aren't as concrete, objective, or important as the things we deal with in "real" life?

If someone accused AllMonks of being a Jansenist, they were being nice.

Jansenism is a mitigated Catholic form of puritanism/Calvinism.

AllMonks is more of a puritan or a Manichean.

Manicheanism is the belief in a duality of gods -- a good god created spirit, and a bad god created matter. These two "gods" are equally powerful and in constant conflict. Therefore everything material/physical is evil.

That particular heresy has come in and out of fashion, in various forms, over the past 2,000 years.

Anytime a poster has an obsession with one particular topic, especially a prurient one, it's obvious something is wrong.

Perhaps "heresy" is too strong a word, Matthew.  That word is thrown around on all sides way too casually.

If he believes that sensible pleasure is intrinsically evil, well then yes he would be a Manichaeen / gnostic type.  If, however, he's speaking to the fact that in our fallen state it's nearly impossible without taking such measures to subordinate the sensible pleasure to the intellect and the will, then he would be correct.  Church Fathers would have characterized the insubordination of sensible pleasure over the will and intellect as a venial sin.  At the very least it's an imperfection that can harm the soul.  That's why even St. Paul says that virginity is ideal but that it's better to be married than to burn.  Our Lord said that there would be no marriage in heaven, that we would become like the angels.

So it would depend on what AllMonks (or his predecessor screen name) would have meant by these statements.

.

I have to give you credit, Matthew, for having the patience to read so many posts, especially when they're voluminous like those of allmonks.  As much as I tried to read them they just gave me a headache and a rising sensation of FATIGUE which literally put me to sleep several times.  How do you keep going through this?  You couldn't have read all of his posts, but maybe a random sampling, enough to be sure there is consistency in his error?  


.

Quote from: soulguard

Quote from: Dolores

Anytime a poster has an obsession with one particular topic, especially a prurient one, it's obvious something is wrong.

Not so. That is how science works. Experts are "obsessed" with their knowledge of a thing because it is relevant to their state in life. All those who want to live as religious I am sure would be "obsessed" with this whether or not they mention it. Instead of affection for marriage they have cold inquiry into it. Marriage is not for everyone, neither is religious life - different personalities and backgrounds.

I wasn't speaking generally, but rather in relation to posting on this particular website.  It seems when a poster shows up, and posts an inordinate number of times on one particular subject, it becomes clear that the poster is simply trying to be disruptive, and is usually irrational in some way (e.g., will not accept arguments to the contrary, will never admit even the possibility that he could be wrong, etc.).

"... will not accept arguments to the contrary, will never admit even the possibility that he could be wrong, etc."  

You mean, like Bishop Fellay!?


.

Perhaps "heresy" is too strong a word, Matthew.  That word is thrown around on all sides way too casually.

If he believes that sensible pleasure is intrinsically evil, well then yes he would be a Manichaeen / gnostic type.  If, however, he's speaking to the fact that in our fallen state it's nearly impossible without taking such measures to subordinate the sensible pleasure to the intellect and the will, then he would be correct.  Church Fathers would have characterized the insubordination of sensible pleasure over the will and intellect as a venial sin.  At the very least it's an imperfection that can harm the soul.  That's why even St. Paul says that virginity is ideal but that it's better to be married than to burn.  Our Lord said that there would be no marriage in heaven, that we would become like the angels.

So it would depend on what AllMonks (or his predecessor screen name) would have meant by these statements.

It's a bit disturbing that you seem to be on "his side". I didn't read all of his voluminous posts, nevermind the dozen threads he posted in, but if I'm not mistaken you were siding with him.

Having a puritan view of sex is *not* Catholic. Sex is good, holy, and beautiful. It's not for public consumption because it's sacred, not because it's dirty. It was designed by God, along with the pleasure and consequent chemically-induced psychological and emotional bonding that accompanies it. That's why the devil strives so fiercely to corrupt it. It's the easiest way to gain souls for hell. Bad marriages, bad companions, bad habits, broken families, lack of Catholic training, bad example, etc. More souls go to hell because of sins of the flesh, etc.

When a man starts distorting doctrine in ANY direction, the only Catholic response is revulsion. Therefore I have revulsion re: Heitanen's views. You seem to be interested in his views and have thought about them deeply, to the point that you agree with him (!)

You know, there is a pretty strong pleasure attached to eating, too. But no one claims it's a sin to eat delicious food (rather than bland or even disgusting food), nor does anyone say we must eat only plain dry bread OR WE'RE GOING TO HELL. Or that if you can't scrape all the flavor off your food, you must sprinkle it with bitter herbs and hold your nose while eating it. But that's precisely Heitanen's view on sex.

It's as wrong and perverted as the hedonists -- just in the opposite direction.

Both are repulsive to anyone with a well-formed Catholic sense.