Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Suscipe Domine  (Read 13278 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Thurifer

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 221
  • Reputation: +126/-2
  • Gender: Male
Suscipe Domine
« Reply #30 on: March 04, 2015, 09:45:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: LaramieHirsch
    Suscipe Domine The Echo Chamber is devolving by the week.  It's a shame that so many of the Fisheaters got roped in by them.  

    I'm willing to bet that the moderators will have some sort of fight within the next three years.  It seems they've already pushed out one Moderator, Bonaventure.  

    I've mentioned them a bit here and there at homebase.  I suppose this post, however is a good broad look at how they do things.  

    http://thehirschfiles.blogspot.com/2015/02/echo-chamber-cannibalizes-another-member.html


    They continue to foster favorites who suck up to them, they foster trouble makers who create sock puppets in order to create forum wars, and they kick out people for silly little reasons--it's all so disingenuous.  The place is sort of like CAF, in that you don't know if the next sensible thing that you say will get you the boot.  

    I, myself, was banned for talking about evangelizing atheists.  


    Laramie, I think you really nailed the situation in the article you posted. I agree with you 100%.

    I hope everyone who has ever invested time over at SD takes the time to read it. You have a talent for assessing the situation fairly and do not take short cuts in expressing yourself. It is fair, balanced, and rightfully critical.

    In fact, it is a gift. I sincerely hope people take the time to read and contemplate your ideas for all the time, effort, and brains you bring to the assessment of the situation.  

    Well done, Sir!


    Offline Croix de Fer

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3219
    • Reputation: +2525/-2210
    • Gender: Male
    Suscipe Domine
    « Reply #31 on: March 04, 2015, 10:17:16 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: LaramieHirsch
    http://thehirschfiles.blogspot.com/2015/02/echo-chamber-cannibalizes-another-member.html  


    Women will be instrumental, but not solely, in ushering in the anti-Christ.
    Blessed be the Lord my God, who teacheth my hands to fight, and my fingers to war. ~ Psalms 143:1 (Douay-Rheims)


    Offline Thurifer

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 221
    • Reputation: +126/-2
    • Gender: Male
    Suscipe Domine
    « Reply #32 on: March 04, 2015, 10:44:35 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: ascent
    Quote from: LaramieHirsch
    http://thehirschfiles.blogspot.com/2015/02/echo-chamber-cannibalizes-another-member.html  


    Women will be instrumental, but not solely, in ushering in the anti-Christ.


    That should be fairly obvious. All one has to do is read the first three chapters of Genesis. I would welcome more discussion on this topic, ascent. If you feel like it, please develop this idea more fully so that we may follow along and contribute.

    I can't think of a more dangerous mix than being smitten by Malachi Martin and equally smitten by feminism. Even if they do not realize they are carriers of this virus. In my view, they want to be men just as much as the radical feminists they will sometimes criticize. I have often wondered how these super Trad women who make appearances on Catholic forums, who also claim to have many children and also home school have the time to move the coffee clutch into cyber space. Something does not add up here.  

    Seriously, what can one say about a woman who will read Windswept House with the same gusto as her next door neighbor may read a "romance" novel? They are beyond worthless and are in fact dangerous.

    Having said that, some of the finest posters are women. But those are usually women with a little more maturity and have older children or perhaps they are single.

    You know Chesterton once said that the most brilliant disguise is grey hair. Because people tend to view anyone who is advanced in years as conservative or even religious and in fear of God. I say the same about these blowhard women who form the echo chamber and sometimes include timelines to their next baby's due date in their signature boxes.

    Does this make me a misogynist?

    Offline Jaynek

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3874
    • Reputation: +1993/-1112
    • Gender: Female
    Suscipe Domine
    « Reply #33 on: March 04, 2015, 01:58:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Pheo
    I sent a PM about the recent bans and the new guess-what-we're-thinking policy - I didn't get a very satisfying explanation.  For what it's worth, I'm not the only one unhappy with it.  I still like SD, but I don't care for the direction that it took here.  The moderation is a bit heavy handed at times, and this is a good example of how that can go wrong.

    Maximillian made some really edifying posts.  I won't be going back while he's banned.

    The warnings for Graham and Quaremerepulisti make just about zero sense too.


    This is just what I feel about this.  I too sent a PM and am on a posting break from SD until Maximilian's temp ban is done.  He is an amazing poster.

    For me, one of the most helpful aspects of traditional Catholicism is its vision of godly womanhood and its stand against feminism.  One thing I look for in a trad forum is a place to discuss these matters with others who understand the evil of feminism and understand it from a truly Catholic perspective.  Before I discovered traditional Catholicism, I used to hang around Evangelical Christian forums and men's rights forums because these were the people who understood that feminism is wrong.  However, these places were not a good fit for me.  

    When I found traditional Catholicism, I found a whole new depth to my faith and correction for all the errors that I had picked up in the Novus Ordo.  Finding a treasure of teaching on women was just an added bonus.  I felt almost cheated that the Catholic Church had had the perfect teaching about women all along and nobody had ever told me.

    Anyhow, I am waiting to see what develops on SD, but I have no interest in being a member of a trad forum that does not allow people to express condemnation of feminism.

    Offline Jaynek

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3874
    • Reputation: +1993/-1112
    • Gender: Female
    Suscipe Domine
    « Reply #34 on: March 04, 2015, 02:51:19 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: LaramieHirsch
    [re: Suscipe Domine]
    I'm willing to bet that the moderators will have some sort of fight within the next three years.  It seems they've already pushed out one Moderator, Bonaventure.  
     


    Bonaventure is there as a poster and seems on good terms with everyone so it does not seem likely that he was "pushed out" of being a moderator.  Another former moderator, tmw, seems to be on bad terms with them.  It is possible that is what happened to him, but we probably should not speculate beyond what we have been told.  


    Offline Graham

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1768
    • Reputation: +1886/-16
    • Gender: Male
    Suscipe Domine
    « Reply #35 on: March 04, 2015, 09:27:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Matto
    I was wondering what posters think about the Catholic forum Suscipe Domine. I have been aware of the site for a while and have considered joining but I do not know if the site is good for a person like me. Is it bad like fisheaters or Catholic answers or is it more traditional?


    I wouldn't recommend it. Feminist, lots of indult-goers and pop culture fans.

    Offline poche

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 16730
    • Reputation: +1218/-4688
    • Gender: Male
    Suscipe Domine
    « Reply #36 on: March 04, 2015, 10:56:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Sbyvl
    Quote from: poche
    Quote from: Sbyvl
    Quote from: poche
    Quote from: Sbyvl
    Quote from: TheKnightVigilant
    Quote from: Sbyvl
    Quote from: TheKnightVigilant
    Quote from: Matto
    Wow. I just learned there is another rival trad forum called Te Deum. I will check that one out too. I am behind the times.


    That forum is no better. It's just where Suscipe Domine's ultramontanists go to nod heads and agree with each other. They permanently banned me for saying that St. Pius X made some destructive changes to the liturgy and that ultramontanism has harmed the Church - two facts that cannot be reasonably denied with the hindsight of Vatican II.

    They complain about SD's banning of Maximilian, but here's the thing: They would have banned Maximilian too, because he shares the same view of ultramontanism that got me banned from their forum, and he isn't shy about it. Infact he rejects papal infallibility outright as a novelty.

    Unrelated really, but Maximilian is the best poster in the entire online trad community.


    You were banned for publicly doubting the dogma of Papal infallibility.  There is no place for heresy on a Catholic forum.  You were given a chance to stop spreading heresy, but you refused.  We've only banned a handful of individuals over the past six months, almost all of them on account of the individuals' obstinate heresy.


    What I did was raise questions about how Vatican I can be squared with what happened at Vatican II, and whether or not it is consistent with how the Church was governed for almost 1900 years - questions that neither you nor any other members of your forum were able to answer. I was banned for doing with Vatican I exactly what you do with Vatican II. Why the inconsistency? Why the double-standard?


    It is impossible for the entire Church to be in error.  The entire Church followed Vatican I.  Ergo.

    Moreover, I believe several members did refute what you said.  But the crux of the matter was that you were publicly doubting an infallible doctrine of the faith.  That is unacceptable.  There is enough heresy and error in the world, and we don't need any of it on a Catholic forum.

    And by the way, I didn't ban discussion of the prudence of Vatican I, but rather it's legitimacy, so most of your posts in this thread were devoted to proving a moot point.

    You are mistaken. the entire Church didn't follow Vatican I. There was a schism that followed. Today there are communities of "Old Catholics" who date themselves from this schism.


    The Old Catholics defected to the Anglicans in 1932.  So if they were right, the Catholic Church is in communion with a false sect, which is clearly impossible.


    Yes but their departure was after Vatican I. Their sacraments have been recognized as valid by the Catholic Church. That will all change now that they "ordain" women to the priesthood.


    Since you accept their defection, where has the Catholic Church been since 1932?  Which bishops have ordinary jurisdiction?  Which have supplied jurisdiction?

    The Catholic church is still here. The bishops of the Old Catholic churches have no ordinary jurisdiction and I haven't heard anything about their supplied jurisdiction. However the validity of their sacranments is up in the air because of their support for womens' ordination.

    Offline Croix de Fer

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3219
    • Reputation: +2525/-2210
    • Gender: Male
    Suscipe Domine
    « Reply #37 on: March 05, 2015, 07:55:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Thurifer
    Quote from: ascent
    Quote from: LaramieHirsch
    http://thehirschfiles.blogspot.com/2015/02/echo-chamber-cannibalizes-another-member.html  


    Women will be instrumental, but not solely, in ushering in the anti-Christ.


     I would welcome more discussion on this topic, ascent. If you feel like it, please develop this idea more fully so that we may follow along and contribute.


    I think there are people here who can do a better job than me at presenting the statement of the problem or thesis, and expounding on it, but I'll mention a few things. I've noticed many woman are attracted to, and swayed by, New Age-esque falsehoods. I've noticed it in real life and online. One of the reasons for women subscribing to NA is because it focuses on the self and feel-good, warm & fuzzy "energies", which induces an emotional high (that's actually artificial and not from the Holy Ghost); and we know, generally, women are driven by their emotions. Since the dawn of feminism, women are increasingly becoming more self-centered with deluded egos, while avoiding the Cross and any discomforts that keep a person level-headed and grounded as a humble, prudent person. Increasingly, they defy any real penance that will help them remain connected to the Lord. The result also diminishes real love and charity for other people, while there's an increase in the superficial, easy, fake charity and synthetic love, and liberalism into which so many people are indoctrinated, which is leading to hell. Due to Jєω-contrived social engineering of women's deluded sense of self and gender role reversals, and the cultural war on heterosɛҳuąƖ, traditional and Catholic men, the effect is that women don't want a spouse. Their deluded egos now overshadow any natural, yet deeply buried and innate, drive to be in union with a real man through marriage and consummation. But where are the real men anymore? They're being social-engineered out. And if a woman does find a real man who evokes a true sense of identity and recognition of what's been imprinted on her heart by the Lord, that real clarity of self and connection to the man is soon demolished by the hostilities toward men that rage within herself. This stems from the Jєωs fomenting a cavernous division between men and woman because woman are taught to resent and be contentious towards real men, especially if they're traditional, white, heterosɛҳuąƖ Christians.  This all leads to a crucial apex. There is a huge void in the lives of these women since they're driven to reject real men, yet they will not admit it to themselves or anyone else, because they've convinced themselves that they're "successful" and "independent". That's what our rootless and deceived culture teaches them. Ergo, to fill this void that they don't admit, they immerse themselves in a religion of self - the New Age - which they can control and deem as good for themselves, depending on what makes them feel good. It's those "vibrations" and "energies", and growing "consciousness". This is their spouse. This gives them (false) "comfort" and "meaning".

    New Age will be one of the conduits to the global false religion of the anti-Christ.

    HeterosɛҳuąƖ women seem to be more tolerant to, and promoting of, pervert fαɢɢօtry than heterosɛҳuąƖ men, although it might be the same for both genders, but I'm not sure if there's a way to quantify it. Some Catholic and Orthodox prophesies say the anti-Christ will be a fag, hence his ushers will be those who have an effrontery to this grotesque perversion.  

    In pop culture, women are put on a higher pedestal than men, and in fictional works and fantasy, the divine-like people are usually women. I believe this is an attempt to brainwash young boys into rejecting their natural roles as leaders and fighters when they become men, and to engineer a twisted, romanticist loyalty to female leaders as if they have more intrinsic worth than males, now, and in the future. Many of these women are also immodest, narcissistic, and power-hungry, and they have a ridiculous, deluded sense of "strength" and "self-preservation". Women who manifest this disposition in real life will go unchecked and unchallenged because the boys who become "men" are accepting of it as real "strength" and "leadership". And any drive to burst out of this social-engineered, restraining bubble in which these man-boys now live will be forfeited as they will seek out porn to "remedy" their frustrations, rather than place themselves in a situation that's inconvenient or causes discomfort for themselves. These man-boys will choose psycho-sɛҳuąƖ, artificial gratification via a pixilated false reality and self-abuse, rather than what they now perceive for themselves as an inconvenience and discomfort of having to call out a woman for being a deluded, conniving, misguided, self-serving wretch.

    Put all of the aforementioned together with the fact that, generally, women are more easily manipulated than men, which is why the ѕуηαgσgυє has debased white "Christian" men from pillars of American society and power structures, and replaced them with women and racial and religious minorities. The same is happening in most advanced, white civilized societies where there is a Fifth Column of Jєωry feeding off of the host nations. These women will be sycophants, shills and pawns for the Jєωs as they play a major role in paving the way for the anti-Christ, and these women will try to ensure that people follow the deception after he has emerged. I don't think it'll be exclusively women as ushers of the anti-Christ, rather it'll be both men and women, but women will have a very significant role and in larger numbers than people realize. Of course, the Jєωs will be on top of this diabolical pyramid with their father, Satan, calling the shots.



    Quote from: Thurifer
    In my view, they want to be men just as much as the radical feminists they will sometimes criticize. I have often wondered how these super Trad women who make appearances on Catholic forums, who also claim to have many children and also home school have the time to move the coffee clutch into cyber space. Something does not add up here.


    Just as the Lord, in His Divine Providence, graced St. Joan of Arc to fight for the Faith and France, He'll also use women to fight for the Faith in other ways, especially when there's a shortage of holy, strong, Catholic men. The internet is no different. I'm not comparing any woman here on CathInfo or other trad forums to St. Joan of Arc, nor am I saying there's a shortage of good Catholic men here at CI, but I have to say there are at least several women here who are great posters. One of my two top favorite posters here is a woman. She contributes greatly to defending and teaching the Catholic Faith, although I don't agree with her on everything. She's also a wife & mother with young children, and she's not an "older" woman with "time one her hands" like the other good posters whom you described.


    Quote from: Thurifer
    I say the same about these blowhard women who form the echo chamber and sometimes include timelines to their next baby's due date in their signature boxes.  


    I don't know much about that forum, although I did join it less than a week ago. Generally, I don't think there's anything wrong with a trad woman posting news and info about their baby's due date or family affairs. They have the most important jobs that any woman can have - being a mother and wife - and they're proud of, and excited about, the prospect of bringing new life into the world and, by the grace of God, raising children to be saints. They should be proud and excited about it. As long as they use prudence in what they share with the online community, I don't see a problem with it. I also don't question their motives, as long as what they contribute to these forums is solid in Catholicity, dogma and doctrine.
    Blessed be the Lord my God, who teacheth my hands to fight, and my fingers to war. ~ Psalms 143:1 (Douay-Rheims)


    Offline BTNYC

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2777
    • Reputation: +3122/-97
    • Gender: Male
    Suscipe Domine
    « Reply #38 on: March 10, 2015, 08:08:08 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: TheKnightVigilant
    Quote from: Sbyvl
    Pius X did not innovate on matters of faith and morals, and the reform of the Breviary was all but necessary by that time.  Moreover, there is nothing wrong with encouraging frequent reception of Communion, because it encourages people to get to Confession more frequently, amongst other things.


    Tamper with the received traditions and you're tampering with the faith.

    There is "nothing wrong" with overturning ancient traditions? You don't see the problem with Pius X overturning the apostolic order of the sacraments?

    If it's acceptable for Pius X to overturn traditions, it's acceptable for Paul VI to do the same.


    Putting aside for a moment the outrageous absurdity of drawing some kind of equivallent parallel between St. Pius X's disciplinary amendments (which he executed well within the parameters of the law and which he as the Church's Supreme Legislator had every right to do) and Paul VI's utterly unprecedented wholecloth invention of an alien, fabricated liturgy, made in collaboration with Protestant heretics and Freemasons, and without any clear, legally binding promulgation (and in direct defiance of St. Pius V's solemn pronouncements in Quo Primum) - to what logical end ought we take your premise?

    Paul VI was easily (before Francis came along to give him serious competition) the worst pope in the history of the Church, and for the very outrages with which you find parallel in St. Pius X. I assume you don't consider Paul VI a saint. So do you consider St. Pius X to be one (I can't help but notice your failure to append the honorific before his name)? If Paul VI's novelties are manifestly contrary to heroic virtue, does it follow that St. Pius X's amendments were as well?

    How far down this perilously slippery slope do you wish to venture?
     

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31176
    • Reputation: +27093/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Suscipe Domine
    « Reply #39 on: March 10, 2015, 12:41:16 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • See what I mean?

    This is a perfect example of Pharasaical Trads wanting/needing to be better than all their Trad brethren -- needing to out-trad the trads, as it were.

    This schismatic mentality is one of the biggest banes and dangers of the Traditional Catholic movement.

    This is another aspect of that mentality: pride and attachment to our own private opinions, even if those opinions place us at odds with the whole known Traditional Catholic world. Hey, Our Lord did say, "When I return, do you think I will find Faith on the earth?" That quote covers any degree of extreme opinions and beliefs, right? (wrong!)

    This is my conclusion, after having run a Trad Catholic forum for 7 1/2 years and counting, having personally experienced the Trad movement in its various flavors for over 3 decades (that I can remember), and having been neck-deep in the SSPX for 3.5 years while I attended their seminary.

    It's my conclusion -- take it for what it's worth.

    It is my firm belief that we Traditional Catholics have much more to fear from schism/home-aloneism/complete despair in the realm of Trust than we EVER have to fear the Novus Ordo and its practices sneaking into our hearts. The latter will never happen. The former? It happens every day to Trads.

    I could spend HOURS giving you examples of this, from all corners of the Traditional Catholic world:
    Traditional priests attacking Traditional bishops (because of disagreements in the realm of who should be ordained bishop and when)
    Traditional priests attacking other Traditional priests in a most scandalous fashion because the latter won't submit to the former in matters of discipline/obedience
    Catholics (who favored the classic SSPX position) rejecting the weekly Masses of a completely solid, SSPX-trained (in the 1980's) priest because said priest is not approved by their "favorite" priest.
    Baseball card dealers completely treading Charity underfoot, attempting to slander and ruin individuals and even whole families because the former holds to the Siri Thesis while the latter does not.
    Catholics staying home on Sunday for less-than-legitimate reasons
    Catholics moving across the country -- all earthly considerations set aside, including "what will I do to earn a living" -- to live in a "mecca" or "shangri-la" of the particular group they favor, only to regret it later.
    Etc
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31176
    • Reputation: +27093/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Suscipe Domine
    « Reply #40 on: March 10, 2015, 01:09:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The Novus Ordo is evil, but how much does it really harm the average Trad? What does the Novus Ordo actually COST the average Trad?

    It means we have less friends or potential friends to visit with on Sunday, perhaps no daily Mass -- but most Trads can arrange it so that they have a Tridentine Mass every Sunday.

    Schism/cultism/home-alone-ism, on the other hand, can make a person completely un-churched, as well as completely lose sight of charity and the big picture of the Catholic Faith. Defense of the group/cult/theological position completely distracts some, causing them to "strain out a gnat and swallow a camel".

    Which of these is more dangerous again?
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com


    Offline Sbyvl

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 129
    • Reputation: +102/-16
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Suscipe Domine
    « Reply #41 on: December 24, 2022, 01:04:37 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • They calumnate their members (See: https://sbyvl.wordpress.com/2015/02/17/4172/), whilst permitting feminists to roam free, banning those who oppose them (See: http://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=10447.0 and http://www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=10525.0).  These are just two examples of their ridiculousness.  There are plenty more.
    All these claims are untrue, and I retract and apologize for them
    I apologize for all rude, calumnious, uncharitable, and unchristian posts I have made, and I retract them.