Author Topic: What is up with AQ? (Read 4619 times)

Alex · « **on:** November 05, 2011, 05:48:37 AM »

This is the second time I've been treated meanly and banned by a moderator for no reason at all. They claim to be Christians but I am really shocked at the lack of charity coming from them (not the members but those in authority on that site). I really don't understand what their problems is with me with me when I don't even cause confrontation or anything of the sort. Both times I was banned, all I did was ask a question on something that was bothering me, seeking the opinion of the forum members on the issue.

Sigismund · « **Reply #1 on:** November 05, 2011, 07:36:41 AM »

I have never been able to register there, but if I could I m sure I would have been banned almost immediately. I have noticed t hat you can't ask controversial questions there either without risking banning, and I don't even look at the site much since I can't post.

MaterDominici · « **Reply #2 on:** November 06, 2011, 12:19:17 AM »

I know nothing about AQ, but clicked over there to see what you were talking about. What is up with the person coming out of the woodwork to call for your beheading?

My thoughts about your question are that you had a pretty good answer from the early reply. Whatever number of masses you have said, they will be used as necessary for your loved one and then applied to other souls in need. I think the limitation on how many more likely comes from practical matters such as your financial resources and the availability of priests to say the masses. This is just my random thoughts, though, as I'd never heard of a Gregorian Mass before quite recently. Ask a priest. : )

Alex · « **Reply #3 on:** November 06, 2011, 01:14:12 AM »

Quote from: MaterDominici

I know nothing about AQ, but clicked over there to see what you were talking about. What is up with the person coming out of the woodwork to call for your beheading?

My thoughts about your question are that you had a pretty good answer from the early reply. Whatever number of masses you have said, they will be used as necessary for your loved one and then applied to other souls in need. I think the limitation on how many more likely comes from practical matters such as your financial resources and the availability of priests to say the masses. This is just my random thoughts, though, as I'd never heard of a Gregorian Mass before quite recently. Ask a priest. : )

Yes. I know that the rest of the Masses will be applied to other souls in Purgatory if my grandmother no longer needed them. My whole dilemma was the fact that I wanted my grandmother out of purgatory more than anyone else. And I was also feeling that maybe I was being selfish because I would be willing to use up all my savings for Masses if I knew they would get her out of purgatory. But, if I knew Granny was in Heaven, then I wouldn't be willing to use up all my savings or, at least as much money as I have already spent, on all the other souls in purgatory. Do you think that is being selfish?

I don't know why that member attacked me for no reason. I think she was the wife of a moderator because she knew that I had formerly been banned. I think she and the moderators got annoyed by the fact that I asked 2 questions within 10 days of each other because I have been a new member on AQ for 2 years since being banned and they never bothered to check who I was (I had posted other times but never posted questions so close to each other like I did). I think that the AQ owner and moderators want to keep AQ only about news and prayer requests. They get annoyed if people come on to ask questions. But, as a Christian, how can you turn away someone who is asking questions about the faith to become a better Christian by asking fellow Catholics to help them resolve spritual doubts or ignorance or ethical issues. It is a sin to turn away a fellow Christian who comes in good faith for spiritual assistance because you don't want to be bothered, or don't want to clog your forum up with questions, or get annoyed by the questioning. I was also unjustly banned me 2 years ago for my question asking. It was a question about a possible Eucharistic profonation that may have occurred and, when I had asked the moderator at that time why he had banned me, he said that I was too scrupulous and didn't belong on his forum. How unChristianly can you be to kick someone to the curb because you think they are scrupulous in their faith(which I am not, by the way). Even if I was scrupulous (which I am not), that should be the last thing you do to a person like that because being treated with such coldness and repulsion will only add to their scrupulosity, doubts, and despair.

Sigismund · « **Reply #4 on:** November 06, 2011, 06:57:54 AM »

Did you post it in the question forum? They seem to get annoyed if you post questions in the general or news forums, so that may be part of it, although that does not excuse attacking you.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with asking practical questions about a devotional practice. Gregorian Masses are a venerable custom.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #5 on:** November 06, 2011, 10:24:08 AM »

Quote from: Alex

This is the second time I've been treated meanly and banned by a moderator for no reason at all. They claim to be Christians but I am really shocked at the lack of charity coming from them (not the members but those in authority on that site). I really don't understand what their problems is with me with me when I don't even cause confrontation or anything of the sort. Both times I was banned, all I did was ask a question on something that was bothering me, seeking the opinion of the forum members on the issue.

1) I have been banned there 5-6 times

2) You may know me as: SSPXer, Seraphim, Simple Man, Devoted Servant, etc.

3) They closed registration some time ago, and only those that were already signed up could remain members;

4) Their preferred membership is of the tradcuмenical (i.e., unprincipled) indultarian with pro-SSPX leanings variety.

5) If you aren't cool with that, they aren't cool with you.

6) There are also members there who wait for the more militant posters to write, then pick a fight and feign being insulted with the goal of getting persons banned that they do not want to have an influence on the forum.

7) These is one poster there who has only posted 5 times in 3 years (4 of which were in responses to posts from me); 2 of which resulted in bans for me.

8) As a friend wrote, it is humorous to read Grassmeier's recent claim that the forum was intended to be a meeting place for people who had been treated meanly on other forums. As whimpy as AQ is, it leads one to wonder what kind of site would have found them too hard core: EWTN?

Charles · « **Reply #6 on:** November 07, 2011, 07:47:48 AM »

AQ is disintegrating. There is a thread over there now where a longtime member known to ruffle feathers has been banned for going off topic. What followed was the banned person's mother posting a defense of her daughter.

Then it get's interesting. The mother posts a link to a site where the owner of AQ is shown in a photo doing something of questionable prudence. A fairly sick act and if anyone here views the thread at AQ, I don't suggest you follow the link. There is enough text in the AQ thread to clue one in on what is in the photo. [moderator note: He's right. It involves fake genitalia. There. Is your curiosity quenched now? moderator note to Charles: if you're going to be THAT vague, why not just refrain from mentioning it at all? It just piques one's curiosity. I wouldn't have clicked the link after MY warning, but I couldn't resist after Charles' invitation -- I mean warning. I thought maybe he dressed up as Hitler, or Hitler carrying around lampshades and soap.]

We are all sinners, but this site owners (AQ) cavalier response to the whole thing is sad considering he owns a trad board. But, I suppose the virtue of humility isn't needed when forum members are patting him on the back telling him " it's ok".

Matthew · « **Reply #7 on:** November 07, 2011, 12:18:18 PM »

Here is the thread in question:
http://angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=39581

John should admit his mistake and remove the pictures that he posted. I would admonish him myself, except that I (and hundreds of others) have been banned from his increasingly private forum.

Here's the link you shouldn't click. Skip the first two pictures if you must click on it.
http://workspc.com/197/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3

This explains a lot.

If John Grasmeier was in the military, it explains why AQ is populated largely with anti-Bishop Williamson republicans & neo-cons.

One can never dismiss the influence a forum owner has on his/her forum.

Charles · « **Reply #8 on:** November 07, 2011, 01:39:13 PM »

why ?
to spare anyone a description they may not want to hear... or parents may not want their children to either

Edit: and I have to wonder if posting a link and saying don't look is wise.... seeing as though youngsters will be youngsters ?

just sayin

Matthew · « **Reply #9 on:** November 07, 2011, 02:38:35 PM »

Here is something John Grasmeier posted (emphasis mine):

Quote from: John Grasmeier

Quote from: spikepaga
The fact that Lucy/D.M have gone into John's personal military website which is probably meant to be seen only by him and the other guys from the brigade amounts to someone going into your house, thru your underwear drawer, thru your diary...

I appreciate the moral support, but in Dawn-and-Family's defense, there was no effort on my part for the site to be secret or hidden from view. Granted the site was designed strictly for the men I served with and only they could post there - but anyone can access it. Dawn's mom was curious, and wound up with Specialist Gamble's red party balloon. Oh well.

While - because I understand the type of members we have here - I would not share some of the stupid stuff I've done with the AQ membership, I on the other hand don't make much of an effort to hide anything I do, or have done. What I did in the military and at other points in my life is simply part of who I am.

Matthew · « **Reply #10 on:** November 07, 2011, 02:43:17 PM »

That's an interesting theology you have there, John.

But, with all due respect, I think I'll stick with Catholic theology.

I was always taught that sins of your past life should NOT be embraced or come-to-terms with, but rather cast away from you as far as possible, confessed, and penance done to atone for them.

Saying past sins are "part of who I am" is a non-Catholic attitude toward past sins, which more closely approximates Protestant thinking.

As I understand it, Catholics should always strive to root out of themselves not only the sinful habits they have, but also the stain the sins have left. For example, a man who suffered under the vice of impurity for 5 years should strive to become pure -- not just avoid the sin. He should never say, "Being a bit weak to sins of the flesh is part of who I am" but he should instead strive through penance to erase the STAIN of sin as well, such that he could become, with God's grace, even STRONG against that sin in particular.

Didn't Mary Magdalene become a great penitent, living in the desert and doing more penance -- which implies having greater self-control -- than most of us?

My own past sins are something I'm ashamed of, I hate to even think of them, and I certainly hate/despise them. I've confessed them to the best of my ability, and hope that I do enough penance and good works to atone for them before my death. If I had any physical evidence of any of them I'd love nothing more than to burn/destroy it.

A person cannot properly REPENT OF sins without literally wishing you hadn't done them to begin with. That's the very definition of repent.

Matthew · « **Reply #11 on:** November 07, 2011, 02:54:03 PM »

And I should also point out --

One man's "hiding" what I've done in the past is another man's trying not to glorify sin and/or scandalize others.

It might be common in modern music to propagate various forms of the idea, "Yes, it was bad, but I can't say I regret having experienced it", but that doesn't mean it's a Catholic notion.

Even if you see today that some good came of it, you should STILL wish you hadn't committed the sin. If God drew good even out of your sin, how much more could God draw good out of your GOOD actions?

Even if a man got involved with a woman he shouldn't have, and ended up living in sin in some way, though today they are married in the Church and presumably in the state of grace -- even in THAT kind of situation he should wonder, "Yes, I love my wife and all, but who would God have sent me if I hadn't moved in with ____ back then?"

That's the part you'll never know -- not until you reach heaven, that is.

Let's put it this way. I'll never believe that God saves the best blessings for those who sin. Sin can never be a "good" thing or beneficial for you in any way.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #12 on:** November 07, 2011, 03:27:18 PM »

Quote from: Seraphim

You may know me as: SSPXer, Seraphim, Simple Man, Devoted Servant, etc.

I didn't know you were Devoted Servant. I saw that you were banned for defending Bishop Williamson. That certainly isn't fair. I liked the posts you made there, especially on that thread.

Diego · « **Reply #13 on:** November 07, 2011, 03:34:48 PM »

Hey, Spiritus Sanctus, do you have a sense of humor? I was going to say something funny, but then hesitated....

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #14 on:** November 07, 2011, 03:35:24 PM »

Quote from: Diego

Hey, Spiritus Sanctus, do you have a sense of humor? I was going to say something funny, but then hesitated....

Yeah, I've got a sense of humor. Why?