Sounds like the new SSPX.

Anyone who supports the neo-SSPX should have no problem with Fisheaters.

Vox has always been all about giving a "good impression about Trads" to the newbies, even as far back as 2006. I don't think she'd even disagree with that.

Which sounds good and all, but what about doctrine? What about morality? What about dangers to the Faith? One can go too far in censoring the "controversial" stuff, to the point that the very truth and important topics are squelched.

Thank you for posting a link -- so much better than just posting an assertion without any basis or proof.

Because from now on, I want to see PROOF or at least something CONCRETE like QUOTES when anything is alleged about another individual or forum.

CathInfo is not a rumor mill, or an axe grinding forum. It's also not a drama queen whoring for attention in some kind of "forum soap opera".

If someone comes on here and says that Fr. Rostand is against the Resistance, I'm going to have to ask for proof (which shouldn't be a problem of course!)

 :wink:

Sounds like the new SSPX.

Anyone who supports the neo-SSPX should have no problem with Fisheaters.

Vox has always been all about giving a "good impression about Trads" to the newbies, even as far back as 2006. I don't think she'd even disagree with that.

Which sounds good and all, but what about doctrine? What about morality? What about dangers to the Faith? One can go too far in censoring the "controversial" stuff, to the point that the very truth and important topics are squelched.

Thank you for posting a link -- so much better than just posting an assertion without any basis or proof.

Because from now on, I want to see PROOF and QUOTES about anything alleged about another individual or forum.

CathInfo is not a rumor mill, or an axe grinding forum. It's also not a drama queen whoring for attention in some kind of "forum soap opera".

If someone comes on here and says that Fr. Rostand is against the Resistance, I'm going to have to ask for proof (which shouldn't be a problem of course!)

 :wink:

Fair enough.

And thanks for being a level headed owner of a trad forum. Seems to be a shortage of such imo.

I saw all of that.  Vox just can't stand the "nastiness" anymore.  The posters over there (including myself who was banned for "general rudeness") are not nasty by and large.    

Of course they aren't unless baited by the neocats.

I saw all of that.  Vox just can't stand the "nastiness" anymore.  The posters over there (including myself who was banned for "general rudeness") are not nasty by and large.    

You are probably right.

Speaking of which, I'd like to bring up something that's been bothering me. I'd like to honestly consider the charge that FE is liberal and/or "all bad".
I mean, how can you make such a broad generalizations about a forum of hundreds or thousands of people?

Sorry, there is no such thing.

How can you summarize -- to any meaningful degree -- a group of hundreds or even thousands of young men and women, middle aged men and women, older men and women, OF ALL WALKS OF LIFE -- single, married, rich, poor, educated, not-so-educated...

How can you paint with a brush that broad? If you dab the ground with it, you'll be able to see the dot from space!

Let's look into it here...

I know people like to call FE "liberal" and maybe they're right -- at least to a point. I know there's at least a very vocal minority that defends outrageous things like a transsɛҳuąƖ man going by "she". Or cohabitation. There's no denying or defending that.

But how many people there just don't say anything? How many try to be Catholic, while not sticking out like a sore thumb? Maybe some of them would prefer not to get banned. For some people, it's in their personality to go with the crowd.

But again, maybe they are liberal. It's true that the moderator herself shows plenty of evidence for being liberal. She speaks the language, etc. and you can see it in most of her posts. And a forum owner will tend to MOSTLY favor people like himself, and be against those who diametrically oppose what he stands for.

I'll admit -- there are a couple members on CathInfo that are a thorn in my side. Maybe more than a couple :)  But they're my penance.

I don't want to excuse Fisheaters or Vox for how she's run that forum -- but let's just say I always want to look into each accusation, and always consider the other side. It's only fair. Things are seldom as cut & dried as people think. Especially when you're talking about a forum of hundreds or thousands of people!

Only in sports are things that cut & dried. "Bears good. Packers bad." (or vice-versa).


At any rate, my point is this: There are some malcontents and troublemakers that even call CathInfo (and myself) liberal, or leaning towards liberalism. Which is about as ridiculous as a pink rhinoceros selling drugs to the Amish.

To throw that word at me is to lose all credibility.

There's not the slightest shred of evidence or basis for that charge. They can't seem to tell the difference between a "devil's advocate" or "different perspective" and a forum that's generally favorable to liberals.

Maybe I'm dense, but I don't get why you feel you need to defend FE from my post.  I'm saying that most posters are not nasty.  What is wrong with that?

Added:  This post was supposed to quote Matthew's post.

Sorry about that -- it wasn't really aimed at you.

It was your defense of FE that reminded me of what I wanted to say, that's all.

I rephrased my post a bit (toward the beginning).

I just saw your change.  But, I actually wasn't defending FE...LOL.  I was just pointing out that Vox said one of the reasons why it might get closed down was because she is tired of the nastiness over there.  I was trying to point out that what she considers "nasty" isn't really "nasty".

It is simply my personal experience and opinion so I am sure others have differing perspectives, but I found Jayne to be exceptionally uncharitable. Too often accusations of heresy and schism are aimed at people she disagrees with. Even if she is right and the other person is clearly incorrect, her way of correction is fierce and can do much damage to the fragile faith of new comers. Often in threads, she seems very determined to make it about herself, or simply hijacks a thread, shouting down dissenting voices.  :drillsergeant:

Perhaps FE could benefit from a retired priest as moderator?  This way charity and censure can be doled out from the perspective of one who genuinely wants to save souls.  
I would be sad to see it go. It is good to know that traditional catholics are just normal people with normal neurosis and frailties. Sometimes, New converts forget that wrapped up in the perfection, order and solemnity of the mass, there are still imperfect human beings.