Author Topic: Lack Of Civility and Good Manners (Read 3449 times)

Marcelino · « **Reply #20 on:** October 16, 2012, 06:24:34 PM »

Quote from: Capt McQuigg

Marcelino,

Perhaps you do see some rudeness here. I'm merely saying that compared to the other forums where, in the past, I participated this place is like a library. The level of politeness here is very high. You say you see rudeness but I see it as very minimal. I'm not referring to trolls who Matthew bans, but to regular participants.

Of course, on matters of spirituality, the sensitivity factor is much higher. Some who attend indults are put off by the hard striving for veracity and conclusion found in the traditionalists, particularly the sedevacantist viewpoint. I say the indults should address these issues straight on and draw their own conclusions (guided by prayer, I hope!) and not be so overly touchy about the more profound issues discussed here.

It goes the other way, too. Sedevacantists and traditionalists should be patient with those who attend indults or even newby novus ordites who are starting to wonder why they feel, in their heart of hearts, that something is dreadfully wrong with the vernacular mass with the eucharistic ministers in mini skirts. It's hard to hear that not only is the lack of modesty a problem but the high likelihood that the priest is not even a valid priest - this troubles newbies.

Maybe there is rudeness but because I'm making the comparison between a vulgar secular forum and this place that the comparison is not an accurate one.

Can you highlist a particular case of rudeness for me?

That seemed like a thoughtful post. However, that hasn't been my experience. Lots of forums I've been to are as polite as this one. As far as I can tell, the big difference between this forum and others is the content that folks are allowed to discuss. Of course, I think there is a general problem of incivility in the culture. It's like "zombieland," there's no place that isn't "infected." Have you ever heard Tele tell his story of "church abuse?" That's a famous one, but there's lots of stories like that around here and at Trad Chapels. Maybe you just aren't paying attention.

Marcelino · « **Reply #21 on:** October 16, 2012, 06:27:19 PM »

Quote from: Sigismund

Several people have clicked on the down thumb icon. No one has actually manned up and explained why.

It doesn't take much courage. And any dummy can do it.

Sigismund · « **Reply #22 on:** October 16, 2012, 07:53:59 PM »

Quote from: Capt McQuigg

Quote from: Sigismund
Several people have clicked on the down thumb icon. No one has actually manned up and explained why.

But I see that you've received some thumb's up!!!

Yes. :smile: And one down thumb from someone who still chooses to offer no explanation. :rolleyes:

Sigismund · « **Reply #23 on:** October 16, 2012, 07:54:58 PM »

Quote from: Marcelino

Quote from: Sigismund
Several people have clicked on the down thumb icon. No one has actually manned up and explained why.

It doesn't take much courage. And any dummy can do it.

Hey, that isn't very polite. Better not let Marcelino catch you...Oh...I see...never mind. :wink:

Daegus · « **Reply #24 on:** October 16, 2012, 10:05:45 PM »

Quote from: Capt McQuigg

Quote from: Daegus

Hi Daegus,

You started a thread a while back explaining why you could no longer call yourself a sedevacantist and that you thought the post-1968 consecrations were valid.

Could you provide me the full text of each rite? I'd like to do a side by side comparison. Or you could just refer me to a specific website that has this information.

http://www.sspx.org/miscellaneous/conditional_ordination.pdf

You should read this if you haven't already. That, in part, influenced my change of opinions.