Author Topic: Apologia pro viris fori (Read 1664 times)

Kephapaulos · « **on:** November 02, 2007, 02:28:08 PM »

Some here may think guys like MichaelSolimanto, gilbertgea, and our own forum moderator Chantcd are something of chauvinist bigots, but that is not so. For one thing, I know Michael and Matthew personally, and I know they are trying to be charitable. The same would have to go for Gilbert in being charitable, although I have never actually met him before. As I more or less said in another thread: charity is not always nice; it can hurt sometimes.

clare · « **Reply #1 on:** November 02, 2007, 03:01:07 PM »

Charity thinketh no evil.

Matthew · « **Reply #2 on:** November 02, 2007, 03:13:26 PM »

I think that naked Scripture quotes aren't going to be enough in this debate. The Catholic Church expounds on them with commentaries, Tradition, etc.

Yes, SOME quotes are self-explanatory -- but you'd be surprised how many people can argue over them.

Matthew

Matthew · « **Reply #3 on:** November 02, 2007, 03:14:58 PM »

So, if I'm walking down the street, and I observe someone shoot another man -- am I to "think no evil"? Is that what Scripture commands that I do in that situation?

See, a naked Scripture quote, in this case, is more confusing than if you had remained silent.

Matthew

Miss_Fluffy · « **Reply #4 on:** November 02, 2007, 03:19:18 PM »

I never would call them chauvinist bigots, but I certainly question why one constantly patronizes me, and the other thinks the burning of St. Joan of Arc was "good symbolism".

Matthew · « **Reply #5 on:** November 02, 2007, 03:24:51 PM »

Being vague about names might be good in many circuмstances -- but when you have 3 men mentioned, and an alleged "crime" or "misdeed" is being discussed, it's not very fair to the "non-accused parties" to keep things on an anonymous basis.

It almost backfires on your intention to not explicitly name names.

I know you didn't do this intentionally, which is why I'm bringing it up here.

...understand what I mean?

Sincerely,

Matthew

Miss_Fluffy · « **Reply #6 on:** November 02, 2007, 03:57:43 PM »

I'm sorry Matthew. I feel I'm in way over my head. Everytime I have engaged in discussion with Mike Solimanto, I feel very patronized by him.

I've never felt that way with you Matthew, nor any other man on the forum.

clare · « **Reply #7 on:** November 02, 2007, 04:35:38 PM »

Quote from: ChantCd

So, if I'm walking down the street, and I observe someone shoot another man -- am I to "think no evil"? Is that what Scripture commands that I do in that situation?

See, a naked Scripture quote, in this case, is more confusing than if you had remained silent.

Matthew

Matthew,

What I had in mind, specifically, was the discussions on this forum, where for example, I have been called dishonest and duplicitous, when I am not, simply because Michael cannot grasp the fact that it is possible to be a traditionalist Catholic and not find women's trousers offensive.

I notice you didn't ask Kephapaulos to be more specific about charity not always being nice. I never said it was. My reply was that it thinketh no evil. In other words, it doesn't persist in thinking the worst about people.

Clare.

Gemma · « **Reply #8 on:** November 02, 2007, 04:53:13 PM »

Quote from: ChantCd

See, a naked Scripture quote, in this case, is more confusing than if you had remained silent.

Because that's what you are supposed to do, Clare. :rolleyes:

clare · « **Reply #9 on:** November 02, 2007, 04:56:27 PM »

Quote from: Gemma

Quote from: ChantCd
See, a naked Scripture quote, in this case, is more confusing than if you had remained silent.

Because that's what you are supposed to do, Clare. :rolleyes:

I type fairly quietly!

MichaelSolimanto · « **Reply #10 on:** November 02, 2007, 04:56:51 PM »

I actually like the taste of chauvinist bigots. They are crunchy and yet rich in flavor. Wait... I'm confusing this another french food I enjoy.

On a more serious manner, I really don't need someone to defend me, although I thank kepha for trying to do so. I'm very happy for defending the faith. It's not a matter of trousers that has gotten the tenor of the debate going, but the emotional and irrational decisions given by people who supposedly support tradition by sitting behind a computer and staying "aloof" from personal involvement of their personality being shielded by pseudonyms.

In other words many of the arguments put forth as "rational" are hidden from true scrutiny because I dare say the people who have opposed a traditional understanding would never do so at their parish, and if they did they would be excoriated, but somehow they use only their first name or a pseudonym and flail away without impunity because they know there is not the same visceral reaction if they did so in the context of parish life.

The other thread about the danger of using your real identity is proven time and time again. You can hide behind an ideology safely without people knowing who you are and you can safely say things you wouldn't say around your parish otherwise you would be the pariah of the parish. The real reason people use pseudonyms is many times they don't want to be connected with an ideology which would be unsafe in public.

People who know me know I'm not afraid of saying what I think about the problems in the Church and in culture. We all want to be safe in real life, we want to take our personal life and views and spread it online because it has no repercussions, but far be it if people knew that's how we actually think because it would lead to confrontation. I could make examples right now but the thread was written in a conciliatory tone so I'm leaving it at that tone as well.

JoanScholastica · « **Reply #11 on:** November 02, 2007, 06:19:18 PM »

Dawn · « **Reply #12 on:** November 02, 2007, 07:03:19 PM »

Goodness, I am not afraid for anyone to know who I am. I am for the record, Dawn Marie Rock, I live in Illinois and am 47 years old. My current haircolor is Miss Clairol Balsam Medium ash brown. BTW, you would not know that I have many many times discussed my thoughts with Traditional priests to their face.

Miss_Fluffy · « **Reply #13 on:** November 02, 2007, 07:14:08 PM »

I spent some time in the Blessed Sacrament chapel today. I spent some time with Our Lord, mulling about all these little arguments and my hurt feelings etc.

I am sorry if I offended anyone. I do have fondness and friendliness for all of you, especially those who I got so worked up about.

I'd especialy like to apologize to Mike, Incognito, and Gilbert. My passion for argument got the best of me, and I never intended to upset anyone. I hope I haven't.

Mike, I would be happy to meet you in person, and I never intended to hide behind a pseudonym. I thank you for your input and thoughts, though I don't agree with everything you've said. I understand that we all get carried away on the internet sometimes, especially me.

MichaelSolimanto · « **Reply #14 on:** November 02, 2007, 11:24:06 PM »

Quote from: Miss_Fluffy

I spent some time in the Blessed Sacrament chapel today. I spent some time with Our Lord, mulling about all these little arguments and my hurt feelings etc.

I am sorry if I offended anyone. I do have fondness and friendliness for all of you, especially those who I got so worked up about.

I'd especialy like to apologize to Mike, Incognito, and Gilbert. My passion for argument got the best of me, and I never intended to upset anyone. I hope I haven't.

Mike, I would be happy to meet you in person, and I never intended to hide behind a pseudonym. I thank you for your input and thoughts, though I don't agree with everything you've said. I understand that we all get carried away on the internet sometimes, especially me.

Don't worry about me. I don't hold anything against anyone (except my barber).