Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on August 02, 2019, 09:21:54 PM

Title: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on August 02, 2019, 09:21:54 PM
The independent "traditional Catholic" school, Holy Family Academy (HFA), which opened for school year 2018-2019 and which was started by the former ruling family of Our Lady of Sorrows (OLOS) in Phoenix has already sold out it's "traditional Catholic" identity for the Almighty Dollar and so the students can play league sports!  

HFA is led by a female Principal who is 100% Novus Ordo (short skirts and all), the academy is in the final stages of being approved by the Diocese of Phoenix as the first "Diocesan Traditional Catholic School", the local Priests from the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter mission Church are saying Holy Mass and hearing Confessions there, and the sports teams joined up with "91st Psalm Christian School" of Phoenix (Protestant School) so they could field a baseball, volleyball, and soccer teams!    

Diocesan money and tuition deals soon to come and then......... liturgical dance lessons for the kids!!!

The poor, young, Catholic souls of HFA are being scandalized!!!  The girls volleyball actually had to wear baby blue uniforms reading "91st Psalm Christian Church"!  "Pastor" Cunningham of the evangelical church (Southgate Christian Church which owns 91st Psalm school) serves as the pitching Coach for the "traditional Catholic" boys baseball team.


http://holyfamilyacad.org/2019/01/from-the-chairman-holy-family-academy-seeking-recognition-from-bishop-olmsted/ (http://holyfamilyacad.org/2019/01/from-the-chairman-holy-family-academy-seeking-recognition-from-bishop-olmsted/)
http://holyfamilyacad.org/2019/05/visit-and-blessing-of-frs-passo-and-malain/ (http://holyfamilyacad.org/2019/05/visit-and-blessing-of-frs-passo-and-malain/)
http://91pcs.com/ (http://91pcs.com/)
https://sglife.org/ (https://sglife.org/)

Dear St. Patrick!  How did this get so out of whack?  SHAME, SHAME, SHAME!  At least thanks to the new families who have recently moved to Phoenix, OLOS Academy is growing again and will soon not even be phased by the exodus of the families that left for HFA.

I shalt now sit back and await a snide comment from my new arch-nemesis, the TownCrier!

Cheers and may you tip a pint up in my memory!
:cheers:
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on August 02, 2019, 10:04:58 PM
Somewhere here on CI, there is a thread within the last several months about a conversation I had with an SSPX priest who, I reported, told me that the main reason these families split from OLOS to form a new school was because the SSPX wouldn't allow them to participate in girls sports.

I was quickly excoriated for reporting that conversation, and told there were other reasons for the split.

Now several months later, the OP is reporting almost exactly what the SSPX priest told me.

Interesting.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Thorn on August 03, 2019, 12:37:54 AM
H4H - I think they won't be fazed by the exodus.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on August 03, 2019, 02:56:49 AM
The independent "traditional Catholic" school, Holy Family Academy (HFA), which opened for school year 2018-2019 and which was started by the former ruling family of Our Lady of Sorrows (OLOS) in Phoenix has already sold out it's "traditional Catholic" identity for the Almighty Dollar and so the students can play league sports!  

HFA is led by a female Principal who is 100% Novus Ordo (short skirts and all), the academy is in the final stages of being approved by the Diocese of Phoenix as the first "Diocesan Traditional Catholic School", the local Priests from the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter mission Church are saying Holy Mass and hearing Confessions there, and the sports teams joined up with "91st Psalm Christian School" of Phoenix (Protestant School) so they could field a baseball, volleyball, and soccer teams!    

Diocesan money and tuition deals soon to come and then......... liturgical dance lessons for the kids!!!

The poor, young, Catholic souls of HFA are being scandalized!!!  The girls volleyball actually had to wear baby blue uniforms reading "91st Psalm Christian Church"!  "Pastor" Cunningham of the evangelical church (Southgate Christian Church which owns 91st Psalm school) serves as the pitching Coach for the "traditional Catholic" boys baseball team.


http://holyfamilyacad.org/2019/01/from-the-chairman-holy-family-academy-seeking-recognition-from-bishop-olmsted/ (http://holyfamilyacad.org/2019/01/from-the-chairman-holy-family-academy-seeking-recognition-from-bishop-olmsted/)
http://holyfamilyacad.org/2019/05/visit-and-blessing-of-frs-passo-and-malain/ (http://holyfamilyacad.org/2019/05/visit-and-blessing-of-frs-passo-and-malain/)
http://91pcs.com/ (http://91pcs.com/)
https://sglife.org/ (https://sglife.org/)

Dear St. Patrick!  How did this get so out of whack?  SHAME, SHAME, SHAME!  At least thanks to the new families who have recently moved to Phoenix, OLOS Academy is growing again and will soon not even be phased by the exodus of the families that left for HFA.

I shalt now sit back and await a snide comment from my new arch-nemesis, the TownCrier!

Cheers and may you tip a pint up in my memory!
:cheers:
So, they left OLOS to go with the Vatican II sect. I didn't know that DETAIL. By their deeds you shall know them

On the other hand, the SSPX hierarchy is working hard to join the Vatican II sect, so OLOS potentially can end up following in the footsteps of the "Fraternity of St. Peter school, the independent "traditional Catholic" school, Holy Family Academy (HFA)".
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Maria Regina on August 03, 2019, 09:55:34 AM
The laity who attend SSPX churches will sooner or later face two choices, unless they lose their faith altogether.

(1) Join the Vatican II church before or after the SSPX joins the Vatican II church in approximately two years unless an awesome miracle happens.

(2) Join the Resistance, CMRI, or one of the other groups of Traditional Catholics.

If all the laity in the SSPX were to pray a novena devoutly before the Feast of the Assumption (Dormition) starting on August 6, 2019, perhaps Our Lady would intercede to Christ our God to save them. However, do not stop praying this prayer, but let it become part of your daily prayers and daily inspiration constantly imploring Our Lady to save us.

REMEMBER, O most gracious Virgin Mary,
that never was it known that anyone who fled to thy protection,
implored thy help, or sought thy intercession was left unaided.

Inspired with this confidence, I fly to thee,
O Virgin of virgins, my Mother;
to thee do I come; before thee I stand, sinful and sorrowful.

O Mother of the Word Incarnate, despise not my petitions,
but in thy mercy hear and answer me. Amen.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on August 03, 2019, 11:10:29 AM
Well said, Maria Regina!  The Blessed Virgin can and will always help us when we implore Her.  She truly is our hope!
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on August 03, 2019, 11:44:09 AM
In all me days at OLOS in Phoenix and then after leaving the city and coming back, I think the OLOS Academy may better positioned now to grow than it ever has been.  There is a feeling of renewed dedication to Tradition, there are new large families, and the negative nellie's who for so many years wanted the Academy to be their personal family school, and even their little piggyback any time repairs or grounds work was needed, ARE GONE!  Some folk worry the Church and Academy will be harmed by their departure because they were considered "large benefactors"; however, even though they donated large sums of money occasionally - via their family construction company they also got richer by way of putting that money they had donated right back into their own silk-lined pockets (new Church construction, performing arts center, baseball field, etc.).  Money manipulation... hmm, I think me knows a certain accountant who was the Church and Academy Treasurer for many years until the crybaby didn't get his way and so he started HFA!  The same accountant started his own construction company and its first project was the new Church building and then the performing arts center.  This accountant awarded the contract to his self!  See a conflict of interest?

Me grandmother who came here from Belfast always said "Money that goes in a circle ends up in the same pockets it first came from and no one will ever be the wiser!"  Ay Granny, you was a smart gal... may God have mercy on your dear soul!
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Town Crier on August 03, 2019, 01:52:44 PM
Believe it or not I agree with everything absolutely everything  you have wrote EXCEPT you allude to the idea that with the ruling elite gone from the school it and church will grow .The ruling elite are still at the church are they not ? and besides that the damage has been done .Unfinished and shoddy construction and a huge dept we are being blackmailed into paying . That church isn't growing no matter what they say from the pulpit . That place looks like a Novus Ordo warehouse and we average 300 a Sunday WOW! that is almost as many as we had at the old church. you remember right ? it is the building turned in the performing arts center so the ruling elite construction company could make a couple of extra million off us  
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - More Nominal Catholics in Phoenix
Post by: Maria Regina on August 03, 2019, 03:10:43 PM
The problem every parish has, whether Traditional or Novus Ordo, is with those who are culturally Catholic.

Oh, yes, they do donate because their parents supported the Church, and they want to be baptized, married, and buried as Catholics. Furthermore, they want their children to also be baptized, married, and buried as Catholics.

However, when it comes to living the daily life of faith, striving to avoid mortal sins and even venial sins, observing the Ten Commandments, and praying their daily prayers, well, they do not have the time. They give their hour to God on Sunday, and perhaps say their prayers before meals, but that is it.

It is these nominal Catholics who scandalize and weaken the life of the Church.

Some of these nominal Catholics compare themselves with Nancy Peℓσѕι saying, "I am not like her." However, Nancy Peℓσѕι is not even a nominal Catholic. She is lost as she publicly supports abortion and infanticide. Instead, these nominal Catholics are like the Pharisees who say, "Thank God, I am not like that sinner over there. I support the Church; I even donated that lovely stained glass window over there. See my name is on it."

Are the SSPX priests in Phoenix addressing this situation of nominal Catholics? Are they offering homilies to help convert these nominal Catholics to a life of sanctity. After all, we are all called to be saints.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Seraphina on August 03, 2019, 05:30:24 PM

Avoid the entire mess.  Homeschool!
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Town Crier on August 03, 2019, 06:43:22 PM

Avoid the entire mess.  Homeschool!
I agree as do many families at OLoS  
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Spork on August 03, 2019, 07:01:58 PM
What's wrong with boys playing sports? 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Seraphina on August 03, 2019, 08:50:10 PM
What's wrong with boys playing sports?
Nothing!  Depending upon the sport, there’s nothing wrong with girls playing sports, either.
Here’s the problem.  Once a school joins a sports league, the players WILL be exposed directly and deliberately to co-ed teams, to single sex teams that wear immodest athletic uniforms, to parents, friends, family of other teams who may behave in an unCatholic manner.  They will have to accept and obey the coaches of the competing schools—-again, a possible problem.  When a school joins an organization, the participating students presume approval of the activities and practices.  Unless there is a sports league where the players will not be exposed to major departures from Catholic morality, the children will get the message that the school, the church, and their parents approve.  If they have found a sports league with such high standards, I’d like to know about it!  
If the parents’ motivation is for their child to go to college on a sports scholarship, for example, because the child truly has extraordinary talent, then they should enroll him in a team as a private individual in order that he alone is exposed to various unCatholic issues.  The parents can prepare, teach, and control when and with whom he competes.  As a rule, I do not think major sports is a proper vocational plan for a traditional Catholic, but there can be exceptions. If parents want the school to belong to a sports league for public prestige, shame on them.  They need not be surprised when their star athlete leaves religion upon turning 18 or moving out.
Why not organize an intramural sports program?  It needn’t be confined to one small school.  Homeschooled children from the chapel, children from the chapel-run school, even community children whose parents are willing to abide by Catholic standards can play.  No, it won’t be like playing sports for a big public high school.  It won’t lead to prestige or money, but so what?  
The purpose of sports, IMHO, should be to foster physical health, coordination, mastery of a physical skill, teamwork, camaraderie, and good sportsmanship.  NOT acceptable, co-ed teams above 3rd grade, immodest or unisex uniforms, obnoxious parental behavior like booing, fighting, cussing out the coach...sports not suited to sex, ie, girls wrestling, boys cheerleading, being overly competitive to the point where the sport usurps more important activities or monopolizes time, or a sport that involves great expense so that money is misused or children who’d like to participate cannot afford it.  
In my experience, intramural sports can be clean, healthy fun.  A sports league?  Most of the time, the wrong things are emphasized.  Did not St. Paul say that physical exercise profits little?  He did not say, “not at all,” lest someone accuse me of being a Jansenist.  He said, “a little.”  So, yes, go ahead and play a little sports, but keep it balance.  Will playing help me save my soul?  The answer can be yes if the fruit is on the good list.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Maria Regina on August 03, 2019, 08:57:35 PM
Most sports leagues require that children have practice and/or games on Sunday morning, which means that the child and their parents cannot attend Mass or must attend Mass wearing their sports clothes and then leave early. It is a bad example to other families, whose children may become jealous and complain, "If Paul can participate in a sports event on Sundays, then why can't I."

Even if some games/practice are only held one Sunday per month and the rest on Saturdays, it is still a slippery slope. One Sunday per month can easily morph into every Sunday.

If the league wins and goes on to a national event, then the child and parents must travel during the weekend and attend mandatory events on Sunday.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Seraphina on August 03, 2019, 10:15:16 PM
Most sports leagues require that children have practice and/or games on Sunday morning, which means that the child and their parents cannot attend Mass or must attend Mass wearing their sports clothes and then leave early. It is a bad example to other families, whose children may become jealous and complain, "If Paul can participate in a sports event on Sundays, then why can't I."

Even if some games/practice are only held one Sunday per month and the rest on Saturdays, it is still a slippery slope. One Sunday per month can easily morph into every Sunday.

If the league wins and goes on to a national event, then the child and parents must travel during the weekend and attend mandatory events on Sunday.
What you say is certainly true of public school sports and of many private, secular leagues.  Joining a Christian sports league eliminates the Sunday problem, but these are mainly comprised of Protestant schools.  Often, Catholics aren’t welcome because we’re not considered Christians, especially by the type of Protestants with whom we share many moral standards!  Example, Independent Baptists, Holiness congregations, Conservative Pentecostals, and many small, traditionally black and southern state churches have standards of modesty, speech, dress, respect for authority as traditional Catholics.  The problem is that they won’t accept Catholics!  
The Protestants who will accept Catholics are liberal; they accept everyone!  One may as well play public schools and novus ordo schools.
Public school sports was not always as it is now.  When I was in grade six, I tried out for volleyball at a friend’s insistence.  I made the team and she didn’t.  I wasn’t into sports, so my parents were a bit surprised, but I played volleyball for two years and enjoyed it, both games and practices.  There were no Saturday or Sunday activities.  Games and practices were M-F in the afternoon.  We were a middle of the road team, didn’t win the championship, but didn’t lose every game, either.  I didn’t play in grade eight because I chose another extracurricular, the Outdoors Club. When my sister hit grade six, she wanted to try out for field hockey and soccer.  I was already a high school senior, not at all involved in school sports.  My sister made the soccer team and all of a sudden, there were arguments about missing Mass—-never allowed by Dad, and staying over various friends’ houses for the weekend to accommodate Saturday practices and games instead of going camping with the family.  Too often, she got her way with the resulting alienation.  She’d agree to go to Mass, either Saturday vigil or Sunday, but often that didn’t happen.  There’d be excuses, headache, upset stomach, got a flat tire on the bike and it was too late to walk...So then Dad required a Mass bulletin. Well, one needn’t actually attend Mass to get a bulletin!  She had a boyfriend who’d supply one, or she’d pick one up on the way to or from school since the church was a block away.  By grade seven, after screaming, yelling fights, a priest whom Dad consulted said she should not be made to attend church(!?!), so she pretty much left off all religion except the five classes in the evening for Confirmation. Dad and Mom insisted in the hope that it would eventually bring her back.  Sadly, I have serious doubt as to the validity at that point in time.  
Did sports cause the entire disaster?  No, of course not, but it didn’t help, and was definitely used by the devil as one more tool.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Maria Regina on August 03, 2019, 10:58:20 PM
What you say is certainly true of public school sports and of many private, secular leagues.  Joining a Christian sports league eliminates the Sunday problem, but these are mainly comprised of Protestant schools.  Often, Catholics aren’t welcome because we’re not considered Christians, especially by the type of Protestants with whom we share many moral standards!  Example, Independent Baptists, Holiness congregations, Conservative Pentecostals, and many small, traditionally black and southern state churches have standards of modesty, speech, dress, respect for authority as traditional Catholics.  The problem is that they won’t accept Catholics!  
The Protestants who will accept Catholics are liberal; they accept everyone!  One may as well play public schools and novus ordo schools.
Public school sports was not always as it is now.  When I was in grade six, I tried out for volleyball at a friend’s insistence.  I made the team and she didn’t.  I wasn’t into sports, so my parents were a bit surprised, but I played volleyball for two years and enjoyed it, both games and practices.  There were no Saturday or Sunday activities.  Games and practices were M-F in the afternoon.  We were a middle of the road team, didn’t win the championship, but didn’t lose every game, either.  I didn’t play in grade eight because I chose another extracurricular, the Outdoors Club. When my sister hit grade six, she wanted to try out for field hockey and soccer.  I was already a high school senior, not at all involved in school sports.  My sister made the soccer team and all of a sudden, there were arguments about missing Mass—-never allowed by Dad, and staying over various friends’ houses for the weekend to accommodate Saturday practices and games instead of going camping with the family.  Too often, she got her way with the resulting alienation.  She’d agree to go to Mass, either Saturday vigil or Sunday, but often that didn’t happen.  There’d be excuses, headache, upset stomach, got a flat tire on the bike and it was too late to walk...So then Dad required a Mass bulletin. Well, one needn’t actually attend Mass to get a bulletin!  She had a boyfriend who’d supply one, or she’d pick one up on the way to or from school since the church was a block away.  By grade seven, after screaming, yelling fights, a priest whom Dad consulted said she should not be made to attend church(!?!), so she pretty much left off all religion except the five classes in the evening for Confirmation. Dad and Mom insisted in the hope that it would eventually bring her back.  Sadly, I have serious doubt as to the validity at that point in time.  
Did sports cause the entire disaster?  No, of course not, but it didn’t help, and was definitely used by the devil as one more tool.
The down side of attending a Protestant-led homeschool coop is that they demand that you sign their homemade Creed, not the original Nicene Creed. They also want you to attend their prayer services.

The down side of attending a Protestant-sponsored little league program is that they want you and your child to come early and pray. Sometimes they even have a youth pastor lead prayer services before the game. Ecumenism raises it ugly head.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on August 03, 2019, 11:46:50 PM
Believe it or not I agree with everything absolutely everything  you have wrote EXCEPT you allude to the idea that with the ruling elite gone from the school it and church will grow .The ruling elite are still at the church are they not ? and besides that the damage has been done .Unfinished and shoddy construction and a huge dept we are being blackmailed into paying . That church isn't growing no matter what they say from the pulpit . That place looks like a Novus Ordo warehouse and we average 300 a Sunday WOW! that is almost as many as we had at the old church. you remember right ? it is the building turned in the performing arts center so the ruling elite construction company could make a couple of extra million off us  
They do indeed still attend Mass at OLOS, but how long do you think that will last?  Will the Priests from the FSSP and the Bishop of Phoenix be ok with spending time and resources to offer daily Mass and hear Confessions at HFA while the families maintain Parish membership at OLOS giving tithe to an SSPX Chapel?  I think the Diocese sees their large families and the financial wherewithal that those families have and sees DOLLAR SIGNS!  Rome follows the money, right?  Back in Post Falls / Coeur d'Alene that almost happened years ago when I was there.  I think the families will gradually migrate to Mater Misericordiae Mission (FSSP Chapel in Phoenix) after they are given some gentle (maybe even not so gentle) nudges from the Diocese. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on August 04, 2019, 12:06:18 AM
What's wrong with boys playing sports?
Absolutely nothing..... especially for the lads.  The problem is playing on an "interfaith sports team" in which religious lines are blurred.  Do they think the evangelical protestants won't try to convert their kids?  They are taught that they MUST under the Great Commission because Catholics are misguided idolaters who are headed to Hell unless they repent of their sins, stop worshiping Mary, and accept a "Fun Jesus" as their Lord and Savior.  We are going to Hell because we don't know that Jesus just wants to be our good buddy, so they have to correct us!!!
Catholic teams playing AGAINST Protestant teams or AGAINST public schools or even playing on non-religious teams (i.e. Little League Baseball) are all fine and build character.  Blurring the lines and letting "Coach / Pastor Bob" influence young Catholics is wrong.  The focus isn't ONLY on the sport, there is the religious piece always just under the surface.  
Will they pray as a team before and after games?  If so, will they hold hands in an ecumenical and heretical kumbaya or will they say a Hail Mary, invoke the help from Our Lady Queen of Victory, and finish with a sign of the Cross?  Any of you you have ever been around any damn Protestants already know that answer.  They worship a different Jesus than us (a false god):

"Don't worry dudes ,Once Saved - Always Saved, so get out your guitars and drums to play some evangelical rock n roll jams for the kids"
(http://)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Town Crier on August 04, 2019, 01:24:09 AM
They do indeed still attend Mass at OLOS, but how long do you think that will last?  Will the Priests from the FSSP and the Bishop of Phoenix be ok with spending time and resources to offer daily Mass and hear Confessions at HFA while the families maintain Parish membership at OLOS giving tithe to an SSPX Chapel?  I think the Diocese sees their large families and the financial wherewithal that those families have and sees DOLLAR SIGNS!  Rome follows the money, right?  Back in Post Falls / Coeur d'Alene that almost happened years ago when I was there.  I think the families will gradually migrate to Mater Misericordiae Mission (FSSP Chapel in Phoenix) after they are given some gentle (maybe even not so gentle) nudges from the Diocese.
You may be absolutely right about the ruling elite moving on to greener pastures . After all they have just about bled us dry  
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on August 06, 2019, 04:14:10 PM
They definitely did their part bleeding us, but to hear it from them they were just willing followers and that they basically did all of the construction / contracting "at cost" out of the goodness of their hearts.  They supposedly made sure that their subcontractors made only meager profits, too!  Come on!  The parking lots and Church steps are cracking all over!  The concrete work obviously wasn't done right (not thick enough and not sealed), but I'll bet the Parish paid for it to be done right!  Costs kept increasing during the course of the project and the donations made for stained glass windows and memorial bricks evaporated into the P&L cost line items covering who knows what expenditures.  Hmm, cutting corners to increase profits as the GC (quality control / cost management duties) while also maintaining the internal auditing powers, wow!  If you play both side you can't lose!  As me ol' granny from Belfast always said, "ay, a snake with 2 tongues makes for double the bite".  I never knew what the ol' gal meant until now!
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on August 07, 2019, 04:27:51 PM
The HFA website offers thanks and gratitude to other independent schools and organizations that had assisted them in starting up their Academy.  They offer special thanks to the Association of Classical Christian Schools (ACCS is a Protestant school association that promotes the heresies of Luther and Calvin by way of assisting independent Protestant schools start-up, operate, and grow).  HFA also thanks several Protestant schools that helped them with their school policy and handbook creation.  I wonder if they will teach "Ecumenism 101", "The Importance of the Reformation", and "Errors of the Roman Catholic Church aka the Whore of Babylon"?  

Ay, now I need a pint of the black stuff!  All of this HFA craic is making me thirsty!
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Augustinus21 on August 09, 2019, 07:03:41 AM
Just to be clear, Holy Family is NOT an SSPX school( not listed on the website) Don’t blame the Society for what they do
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on August 09, 2019, 11:29:14 AM
Just to be clear, Holy Family is NOT an SSPX school( not listed on the website) Don’t blame the Society for what they do
I don't think anyone on this post was blaming the Society for what this group of families has done while creating this school.  The Society, and especially OLOS. are victims in all this since HFA has been targeting Parish families in an effort to recruit away students.  HFA is even using a stolen Parish directory to mail their HFA brochures to OLOS Parishioners' homes.  The other victims in this are the HFA students who are being scandalized by being led and influenced by a Novus Ordo Principal and Protestant coaches and teammates. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Town Crier on August 10, 2019, 01:20:23 AM
Just to be clear, Holy Family is NOT an SSPX school( not listed on the website) Don’t blame the Society for what they do
No one is blaming the SSPX or OLoS for the HFA scandal We are not only the
victims as a matter of fact we are being victimized by the same family twice as they the founders of HNA are also the owners of the construction company that built our for the lack of a better word church. No I'm afraid the society is to blame for a lot the problems we are having but not this
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on August 10, 2019, 01:27:32 AM
No one is blaming the SSPX or OLoS for the HFA scandal We are not only the
victims as a matter of fact we are being victimized by the same family twice as they the founders of HNA are also the owners of the construction company that built our for the lack of a better word church. No I'm afraid the society is to blame for a lot the problems we are having but not this
The SSPX is arguably culpable for not recognizing the influence and for not toppling the clique before the catastrophes.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Town Crier on August 10, 2019, 02:38:55 AM
The SSPX is arguably culpable for not recognizing the influence and for not toppling the clique before the catastrophes.
 Can't argue with that now that I think about it.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on August 11, 2019, 02:18:36 PM
No one is blaming the SSPX or OLoS for the HFA scandal We are not only the
victims as a matter of fact we are being victimized by the same family twice as they the founders of HNA are also the owners of the construction company that built our for the lack of a better word church. No I'm afraid the society is to blame for a lot the problems we are having but not this
Very true... well said!
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on August 11, 2019, 02:20:31 PM
The SSPX is arguably culpable for not recognizing the influence and for not toppling the clique before the catastrophes.
That is a good point and it's hard to argue with since someone at a higher level than the young / inexperienced Priest who was the Prior at the time should have noticed what was going on.  This family ran circles around the young Priest and lined their pockets in the process.  
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on August 14, 2019, 02:20:31 PM
I looked at his Instagram. He doesn't know how to spell "haboob." He'll have to learn now that he lives in Phoenix.

He seems harmless...and STRAIGHT.

Hooligan, it's not right to rip on some guy, especially considering nothing bad has happened! It makes you look like you have sour grapes.

He might not be what you envision for a teacher, but there are good people of good will in the Novus Ordo, you know.

Come to think of it, that guy seems a lot better than a certain boys' school teacher at Post Falls that was removed, who we are not to name. The one that had a certain "culpability."  ;)
You're right.  There truly are many good folk in the Novus Ordo and I'm actually not ripping this guy personally.  He appears to be a nice enough guy and probably has no idea what he signed on for at HFA.  At face value, I would hope that HFA might bring him to Tradition, but that's not really what they're about.  I'm actually ripping HFA and the elitist family that runs it.  They act like they are "Holier Than Thou" and more "Traditional Catholic than ABF himself", but they hire a Novus Ordo Principal and Novus Ordo teachers to teach the HFA kids who, according to them, "weren't receiving a sound and well-rounded Traditional Catholic education" at OLOSA.  Total BS.  Sorry, it is what it is, though.  Am I venting?  Yes.  They drained the Parish coffers and lined their pockets and, at the end of the day, they are just elitist fakes.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: hollingsworth on August 15, 2019, 11:26:24 AM


Quote
Hool: but they hire a Novus Ordo Principal and Novus Ordo teachers to teach the HFA kids who, according to them, "weren't receiving a sound and well-rounded Traditional Catholic education" at OLOSA.  Total BS.  Sorry, it is what it is, though.  Am I venting?  Yes.  They drained the Parish coffers and lined their pockets and, at the end of the day, they are just elitist fakes.


 
Which begs the questions: Are sspx schools good for anything now, since, I speculate, a “well-rounded Traditional Catholic education” is not available in any of the sspx schools nation wide? Does the sspx serve any real purpose at all in the traditional world? And wouldn’t traditional Catholics be well advised to leave this shell of an apostalate behind, and seek refuge elsewhere?
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: homeschoolmom on August 15, 2019, 12:00:23 PM
The SSPX is arguably culpable for not recognizing the influence and for not toppling the clique before the catastrophes.

It sounds like this family has money. I have yet to live in a parish where the priests are not swayed by the sparkly families with money. Even the good ones surprise you sometimes by falling for it like anyone else. This is not a uniquely SSPX problem, that is true, but they are certainly not exempt. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Smedley Butler on August 15, 2019, 01:32:12 PM
You're right.  There truly are many good folk in the Novus Ordo and I'm actually not ripping this guy personally.  He appears to be a nice enough guy and probably has no idea what he signed on for at HFA.  At face value, I would hope that HFA might bring him to Tradition, but that's not really what they're about.  I'm actually ripping HFA and the elitist family that runs it.  They act like they are "Holier Than Thou" and more "Traditional Catholic than ABF himself", but they hire a Novus Ordo Principal and Novus Ordo teachers to teach the HFA kids who, according to them, "weren't receiving a sound and well-rounded Traditional Catholic education" at OLOSA.  Total BS.  Sorry, it is what it is, though.  Am I venting?  Yes.  They drained the Parish coffers and lined their pockets and, at the end of the day, they are just elitist fakes.
Yeah, I'm willing to cut that young man a break.
While it is true that OLOSA has its deficiencies, I would not say that the Traditional Catholicism part is one of them. I think the family wanted to open a school for other reasons, not because OLOSA wasn't "Catholic" enough.
It is a mystery that after HFA is joining forces with the FSSP in such a formal way, that they are being allowed to stay in the parish. Fr. Remski was no friend to the SSPX. 
I guess the SSPX priory figures they need their money in the Sunday collection plate, which collectively, must be a lot. Any other family that left the SSPX parish school to start their own would have been kicked out, post haste!
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on August 15, 2019, 03:26:47 PM
…Fr. Remski was no friend to the SSPX.…
You are familiar with what Fr. Remski did at St. Michael's in Bethany, OK?
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Geremia on August 15, 2019, 04:28:49 PM
Lay government is the Protestant model (listen to this True Restoration episode on lay boards (https://www.truerestoration.org/season-6-clerical-conversations-episode-28-lay-boards/)).
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Geremia on August 15, 2019, 04:31:04 PM
The SSPX is arguably culpable for not recognizing the influence and for not toppling the clique before the catastrophes.
This is analogous to the argument that the Church shares in the guilt of schismatics' having left the Church.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Smedley Butler on August 15, 2019, 05:28:53 PM
You are familiar with what Fr. Remski did at St. Michael's in Bethany, OK?
No, do tell...
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on August 18, 2019, 06:12:26 PM
It sounds like this family has money. I have yet to live in a parish where the priests are not swayed by the sparkly families with money. Even the good ones surprise you sometimes by falling for it like anyone else. This is not a uniquely SSPX problem, that is true, but they are certainly not exempt.
Ay, you are correct about this family having wealth.  Unfortunately, quite a bit of their wealth came from the services that they provided to the Chapel and Academy.  Services for which OLOS paid top dollar. When you own the general contracting company that was awarded Church and Academy construction contracts - and you’re also the Treasurer who has contract awarding rights for the same said Church and Academy - you can’t lose. 
Smartest guys in the room? They indeed think they are, but it’s not true because many Parishioners know what they did. We just don’t have any recourse but I to tell of their deceit and hope they are moving on to new prey.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on November 08, 2019, 05:04:07 PM
TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC MODESTY FOR YOUNG LADIES AT HOLY FAMILY ACADEMY??
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Town Crier on November 12, 2019, 07:38:35 PM
TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC MODESTY FOR YOUNG LADIES AT HOLY FAMILY ACADEMY??
Yes this just another example of OLoS and district overlooking the behavior of the HFA families .I know personality of people who have complained to district only to be told they are guilty of backbiting for doing so 
Meanwhile ,
I have heard that FSSP has turned down the HFA request to be under the FSSP spiritual wing as they say .This has put a damper on their expansion plans 
  
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Incredulous on November 12, 2019, 09:23:19 PM
TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC MODESTY FOR YOUNG LADIES AT HOLY FAMILY ACADEMY??

Why... how dare those neo-trad girls wear culottes while playing sports and expose their bare knees!

This is an outrage.... 
Close the school down!  :really-mad2:
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: canis on November 12, 2019, 11:19:56 PM
For what it's worth, to those interested, the National Council of Catholic Women in America passed the following resolution on athletic dress for women in 1928, which received the approbation of Cardinal Sbarretti and Pius XI for promoting the cause of Catholic modesty among women:

Quote
WHEREAS careful study of costumes made by the best sports-goods houses and used by the majority of private and public schools and colleges, leads to the conclusion that the necessary requirements for an appropriate costume for the girl and young woman in athletics may be met by the knicker-bloomer of material suited to the season; middie [sic] Blouses for children; tailored shirts with long (or short) sleeves for older girls; sweaters, sleeveless or with sleeves according to season; long stockings and "sneakers;"

BE IT RESOLVED that the National Council of Catholic Women recommend the above costume as best suited to feminine dignity and the best interest of sportsmanship and good health.

BE IT RESOLVED that the Council condemn "trunks" and other such objectionable extremes of costume which are as inappropriate and undesirable for women as are the particular forms of athletics with which they are especially associated.

The following blog post shows pictures from the decade that show you what that dress would have looked like: https://fascinationstreetvintage.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/1920s-womens-sportswear/ (https://fascinationstreetvintage.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/1920s-womens-sportswear/)

As Abp. John McNicholas of Cincinnati said to the above group: "The lives of our Catholic women must be a manifest challenge to the women of the whole world..." Of course, manifest means visible and obvious. Maybe this issue isn't one to write in all caps about, but it's certainly a sign.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 13, 2019, 09:58:24 AM
(https://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=52919.0;attach=13502;image) (https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/holy-family-academy-another-scandal-in-phoenix/?action=dlattach;attach=13501;image)
Why... how dare those neo-trad girls wear culottes while playing sports and expose their bare knees!

This is an outrage....
Close the school down!  :really-mad2:

Sounds like the mocking poster has been slow boiled over the years to think that it is "modest compared to the rest of the world".  
Their legs should not be exposed like that at any time in public, whether they are wearing a skirt or dress to mass or in an athletic field.. The coach on the right is the worst offender. Even worse, they look like spandex tights, which is just wearing underwear on the outside. If they are spandex shorts, they are running around in their underwear. Now that is really slow boiling over time, "trads" wearing underwear on the outside.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 13, 2019, 10:06:53 AM
I can assure you that my friend Incredulous is quite humorous, playful, and not "boiled" to any degree.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 13, 2019, 10:12:34 AM
I can assure you that my friend Incredulous is quite humorous, playful, and not "boiled" to any degree.
I rarely look at the name of a poster. One can make a joke, no problem, but they should follow it up with a lesson, the truth, or else it could end up teaching the totally wrong thing.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Town Crier on November 13, 2019, 08:00:30 PM
Why... how dare those neo-trad girls wear culottes while playing sports and expose their bare knees!

This is an outrage....
Close the school down!  :really-mad2:
Ahhh sarcasm, a truly low example of humor
but the fact remains if these same young woman were at the sspx academy they would not be wearing these modernist outfits .One must what else in their education has been given over to modernism and secular ideals
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 13, 2019, 08:20:27 PM
I think that their coach is the bigger issue.  She is not playing and need not be dressed that way.

As for the girls, I think that the clothes might be as modest as you can get while playing the sport.  As far as girls' sports, if they are in a closed venue with a known girls sport taking place, then if some guy shows up there and finds himself "tempted," then he should have known better than to go there.  But it looks like they are outside of the sports venue, and the picture should not have been taken that way.  They could have had them stand up and capture only the view above the bottoms of their uniforms.  So, for instance, if there's a private property, a camp, for instance, where it's just girls in attendance, they could go swimming.  So what might be OK in that context, may not be outside of it.  Same thing applies to some girls' sports.  In a Catholic society, girls' sporting events should likely be offlimits to men and boys ... except as necessary.  But, as it is, if they restrict their immodesty to within the venue, nobody is forcing any man to attend.  If I walk into a womens' locker room and see nude women, is that their fault and are they being "immodest"?  I should not have gone in there ... obviously.  Likewise, if there's a girls' swim meet, I should not go in there, nor a girls' volleyball game.

So, the rules, IMO, should be:
1) dress as modestly as possible given the sport if someone is playing (coach and other staff do not count)
2) keep the objectively-immodest dress within the venue (don't venture outside of the venue or take pictures that aren't properly cropped)

Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 13, 2019, 09:00:37 PM
I think that their coach is the bigger issue.  She is not playing and need not be dressed that way.

As for the girls, I think that the clothes might be as modest as you can get while playing the sport.  As far as girls' sports, if they are in a closed venue with a known girls sport taking place, then if some guy shows up there and finds himself "tempted," then he should have known better than to go there.  But it looks like they are outside of the sports venue, and the picture should not have been taken that way.  They could have had them stand up and capture only the view above the bottoms of their uniforms.  So, for instance, if there's a private property, a camp, for instance, where it's just girls in attendance, they could go swimming.  So what might be OK in that context, may not be outside of it.  Same thing applies to some girls' sports.  In a Catholic society, girls' sporting events should likely be offlimits to men and boys ... except as necessary.  But, as it is, if they restrict their immodesty to within the venue, nobody is forcing any man to attend.  If I walk into a womens' locker room and see nude women, is that their fault and are they being "immodest"?  I should not have gone in there ... obviously.  Likewise, if there's a girls' swim meet, I should not go in there, nor a girls' volleyball game.

So, the rules, IMO, should be:
1) dress as modestly as possible given the sport if someone is playing (coach and other staff do not count)
2) keep the objectively-immodest dress within the venue (don't venture outside of the venue or take pictures that aren't properly cropped)

Girls have no business playing sports (a masculine recreation whose only purpose is to encourage competitiveness and provide a cathartic outlet for aggression in a controlled environment).

Saying girls can play sports privately still undermines their feminine psyche, and encourages masculine traits incompatible with submissiveness, nurturing, and other essential qualities of espousal and motherhood.

Essentially what you are saying is that I could sit around in thong underwear and practice knitting and embroidery, so long as only other “men” are around, and any pics of me in a inappropriate attire are carefully cropped.

This vigorous defense by some of women in sports reveals an undeniable taint of feminism, and is surprising to see coming from those who consider themselves traditional.

Soon we will hear from Fr. Urrutigoity, warning us not to be puritanical.

Yes, for any who have not yet been slow-boiled in modernism, women in sports is a scandal (as are the demeaning outfits, which seem to be nothing more than a contrived facade of modesty, but which are in reality an ulterior means by which to be modern, and show some leg).
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Nadir on November 14, 2019, 03:14:39 AM
I think you make a good point, Sean.

As a child I was never happy when I had sport, and I would ask the teacher could I polish the desks instead. She would allow me!

I thought it was because I was not very physically adept, but maybe it was that Unconsciously I felt what you are describing. I could never compete in sports.

Thank you. The only physical recreation (not competitive sport) that I enjoyed was swimming, but never competitively.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 14, 2019, 03:38:33 AM
As far as girls' sports, if they are in a closed venue with a known girls sport taking place, then if some guy shows up there and finds himself "tempted," then he should have known better than to go there. ….In a Catholic society, girls' sporting events should likely be offlimits to men and boys ... except as necessary.  But, as it is, if they restrict their immodesty to within the venue, nobody is forcing any man to attend.
When discussing immodest dress, your focus appears always to be on the sin of tempting men. Your comment above further corroborates it. What you are describing is a type of situational "modesty". The entire comment from SJ is spot on, but the part that directly applies to your erroneous mindset is this:


Quote
Essentially what you are saying is that a group of girls could sit around in thong underwear and practice knitting and embroidery, so long as other “men” are not around, and any pics of them in the inappropriate attire are carefully cropped.

Until you fully imbibe and understand the other and deeper repercussions of the sin of immodestly, you will forever see this as a simple matter of the sin of tempting men. I think the error comes from your coming from a good clean background (nothing to feel unmanly about), and you even thought of being a priests, going to the seminary for x years . I on the other hand was raised in the streets, living in sin, never having learned anything about the faith (and that is nothing to be proud of). Maybe that is why SSPX priests do not speak of the immodest dress, they do not see it either, to their mindset it is just a silly matter of a few inches of cloth.

Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Incredulous on November 14, 2019, 05:35:29 AM
Girls have no business playing sports (a masculine recreation whose only purpose is to encourage competitiveness and provide a cathartic outlet for aggression in a controlled environment).

Saying girls can play sports privately still undermines their feminine psyche, and encourages masculine traits incompatible with submissiveness, nurturing, and other essential qualities of espousal and motherhood.

Essentially what you are saying is that I could sit around in thong underwear and practice knitting and embroidery, so long as only other “men” are around, and any pics of me in a inappropriate attire are carefully cropped.

This vigorous defense by some of women in sports reveals an undeniable taint of feminism, and is surprising to see coming from those who consider themselves traditional.

Soon we will hear from Fr. Urrutigoity, warning us not to be puritanical.

Yes, for any who have not yet been slow-boiled in modernism, women in sports is a scandal (as are the demeaning outfits, which seem to be nothing more than a contrived facade of modesty, but which are in reality an ulterior means by which to be modern, and show some leg).

   There are many ideals, we Trads should strive to achieve.  Do you agree?

   For example, Catholic gentlemen shouldn't describe their debate adversaries as pieces of excrement, stupid or incapable.


   To put the neo-trad ladies into context:

     1. They are living in the hottest state in the nation.  I didn't fine their attire or their fat little knees provocative.
         It could have been much, much worse.

     2. While many sports are out-of-bounds, Catholic girls should be able to do something in the field of sports.

     3. Our Lady of Sorrows has many more problems than athletic culottes.
         


Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 14, 2019, 05:54:49 AM
Let's try to keep the two issues separate:

1) whether girls should be competing (is competitive chess off limits also?)
    what if they play in a less competitive environment, intramural, etc.?
    sports can have many benefits physically, emotionally, psychologically

2) modesty
    while modesty should be observed even when not in the presence of the opposite sex, the latter is in fact a huge determining factor regarding immodesty
    some things that women should not do in the presence of men are not an issue when done among others of their own gender

I'll get into more detail later ... have to head to work now.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 14, 2019, 05:59:03 AM
HINT:  can anyone point to anything from the Church which states that spots are "off limits" to girls?

When discussions took place regarding female athletic attire, this entirely presupposes the licitness of their playing sports
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 14, 2019, 06:01:52 AM
Most sports leagues require that children have practice and/or games on Sunday morning, ...

This is rarely the case.  Most leagues play on Saturdays and sometimes Sunday afternoons, and practices are invariably during the week.  There's an occasional tournament, if one gets into a very competitive club type of league, where some games might be scheduled on Sunday mornings, once or twice a year, but that is the exception rather than the rule.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 14, 2019, 06:03:46 AM
  There are many ideals, we Trads should strive to achieve.  Do you agree?

   For example, Catholic gentlemen shouldn't describe their debate adversaries as pieces of excrement, stupid or incapable.


   To put the neo-trad ladies into context:

     1. They are living in the hottest state in the nation.  I didn't fine their attire or their fat little knees provocative.
         It could have been much, much worse.

     2. While many sports are out-of-bounds, Catholic girls should be able to do something in the field of sports.

     3. Our Lady of Sorrows has many more problems than athletic culottes.
          

I appreciate your honest rejection of both the norms for Catholic modesty, and Catholic femininity.

Yes, I can well imagine the BVM wearing these outfits and playing volleyball.

NOT!!
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 14, 2019, 06:09:36 AM
I appreciate your honest rejection of both the norms for Catholic modesty, and Catholic femininity.

Yes, I can well imagine the BVM wearing these outfits and playing volleyball.

NOT!!

You are making up your own norms, Sean.  Again, please point to a Church teaching which precludes women/girls entirely from athletic endeavours.

As far as modesty, you know, right?, that in the early Church women were baptized by immersion and either nude or close to it.  That was the original role of the so-called (non-ordained) "deaconesses".  They would assist the women being baptized while the bishop would stand behind a screen so as not to see them while he pronounced the form of Baptism.  So, again, given the stipulation I laid out that the girls should not dressed that way in mixed company or out in public, the perfect modesty required when in the presence of the opposite sex does not always apply.

If the girls were to, say, play volleyball at an all-girls' school in the gym, in an intramural (not-particularly-competitive) manner, I don't see anything wrong with that.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 14, 2019, 06:11:40 AM
HINT:  can anyone point to anything from the Church which states that spots are "off limits" to girls?

When discussions took place regarding female athletic attire, this entirely presupposes the licitness of their playing sports
It’s implicit in the teaching on modest attire, and in the Catholic conception of femininity.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 14, 2019, 06:13:51 AM
Yes, I can well imagine the BVM wearing these outfits and playing volleyball.

There are many things that Our Lady would not do that are, nevertheless, licit and not sinful ... e.g., getting married and having marital relations.  Moral theologians always distinguish between the evangelical counsels, which are things that are not strictly required for all, but nevertheless represent the striving for a higher state of perfection.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04435a.htm (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04435a.htm)

Quote
This distinction between the precepts (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12372b.htm) of the Gospel, which are binding on all, and the counsels, which are the subject of the vocation of the comparatively few, has ever been maintained by the Catholic (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03449a.htm) Church (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03744a.htm). It has been denied by heretics (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07256b.htm) in all ages, and especially by many Protestants (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12495a.htm) in the sixteenth and following centuries, on the ground that, inasmuch as all Christians (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03712a.htm) are at all times bound, if they would keep God's Commandments (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04153a.htm), to do their utmost, and even so will fall short of perfect obedience, no distinction between precepts (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12372b.htm) and counsels can rightly be made.
...
The difference between a precept and a counsel lies in this, that the precept is a matter of necessity while the counsel is left to the free choice of the person (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11726a.htm) to whom it is proposed.

Our Lady, of course, freely chose to adopt and to follow, EVERY such counsel for perfection, but that does not mean all are bound, nor are all capable of keeping them, so that, for instance, as St. Paul states, some need to marry rather than to "burn".
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 14, 2019, 06:19:25 AM
You are making up your own norms, Sean.  Again, please point to a Church teaching which precludes women/girls entirely from athletic endeavours.

As far as modesty, you know, right?, that in the early Church women were baptized by immersion and either nude or close to it.  That was the original role of the so-called (non-ordained) "deaconesses".  They would assist the women being baptized while the bishop would stand behind a screen so as not to see them while he pronounced the form of Baptism.  So, again, given the stipulation I laid out that the girls should not dressed that way in mixed company or out in public, the perfect modesty required when in the presence of the opposite sex does not always apply.

If the girls were to, say, play volleyball at an all-girls' school in the gym, in an intramural (not-particularly-competitive) manner, I don't see anything wrong with that.

Yes, yes, I’m making stuff up.  Everyone knows the Church has no problem with high cut revealing attire on women, manly attire on women, makeup, or whatever else feminist liberal Americans want to push through on the pretext it hasn’t been infallibly condemned.

Why, if the BVM were alive today, she would wear pants, play field hockey, and slap on some makeup before heading out for girls night to impress the other girls.

BS!

For someone so severe in other areas, your liberal-laxist-feminist views in this area are rather surprising.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 14, 2019, 06:22:38 AM
There are many things that Our Lady would not do that are, nevertheless, licit and not sinful ... e.g., getting married and having marital relations.  Moral theologians always distinguish between the evangelical counsels, which are things that are not strictly required for all, but nevertheless represent the striving for a higher state of perfection.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04435a.htm (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04435a.htm)

Our Lady, of course, freely chose to adopt and to follow, EVERY such counsel for perfection, but that does not mean all are bound, nor are all capable of keeping them, so that, for instance, as St. Paul states, some need to marry rather than to "burn".

Thank you for honest liberal and uncatholic viewpoint that the imitation of the BVM is not The reference point for Catholic norms of modesty and femininity.

This is the cause of all your subsequent laziest-feminist errors.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on November 14, 2019, 07:57:44 AM
The HFA girls volleyball team DOES NOT play their games in a "closed gym setting"... they play all over the Valley, weeknights & Saturdays, and in front of all types of crowds (Catholic, Protestant, secular).  On November 2nd the volleyball Finals were at the Arizona State University basketball arena.  As for the defense that we live in "the hottest State in the country", the gyms are air conditioned and the high temps this time of year are in the low 80 degree range.  
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 14, 2019, 08:11:07 AM
Dear Ladislaus,

You are just arguing for arguments sake, likely because it is SJ on the other side.

Until you fully imbibe and understand the other and deeper repercussions of the sin of immodestly, you will forever see this as a simple matter of the sin of tempting men, just a an insignificant matter of a few inches of cloth. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on November 14, 2019, 08:18:25 AM
WOO HOO... HFA GIRLS "STATE VOLLEYBALL CHAMPS" (the Creepy-Looking Male Coach looks very excited, too!!!)...

They're #1 and they're almost ready for LITURGICAL DANCER TRY-OUTS!!!  :applause:

(https://secureservercdn.net/45.40.155.175/i6z.8dd.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/73249829_3073852345963676_2357690909518200832_n.jpg?time=1573497264)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 14, 2019, 08:25:25 AM

   To put the neo-trad ladies into context:

     1. They are living in the hottest state in the nation.  I didn't fine their attire or their fat little knees provocative.
         It could have been much, much worse.



  
          
Your focus is also on the sin of tempting men,  a simplistic mindset which leads one to dismiss this as an insignificant matter of a few inches of cloth.

By the way, I have lived/live and worked outdoors in much much hotter locations in the tropics (the climate in Arizona is dry and they have seasons. I hiked there in 107 degrees, it was cool compared to the tropics because the air is dry). I have never worn shorts to do hard labor work in the outdoors in my life. Shorts means bug bites of every kind, it means grease and dirt on your skin, burns from hot steel, cuts from thorns/machete/shovels...….. In sports, I played football in the same stifling humid heat, where a 300lb athlete loses 17 lbs in a practice,  all of that and never wore shorts.  
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on November 14, 2019, 08:30:30 AM
And a BIG CONGRATS to the HFA / 91st Psalms Protestant church JOINT "Ecumenical Soccer Team"...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HFA boys help secure second place at State!
Many boys in grades 8-12 are currently playing on the soccer team of 91st Psalm Christian School. The team is coached by HFA parent Dr. Shannon Obernuefemann and Gabriel DeMark.
On Saturday, November 2nd the HFA boys helped secure a second-place finish against Pan America High School in the CAA Division 2 State Championships.
The HFA boys gave their all and are proud of their soccer season!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on November 14, 2019, 08:32:49 AM
HFA IS JUST A BUNCH OF TRAD-PHONIES!!!
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on November 14, 2019, 08:37:54 AM
Your focus is also on the sin of tempting men,  a simplistic mindset which leads one to dismiss this as an insignificant matter of a few inches of cloth.

By the way, I have lived/live and worked outdoors in much much hotter locations in the tropics (the climate in Arizona is dry and they have seasons. I hiked there in 107 degrees, it was cool compared to the tropics because the air is dry). I have never worn shorts to do hard labor work in the outdoors in my life. Shorts means bug bites of every kind, it means grease and dirt on your skin, burns from hot steel, cuts from thorns/machete/shovels...….. In sports, I played football in the same stifling humid heat, where a 300lb athlete loses 17 lbs in a practice,  all of that and never wore shorts.  
...and they play in air-conditioned gyms, so there's just no excuse for it.  "Highway to Modernism"!
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 14, 2019, 09:27:48 AM
Quote
As for the girls, I think that the clothes might be as modest as you can get while playing the sport. 
"As modest as you can get"?  Does such a standard exist in the public forum?  I don't see how.
.
Quote
As far as girls' sports, if they are in a closed venue with a known girls sport taking place,
Such a "closed venue" does not exist in our current society.  You're inserting an idealism which is imaginary.
.
Quote
then if some guy shows up there and finds himself "tempted," then he should have known better than to go there. 
If he were tempted for reasons other than the clothing, I agree.  But since we're talking about clothing, your point makes no sense.
.
Quote
But it looks like they are outside of the sports venue, and the picture should not have been taken that way.  They could have had them stand up and capture only the view above the bottoms of their uniforms. 
They were either dressed immodestly or they were not.  These girls either scandalized those in attendance or not.  The issue of the picture is a SEPARATE issue, where they take an isolated immodesty and SPREAD IT to those not in attendance.  Assuming one argues that the clothing was immodest at the game, then a picture is an ADDITIONAL sin, which exposes the scandal to far more people.
.
Quote
So, for instance, if there's a private property, a camp, for instance, where it's just girls in attendance, they could go swimming.  So what might be OK in that context, may not be outside of it.  Same thing applies to some girls' sports. 
We don't live in this ideal world where women are separated from men in sporting events.  Your example of swimming at a girls camp is acceptable.  Sporting events aren't private in the same degree.  Not. at. all. 

Quote
In a Catholic society, girls' sporting events should likely be offlimits to men and boys ... except as necessary. 
That society doesn't exist.  We're talking about current reality.

Quote
But, as it is, if they restrict their immodesty to within the venue, nobody is forcing any man to attend.  If I walk into a womens' locker room and see nude women, is that their fault and are they being "immodest"?  I should not have gone in there ... obviously.  Likewise, if there's a girls' swim meet, I should not go in there, nor a girls' volleyball game.
No such thing as a girls-only swim meet.  They don't exist nowadays.

Quote
So, the rules, IMO, should be:
1) dress as modestly as possible given the sport if someone is playing (coach and other staff do not count)
2) keep the objectively-immodest dress within the venue (don't venture outside of the venue or take pictures that aren't properly cropped)
You are either dressed modestly or not.  "Modestly as possible" is anti-Catholic thinking, and only applies to emergency situations.
.
.
Pope Pius XI on sports, to women:
The means employed to give health to the body, “the noble instrument of the soul,” he stated, should take into account suitability of time and place. They should not excite vanity or promote immodesty. And they must not lessen a young woman’s “reserve and self-possession which are both the ornament and guarantee of virtue
– Pope Pius XI – (Letter A Lei, Vicario Nostro, May 2, 1928).
.
.
Pope Pius XII speaking to girls on sports:
If a form of dress becomes a grave and proximate danger for the soul, it is certainly not hygienic for the spirit, and you must reject it”  . . . .  “Will you, then, for the love of Christ, in the esteem for virtue, not find at the bottom of your hearts the courage and strength to sacrifice a little well-being – a physical advantage, if you will – to conserve safe and pure the life of your souls?”
-  Allocution to the girls of Catholic Action, October 6, 1940
.
Papal Decree Concerning Modesty,
POPE PIUS XI, 12 January 1930
http://www.olvrc.com/reference/documents/Modesty.Pius.XI.pdf (http://www.olvrc.com/reference/documents/Modesty.Pius.XI.pdf)

3. Let those same parents prohibit their children from public athletic events and gymnastics competitions, or at least, if their daughters must be involved in them, that they take care to exhibit clothing which is fully in keeping with modesty and that their parents never permit them to wear immodest clothing.

.

.

"Fully keeping with modesty" does not mean "modestly as possible".
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 14, 2019, 09:32:00 AM
 
(https://secureservercdn.net/45.40.155.175/i6z.8dd.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/73249829_3073852345963676_2357690909518200832_n.jpg?time=1573497264)
They could easily cover themselves underneath the skirts with leggings, like football pants that already have the knee pads. BY the way, volleyball players wear padding around other areas. 
 (https://s7d2.scene7.com/is/image/academy/20125086)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 14, 2019, 09:33:33 AM
Quote
Your focus is also on the sin of tempting men,  a simplistic mindset which leads one to dismiss this as an insignificant matter of a few inches of cloth

Great point.  Women used to be taught, and made to comply, with modesty even when they were only in the presence of other women.  Modesty is a STANDARD of morality that must be met, as a matter of salvation, whether alone or with those of the same sex and certainly with those of the opposite sex. 
.
Pay attention to #8 below.  It's talking about sin for immodesty only the presence of other women...
.
.
PAPAL DECREE CONCERNING MODESTY
HIS HOLINESS POPE PIUS XI
12 January 1930
.
7. May pious associations of women be established and fostered, organizations which, by their counsel, example and deed, set before themselves the goal of checking the abuse of dress, which is not consistent with the dictates of Christian modesty, as well as the goal of promoting purity of morals and modesty of dress.
.
8. Into the pious associations of women, let not those women be admitted who put on immodest clothing; and once admitted, if afterwards they commit a sin in this regard, and come not to their senses when admonished, may be expelled as well.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 14, 2019, 09:44:29 AM
THE MARYLIKE STANDARDS FOR MODESTY IN DRESS
.
“A dress cannot be called decent which is cut deeper than two fingers breadth under the pit of the throat; which does not cover the arms at least to the elbows; and scarcely reaches a bit beyond the knees. Furthermore, dresses of transparent materials are improper.” (The Cardinal Vicar of Pope Pius XI).
.
1. Marylike is modest without compromise, “like Mary,” Christ’s mother.
2. Marylike dresses have sleeves extending at least to the elbows; and skirts reaching below the knees.
[N.B. Because of impossible market conditions quarter-length sleeves are temporarily tolerated with Ecclesiastical Approval, until Christian womanhood again turns to
Mary as the model of modesty in dress.]
.
3. Marylike dress requires full coverage for the bodice, chest, shoulders and back; except for a cut-out about the neck not exceeding two inches below the
neckline in front and in back and a corresponding two inches on the shoulders.
4. Marylike dresses do not admit as modest coverage transparent fabrics — laces, nets, organdy, nylons, etc. — unless sufficient backing is added.  However, their moderate use as trimmings is acceptable.
5. Marylike dresses do not admit the use improper of flesh-colored fabrics.
6. Marylike dresses conceal rather than reveal the figure of the wearer; they do not unduly emphasize the parts of the body.
7. Marylike dresses provide full coverage — even after the jacket, the cape or the stole are removed.
8. Slacks or ‘jeans’ are not to be worn to church.
.
Marylike fashions are designed to conceal as much of the body as possible rather than reveal it. This would automatically eliminate such fashions as tight fitting slacks or ‘jeans’, sweaters, shorts; shorts which do not reach down at least to the knees; sheer blouses and sleeveless dresses, etc. These Marylike standards are a guide to instill a sense of modesty. Women and girls who follow these standards and who look to Mary as their ideal and model will have no problem of modesty in dress. She who follows these standards will not be the occasion of sin nor a source of embarrassment or shame to others.
.
.
-- Maybe this sounds outdated, but modesty and morality are never outdated.  We live in a "modern world".  If you want to go to hell with the moderns, it's your choice.  Catholics are supposed to "be not of the world".  The first step to rejecting the world, and following Christ (especially for women) is to dress differently.  That's very hard for women, but no one ever said that getting to heaven was easy.


Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 14, 2019, 10:05:08 AM
Girls have no business playing competitive sports (a masculine recreation whose only purpose is to encourage competitiveness and provide a cathartic outlet for aggression in a controlled environment).
What do you think of my addition SJ? I added it because there are sports activities for girls that are not competitive, or team oriented, nor a cathartic outlet for aggression in a controlled environment.

For others, notice that in all women's sports, the women are scantily dressed. Even in women's pro football where you would think they would be covered for protection, they play bare butt. Look at track, bare butt. Tennis...… There is a reason for that, it is to attract men to the "sport". Why would anyone go to watch woman's highschool/college/pro sports except they be parents or relatives? It is like going to watch a pro football game between men with their ankles tide together, or other handicap. That is the reason for the bare butt and exposed breasts outfits. It is of course of the devil. Also, because of the aggression in competitive sports it attracts an abnormally high percentage of lesbians to play or watch/stalk. I have a relative who's daughgter played on the highschool volleyball team and I was at his house once when the girls were all there. I smelled something wrong, and over time found that many of them were indeed lesbians, maybe the majority. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 14, 2019, 10:10:37 AM
You are just arguing for arguments sake, likely because it is SJ on the other side.

That's ridiculous.  I made my comments before Sean made his reply.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 14, 2019, 10:13:51 AM
It’s implicit in the teaching on modest attire, and in the Catholic conception of femininity.

That is your interpretation of Catholic teaching on those subjects.  Presumably at some point you would find something from the Church about this ... if it were wrong, since many Catholic girls have participated in sports for a very long time now, long before Vatican II.

I'll actually come back later and cite some things from Pius XI.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 14, 2019, 10:15:17 AM
Women used to be taught, and made to comply, with modesty even when they were only in the presence of other women.

To a point, but not to the same point as when with mixed company or in public.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 14, 2019, 10:17:39 AM
Quote from: Ladislaus (https://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?topic=52919.msg675413#msg675413) on Thu Nov 14 2019 10:13:51 GMT-0600 (CST)
That is your interpretation of Catholic teaching on those subjects.  Presumably at some point you would find something from the Church about this ... if it were wrong, since many Catholic girls have participated in sports for a very long time now, long before Vatican II.

I'll actually come back later and cite some things from Pius XI.

LT posted the following earlier:

Pope Pius XI on sports, to women:
The means employed to give health to the body, “the noble instrument of the soul,” he stated, should take into account suitability of time and place. They should not excite vanity or promote immodesty. And they must not lessen a young woman’s “reserve and self-possession which are both the ornament and guarantee of virtue”
– Pope Pius XI – (Letter A Lei, Vicario Nostro, May 2, 1928).

Pope Pius XII speaking to girls on sports:
If a form of dress becomes a grave and proximate danger for the soul, it is certainly not hygienic for the spirit, and you must reject it”  . . . .  “Will you, then, for the love of Christ, in the esteem for virtue, not find at the bottom of your hearts the courage and strength to sacrifice a little well-being – a physical advantage, if you will – to conserve safe and pure the life of your souls?”
-  Allocution to the girls of Catholic Action, October 6, 1940

Papal Decree Concerning Modesty,
POPE PIUS XI, 12 January 1930
http://www.olvrc.com/reference/documents/Modesty.Pius.XI.pdf (http://www.olvrc.com/reference/documents/Modesty.Pius.XI.pdf)

3. Let those same parents prohibit their children from public athletic events and gymnastics competitions, or at least, if their daughters must be involved in them, that they take care to exhibit clothing which is fully in keeping with modesty and that their parents never permit them to wear immodest clothing.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 14, 2019, 10:20:24 AM
To a point, but not to the same point as when with mixed company or in public.
This is nitpicking, you are debating about gnats, just to defend your point. All you are doing is lengthening this thread and making it worthless. You should be asking questions, instead you are just defending yourself.   
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 14, 2019, 11:16:09 AM
What do you think of my addition SJ? I added it because there are sports activities for girls that are not competitive, or team oriented, nor a cathartic outlet for aggression in a controlled environment.

For others, notice that in all women's sports, the women are scantily dressed. Even in women's pro football where you would think they would be covered for protection, they play bare butt. Look at track, bare butt. Tennis...… There is a reason for that, it is to attract men to the "sport". Why would anyone go to watch woman's highschool/college/pro sports except they be parents or relatives? It is like going to watch a pro football game between men with their ankles tide together, or other handicap. That is the reason for the bare butt and exposed breasts outfits. It is of course of the devil. Also, because of the aggression in competitive sports it attracts an abnormally high percentage of lesbians to play or watch/stalk. I have a relative who's daughgter played on the highschool volleyball team and I was at his house once when the girls were all there. I smelled something wrong, and over time found that many of them were indeed lesbians, maybe the majority.

LT-

Yes, I agree with your qualifier that women should not play “competitive” sports.

That -combined with truly modest attire- would preserve a true feminine psyche, and protect against inculcating masculinity in girls.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 14, 2019, 11:31:05 AM
LT-

Yes, I agree with your qualifier that women should not play “competitive” sports.

That -combined with truly modest attire- would preserve a true feminine psyche, and protect against inculcating masculinity in girls.

And I guess it should be obvious why it is important to protect and nurture a true feminine psyche in women:

Masculinized women are unfit for motherhood and the married state:

They will not be content to remain at home and/or nurture and educate their children, finding it all very mundane and unfulfilling.

They will with difficulty remain submissive to their husbands, and instead habitually compete with him, destroying order and peace in the home, and giving bad example to the children.

In short, to sacrifice true femininity to secular, liberal, feminist conceptions of “modesty” (a word infected women find degrading and repressive) and gender roles, is to destroy the Catholic family (and therefore any possibility of proper social order, not to mention the diminished prospects for eternal salvation of those infected, who promote disorder in Church and society).

Note that none of what is said above has even (directly) touched upon the issue of leading men into sin yet.

Whenever you hear someone object to what has been said here (repressive; puritanical; etc.), know that that person has been (wittingly or unwittingly) infected with worldly thinking.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 14, 2019, 11:40:48 AM
Let’s not forget Cardinal Siri’s exhortation to his flock in Genoa, Italy in the early 60s.  He was warning of the psychological evils of women wearing men’s attire (ie pants).  This was an evil, he said, even if the attire was not necessarily immodest, because it was an attack on femininity itself and of the social order, and the family.  
.
Does this psychological attack on femininity (and by extension, the family) also apply to the idea of women playing sports “like men”? Of course.  
.
Women in sports should be isolated to such things as gymnastics, ice skating or anything which involves the improvement of their natural grace, beauty and inclinations.  It is not natural for women to compete with each other physically or in the aggressive manner that most “male invented” sports require.  Such sports were created by men for a reason and winning requires male behavior and male ideals. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 14, 2019, 11:44:18 AM
Some of you guys are ridiculous, and singlehandedly responsible for making Traditional Catholics look like nutjobs.

There's no way that some volleyball games played during a gym class at an all girls school leads to "masculinized" women.  That's just insane.  Playing hockey or football or playing against boys, certainly.

And to imply that it's practically the same thing for a girl to not be in perfect conformity with the rules of modesty when in the company of other females, especially when the nature of the activity makes it difficult or cumbersome, that it's practically the same thing as running around naked in front of men ... that's also insane.

This stuff is just nuts.

When you get this unreasonable and insane, 90% of the time this comes from an at-least latent misogyny, which in turn usually derives from insecurity of some kind that I need not further elaborate on.

And, finally, these uniforms in the pictures, are really NOT THAT BAD for what they are.  If these girls were to stand up, they probably hit right at or just slightly above the knee.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 14, 2019, 11:51:22 AM
Papal Decree Concerning Modesty,
POPE PIUS XI, 12 January 1930
http://www.olvrc.com/reference/documents/Modesty.Pius.XI.pdf (http://www.olvrc.com/reference/documents/Modesty.Pius.XI.pdf)

3. Let those same parents prohibit their children from public athletic events and gymnastics competitions, or at least, if their daughters must be involved in them, that they take care to exhibit clothing which is fully in keeping with modesty and that their parents never permit them to wear immodest clothing.

Did you see the the "public" part?  I bolded it for you in case your eyesight was wanting.  You ignored this.  "Public" is also stipulated by Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri.  Learn how to read, people, before you hurts yourself attempting to reason.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: HOOLIGAN4HIRE on November 14, 2019, 11:54:59 AM
Some of you guys are ridiculous, and singlehandedly responsible for making Traditional Catholics look like nutjobs.

There's no way that some volleyball games played during a gym class at an all girls school leads to "masculinized" women.  That's just insane.  Playing hockey or football or playing against boys, certainly.

And to imply that it's practically the same thing for a girl to not be in perfect conformity with the rules of modesty when in the company of other females, especially when the nature of the activity makes it difficult or cumbersome, that it's practically the same thing as running around naked in front of men ... that's also insane.

This stuff is just nuts.

When you get this unreasonable and insane, 90% of the time this comes from an at-least latent misogyny, which in turn usually derives from insecurity of some kind that I need not further elaborate on.

And, finally, these uniforms in the pictures, are really NOT THAT BAD for what they are.  If these girls were to stand up, they probably hit right at or just slightly above the knee.
You would actually be correct if the girls were just standing, but they are jumping, diving, and even falling at times.  Those skirts fly up when they do those things.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 14, 2019, 12:02:50 PM
Some of you guys are ridiculous, and singlehandedly responsible for making Traditional Catholics look like nutjobs.

There's no way that some volleyball games played during a gym class at an all girls school leads to "masculinized" women.  That's just insane.  Playing hockey or football or playing against boys, certainly.

And to imply that it's practically the same thing for a girl to not be in perfect conformity with the rules of modesty when in the company of other females, especially when the nature of the activity makes it difficult or cumbersome, that it's practically the same thing as running around naked in front of men ... that's also insane.

This stuff is just nuts.

When you get this unreasonable and insane, 90% of the time this comes from an at-least latent misogyny, which in turn usually derives from insecurity of some kind that I need not further elaborate on.

And, finally, these uniforms in the pictures, are really NOT THAT BAD for what they are.  If these girls were to stand up, they probably hit right at or just slightly above the knee.

Perhaps you have daughters who played sports?
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 14, 2019, 12:07:59 PM
Did you see the the "public" part?  I bolded it for you in case your eyesight was wanting.  You ignored this.  "Public" is also stipulated by Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri.  Learn how to read, people, before you hurts yourself attempting to reason.

The public vs private distinction pertains to modesty, but not to femininity.

Siri and others have written about the deleterious and masculinizing effects of men’s attire and sports upon the feminine psyche (and it applies whether girls wear or do these in public and private).
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 14, 2019, 12:13:22 PM
The public vs private distinction pertains to modesty, but not to femininity.

Siri and others have written about the deleterious and masculinizing effects of men’s attire and sports upon the feminine psyche (and it applies whether girls wear or do these in public and private).

To illustrate:

If I like to wear women’s panties in private, and paint my toenails, and wax my eyebrows, and do embroidery and sew, it would all still be damaging my masculinity despite being in private, because these behaviors would be inculcating within me a feminine psyche, to the detriment of my God-given masculinity.

Same thing with women inculcating themselves with masculine behaviors (whether public or private).

That public v private distinction only pertains to the modesty issue, not the femininity/masculinity issue.

If you can’t see this, it is only because you don’t want to.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: canis on November 14, 2019, 12:22:50 PM
Some of you guys are ridiculous, and singlehandedly responsible for making Traditional Catholics look like nutjobs.
"And many of them said: He hath a devil, and is mad: why hear you him?" (John 10:20). 
Being perceived as insane by an insane culture? Sounds fine to me! 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 14, 2019, 12:45:37 PM
Quote
Some of you guys are ridiculous, and singlehandedly responsible for making Traditional Catholics look like nutjobs.

There's no way that some volleyball games played during a gym class at an all girls school leads to "masculinized" women.  That's just insane.  Playing hockey or football or playing against boys, certainly.
We're not talking about a private game of volleyball or some "pick up" game where the girls are playing in gym class.  We're talking about a PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL game, where HUNDREDS of people are present (or could be) to watch.  You keep inserting imaginary factors into a clear-cut, factual case of a PUBLIC SPORTING EVENT.
.
Quote
And to imply that it's practically the same thing for a girl to not be in perfect conformity with the rules of modesty when in the company of other females, especially when the nature of the activity makes it difficult or cumbersome, that it's practically the same thing as running around naked in front of men ... that's also insane.
Ladislaus, have you ever been to a high-school or club sporting event?  The attendance is OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.  These games are not being played "in the company of other females" only.  Your arguments are borderline insane.  That, or you're just so sheltered that you have no experience of what these games are all about or the atmosphere surrounding them.
.
Quote
And, finally, these uniforms in the pictures, are really NOT THAT BAD for what they are.  If these girls were to stand up, they probably hit right at or just slightly above the knee.
The 'above the knee', non-Trad skirts are the least problem with this whole scenario.  The overall problems are
1) supposedly "Trad" girls playing with non-Catholic novus ordo girls in a competitive style sport, while being coached by a novus ordo coach who will not support Trad ideals or goals.
2) supposedly "Trad" girls being allowed to act like they are just one of the "normal schools" and be in association with the novus ordo diocese.  Just another example of the new-sspx watering down and slowing compromising the former-Trad ideals which we should all be striving for.
3) the idea that one can compromise modesty (in any degree) for a non-emergency situation...especially one as superfluous as sports.  It's the allowance of a "lessening" of standards is the problem.
.
Are we Traditional Catholic or not?  Can these young people even define what "Traditionalism" is?  Or explain why we are what we are?  Being able to modify such actions when in a "public" arena gives more credence to the error that the only thing that separates Trads from other catholics is the "latin mass".  This situation is a perfect time to explain to the youngsters that we are not "of the world" but only live in it.  Life's not easy; the road to Calvary requires sacrifices.  It should be an honor to uphold Catholic ideals and to suffer and set an example.
.
He that is faithful in that which is least, is faithful also in that which is greater: and he that is unjust in that which is little, is unjust also in that which is greater. (Luke 16:10).
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Incredulous on November 14, 2019, 12:46:10 PM
You would actually be correct if the girls were just standing, but they are jumping, diving, and even falling at times.  Those skirts fly up when they do those things.

Hooligan,

How do their opponent teams dress?
I would guess the neo-trad girls look modest by comparison... flying culottes and all  :jester:
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 14, 2019, 12:48:21 PM
Quote
3. Let those same parents prohibit their children from public athletic events and gymnastics competitions, or at least, if their daughters must be involved in them, that they take care to exhibit clothing which is fully in keeping with modesty and that their parents never permit them to wear immodest clothing.

Right, Ladislaus, we're talking about a PUBLIC sporting activity.  What part of a public volleyball game do you not understand?  What part of "fully" keeping modest, don't you understand?  Having skirts above the knee while "not that bad" is not "fully keeping with modesty"...especially in the PUBLIC realm.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 14, 2019, 12:54:36 PM
Quote
How do their opponent teams dress?
Probably wear the typical female-volleyball garb:  uber-tight, spandex, daisy-duke style, short-shorts, with sleeveless, masculine-style tank tops.  It would be an occasion of sin for anyone to be the same room with this style of clothing, whether male or female.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 14, 2019, 12:55:12 PM
Some of you guys are ridiculous, and singlehandedly responsible for making Traditional Catholics look like nutjobs. (no explanations or quotes to point out who is or what makes X a "nutjob")

There's no way that some volleyball games played during a gym class at an all girls school leads to "masculinized" women.  (who said that? I specifically added competitive, as in being in a team practicing all week to play other schools teams, not just playing in a gym class in an all girls school.)

And to imply that it's practically the same thing for a girl to not be in perfect conformity with the rules of modesty when in the company of other females, especially when the nature of the activity makes it difficult or cumbersome, that it's practically the same thing as running around naked in front of men ... that's also insane. (again your nit picking, you are going on and on and on about your trivial idea that girls can wear immodest clothes if there are no men around. That's focusing on a gnat, that has nothing to do with 99.99% of girls competitive sports which is performed in public. By the way, the immodest dress "just among girls" is a bonus for the lesbians which are women too. )

This stuff is just nuts. (what is nuts is this strawman that you created on this thread. This whole posting is one big strawman)

When you get this unreasonable (about what?) and insane (about what?), 90% of the time this comes from an at-least latent misogyny (I had to look up that word ), which in turn usually derives from insecurity of some kind that I need not further elaborate on. (You are totally out of your area of expertise, I would suggest that you just ask questions. )

And, finally, these uniforms in the pictures, are really NOT THAT BAD for what they are .  If these girls were to stand up, they probably hit right at or just slightly above the knee. (Again, all it is to you is a matter of inches. You do not understand. But you ask no questions, so you will never understand, to you it will always be a matter of inches of cloth and how men react to it.  )
My responses in red
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 14, 2019, 02:44:13 PM
Why do I post on this thread? It certainly is not to debate the matter of a few inches of cloth and how it affects men. I could care less how immodesty affects men. Do I post because I have many daughters? Well, I do have many daughters, but none of the errors described below affect my girls, for we have taught them the facts.



So why do I post here?

I post because of the deeper repercussions. I post because I see the SSPX trad young girls and their parents step by step re-living exactly what happened in the 1960’s. I’ve already been through this and I know the results. In the 1960’s everyone went to the Latin Mass and Catholic schools, there was no Novus Ordo.   I lived it and saw what happened to young Catholic school girls when they were allowed to imbibed the dєαdlу idea that "showing some legs and not being a prude" is the way to attract boys and to have fun and be popular. We see today the result of that ʀɛʋօʟutιօn, scarcely a Catholic left.  It is now 1960's all over again in every detail for the SSPX trad young girls and parents. I see the trad girls during the week dressing and living pretty much no different than any public school girls. All I hear from the SSPX trad girls (6 and up!) is talk about boys, "who is your crush" or "my crush is"..... The SSPX schools and parents are raising boy crazy airheads, all of their self-esteem and their idea of self-worth coming from the boys they attract.   And the parents are just like the parents in the 1960's they see nothing wrong till it is too late and their daughter becomes an unwed mother, or marries or shacks up with a non-Catholic bum and leaves the Church. At least the parents in the 1960’s had an excuse, for they were totally caught by surprise by something alien. The parents today have learned nothing from the past or maybe they could care less.  



What disturbs me about those volleyball outfits is not a few inches of cloth, it is that those outfits are just a sign that they are well on the way to slaughter. If those girls and their parents really were Catholic, they would not even think of wearing those clothes or even going through all of the work to play in competitive sports. What bothers me is that those clothes are just the tip of the iceberg, just a sign that they live no different than any public school girl.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 14, 2019, 03:25:56 PM
By placing all those caveats and limits on it, I was trying to get at the PRINCIPLES, as I always do.  I'm not interested in emotion.

So, in other words,

1) Are sports completely unacceptable for ladies?  You said non-competitive sports were OK.

2) Is any competition between ladies OK?  Playing board games?  Playing competitive chess against other ladies?  Girls competing to get the best grades and become valedictorian at an all girls' school?

So, if sports are allowed, and competition is allowed, what is it that makes competitive sports disallowed?

I understand that excessive physicality in a sport is certainly against feminine nature, so for instance, sports like football and hockey, etc.  And it's certainly not feminine for girls to play against boys, since this militates against the future attitude of being deferential and submissive to their husbands.  And physical competition against boys adds the additional aspect of inappropriate physical contact between the sexes.

But what makes it wrong to practice and then play against another girls' school.  Is it the competition?  Is it the sport?  ... as per questions #1 and #2 above.  I mean, it could be a healthy way for girls to explore competing against one another so that it doesn't manifest itself in sinful ways later on, e.g. competing with other girls to catch the eye of a man, even if it means immodesty.  Women DO in fact compete with one another for husbands.  There's no question about that.  But what if they understand how to win graciously and to lose graciously.  Having "practiced" losing and winning, perhaps they would not be so afraid of "losing" at something later.

You learn in sports that it's not a satisfying victory to win unless you play by the rules.  So, perhaps a girl could learn that it's nothing to brag about winning if you didn't play by the rules ... and won only due to violating the laws of God.

Another thing I find potentially quite valuable in girls' competitive sports.  Girls by nature tend to resent their OWN TEAMMATES if they outplay them or are better.  This gives them a venue to come to terms with those emotions, and to learn to be happy for the TEAM if their teammates perform well, a lesson that's only learned with great difficulty by girls.

But enough of the potential benefits.  I cannot in principle come to the conclusion that competitive sports between girls is inherently unacceptable and harmful ... if they're not particularly aggressive forms of competition.

To my knowledge, except for potential reasons of MODESTY, the Church has never cautioned against women competing athletically against other girls.  And all the caveats by Pius XI regarding female sports has to do with whether they take place "in public".  That clearly implies that they're OK so long as they're not carried out in public or the girls are dressed modestly.  And I added both of these stipulations in my initial response.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 14, 2019, 03:44:24 PM
Your theoretical principles are fine, Ladislaus, but they do not apply to the point of this thread.  The actual games being played are happening in public arenas, are of a masculine/competitive nature (as are all high school girl sports today), and involve immodest attire relative to those watching and to the type of sport involved.  
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 14, 2019, 04:21:20 PM
Your theoretical principles are fine, Ladislaus, but they do not apply to the point of this thread.  The actual games being played are happening in public arenas, are of a masculine/competitive nature (as are all high school girl sports today), and involve immodest attire relative to those watching and to the type of sport involved.  

It appears that the girls were out in public, in this picture, but I do not consider playing in an arena where the scheduled event states that it's a girls' match ... to be public.  You have to buy a ticket to get in.  And the events are not viewable to someone who hasn't entered the arena of his own accord.  Secondly, the degree of immodesty here is something might even be tolerable at Mass.  These uniforms are not even close to being gravely immodest.  Even if these girls walked out to the grocery store like this, truly in public, I would consider it a venial violation of modesty at the most.  But with regard to a sport that is clearly billed as a girls' sporting event, I consider this acceptable.  Now, if they were wearing those so-called "spanks" which have their butt cheeks hanging out and leaving little to the imagination, yeah, that would be in appropriate even in the relatively closed venue.  But, really?  These uniforms are just not that bad.  What, because someone can catch a glimpse of knee when they're standing up.  Even that is mitigated by the fact that they are wearing knee pads.

Now, the coach in the picture appears to have an inappropriate skirt on ... without any whatsoever reason to do so.  Now, THAT is a bad example to the girls on the team for sure.  Now, I can see it being a problem if the players' skirts were too long over the knee.  If they were to go down on their knees, the skirt could actually get caught between the floor and their knee and they could be injured.

I bet that their competition was very badly dressed, and the fact that they beat them sends a message that you don't need to dress like that to be competitive.  I think that the excuse for the immodesty in dress is the competitive advantage to be gained from it ... although for girls it's usually an excuse to practice exhibitionism.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 14, 2019, 04:30:59 PM
It appears that the girls were out in public, in this picture, but I do not consider playing in an arena where the scheduled event states that it's a girls' match ... to be public.  You have to buy a ticket to get in.  And the events are not viewable to someone who hasn't entered the arena of his own accord.  

::)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 14, 2019, 09:02:56 PM

Quote
but I do not consider playing in an arena where the scheduled event states that it's a girls' match ... to be public.  You have to buy a ticket to get in. 
Oh come on.  Tickets to this event might be $2 for adults and free for children.  These are high school events, put on by the diocese.  They could have a few hundred attendees at each match.  Very public and very family oriented...which makes the immodesty that much worse.  A horrible example these young ladies and the schools are setting for the 7-13 year old girls.  
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 15, 2019, 06:27:37 AM
It appears that the girls were out in public, in this picture, but I do not consider playing in an arena where the scheduled event states that it's a girls' match ... to be public.  You have to buy a ticket to get in.  And the events are not viewable to someone who hasn't entered the arena of his own accord.  Secondly, the degree of immodesty here is something might even be tolerable at Mass. These uniforms are not even close to being gravely immodest.  Even if these girls walked out to the grocery store like this, truly in public, I would consider it a venial violation of modesty at the most.  But with regard to a sport that is clearly billed as a girls' sporting event, I consider this acceptable.  Now, if they were wearing those so-called "spanks" which have their butt cheeks hanging out and leaving little to the imagination, yeah, that would be in appropriate even in the relatively closed venue.  But, really?  These uniforms are just not that bad.  What, because someone can catch a glimpse of knee when they're standing up.  Even that is mitigated by the fact that they are wearing knee pads.

Now, the coach in the picture appears to have an inappropriate skirt on ... without any whatsoever reason to do so.  Now, THAT is a bad example to the girls on the team for sure.  Now, I can see it being a problem if the players' skirts were too long over the knee.  If they were to go down on their knees, the skirt could actually get caught between the floor and their knee and they could be injured.

I bet that their competition was very badly dressed, and the fact that they beat them sends a message that you don't need to dress like that to be competitive.  I think that the excuse for the immodesty in dress is the competitive advantage to be gained from it ... although for girls it's usually an excuse to practice exhibitionism.

I learned everything I know from doing it, living it and making mistakes and mostly learning from other peoples mistakes, after all there is only one of me to make mistakes and there are 7 billion others to learn from. That said, my analysis of the above posting and really all of the postings on this thread by the same writer (for the above is finally putting everything together) is what I said all along, that the poster does not understand, that for him it is just a silly matter of inches of cloth and how it affects men.  

Now, the deeper analysis is:

When a normally very intelligent, analytical, sincere seeker of truth person, like the poster, does a 180 degree on a subject, writing total babble, one has to wonder what happened, what is going on? The answer is pressure, they have a "gun to their heads" and can't write freely as they do on other subjects. For the writer and all of those like him, I have this advise, and it is the only reason why I posted on this thread (like I said before):

This subject has a direct real impact on ones family, specially ones daughters, direct and real impact! Whether the pope is the pope, that Cardinal X is a sơdơmite, that Bp. Fellay is kissing up to  Bergolio...…. etc. has absolutely no effect on ones family. This does. This is real, and it is in ones face! Do not rationalize this, for it could ruin your daughters entire future.

I see the SSPX trad young girls and their parents step by step re-living exactly what happened in the 1960’s. I’ve already been through this and I know the results. In the 1960’s everyone went to the Latin Mass and Catholic schools, there was no Novus Ordo.   I lived it and saw what happened to young Catholic school girls when they were allowed to imbibed the dєαdlу idea that "showing some legs and not being a prude" is the way to attract boys and to have fun and be popular....It is now 1960's all over again in every detail for the SSPX trad young girls and parents.....All I hear from the SSPX trad girls (6 and up!) is talk about boys, "who is your crush" or "my crush is"..... The SSPX schools and parents are raising boy crazy airheads, all of their self-esteem and their idea of self-worth coming from the boys they attract.   And the parents are just like the parents in the 1960's they see nothing wrong till it is too late and their daughter becomes an unwed mother, or marries or shacks up with a non-Catholic bum and leaves the Church.



What disturbs me about those volleyball outfits is not a few inches of cloth, it is that those outfits and similar immodest clothes that they wear to mass are just a sign that they are well on the way to slaughter. ….. those clothes are just an indicator that the mothers and daughter have imbibed the dєαdlу idea that "showing some legs and not being a prude" is the way to attract boys and to have fun and be popular.. those clothes are  just the tip of the iceberg, just a sign of what is to come. What is to come is daughters going to bars at night "to dance", fornication, pregnancy, abortion or unwed mothers, shot gun weddings to non-Catholic bums, divorce, annulments, 2nd, 3rd 4th marriages (slaughter). I've been there and seen that first hand over and over and over. It is happening right now at SSPX chapels. All because a husband did not have the fortitude to never surrender, the fortitude to use his head. Martyrs for the faith were boiled in oil or cooked on the grill for the faith, today a father is afraid to upset his wife and daughters.  

Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 15, 2019, 06:48:02 AM

Everything I wrote applies to priests and the SSPX, so: 

Martyrs for the faith were boiled in oil or cooked on the grill for the faith, today fathers and priests are afraid to upset the wives and daughters.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 15, 2019, 08:52:28 AM
Quote
Now, if they were wearing those so-called "spanks" which have their butt cheeks hanging out and leaving little to the imagination, yeah, that would be inappropriate even in the relatively closed venue. 
 Wearing spandex short shorts is "inappropriate"?  That's it?!  Such attire is borderline pornographic.  It's totally, 100% impure, in every regard. 

Quote
I bet that their competition was very badly dressed, and the fact that they beat them sends a message that you don't need to dress like that to be competitive.

Yes, their competition was 100% wearing such "spanks" and everyone in attendance was part of the occasion of sin, for taking part in the game where such women are dressed such.  You can visit the athletic association's facebook page to confirm, as I did:  https://www.facebook.com/CanyonAthleticAssociation/ (https://www.facebook.com/CanyonAthleticAssociation/)
I saw 1 picture of an opposing team all wearing "spanks" but almost all of the girls (or should I call them "land whales"?) were so overweight that such scandalous "shorts" were vomit-inducing.  Thank God for that.
.
Can one partake of a sporting event where your competition is impurely and provocatively dressed?  I don't see how this is morally acceptable.  So, by the very fact you are playing this hooker-dressed team, you are condoning such dress all in the name of sports.  What a great example of living the Faith!
.
Finally, these events are not held in a "closed venue".  All are open to the public, all addresses are posted all over the web, anyone can attend for a nominal fee of $2-5 (children are free). 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 15, 2019, 08:53:30 AM

Here is a short 4 minute sermon given by Fr. Wathen on the subject. (CI's Stubborn  originally posted it on another thread)  

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ia84vj5ot24vbab/St.%20Agnes.mp3?dl=0 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/ia84vj5ot24vbab/St.%20Agnes.mp3?dl=0)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 15, 2019, 08:57:36 AM
Holy Family Academy
https://holyfamilyacad.org/about/ (https://holyfamilyacad.org/about/)

Here's what their "about us" page says about their school (I did not add the bold...this is part of their website.  They highlight this "potential recognition" as some great thing to be happy about and to spread around as "good news").  They also refer to the new code of canon law, do not represent themselves as a catholic school, and their website has no mention of anything religious except to say that the education is "Christ-centered".  Wow, this school (and the new-sspx) has completely lost it.  They are way further along in the "V2 indoctrination" than the 1960s.  They are being fast tracked into the 1970s.
.
.
Holy Family Academy is currently in the process of being recognized as a private, independent Catholic school operating in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Phoenix.
.
Therefore, Holy Family Academy does not offer Sacramental preparation for its students who must be initiated into the Sacraments through a parish. Moreover, in full accordance with Canon Law 803.3, Holy Family Academy does not bear the title of “Catholic School”, nor does it represent itself as a “Catholic School”.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Incredulous on November 15, 2019, 12:06:44 PM



Gentlemen,


Please provide us with a photo or sketch of what you believe is suitable attire for a traditional Catholic girl to wear on the public volley ball court.

Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 15, 2019, 12:22:31 PM
Gentlemen,
Please provide us with a photo or sketch of what you believe is suitable attire for a traditional Catholic girl to wear on the public volley ball court.
Learning from what Pax Vobis posted, it matters little what they wear, they can't be in a match against girls in panties. (Saying they can convert them by a "good" example, is like Eric Gajewski saying he is picking up prostitutes to convert them.)


Quote
Yes, their competition was 100% wearing such "spanks" and everyone in attendance was part of the occasion of sin, for taking part in the game where such women are dressed such.  You can visit the athletic association's facebook page to confirm, as I did:  https://www.facebook.com/CanyonAthleticAssociation/ (https://www.facebook.com/CanyonAthleticAssociation/)
I saw 1 picture of an opposing team all wearing "spanks" but almost all of the girls (or should I call them "land whales"?) were so overweight that such scandalous "shorts" were vomit-inducing.  Thank God for that.
.
Can one partake of a sporting event where your competition is impurely and provocatively dressed?  I don't see how this is morally acceptable.  So, by the very fact you are playing this hooker-dressed team, you are condoning such dress all in the name of sports.  What a great example of living the Faith!

.
Finally, these events are not held in a "closed venue".  All are open to the public, all addresses are posted all over the web, anyone can attend for a nominal fee of $2-5 (children are free).
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 15, 2019, 12:35:39 PM

Quote
For others, notice that in all women's sports, the women are scantily dressed. Even in women's pro football where you would think they would be covered for protection, they play bare butt. Look at track, bare butt. Volleyball, ice skating. Tennis...… There is a reason for that, it is to attract men to the "sport". Why would anyone go to watch woman's highschool/college/pro sports except they be parents or relatives? It is like going to watch a pro football game between men with their ankles tide together, or other handicap. That is the reason for the bare butt and exposed breasts outfits. It is of course of the devil. Also, because of the aggression in competitive sports it attracts an abnormally high percentage of lesbians to play or watch/stalk. I have a relative who's daughgter played on the highschool volleyball team and I was at his house once when the girls were all there. I smelled something wrong, and over time found that many of them were indeed lesbians, maybe the majority.
No Catholic can attend such events, just like they can't go to a crowded beach full of young girls in their underwear (better known to the brainwashed as bikinis and one piece bathing suits).  
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 15, 2019, 12:36:44 PM
Quote
Please provide us with a photo or sketch of what you believe is suitable attire for a traditional Catholic girl to wear on the public volley ball court.
The issue is not ONLY "what is suitable to wear"?  But also,
1) "Whom are you playing against?  Are they dressed impurely?"  (The issue of 'bad companions' applies here).
2) Is this game private (i.e. girls only) vs public?
3) What is the context of the game?  Is this a recreational game or a school-sanctioned, diocesan-affiliated event?
.
The picture posted earlier on this thread is objectively not in accord with Traditional Catholic standards.  Those who argue that "isn't it modest enough?" are asking the wrong question.  If a few inches of fabric ABOVE the knee is no big deal, then why not make the skirts a few inches BELOW the knee?  It's just a "few inches", right?  Is a long skirt really going to impede proper volleyball performance?  Longer skirts didn't impede female tennis players from being some of the best in history, even by today's standards.  So I don't see how a longer skirt could impede a volleyball player, being that tennis requires way more mobility and way more running, and for a longer duration, than does the game of volleyball.
.
The picture posted is, one could argue, not gravely immoral (though it is certainly a venial sin, as it is objectively not Traditional) if viewed on its own.  However, in the context of such attire being worn by supposed-Trad girls, while in the public arena for anyone to see, and in the context of a non-emergency, recreational activity, where the opponents are ALL dressed totally and scandalously provocative, the circumstances of this not-grave attire make the action a grave moral offense.
.
Finally, even if the skirts in question were down to the ankles, the circumstances of playing in an organized league, against competitors who are GRAVELY immorally dressed, makes the activity gravely sinful.  A man is not allowed to visit a "dance club", just to get a drink and read a book in the back.  "I'm not there for the dancers; i'm reading a book."  Such circumstances make his action gravely scandalous and gravely sinful.  In the same way, those who participate in an activity where there is CONSITENTLY GRAVELY immoral dress, are sinning by the "9 ways" one can be an accessory to a sin, by silently condoning the dress and by not avoiding a grave occasion of sin.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Incredulous on November 15, 2019, 05:12:02 PM

Okay.. okay.

Let’s imagine we are living in the “Sixth Age of the Church”.

What’s left of the jews are in hiding and everybody else is Catholic. The Restoration Pope has reiterated the rules for modest dress.

There’s a Catholic girls school volleyball league.  What might there uniforms look like?
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 15, 2019, 05:27:01 PM
Okay.. okay.

Let’s imagine we are living in the “Sixth Age of the Church”.

What’s left of the jews are in hiding and everybody else is Catholic. The Restoration Pope has reiterated the rules for modest dress.

There’s a Catholic girls school volleyball league.  What might there uniforms look like?
I played football and baseball from 9 years of age till 12th grade and I was very good at it. The daily football practices and games sapped me of all of my aggression and made me a better student. Hitting people and getting hit everyday day till you can't walk will do that. Had I known the faith like my son does today (I knew absolutely NOTHING!), I would never have played, as I would not have had the aggression and the malice. It is a lot of work to play any organized competitive sport and a waste of time for 99% of the people who play it.  

Female sports today only exist for the pleasure of men. That is why girls sports are played bare butt (in pro football, track, tennis, volleyball, swimming.....). If people once again lived the faith, you would not see any girls going through all of the work to compete in sports.

If you want a hypothetical uniform for today,  I already mentioned a suggestion with a picture earlier, thinner material spandex like football pants with knee pads and hip guards so the girls don't get hip pointers when they dive for shots. Over that they can wear those skirts they are wearing now.  Hip pointers take forever to heal, because your hip keeps getting hit all season in practice. I'm surprised that those volleyball girls just wear spandex underwear on the outside. The softball girls used to wear shorts like 3 years ago, again to show butts. I thought it was insane, having played baseball myself. You slide once and your butt is scraped raw, oozing blood forever, and it will never heal while you still play. I notice now that they are wearing regular long baseball pants.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 15, 2019, 05:46:14 PM
Here's what the uniform could look like, but made with lighter material with built in hip and knee padding (or they could just wear separate knee pads like they do know).The skirt can be the same length as they currently use. The sleeves above the elbow:

(https://www.bing.com/th?id=OIP.RaOah8JwipswhPV6P-sgzQAAAA&w=141&h=162&c=7&o=5&pid=1.7)



Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 15, 2019, 05:56:29 PM
Here's what the uniform could look like, but made with lighter material with built in hip and knee padding.The skirt can be the same length as they currently use:

So the picture I see in the thread is different than what I see when trying to respond.  I think you meant the one in the response.  Not bad, but the skirt would need to be a little looser so that they can move their legs more freely, and the elbow-length sleeves just would not allow their arms to move freely enough to play well.  But this isn't too far off.  But short of having them custom designed, I'm not sure where you'd fine something like that.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 15, 2019, 06:00:52 PM
Female sports today only exist for the pleasure of men. That is why girls sports are played bare butt (in pro football, track, tennis, volleyball, swimming.....). If people once again lived the faith, you would not see any girls going through all of the work to compete in sports.

No, female sports rose in popularity due to feminism ... and not the pleasure of men.  That's why even today you have on the books all these rules in school athletics about having to have the same number of sports for women/girls as for men ... with anything else being "discrimination".  Then the girls themselves are the ones who set the styles to be more provocative ... for the same reasons they do that with everyday clothing as well.

Very few men watch womens' sports, and that's why the womens' leagues usually fold and pay next to nothing.  If men are interested in ogling women, they won't be watching womens' sports, but going straight to something more provocative ... unless you count "swimsuit" as a sport (to have it appear in Sports Illustrated).
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 15, 2019, 06:16:32 PM
Not bad, ...But short of having them custom designed, I'm not sure where you'd fine something like that.
We buy those bathing suit for our girls from Hydrochic. They last forever and can be passed on for years. The material is too thick for volleyball however,  it would be too hot. It could easily be replicated by the girls just using black leggings under their current skirts. They currently likely only have the same spandex short underwear like their competitions, and whenever they jump or bend over you can see everything under the skirt.  The leggings would fix that. A simple cure. Nevertheless, they can't play against other teams because the other girls are naked.  
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 15, 2019, 06:18:46 PM
Here's what the uniform could look like, but made with lighter material with built in hip and knee padding (or they could just wear separate knee pads like they do know).The skirt can be the same length as they currently use. The sleeves above the elbow:

(https://www.bing.com/th?id=OIP.RaOah8JwipswhPV6P-sgzQAAAA&w=141&h=162&c=7&o=5&pid=1.7)

....umm, no.  You don’t notice boobs bursting through the clingy chest??

Women have no business playing sports regardless of whether they are modestly dressed or not.

Their involvement was largely the result of the Jew slut movement in 1920’s America known as the “flapper movement.”

I believe a slut named Madonna starred in a movie called “A League of Their Own” back in the 80’s/90’’s based on that slut movement.

Yes, flappers were sluts, and encouraging women in sports one of their Jєωιѕн legacies.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 15, 2019, 06:21:08 PM
No, female sports rose in popularity due to feminism ... and not the pleasure of men.  That's why even today you have on the books all these rules in school athletics about having to have the same number of sports for women/girls as for men ... with anything else being "discrimination".  Then the girls themselves are the ones who set the styles to be more provocative ... for the same reasons they do that with everyday clothing as well.

Very few men watch womens' sports, and that's why the womens' leagues usually fold and pay next to nothing.  If men are interested in ogling women, they won't be watching womens' sports, but going straight to something more provocative ... unless you count "swimsuit" as a sport (to have it appear in Sports Illustrated).
If female sports relied on women spectators, they would not last one year.  Look at the crowds at women's pro-football, which is the most ridiculous of proofs of what I say. (beware, they are really naked). 

They need men, that is why they are all naked sports. There are not enough lesbians to make a profit.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 15, 2019, 06:26:44 PM
....umm, no.  You don’t notice boobs bursting through the clingy chest??

Women have no business playing sports regardless of whether they are modestly dressed or not.

Their involvement was largely the result of the Jew slut movement in 1920’s America known as the “flapper movement.”

I believe a slut named Madonna starred in a movie called “A League of Their Own” back in the 80’s/90’’s based on that slut movement.

Yes, flappers were sluts, and encouraging women in sports one of their Jєωιѕн legacies.
The guy kept insisting on a uniform so I gave him one. I made it quite clear that they can't play other teams because the other girls are naked. Also, that in a Catholic world, no girl would want to go through all of the work to be in competitive sports. That I myself, would never have played competitive sports if I had known the faith. 

Yes I did notice "the boobs bursting through the clingy chest" and that is a problem. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Nadir on November 15, 2019, 06:27:59 PM
Here's what the uniform could look like, but made with lighter material with built in hip and knee padding (or they could just wear separate knee pads like they do know).The skirt can be the same length as they currently use. The sleeves above the elbow:

(https://www.bing.com/th?id=OIP.RaOah8JwipswhPV6P-sgzQAAAA&w=141&h=162&c=7&o=5&pid=1.7)
The misfit  could be fixed by wearing the correct size, not 1 or 2 sizes too small, as this image depicts.
Then chop off the sleeves above the elbow and hemstitch.
Insert a panel of similar fabric in matching or contrasting colour in the side seams of the skirt, and you're home and hosed.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 15, 2019, 06:33:40 PM
The guy kept insisting on a uniform so I gave him one. I made it quite clear that they can't play other teams because the other girls are naked. Also, that in a Catholic world, no girl would want to go through all of the work to be in competitive sports. That I myself, would never have played competitive sports if I had known the faith.

Sorry, LT-

I thought Lad had backed you into a corner somehow, and now you guys were just arguing about what constitutes a modest uniform (Ie., I wasn’t keeping up with the thread, but only checking the most recent post).

Glad that wasn’t the case.

Don’t cave in on this one for any reason:

If you were any more right, you would be wrong (ie., your position perfectly walks the fine line between laxism and rigour).
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 15, 2019, 07:28:18 PM
Women have no business playing sports regardless of whether they are modestly dressed or not.

There's absolutely zero support for this emotional outburst.  You didn't even qualify this with "competitive" sports.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 15, 2019, 07:42:23 PM
There's absolutely zero support for this emotional outburst.  You didn't even qualify this with "competitive" sports.

Your post contains absolutely zero justification for women in sports.

I suspect you have daughters, capitulated to this pressure, and must now defend it against all common sense.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Incredulous on November 15, 2019, 08:37:03 PM
Thank you for your inputs.

It seems the logical conclusion to this exchange is that female organized sports are inherently evil... or a significant occasion for sin.

Therefore, in an ideal Catholic world, women would abstain from sports.

Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Nadir on November 15, 2019, 09:02:40 PM

Therefore, in an ideal Catholic world, women would abstain from sports.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RYZ6-rort6E

Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 15, 2019, 10:00:37 PM
Your post contains absolutely zero justification for women in sports.

I needn't provide any.  Burden of proof is squarely on you, since the Church has never forbidden it or declared it to be sinful or bad.  Find me a single pre-Vatican II theologian who stated that female sports are categorically sinful, bad, or displeasing to God.  THEN I might begin to listen to your drivel.

Sports can have many benefits.  I'm not talking about competitive sports or anything involving immodest dress.  There are many physical, psychological, and emotional benefits.  Getting into shape can give one more energy to perform one's duties of state.  There's absolutely NO reason whatsoever that girls should be deprived of this.

It's idiots like yourself that make Traditional Catholics look like an Amish cult.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Incredulous on November 16, 2019, 08:42:32 AM


Lads,

In the "6th Age of the Church", this is as far as they can go...


(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fjenniferlamontleo.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F08%2Fcroquet7-400x280.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)

And even then, according to Sean Johnson, there's still the problem with unrestrained "boobs" :facepalm:


Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 09:25:49 AM
With this ridiculous unqualified assertion, it would be sinful if girls enjoyed a little pickup game of badminton and a girls'-only outing in the park ... even if they had ankle-length dresses on the entire time.

This is just stupid.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 09:38:50 AM
I needn't provide any.  Burden of proof is squarely on you, since the Church has never forbidden it or declared it to be sinful or bad.  Find me a single pre-Vatican II theologian who stated that female sports are categorically sinful, bad, or displeasing to God.  THEN I might begin to listen to your drivel.

Sports can have many benefits.  I'm not talking about competitive sports or anything involving immodest dress.  There are many physical, psychological, and emotional benefits.  Getting into shape can give one more energy to perform one's duties of state.  There's absolutely NO reason whatsoever that girls should be deprived of this.

It's idiots like yourself that make Traditional Catholics look like an Amish cult.

There, there, Loudestmouth-

I accept your concession.

Your retreat from defending women in sports (i.e., your initial position on this thread, which defended a competitive and immodest volloyball team of fake trads), and your subsequent transition to defending women in non-competitive "sports" after you were thoroughly trounced, is duly noted.

No need for all the hot air and blather to cover/disguise your retreat.

It was already pointed out to you that the popes had discouraged female participation in sports (e.g., Pius XI: "The means employed to give health to the body, the noble instrument of the soul should take into account suitability of time and place. They should not excite vanity or promote immodesty. And they must not lessen a young woman’s reserve and self-possession which are both the ornament and guarantee of virtue.” (Letter, A Lei, Vicario Nostro, May 2, 1928), as these types of activities damage the femenine psyche and make manly women (and foment lesbianism).

It was only after this, that you moved into pretending you had always and only been defending girls participation in non-competitive "sports."

Of course, nobody in the entire thread was ever protesting girls participating in non-competitive "sports" (e.g., fishing, horseback riding, hiking, etc.), which are really just recreations, and not properly "sports" at all.

To pretend that you have only been defending girls recreation/non-competitive "sports" is betrayed by the fact that you intervened in this protest thread at all, which does not concern such things.

In any case, here is an excerpt from a longer TIA article (which Incred therefore surely supports!) to instill in you the common sense you are lacking regarding women in sports (and why it leads to lesbianism):

https://www.traditioninaction.org/Cultural/B003cpWomenSports.htm (https://www.traditioninaction.org/Cultural/B003cpWomenSports.htm)

"Increasingly masculine girls

Popes Pius XI and Pius XII were addressing an age-old problem, a badly governed feminine spirit that tempts men with immodest clothing and bold attitudes. Consciously or unconsciously seductive, these women at least remain feminine, and their censurable position is still a natural one. Today a new long step has been taken down the stairs of decadence: the emergence of the masculine girl.

(https://www.traditioninaction.org/Cultural/images/B003_BasketballPlayer1.jpg)

A masculine young woman ... or a feminine young man?

LA Times, August 22, 2004
The new model is a strange androgynous figure. “Baller girls” is what some of the modern young athletes call themselves: girls who live for basketball, baseball, soccer, football – for the game, the sport, not for the skills and virtues that will help them as future wives and mothers. They are rough, sassy girls with the muscles of men, good enough to play against the “guys,” girls who have traded in their femininity in their mania for sports.

Look, for example, at the picture at left. Is the figure in it a he or a she? One doesn’t really know at first glance if the basketball player is a masculine girl or a feminine young man.

It is, in fact, a young woman, a popular college basketball player who represented the US at the Olympics. For some young girls aspiring to be athletes, she has become a new model ideal.

(https://www.traditioninaction.org/Cultural/images/B003_BasketballPlayer2.jpg)
She is an icon for the “baller girls” in-the-making who surround her in the picture at right. They wear their baggy t-shirt and shorts not just on the court, but at home, at school, in the malls, even to church. They slick back their hair tight, no curls, bows and fancy barrettes for them. They shuffle everywhere in tennis shoes and socks. This kind of behavior represents a trend toward the ever more masculine girl. Such women seem to have taken a step past the loss of the instinct of modesty that Pope Pius XII warned against, they are losing the very instinct of femininity.

One can only wonder about the harsh and unhappy future of girls who reject their femininity openly and blatantly. They clearly have lost the notion of the dignity of the woman in view of her most noble office as wife, mother and helpmate of man. The masculine woman does not reflect a true emancipation. It is rather the debasing of the feminine character, a rejection of the wise plan of God. It is a position against nature.

Health of soul takes precedence over health of body

Catholic Morals are not like styles, they do not change with the times. What was immodest or indecent yesterday has not miraculously become acceptable today because of the omission or the complacence of the Conciliar Church. The words of Pope Pius XII to girls and women continue to be appropriate today:
Quote
“Beyond fashion and its demands, there are higher and more pressing laws, principles superior to fashion, and unchangeable, which under no circumstances can be sacrificed to the whim of pleasure or fancy, and before which must bow the fleeting omnipotence of fashion. These principles have been proclaimed by God, by the Church, by the Saints, by reason, by Christian morality…

"As St. Thomas of Aquinas teaches, the good of our soul must take precedence over that of our body, and to the good of our body we must prefer the good of the soul of our neighbor” (Allocution to the girls of Catholic Action of May 22, 1941).
There is only one way, today, as yesterday and tomorrow, for the Catholic girl and woman to counter immodesty in immoral fashions, bad language, and masculine attitudes: an absolute rejection of them. For the good of the soul, certain gymnastic exercises and sports are simply not suitable for Catholic young ladies."
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 09:56:49 AM
With this ridiculous unqualified assertion, it would be sinful if girls enjoyed a little pickup game of badminton and a girls'-only outing in the park ... even if they had ankle-length dresses on the entire time.

This is just stupid.

Without any qualifications, I reject your categorical absolute statement that girls/women playing any sports is bad, harmful, and sinful. 

It's utterly idiotic.  If someone wanted to put stipulations on it, that it shouldn't be competitive, or create any issues regarding modesty, that's one thing and has merit, but your statement of position is absurd.  As you have it, if a girls' school went on a picnic in a secluded area and the started playing badminton, it would be a sin.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 10:02:38 AM
Of course, nobody in the entire thread was ever protesting girls participating in non-competitive "sports" (e.g., fishing, horseback riding, hiking, etc.), which are really just recreations, and not properly "sports" at all.

To pretend that you have only been defending girls recreation/non-competitive "sports" is betrayed by the fact that you intervened in this protest thread at all, which does not concern such things.

You idiot.  You made a post that stated, categorically and absolutely, without any qualifications whatsoever, that girls cannot play sports ... without even so much as attempting to define the basic terms like "sport".  I rejected the statement outright.  Without actually admitting that your statement needs to be qualified, now here you're half walking it back by allowing for certain qualified "not-really-sports".  So where would a game of badminton fit in?  Is that "properly" a sport?  You have two teams of girls competing to get the higher score.  Is this wrong?  It sounds like you're suggesting that solitary exercise is OK, but nothing in groups.  But, again, you're too stupid to actually articulate what you're talking about, so I'm left in the position of having to draw it out from your dull wits.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 10:06:07 AM
Is competition wrong for girls at all?  Can they play board games against each other?  Competitive chess?  Should girls' schools not even have a valedictorian?  Should there be no competition for who has the best grades?

Your'e blending together a bunch of separate considerations into your toxic emotional effeminate outbursts.

Make some kind of rational argument, stop emoting like a girl, and then I'm prepared to listen.  Until you make definitions, define your terms, I'm arguing with an amorphous wobbling ever-shifting bowl of jello.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 10:07:45 AM
For the good of the soul, certain gymnastic exercises and sports are simply not suitable for Catholic young ladies."
We do have an obligation to respect our temples of the Holy Ghost. In that regard, 120 minutes per week of moderate exercise is a reasonable target for meeting that obligation. That obligation can be met with modesty and without violating the boundaries of male/female roles. Women can certainly play at games without becoming sportanists (portmanteau of sports and satanists).
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 10:09:56 AM
Start by taking modesty totally out of consideration, and assume all parties are perfectly in keeping with standards of modesty.

1) Is physical activity / exertion wrong for girls?

2) Is any competition among girls wrong?

Sounds to me like you consider any kind of more intense physical exertion to be wrong in limiting your list to things like hiking.  What about jogging or even running, assuming there's no competition?  But then you never clearly articulate anything.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 10:13:08 AM
You idiot.  You made a post that stated, categorically and absolutely, without any qualifications whatsoever, that girls cannot play sports ... without even so much as attempting to define the basic terms like "sport".  I rejected the statement outright.  Without actually admitting that your statement needs to be qualified, now here you're half walking it back by allowing for certain qualified "not-really-sports".  So where would a game of badminton fit in?  Is that "properly" a sport?  You have two teams of girls competing to get the higher score.  Is this wrong?  It sounds like you're suggesting that solitary exercise is OK, but nothing in groups.  But, again, you're too stupid to actually articulate what you're talking about, so I'm left in the position of having to draw it out from your dull wits.
Loudestmouth-

No need to get your panties in such a bunch.

I absolutely stated girls have no business in sports, period.

But you conveniently ignore that I also say that what you call “non-competitive sports” (eg., hiking, fishing, etc) are really not “sports” at all, but simple recreations.

You really ought to read a bit more carefully before you open your big mouth and repeatedly make a fool of yourself.

Oh yeah: And lest your diversion be successful, I would like to remind you that your presence in this thread was not to defend women participating in what you call “non-competitive sports” (ie., mere recreations), but in a competitive volleyball game, with immodesty to boot!
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 10:14:54 AM
Gents, 

Why not direct all that bile towards someone more deserving? Ummm… Poche anyone?

https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/serial-habitual-liar-falsifier-of-scripture/ (https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/serial-habitual-liar-falsifier-of-scripture/)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 10:18:07 AM
We do have an obligation to respect our temples of the Holy Ghost. In that regard, 120 minutes per week of moderate exercise is a reasonable target for meeting that obligation. That obligation can be met with modesty and without violating the boundaries of male/female roles. Women can certainly play at games without becoming sportanists (portmanteau of sports and satanists).
Exercise is not competition.
Neither is it a sport (unless you are watching ESPN2, where they shake a stick and call it a sport), but a recreation.
Generally, if it is not competitive, it is not a sport.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 10:23:47 AM
Exercise is not competition.
Neither is it a sport (unless you are watching ESPN2, where they shake a stick and call it a sport), but a recreation.
Generally, if it is not competitive, it is not a sport.
Would you argue that playing a card or board game is sinful?  After all, someone wins, hence there is competition.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 10:24:49 AM
Start by taking modesty totally out of consideration, and assume all parties are perfectly in keeping with standards of modesty.

1) Is physical activity / exertion wrong for girls?

2) Is any competition among girls wrong?

Sounds to me like you consider any kind of more intense physical exertion to be wrong in limiting your list to things like hiking.  What about jogging or even running, assuming there's no competition?  But then you never clearly articulate anything.
Modesty is your argument (ie., women can play sports if modestly dressed).
Then I made you back off that position by recalling the popes’ teaching On preserving and protecting the feminine psyche and character.
Confronted with that, you invented “non-competitive sports,” (ie., no sport st all, but mere recreations) and tried to make the conversation about that (as though you hadn’t initially intervened to defend women’s volleyball (ie., competitive).
Essentially, you have completely capitulated to me, and bowed down at my feet.  I accept your surrender, and look forward to defeating you again on the next subject.
To date, your resume includes:
-defending women in pants
-defending women in sports
-defending women in makeup 
Not very traddy, it it?
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 10:25:16 AM
I absolutely stated girls have no business in sports, period.

But you conveniently ignore that I also say that what you call “non-competitive sports” (eg., hiking, fishing, etc) are really not “sports” at all, but simple recreations.

That part I "conveniently ignore" was added long after I objected to your initial unqualified statement.  There was nothing to ignore until you posted that 5 minutes ago.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 10:26:54 AM
Would you argue that playing a card or board game is sinful?  After all, someone wins, hence there is competition.

Thank you.  He's unable to articulate anything on his own, so you have for force it out of him ... like playing Socrates.

Is any competition among girls wrong?  That's step one to him unraveling his own emotional brain.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 10:29:31 AM
Would you argue that playing a card or board game is sinful?  After all, someone wins, hence there is competition.
The key distinction is sport vs recreation.
Why?
Because Pius XI said we had to be careful to protect feminine reserve.
And where sport by nature excites the passions (thereby surrendering feminine reserve: think of the tennis player in the 1990’s going down to her knees after victory and ripping off her top in exuberance), recreations (eg., boardgames, hiking, fishing) do not elicit such passions, and therefore present no threat to feminine comportment or reserve.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 10:30:28 AM
Thank you.  He's unable to articulate anything on his own, so you have for force it out of him ... like playing Socrates.

Is any competition among girls wrong?  That's step one to him unraveling his own emotional brain.
Refuted again (see previous post); victory after victory...
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 10:31:20 AM
To date, your resume includes:
-defending women in pants
-defending women in sports
-defending women in makeup
Not very traddy, it it?

Everything above with distinctions and qualifications that you are incapable of grasping.  If being "traddy" means being an idiotic unthinking Jansenistic member of an Amish cult, then I'm happy to say that i'm not "traddy" ... whatever emotional litmus test you wish to apply to that amorphous term.

Absolutely none of the above is intrinsically wrong and can be done, with qualifications.  You are a moron who makes all "trads" look bad.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 10:32:00 AM
Everything above with distinctions and qualifications that you are incapable of grasping.  If being "traddy" means being an idiotic unthinking Jansenistic member of an Amish cult, then I'm happy to say that i'm not "traddy" ... whatever emotional litmus test you wish to apply to that amorphous term.

Absolutely none of the above is intrinsically wrong and can be done, with qualifications.  You are a moron who makes all "trads" look bad.
Are you Fr. Urrutigoity?

Once again, one can only conclude your daughters wear the pants, makeup, and play sports, and that it is not all very traddy.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 10:34:07 AM
The key distinction is sport vs recreation.
Why?
Because Pius XI said we had to be careful to protect feminine reserve.
And where sport by nature excites the passions (thereby surrendering feminine reserve: think of the tennis player in the 1990’s going down to her knees after victory and ripping off her top in exuberance), recreations (eg., boardgames, hiking, fishing) do not elicit such passions, and therefore present no threat to feminine comportment or reserve.

OK, you have now come a step closer to having a rational thought ... since it's been forced out of you.  Don't hurt yourself now.  Except that you make these idiotic caricatures about it somehow being inherent in sport to "rip [one's] top off in exuberance".  Not sure how much of your idiotic brain I can tolerate.

So your current position, after your being unable to articulate your own emotions, is that competition combined with physical exertion is wrong.

What about a competitive game of badminton?  Right or wrong for girls?
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 10:35:00 AM
…Because Pius XI said we had to be careful to protect feminine reserve.…
There is nothing feminine about the many sows among us.
I argue that moderate exercise dressed modestly protects feminine reserve.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 10:38:29 AM
There is nothing feminine about the many sows among us.
I argue that moderate exercise dressed modestly protects feminine reserve.
...and is not a sport, but a recreation.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 10:38:49 AM
Any kind of "competition" can violate "feminine reserve".  It's all about how you pretend to apply, misapply, or distort the meaning of the term.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 10:39:44 AM
Are you Fr. Urrutigoity?

Yet another rational argument from the great theological luminary of our time.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 10:40:39 AM
OK, you have now come a step closer to having a rational thought ... since it's been forced out of you.  Don't hurt yourself now.  Except that you make these idiotic caricatures about it somehow being inherent in sport to "rip [one's] top off in exuberance".  Not sure how much of your idiotic brain I can tolerate.

So your current position, after your being unable to articulate your own emotions, is that competition combined with physical exertion is wrong.

What about a competitive game of badminton?  Right or wrong for girls?
On the contrary:
It seems you have temporarily pulled your head out of your butt, but I’m sure it will be reinserted soon.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Incredulous on November 16, 2019, 10:45:44 AM
Would you argue that playing a card or board game is sinful?  After all, someone wins, hence there is competition.

Not allowed in a traditional Catholic home. 
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Frmsidac.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F07%2F1bigstockphoto_Old_Women_Playing_Cards__398706.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
It brings out their "competitiveness" and manly qualities.

Plus, when they lose and get up from the table angry, it's hard for them to restrain their "boobs".
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: DecemRationis on November 16, 2019, 10:48:18 AM

The key distinction is sport vs recreation.
Why?
Because Pius XI said we had to be careful to protect feminine reserve.
And where sport by nature excites the passions (thereby surrendering feminine reserve: think of the tennis player in the 1990’s going down to her knees after victory and ripping off her top in exuberance), recreations (eg., boardgames, hiking, fishing) do not elicit such passions, and therefore present no threat to feminine comportment or reserve.

Are spelling bees sports or recreation? Just wondering on your “key distinction” in light of my personal experience.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 10:48:28 AM
Not allowed in a traditional Catholic home.  
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Frmsidac.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F07%2F1bigstockphoto_Old_Women_Playing_Cards__398706.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
It brings out their "competitiveness" and manly qualities.

Plus, when they lose and get up from the table angry, it's hard for them to restrain their "boobs".
You would make less an ass of yourself if you paid a bit closer attention.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 10:49:47 AM
Are spelling bees sports or recreation? Just wondering on your “key distinction” in light of my personal experience.
Do women lose their feminine reserve when competing in spelling bees?
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 10:52:54 AM
You know, some forum software allows for people to start threads and then ban various individuals from participation in them.

I would actually like to start a serious, rational discussion of issues like this and ban the likes of Johnson from participation in them.  I'm interested in discussing issues rationally, applying definitions and logic and distinctions ... according to a scholastic definition.  And, no, the intention isn't to limit it to people who agree with me.  That would be boring.  You can sometimes best arrive at the truth when people who disagree actually help you elicit the proper distinctions.  I'm sick and tired of the irrational emoting and huffing-and-puffing.

I'm this close to insisting that someone actually format their argument into a syllogism before I bother responding.

From the beginning, people blurring together the concerns of modesty and competition and physical exertion (that evidently excites the passions).  [PS most moral theologians recommend strenuous physical activity precisely in order to TAME and CONTROL and to QUELL the passions]. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 10:54:22 AM
Do women lose their feminine reserve when competing in spelling bees?

Well, some of these can get pretty intense.  I'm just waiting for some girl to rip off her shirt in exuberance after getting a difficult word right.  Could happen, you know.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 10:59:51 AM
I do hold that direct competition between boys and girls is wrong.

So, for instance, there should be no spelling bee that includes boy and girls competing against one another.  Girls should not compete against boys.

But I do not hold that it's necessarily wrong for girls to compete against one another.

Nor do I hold that vigorous physical activity is wrong for girls either.

But, now, the current argument is that vigorous physical activity combined with competition is wrong because it excites the passions.

But, then, to the contrary, any kind of competition can excite the passions, get people worked up against one another, hostile, etc. ... shirt-removal notwithstanding.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: DecemRationis on November 16, 2019, 11:01:38 AM

Do women lose their feminine reserve when competing in spelling bees?
Some.

Do all women lose their feminine reserve in playing sports? Hauling a huge load of laundry up the stairs?

I don’t see the physicality element  as a “key distinction.”

It’s the striving for mastery or winning over a competitor that contains the potential abuse of releasing the darker side, in men as well.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 11:04:44 AM
You know, some forum software allows for people to start threads and then ban various individuals from participation in them.

I would actually like to start a serious, rational discussion of issues like this and ban the likes of Johnson from participation in them.  I'm interested in discussing issues rationally, applying definitions and logic and distinctions ... according to a scholastic definition.  And, no, the intention isn't to limit it to people who agree with me.  That would be boring.  You can sometimes best arrive at the truth when people who disagree actually help you elicit the proper distinctions.  I'm sick and tired of the irrational emoting and huffing-and-puffing.

I'm this close to insisting that someone actually format their argument into a syllogism before I bother responding.

From the beginning, people blurring together the concerns of modesty and competition and physical exertion (that evidently excites the passions).  [PS most moral theologians recommend strenuous physical activity precisely in order to TAME and CONTROL and to QUELL the passions].
:baby: 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 11:07:11 AM
Some.

Do all women lose their feminine reserve in playing sports? Hauling a huge load of laundry up the stairs?

I don’t see the physicality element  as a “key distinction.”

It’s the striving for mastery or winning over a competitor that contains the potential abuse of releasing the darker side, in men as well.
If I sit around privately wearing pink panties and painting my toenails, does it affect my psyche and make me less manly?
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 11:15:52 AM
...and is not a sport, but a recreation.
In your opinion is playing tennis a "sport" or "recreation"?
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 11:16:24 AM
If I sit around privately wearing pink panties and painting my toenails, does it affect my psyche and make me less manly?
Yes, the pink is a hormone blocker and feminizes you.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 11:19:17 AM


…It’s the striving for mastery or winning over a competitor that contains the potential abuse of releasing the darker side, in men as well.
But Sean already stipulated that the competition of playing card and board games is acceptable even though someone wins and someone loses.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 11:21:16 AM
In your opinion is playing tennis a "sport" or "recreation"?
Sport: 
When Bishop Williamson was sequestered in a Wimbledon attic, he wrote an EC on the “Gladiatrixes.”
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 11:24:31 AM
Yes, the pink is a hormone blocker and feminizes you.
Then by the same logic, one would have to conclude women participating in masculine endeavors like sports (vs recreation) become masculinized (as was shown earlier in the TIA article excerpt).  
This also explains the disproportionately high incidence of lesbianism in women’s sports:
The feminine psyche is damaged.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: DecemRationis on November 16, 2019, 11:26:05 AM
If I sit around privately wearing pink panties and painting my toenails, does it make me less manly?
Mr. Johnson,

You asserted the physicality element of sports competition as a "key distinction." I referenced "spelling bees" as an example of how absurd your "key distinction" is, because girls have lost their "feminine reserve" in spelling bees, or any other competition - some referenced card games here. I also referenced the physical exertion of carrying a heavy load of laundry up the stairs. Does a woman lose her feminine reserve in doing so? Perhaps we should ban doing laundry loads of a certain weight to females.

I submit that any rational man would recognize that the physicality of sports is not the "key distinctive." You do your position no favors advancing such shoddy arguments. Indeed, Traditionalism itself - or any truth - can be hurt by such poor intellectual defense. Or by, as you have done, irrelevant argumentation fed by emotion and not reason.  

It is the competitive act. COMPETITION that is the distinctive factor in the subject to which we are adverting our minds.

It remains so whether a man contemplates it in pink panties or a three piece suit.

As an aside, I agree with you about women in pants, makeup, etc. We are dealing with intellectual rigor here (I hope), and not simply whether we agree with one another. Unprincipled agreement is easily exposed as inadequate when questioned by a rational interrogation. Prithee, let's strive to find adequate and supportive principles in defending truth.

By pointing out the problems with a man "privately" doing what you say you're perhaps starting to find the right groove to arriving at some kind of principle or truth.

DR
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 11:27:39 AM
Sport:
When Bishop Williamson was sequestered in a Wimbledon attic, he wrote an EC on the “Gladiatrixes.”
I'd be interested in that column (but not interested enough to search for it).
I recall playing tennis with women modestly dressed and the spirit was recreational. Same with bicycling.
I think there are objective issues, e.g., the modesty of dress, and subjective issues, e.g., the intensity and motive of the competition, that determine whether or not there is any sinfulness. The inner forum plays a key role here.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 11:27:55 AM
But Sean already stipulated that the competition of playing card and board games is acceptable even though someone wins and someone loses.
...because those activities are mere recreation, not sport (ie.  They do not typically provoke aggression, imposition of will, and the desire to dominate an adversary as a sport would).
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 11:28:38 AM
Mr. Johnson,

You asserted the physicality element of sports competition as a "key distinction." I referenced "spelling bees" as an example of how absurd your "key distinction" is, because girls have lost their "feminine reserve" in spelling bees, or any other competition - some referenced card games here. I also referenced the physical exertion of carrying a heavy load of laundry up the stairs. Does a woman lose her feminine reserve in doing so? Perhaps we should ban doing laundry loads of a certain weight to females.

I submit that any rational man would recognize that the physicality of sports is not the "key distinctive." You do your position no favors advancing such shoddy arguments. Indeed, Traditionalism itself - or any truth - can be hurt by such poor intellectual defense. Or by, as you have done, irrelevant argumentation fed by emotion and not reason.  

It is the competitive act. COMPETITION that is the distinctive factor in the subject to which we are adverting our minds.

It remains so whether a man contemplates it in pink panties or a three piece suit.

As an aside, I agree with you about women in pants, makeup, etc. We are dealing with intellectual rigor here (I hope), and not simply whether we agree with one another. Unprincipled agreement is easily exposed as inadequate when questioned by a rational interrogation. Prithee, let's strive to find adequate and supportive principles in defending truth.

By pointing out the problems with a man "privately" doing what you say you're perhaps starting to find the right groove to arriving at some kind of principle or truth.

DR
I did not assert physicality is the distinguishing characteristic between sport and recreation.
I lay out the distinction in my previous post to Mark79
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 11:29:10 AM
Then by the same logic, one would have to conclude women participating in masculine endeavors like sports (vs recreation) become masculinized (as was shown earlier in the TIA article excerpt).  
This also explains the disproportionately high incidence of lesbianism in women’s sports:
The feminine psyche is damaged.
See my tennis/bicycling post above.
The inner forum plays a key role.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 11:31:41 AM
...because those activities are mere recreation, not sport (ie.  They do not typically provoke aggression, imposition of will, and the desire to dominate an adversary as a sport would).
Clearly you are not a serious chess player.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: DecemRationis on November 16, 2019, 11:32:59 AM
But Sean already stipulated that the competition of playing card and board games is acceptable even though someone wins and someone loses.
He can stipulate all he wants. His principle - the physicality of sports - doesn't support his position. The loss of feminine reserve that also happens in those competitions undoes him. He hasn't identified the "key distinctive." 

Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: DecemRationis on November 16, 2019, 11:33:44 AM
I did not assert physicality is the distinguishing characteristic between sport and recreation.
I lay out the distinction in my previous post to Mark79
Perhaps my error. I will take a look at that. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 11:34:05 AM
The distinction between sport and recreation is this:

The former typically encourage aggression, desire to dominate, and elicit a strong emotional response in the participating athlete.

Recreations typically involve none of these.

Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 11:35:22 AM
Clearly you are not a serious chess player.
Do you believe chess was a COMMON female activity 100 years ago?
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 11:37:58 AM
The distinction between sport and recreation is this:

The former typically encourage aggression, desire to dominate, and elicit a strong emotional response in the participating athlete.

Recreations typically involve none of these.

Typically… for whom?

I play chess as a matter of life and death (even within the family) and I play tennis and bicycle with women (within the family these days) recreationally.

I submit that the internal forum and modest dress are the key distinctions—hence require proper formation in both regards.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 11:40:56 AM
He can stipulate all he wants. His principle - the physicality of sports - doesn't support his position. The loss of feminine reserve that also happens in those competitions undoes him. He hasn't identified the "key distinctive."
Physicality is not my principle, and you are wrong to attribute it to me:
My principle distinguishes between sport and recreation, and asserts the the former are not permissible for women because they elicit psychological reactions damaging to the feminine psyche, and in violation of the “prudent reserve” Pius XI required .
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: DecemRationis on November 16, 2019, 11:42:10 AM
The distinction between sport and recreation is this:

The former typically encourage aggression, desire to dominate, and elicit a strong emotional response in the participating athlete.

Recreations typically involve none of these.
Thank you. 

Of the three factors, the desire to dominate and eliciting strong emotion I believe are present in all competition without question. I think aggression is also present in the nature of all competition. You must exert in some way to gain advantage; you must act to differentiate from and above another. 

We're making progress though. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 11:42:25 AM
Physicality is not my principle, and you are wrong to attribute it to me:
My principle distinguishes between sport and recreation, and asserts the the former are not permissible for women because they elicit psychological reactions damaging to the feminine psyche, and in violation of the “prudent reserve” Pius XI required .
So, if I dare point out the unanimous agreements, the inner forum and modest dress are key. Proper formation is crucial.


Shalom. (laughing uproariously)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: DecemRationis on November 16, 2019, 11:44:04 AM
Physicality is not my principle, and you are wrong to attribute it to me:
My principle distinguishes between sport and recreation, and asserts the the former are not permissible for women because they elicit psychological reactions damaging to the feminine psyche, and in violation of the “prudent reserve” Pius XI required .
Again: I submit those same psychological factors are elicited in all competitive endeavors. 

You need another principle, imho. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 11:49:46 AM
Typically… for whom?

I play chess as a matter of life and death (even within the family) and I play tennis and bicycle with women (within the family these days) recreationally.

I submit that the internal forum and modest dress are the key distinctions—hence require proper formation in both regards.
Typically… for whom?

I play chess as a matter of life and death (even within the family) and I play tennis and bicycle with women (within the family these days) recreationally.

I submit that the internal forum and modest dress are the key distinctions—hence require proper formation in both regards.
Growing up, I played hockey and baseball in city league.  I played football in high school, and rugby for four years in college.  And I trained jiu-jitsu and MMA for 15 years.
I have also played chess my whole life.
I can assure you that the emotional and psychological state of mind provoked  between chess and rugby/MMA/etc. is not in any way comparable.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 11:50:34 AM
Again: I submit those same psychological factors are elicited in all competitive endeavors.

You need another principle, imho.
Typically… for whom?

I play chess as a matter of life and death (even within the family) and I play tennis and bicycle with women (within the family these days) recreationally.

I submit that the internal forum and modest dress are the key distinctions—hence require proper formation in both regards.
Growing up, I played hockey and baseball in city league.  I played football in high school, and rugby for four years in college.  And I trained jiu-jitsu and MMA for 15 years.
I have also played chess my whole life.
I can assure you that the emotional and psychological state of mind provoked  between chess and rugby/MMA/etc. is not in any way comparable.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 16, 2019, 11:51:44 AM
This thread tells me that you guys have too much time on your hands. May I suggest that you go and do some activity  with your children?  

While you guys were wasting your time here talking about gnats, I just got a date with the two girls in bikinis that keep popping up on the Cathinfo sight. LOL , so much for those people criticizing others who posted pictures of immodest dresses two inches above the knees as being a sin for the poster.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 11:56:38 AM
Growing up, I played hockey and baseball in city league.  I played football in high school, and rugby for four years in college.  And I trained jiu-jitsu and MMA for 15 years.
I have also played chess my whole life.
I can assure you that the emotional and psychological state of mind provoked  between chess and rugby/MMA/etc. is not in any way comparable.
My sports/recreation background is similar and I can assure you that the emotional and psychological state of mind provoked  between chess and soccer/martial arts/crew/etc. is entirely comparable.

Suum cuique.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 12:01:31 PM
This thread tells me that you guys have too much time on your hands. May I suggest that you go and do some activity  with your children?  

While you guys were wasting your time here talking about gnats, I just got a date with the two girls in bikinis that keep popping up on the Cathinfo sight. LOL , so much for those people criticizing others who posted pictures of immodest dresses two inches above the knees as being a sin for the poster.
How do you spell ass-u-me?
We are doing family Saturday morning activities and I am posting in between. :-)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: DecemRationis on November 16, 2019, 12:02:00 PM
Growing up, I played hockey and baseball in city league.  I played football in high school, and rugby for four years in college.  And I trained jiu-jitsu and MMA for 15 years.
I have also played chess my whole life.
I can assure you that the emotional and psychological state of mind provoked  between chess and rugby/MMA/etc. is not in any way comparable.
Sean,
Your assurance in not an adequate principle, either.  :)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: DecemRationis on November 16, 2019, 12:09:12 PM
This thread tells me that you guys have too much time on your hands. May I suggest that you go and do some activity  with your children?  

While you guys were wasting your time here talking about gnats, I just got a date with the two girls in bikinis that keep popping up on the Cathinfo sight. LOL , so much for those people criticizing others who posted pictures of immodest dresses two inches above the knees as being a sin for the poster.
Lol

And I get your very effective point. 

Btw, what if I'm alone at the moment? If you say I should have better things to do, I say you could use a mirror, friend. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Incredulous on November 16, 2019, 12:33:05 PM
This thread tells me that you guys have too much time on your hands. May I suggest that you go and do some activity  with your children?  

While you guys were wasting your time here talking about gnats, I just got a date with the two girls in bikinis that keep popping up on the Cathinfo sight. LOL , so much for those people criticizing others who posted pictures of immodest dresses two inches above the knees as being a sin for the poster.

Traditional Catholicism is all relative on this forum LT.

Matthew has to keep the bikini ads going because Sean, the de facto moderator/theologian is driving-off so many members.

Hopefully Amazon’s “Black Friday” business will keep Cathinfo healthy despite Sean’s efforts.

Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 01:12:10 PM
Traditional Catholicism is all relative on this forum LT.

Matthew has to keep the bikini ads going because Sean, the de facto moderator/theologian is driving-off so many members.

Hopefully Amazon’s “Black Friday” business will keep Cathinfo healthy despite Sean’s efforts.
:baby:
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 01:51:05 PM
Some.

Do all women lose their feminine reserve in playing sports? Hauling a huge load of laundry up the stairs?

I don’t see the physicality element  as a “key distinction.”

It’s the striving for mastery or winning over a competitor that contains the potential abuse of releasing the darker side, in men as well.

Yes, thank you for seeking distinctions.

I don't see competition as necessarily bad, for males or for females.  When I was in school, there was a lot of competition to get the best GPA in my class at High School.  Competition can be good spirited and can help PUSH a person to perform better than he might have without it.  I might otherwise be complacent with doing "my personal best" (as the new PC term would have it) ... which complacency would lead to my not ACTUALLY doing my best.  Competition can push me to find my REAL best.

Now, the feminine nature IS in fact more inclined to turn competition to its "darker side".  Why?  Because they make everything so personal.  It's much easier for a man NOT to resent another man, but rather actually respect him.  Men could have their butts kicked in some area, and they can shake the guy's hand sincerely and respect him for his accomplishment.  And this loss in turn can motivate him to work harder to come back and beat him ... but, again, with no hard feelings.  With females, resentment and jealousy VERY QUICKLY creeps in, and it's very difficult for them to shake it.  Of course, I speak only in terms of natural tendencies (due to our fallen natures).  Some men are very bad sports and bad losers and get jealous, whereas some women take it very well.

But, even then, this is the case whether it's sports or beauty or academic accomplishment, or anything else.

As you very articulately point out, competition is not the key distinctive, however, when it comes to sport.

I also agree that a certain degree of "physical aggression" is not in keeping with feminine nature.  Certainly, girls should not be playing a sport like football, where have the time you're trying to demolish your opponent physically.  Other sports can have a certain amount of physical aggression in them, but it's not essential to the game, but just happens incidentally ... whereas in football it's almost essential to the sport.  You're SUPPOSED to tackle someone.  In these other sports, actions like that are considered fouls.  Should two ladies be allowed to "wrestle" on another?  I think not.  I agree that something like that is also contrary to feminine nature, the attempt to physically dominate your opponent.

But take a sport like volleyball or tennis.  There's no direct physical contact there at all.  Or softball (although for some unknown reason a disproportionate of female softball players are lesbians).  Sports like basketball or soccer are somewhere in between, where the intent of the game is to achieve some objective (score a goal or a basket), but there's contact along the way.  It's incidental to your objective however.  You're not directly attacking the person but are competing do something with the ball.  You're trying to get the ball and not attack the player.

So perhaps the distinction Sean is looking for is "contact sports" ... even though he's been unable to articulate it.  And perhaps another thing he's grasping for is the rise of adrenaline that happens during sports ... vs. intellectual competitions.  But then, there can be a rise of adrenaline associated even with solitary sports ... like running.  And also, as Mark79 points out, in a high-tense chess game.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 02:08:16 PM
Sean, your Saint John Paul II had the most to say about sports of any pope.  You should heed his wisdom.  He's a canonized saint after all.

https://www.stmarysmenston.org/john-paul-ii-quotes-about-sport (https://www.stmarysmenston.org/john-paul-ii-quotes-about-sport)

Quote
Athletic activity can help every man and woman to recall that moment when God the Creator gave origin to the human person, the masterpiece of his creative work.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 02:29:14 PM
Yes, thank you for seeking distinctions.

I don't see competition as necessarily bad, for males or for females.  When I was in school, there was a lot of competition to get the best GPA in my class at High School.  Competition can be good spirited and can help PUSH a person to perform better than he might have without it.  I might otherwise be complacent with doing "my personal best" (as the new PC term would have it) ... which complacency would lead to my not ACTUALLY doing my best.  Competition can push me to find my REAL best.

Now, the feminine nature IS in fact more inclined to turn competition to its "darker side".  Why?  Because they make everything so personal.  It's much easier for a man NOT to resent another man, but rather actually respect him.  Men could have their butts kicked in some area, and they can shake the guy's hand sincerely and respect him for his accomplishment.  And this loss in turn can motivate him to work harder to come back and beat him ... but, again, with no hard feelings.  With females, resentment and jealousy VERY QUICKLY creeps in, and it's very difficult for them to shake it.  Of course, I speak only in terms of natural tendencies (due to our fallen natures).  Some men are very bad sports and bad losers and get jealous, whereas some women take it very well.

But, even then, this is the case whether it's sports or beauty or academic accomplishment, or anything else.

As you very articulately point out, competition is not the key distinctive, however, when it comes to sport.

I also agree that a certain degree of "physical aggression" is not in keeping with feminine nature.  Certainly, girls should not be playing a sport like football, where have the time you're trying to demolish your opponent physically.  Other sports can have a certain amount of physical aggression in them, but it's not essential to the game, but just happens incidentally ... whereas in football it's almost essential to the sport.  You're SUPPOSED to tackle someone.  In these other sports, actions like that are considered fouls.  Should two ladies be allowed to "wrestle" on another?  I think not.  I agree that something like that is also contrary to feminine nature, the attempt to physically dominate your opponent.

But take a sport like volleyball or tennis.  There's no direct physical contact there at all.  Or softball (although for some unknown reason a disproportionate of female softball players are lesbians).  Sports like basketball or soccer are somewhere in between, where the intent of the game is to achieve some objective (score a goal or a basket), but there's contact along the way.  It's incidental to your objective however.  You're not directly attacking the person but are competing do something with the ball.  You're trying to get the ball and not attack the player.

So perhaps the distinction Sean is looking for is "contact sports" ... even though he's been unable to articulate it.  And perhaps another thing he's grasping for is the rise of adrenaline that happens during sports ... vs. intellectual competitions.  But then, there can be a rise of adrenaline associated even with solitary sports ... like running.  And also, as Mark79 points out, in a high-tense chess game.
Yes, thank you for inventing your own distinction and attributing it to me, while somehow ignoring the distinction I have laid out no fewer than 5 times in the last page.
It is either malice or incompetence, and neither is going to lead you to truth.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 02:31:47 PM
Sean, your Saint John Paul II had the most to say about sports of any pope.  You should heed his wisdom.  He's a canonized saint after all.

https://www.stmarysmenston.org/john-paul-ii-quotes-about-sport (https://www.stmarysmenston.org/john-paul-ii-quotes-about-sport)
More lies and malice from the Loudestmouth on the forum:
All know I reject the conciliar conanizations (as do you), but hey, for you the ends justify the means, and you would rather burn in hellfire for eternity than lose an argument.
But you lose it nonetheless.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 02:33:07 PM
Yes, thank you for inventing your own distinction and attributing it to me, while somehow ignoring the distinction I have laid out no fewer than 5 times in the last page.
It is either malice or incompetence, and neither is going to lead you to truth.

That distinction has been pointed out to be meaningless, so I was trying to figure out what you're actually driving at.  If you stick with your original position, then I continue to dismiss it.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 02:34:13 PM
More lies and malice from the Loudestmouth on the forum:
All know I reject the conciliar conanizations (as do you), but hey, for you the ends justify the means, and you would rather burn in hellfire for eternity than lose an argument.
But you lose it nonetheless.

You cannot reject them, since they were infallibly proclaimed by a legitimate pope.  These canonizations enjoy the Universal Peaceful Acceptance of the entire Church and therefore cannot be wrong.

There is no argument here to lose.

(https://i.pinimg.com/564x/0d/e3/5d/0de35d6b613cb1390f2975a76c8982f2.jpg)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 02:44:07 PM
This actually raises a more serious point.  You quote Pius XI to try proving your point but then you ignore anything John Paul II might have to say.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: DecemRationis on November 16, 2019, 02:50:05 PM

Yes, thank you for seeking distinctions.

I don't see competition as necessarily bad, for males or for females.  When I was in school, there was a lot of competition to get the best GPA in my class at High School.  Competition can be good spirited and can help PUSH a person to perform better than he might have without it.  I might otherwise be complacent with doing "my personal best" (as the new PC term would have it) ... which complacency would lead to my not ACTUALLY doing my best.  Competition can push me to find my REAL best.

Agreed. Which is why I used the phrase, "potential for abuse" regarding competition. In using the phrase I allowed for a positive side to competition even for woman, although I am not necessarily convinced that competition in itself is not bad for women.  

Now, the feminine nature IS in fact more inclined to turn competition to its "darker side".  Why?  Because they make everything so personal.  It's much easier for a man NOT to resent another man, but rather actually respect him.  Men could have their butts kicked in some area, and they can shake the guy's hand sincerely and respect him for his accomplishment.  And this loss in turn can motivate him to work harder to come back and beat him ... but, again, with no hard feelings.  With females, resentment and jealousy VERY QUICKLY creeps in, and it's very difficult for them to shake it.  Of course, I speak only in terms of natural tendencies (due to our fallen natures).  Some men are very bad sports and bad losers and get jealous, whereas some women take it very well.

But, even then, this is the case whether it's sports or beauty or academic accomplishment, or anything else.

Agreed again. I appreciate the effort at finding a true distinction in the nature of woman that provides a principled explanation. And as you pointed out, and as I have, this is the case in all competition. 

As you very articulately point out, competition is not the key distinctive, however, when it comes to sport.

I also agree that a certain degree of "physical aggression" is not in keeping with feminine nature.  Certainly, girls should not be playing a sport like football, where have the time you're trying to demolish your opponent physically.  Other sports can have a certain amount of physical aggression in them, but it's not essential to the game, but just happens incidentally ... whereas in football it's almost essential to the sport.  You're SUPPOSED to tackle someone.  In these other sports, actions like that are considered fouls.  Should two ladies be allowed to "wrestle" on another?  I think not.  I agree that something like that is also contrary to feminine nature, the attempt to physically dominate your opponent.

But take a sport like volleyball or tennis.  There's no direct physical contact there at all.  Or softball (although for some unknown reason a disproportionate of female softball players are lesbians).  Sports like basketball or soccer are somewhere in between, where the intent of the game is to achieve some objective (score a goal or a basket), but there's contact along the way.  It's incidental to your objective however.  You're not directly attacking the person but are competing do something with the ball.  You're trying to get the ball and not attack the player.

So perhaps the distinction Sean is looking for is "contact sports" ... even though he's been unable to articulate it.  And perhaps another thing he's grasping for is the rise of adrenaline that happens during sports ... vs. intellectual competitions.  But then, there can be a rise of adrenaline associated even with solitary sports ... like running.  And also, as Mark79 points out, in a high-tense chess game.

And yet again, I appreciate the attempt to think through this. This is progress. 

My comments are in red of course. I find this the easiest way to comment on a long post. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 02:59:59 PM
My comments are in red of course. I find this the easiest way to comment on a long post.

Thank you for the response.  Sorry my original was so long.

I've never said that anyone had to agree with me.  I only ask for a sincere interest in getting at the truth and rational arguments with the appropriate distinctions.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 03:00:12 PM
You cannot reject them, since they were infallibly proclaimed by a legitimate pope.  These canonizations enjoy the Universal Peaceful Acceptance of the entire Church and therefore cannot be wrong.

There is no argument here to lose.

(https://i.pinimg.com/564x/0d/e3/5d/0de35d6b613cb1390f2975a76c8982f2.jpg)

:facepalm:
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 03:01:20 PM
That distinction has been pointed out to be meaningless, so I was trying to figure out what you're actually driving at.  If you stick with your original position, then I continue to dismiss it.

...except two hours ago you were saying it made sense.

:facepalm:
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 03:03:13 PM
Thank you for the response.  Sorry my original was so long.

I've never said that anyone had to agree with me.  I only ask for a sincere interest in getting at the truth and rational arguments with the appropriate distinctions.
Pfft...what a bag of wind.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Incredulous on November 16, 2019, 05:08:19 PM

It's fascinating that Sean perceives himself as winning this argument over women sports :farmer:

This topic had "Sean bait" written all over it.


And he walked into it like a 3-point deer in a corn stand, during bow season.

(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn0.wideopenspaces.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F09%2Fcorn.gif&f=1&nofb=1)


He got shot, at least five times by my count.

Now, he's exhibiting post topic, butt hurt.



Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Geremia on November 16, 2019, 05:28:21 PM
Pope Pius XI's 1929 encyclical on Christian education, Divini illius magistri (http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121929_divini-illius-magistri.html) §68 (same § in which he condemns coeducation):
Quote from: Pope Pius XI
in gymnastic exercises and deportment, special care must be had of Christian modesty in young women and girls, which is so gravely impaired by any kind of exhibition in public.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 05:34:56 PM
Pope Pius XI's 1929 encyclical on Christian education, Divini illius magistri (http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121929_divini-illius-magistri.html) §68 (same § in which he condemns coeducation):
Don’t expect any admission from these Feeneyite heretic infiltrators.
One is only capable of posting pics, and the other just likes to read his own words.
They will conclude the pope was insane, puritanical, or whatever is necessary to submit to their wives.
They are liberal feminists, and should be banned.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 05:36:47 PM
…I also agree that a certain degree of "physical aggression" is not in keeping with feminine nature.  Certainly, girls should not be playing a sport like football, where have the time you're trying to demolish your opponent physically.…

By this standard, you might judge me a deficient parent for encouraging my daughters in a particular combat (not "sport") martial art.  I intend for all the women in our family to be competent in dropping and injuring any inappropriate male (or dyke) activity through "physical contact." Yes, demolish. They also shoot… with purpose.


…And also, as Mark79 points out, in a high-tense chess game.…

I'm telling you every "game" is life or death.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 05:42:33 PM
Sean, your Saint John Paul II had the most to say about sports of any pope.  You should heed his wisdom.  He's a canonized saint after all.

https://www.stmarysmenston.org/john-paul-ii-quotes-about-sport (https://www.stmarysmenston.org/john-paul-ii-quotes-about-sport)
I look forward to the next "Cadaver Synod" when they dig that guy up.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 05:42:58 PM
Geremia said:

Pope Pius XI's 1929 encyclical on Christian education, Divini illius magistri (http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121929_divini-illius-magistri.html) §68 (same § in which he condemns coeducation):
Quote from: Pope Pius XI
Quote
in gymnastic exercises and deportment, special care must be had of Christian modesty in young women and girls, which is so gravely impaired by any kind of exhibition in public.

Case closed.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 05:46:18 PM
Pope Pius XI's 1929 encyclical on Christian education, Divini illius magistri (http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121929_divini-illius-magistri.html) §68 (same § in which he condemns coeducation):
If someone here championed immodest attire, I missed the post.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 05:50:13 PM
Geremia said:

Pope Pius XI's 1929 encyclical on Christian education, Divini illius magistri (http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121929_divini-illius-magistri.html) §68 (same § in which he condemns coeducation):
Quote from: Pope Pius XI
Case closed.
Case closed "in gymnastic exercises and deportment."
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 05:50:52 PM
If someone here championed immodest attire, I missed the post.
He says it is also public exhibitionism which impairs girls modesty, not merely their attire. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: DecemRationis on November 16, 2019, 05:51:38 PM
Don’t expect any admission from these Feeneyite heretic infiltrators.
One is only capable of posting pics, and the other just likes to read his own words.
They will conclude the pope was insane, puritanical, or whatever is necessary to submit to their wives.
They are liberal feminists, and should be banned.
Come on, man, that's trash.

For example, I said I agreed with your position in general on women but found your reasoning to be defective - to say the least.

And I hope to God you don't smoke because you shouldn't anywhere near fire.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 05:52:47 PM
Case closed "in gymnastic exercises and deportment."
You would require of the pope an enumerated list of all condemned sports?
The principle of preserving feminine reserve and comportment does not suffice?
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 05:54:03 PM
Come on, man, that's trash.

For example, I said I agreed with your position in general on women but found your reasoning to be defective - to say the least.

And I hope to God you don't smoke because you shouldn't anywhere near fire.

You will be troubled to learn I sometimes smoke a pipe or cigar.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 06:02:29 PM
You would require of the pope an enumerated list of all condemned sports?
The principle of preserving feminine reserve and comportment does not suffice?
I think that "modesty," especially in the context of "public exhibition," are quite clear.
I think the inner forum, that no one else has addressed, is key in assessing such activities.
For example, I think women's martial arts for exhibition or pure "competition" are illegitimate.
As I stated above, I think that women's martial arts for self-defense and defense of the family in the absence of the husband, are completely legitimate.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 06:04:26 PM
You will be troubled to learn I sometimes smoke a pipe or cigar.
Yes, troubled that you would defile your temple of the Holy Ghost with carcinogens and nervous system toxins.
(That's a joke.)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Incredulous on November 16, 2019, 06:09:13 PM
Don’t expect any admission from these Feeneyite heretic infiltrators.
One is only capable of posting pics, and the other just likes to read his own words.
They will conclude the pope was insane, puritanical, or whatever is necessary to submit to their wives.
They are liberal feminists, and should be banned.
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn0.wideopenspaces.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F10%2FTC8.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 06:15:25 PM
Pope Pius XI's 1929 encyclical on Christian education, Divini illius magistri (http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121929_divini-illius-magistri.html) §68 (same § in which he condemns coeducation):

Right, this absolutely persupposes and implies the general licitness of such activities by simply commenting on their "public exhibition".  Otherwise, we would clearly have expected him to declare them illicit.

Note:   I hope that everyone understands that "gymnastics" here is a general term for "sport" and is not limited to what is popularly known as gymnastics today.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 06:17:44 PM
Don’t expect any admission from these Feeneyite heretic infiltrators.
One is only capable of posting pics, and the other just likes to read his own words.
They will conclude the pope was insane, puritanical, or whatever is necessary to submit to their wives.
They are liberal feminists, and should be banned.

Dude, this quote from Pius XI clearly undermines your position that gymnastics (aka sports) is illicit per se.  Pope XI's only constraint is the protection of modesty ... in public exhibition.

I love how when every time Johnson finds himself in a corner, he pulls out the old 'Feeneyite heretic" card ... as if Feeneyism has anything even remotely to do with this subject.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 06:31:08 PM
Note:   I hope that everyone understands that "gymnastics" here is a general term for "sport" and is not limited to what is popularly known as gymnastics today.
Gratuitous BS.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 06:38:57 PM
By this standard, you might judge me a deficient parent for encouraging my daughters in a particular combat (not "sport") martial art.  I intend for all the women in our family to be competent in dropping and injuring any inappropriate male (or dyke) activity through "physical contact." Yes, demolish. They also shoot… with purpose.

Not at all.

I won't judge anyone personally, since I am not privy to the context or to the prudential judgments you have made with regard to you family and your children, of which you are the head.  I'm merely about understanding the principles.  Their application to your situation is between you, God, and your confessor.

Also, I believe that any caveats can be outweighed by a proportionate reason.  I do not object to this type of activity with a view towards the girls being able to defend themselves and their children.  There would, however, be no proportionate reason to allow a girl to play football that I can imagine.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 06:41:44 PM
He says it is also public exhibitionism which impairs girls modesty, not merely their attire.

:facepalm: ... public exhibition, not exhibitionism.

What this means is that they should play in public.  This implies that it's OK for them to play in a private setting.  If some girls were to play basketball or volleyball in the gym of a girls' school, that would not violate this teaching.  No mention is made of sports being incompatible with femininity.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 06:41:56 PM
Dude, this quote from Pius XI clearly undermines your position that gymnastics (aka sports) is illicit per se.  Pope XI's only constraint is the protection of modesty ... in public exhibition.

I love how when every time Johnson finds himself in a corner, he pulls out the old 'Feeneyite heretic" card ... as if Feeneyism has anything even remotely to do with this subject.
Nice try:
The pope is saying that whatever “gymnastics” is, it is not something which can be permitted if it threatens feminine comportment in public.
Can you contrive some kind of gymnastics which doesn’t do that?
No.
As for your Feeneyite sedevacantism, it is relevant insofar as it testifies to your heresy and proud judgments, which make you a notoriously unreliable commentator on anything.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: ByzCat3000 on November 16, 2019, 06:43:31 PM
Not at all.

I won't judge anyone personally, since I am not privy to the context or to the prudential judgments you have made with regard to you family and your children, of which you are the head.  I'm merely about understanding the principles.  Their application to your situation is between you, God, and your confessor.

Also, I believe that any caveats can be outweighed by a proportionate reason.  I do not object to this type of activity with a view towards the girls being able to defend themselves and their children.  There would, however, be no proportionate reason to allow a girl to play football that I can imagine.
I don't see why it would be immoral for women to play football unless they were playing with (or maybe around) men.

What am I missing?
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 06:44:25 PM
Gratuitous BS.

What the heck are you talking about?  This makes the term more broad than people might otherwise imagine.  I'm just clarifying a word he's using ... in case someone reading the term might be confused.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 16, 2019, 06:44:36 PM
Have a good night Loudestmouth; have to run, but can’t wait to beat up on you some more tomorrow (lol...tgat ought to provoke at least 6-7 Loudestmouth posts within 5 minutes)😂
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: ByzCat3000 on November 16, 2019, 06:46:21 PM
Have a good night Loudestmouth; have to run, but can’t wait to beat up on you some more tomorrow (lol...tgat ought to provoke at least 6-7 Loudestmouth posts within 5 minutes)😂
I see you've gone back to being as petty as possible.

I'm against Feeneyism, have gotten more against it since I've been here, and I still know that's completely irrelevant too.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 06:53:53 PM
I don't see why it would be immoral for women to play football unless they were playing with (or maybe around) men.

What am I missing?

I think that the sport is too violent for femininity.  I'm thinking of course about full-blown tackle football and not something like flag football.  I think that it's very rare for girls to play football anyway (except the occasional story of a kicker).
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 16, 2019, 06:54:47 PM
Nice try:
The pope is saying that whatever “gymnastics” is, it is not something which can be permitted if it threatens feminine comportment in public.
Can you contrive some kind of gymnastics which doesn’t do that?

Uhm, if it's not in public?
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 16, 2019, 09:28:24 PM
Not at all.

I won't judge anyone personally, since I am not privy to the context or to the prudential judgments you have made with regard to you family and your children, of which you are the head.  I'm merely about understanding the principles.  Their application to your situation is between you, God, and your confessor.

Also, I believe that any caveats can be outweighed by a proportionate reason.  I do not object to this type of activity with a view towards the girls being able to defend themselves and their children.  There would, however, be no proportionate reason to allow a girl to play football that I can imagine.
Crime rates and morality being what they are, nobody is safe anywhere.

I too cannot envision an excuse for females playing football.

I am surprised that this discussion is so heated.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 17, 2019, 12:22:15 AM
It appears that the girls were out in public, in this picture, but I do not consider playing in an arena where the scheduled event states that it's a girls' match ... to be public.  You have to buy a ticket to get in.  And the events are not viewable to someone who hasn't entered the arena of his own accord.  Secondly, the degree of immodesty here is something might even be tolerable at Mass. These uniforms are not even close to being gravely immodest.  Even if these girls walked out to the grocery store like this, truly in public, I would consider it a venial violation of modesty at the most.  But with regard to a sport that is clearly billed as a girls' sporting event, I consider this acceptable. Now, if they were wearing those so-called "spanks" which have their butt cheeks hanging out and leaving little to the imagination, yeah, that would be in appropriate even in the relatively closed venue.  But, really?  These uniforms are just not that bad.  What, because someone can catch a glimpse of knee when they're standing up.  Even that is mitigated by the fact that they are wearing knee pads.

Now, the coach in the picture appears to have an inappropriate skirt on ... without any whatsoever reason to do so.  Now, THAT is a bad example to the girls on the team for sure.  Now, I can see it being a problem if the players' skirts were too long over the knee.  If they were to go down on their knees, the skirt could actually get caught between the floor and their knee and they could be injured.

I bet that their competition was very badly dressed, and the fact that they beat them sends a message that you don't need to dress like that to be competitive.  I think that the excuse for the immodesty in dress is the competitive advantage to be gained from it ... although for girls it's usually an excuse to practice exhibitionism.

This thread has gone into minute details and turned into a food fight over minute details and in the end it is impossible for a reader to know what Ladislaus really believes and practices. This has become kind of like a debate on EENS between SJ and Ladislaus, except in this case it is reversed, in EENS we know exactly where Ladislaus stands, he believes it exactly as the dogmas are written, while we do not know what SJ believes because it is impossible to know what a person who calls others Feeneyites, really believes. In the end they don't even know what they believe. So, in this posting I'd like to pin down the important points with what I have read that Ladislaus has written, to get closer to understand what he has said he believes. I hope this analogy of Strict EENS vs People who call others Feeneyites strikes a cord with you Ladislaus and will bring you to just say clearly what you believe, for you sound just like the people who call others Feeneyites, you seem to be embarrased to fully reveal what you believe. I've never seen this in you before.


The subject that started this of this discussion and is the subject of this thread is this girls volleyball teams outfits and the above was Ladislaus conclusion on the matter. I responded to that conclusion at length and even started a new thread based on his conclusion here: https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/sspx-daughters-being-lost-to-the-world-1960s-all-over-again/ it is entitled "SSPX Trad Daughters Being Lost to the World, 1960’s All Over Again", therefore I will not repeat myself here.

Questions for Ladislaus

Ladislaus concludes that: "These uniforms are not even close to being gravely immodest.  Even if these girls walked out to the grocery store like this....These uniforms are just not that bad....might even be tolerable at Mass". You had been told  quite a few times that the girls are jumping around and diving to get balls, and that the upper thighs are constantly being exposed, and yet you still consider these outfits to be appropriate?

Do you still consider this "excuse" to still hold after all the responses you've gotten:  "It appears that the girls were out in public, in this picture, but I do not consider playing in an arena where the scheduled event states that it's a girls' match ... to be public."?

Pax Vobis rightly stated that the girls can't play and the parents can't attend matches against other teams because the other teams are basically in their underwear, naked. Do you agree with that?

SJ and others said that girls can't take part in the competitive sport of volleyball (to be precise) and I defined a team sport with examples quite a few times, as a sporting activity where a school has a team that practices together all week to play against other school teams? You said it was OK to play competitive team volleyball at first, but I believe later you changed your mind? If the opposing team was a trad school that wore even better outfits than the team of this thread would it be acceptable to you?

Answering the above would clear up things with everyone, the same as a person who calls another a Feeneyites saying that they limit their belief to the belief in the theory of BOD of the catechumen of St. Thomas Aquinas.

Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Bonaventure on November 17, 2019, 10:53:06 AM
The more this thread prattles on, the more it becomes clear that Islam has a leg up on certain CathInfoTradTM.

(http://www.barenakedislam.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Iran_womensteam2-vi.jpg)

(https://secure.i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03459/iranian-womens-foo_3459299b.jpg)

(https://secure.i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03459/iranian-womens-foo_3459300b.jpg)

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/91/e6/71/91e671ec9390859426565169a05e8a49.jpg)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 17, 2019, 11:27:25 AM
The more this thread prattles on, the more it becomes clear that Islam has a leg up on certain CathInfoTradTM.

(http://www.barenakedislam.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Iran_womensteam2-vi.jpg)

(https://secure.i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03459/iranian-womens-foo_3459299b.jpg)

(https://secure.i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03459/iranian-womens-foo_3459300b.jpg)

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/91/e6/71/91e671ec9390859426565169a05e8a49.jpg)
Is that you, Fr. Urrutigoity?
PS: These Muslims are liberals; women have no business playing soccer.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 17, 2019, 11:27:39 AM
The more this thread prattles on, the more it becomes clear that Islam has a leg up on certain CathInfoTradTM.

(http://www.barenakedislam.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Iran_womensteam2-vi.jpg)

(https://secure.i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03459/iranian-womens-foo_3459299b.jpg)

(https://secure.i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03459/iranian-womens-foo_3459300b.jpg)

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/91/e6/71/91e671ec9390859426565169a05e8a49.jpg)
Bonaventure-
You forgot to accuse us of prudery and puritanism!
What would Fr. Urrutigoity say??
PS: These are obviously liberal Muslims, as women have no business playing soccer.  No point in trying to dress modestly, if they are only going to be turned into lesbians in the end by inculcating manly qualities, at the expense of their femininity.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 17, 2019, 01:32:34 PM
Ah, so the Muslims playing in burqas are too liberal for Johnson.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 17, 2019, 02:00:07 PM
#1) I reject the assertion, held by Johnson, that it is not permitted for women to play team sports (provided it's against other women and not violently aggressive ... like football ... and there's no public immodesty).  There's ZERO Church teaching to back this up.  In fact, Pius XI stated that such sport in "public" exhibition could offend modesty.  So, in other  words, the sole considerations is modesty, and not the sport itself.  He implies that it is permitted for them to play in a more private setting.

#2) With regard to modesty, there are degrees of immodesty, and as is the case with all things venial, if the matter is not intrinsically evil, then a proportionate reason could justify a certain amount of immodesty.  Grave immodesty would require a grave reason.  Let's say a woman has been kidnapped and is being held captive unclothed somewhere.  She escapes and runs out in public without clothing on.  Grave immodesty justified by a grave reason.  So too, venial immodesty, can be justified by a proportionate reason.  The slight immodesty of showing one's knees to be able to properly play a game without risk of injury can be justified.

To answer LastTrad's questions:

Please drop the arrogant "you have been told" language.  I have been old nothing.  We do not know how those outfits were designed, how they react to the movements of the game, or what they have underneath.  Yes, if they do fly up to reveal their panties, for instance, then that could rise to the level of being gravely immodest.  But none of us know the details of how this would work.  I am going simply on just what I saw.  If the girls would go out in public, say, to a grocery store, with those outfits, I would consider that venially immodest.  But, assuming it's not the case that it becomes gravely immodest during game play, then there's proportionate reason for them to dress like that.

If the other teams do dress in a gravely immodest fashion (we do not now what kind of league they play in and what their rules are), then indeed it would be inappropriate for men to attend those games.  Whether or not this would constitute a near occasion of sin for them, it would still be scandalous for a man to watch such displays, and therefore inappropriate and at least venially sinful (depending on the degree of scandal given).
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 17, 2019, 02:07:23 PM
My biggest problem is with the haughty, self-righteous, Pharisaical attitude of standing in judgment over everyone ... whether or not you have all the facts or can present a rational argument.  You refuse to entertain distinctions or degrees of sin or proportionate reasons.  You pretend that moral theology is binary, or at least act like it, that either something is a mortal sin or it's perfect, that there's nothing in between.  You paint moral theology as black-and-white, whereas in actuality it admits of much gray, with prudential considerations being weighed in.  Most of all, you refuse to give anyone of the benefit of the doubt, but immediately stand on your soapbox to denounce these girls as whores ... simply because you can catch a glimpse of knee from their uniforms.

Trust me, God is much more offended by arrogant judgmental self-righteous Pharisaism than by a glimpse of female knee.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 17, 2019, 03:26:35 PM
My biggest problem is with the haughty, self-righteous, Pharisaical attitude of standing in judgment over everyone ... whether or not you have all the facts or can present a rational argument.  You refuse to entertain distinctions or degrees of sin or proportionate reasons.  You pretend that moral theology is binary, or at least act like it, that either something is a mortal sin or it's perfect, that there's nothing in between.  You paint moral theology as black-and-white, whereas in actuality it admits of much gray, with prudential considerations being weighed in.  Most of all, you refuse to give anyone of the benefit of the doubt, but immediately stand on your soapbox to denounce these girls as whores ... simply because you can catch a glimpse of knee from their uniforms.

Trust me, God is much more offended by arrogant judgmental self-righteous Pharisaism than by a glimpse of female knee.
Who is "you"? 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 17, 2019, 03:33:51 PM
Trust me, God is much more offended by arrogant judgmental self-righteous Pharisaism than by a glimpse of female knee.
Once again the writer clearly reveals that he does not understand the problem, he still only sees it as a matter of a few inches of cloth "a glimpse of a female knee"
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: forlorn on November 17, 2019, 03:41:55 PM
Crime rates and morality being what they are, nobody is safe anywhere.

I too cannot envision an excuse for females playing football.

I am surprised that this discussion is so heated.
Fitness and recreation? 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Incredulous on November 17, 2019, 04:15:14 PM
Once again the writer clearly reveals that he does not understand the problem, he still only sees it as a matter of a few inches of cloth "a glimpse of a female knee"

No, it's fat knees in culottes, with unrestrained "boobs".

It drives Johnson wild  :laugh1:
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Incredulous on November 17, 2019, 04:18:31 PM


Goodness, take the burqas off!


(https://secure.i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03459/iranian-womens-foo_3459299b.jpg)

These women are so ugly, they could pass for men.

Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 17, 2019, 04:18:43 PM
Dear Ladislaus,

Taking into consideration your response today, please asnswer the questions below in red:


Quote
It appears that the girls were out in public, in this picture, but I do not consider playing in an arena where the scheduled event states that it's a girls' match ... to be public.  You have to buy a ticket to get in.  And the events are not viewable to someone who hasn't entered the arena of his own accord.  Secondly, the degree of immodesty here is something might even be tolerable at Mass. These uniforms are not even close to being gravely immodest. (would you allow your daughters to wear to similar outfits to mass or the grocery store?) Even if these girls walked out to the grocery store like this, truly in public, I would consider it a venial violation of modesty at the most.  But with regard to a sport that is clearly billed as a girls' sporting event, I consider this acceptable. Now, if they were wearing those so-called "spanks" which have their butt cheeks hanging out and leaving little to the imagination, yeah, that would be in appropriate even in the relatively closed venue.  But, really?  These uniforms are just not that bad.  What, because someone can catch a glimpse of knee when they're standing up.  Even that is mitigated by the fact that they are wearing knee pads.

Now, the coach in the picture appears to have an inappropriate skirt on ...( I don't see much difference in the lengths between the coach and some of the other girls (except the one next to her), why is the coach dressed inappropiate for you  and not the others?  ) without any whatsoever reason to do so.  Now, THAT is a bad example to the girls on the team for sure.  Now, I can see it being a problem if the players' skirts were too long over the knee.  If they were to go down on their knees, the skirt could actually get caught between the floor and their knee and they could be injured.

I bet that their competition was very badly dressed, and the fact that they beat them sends a message that you don't need to dress like that to be competitive.  I think that the excuse for the immodesty in dress is the competitive advantage to be gained from it ... although for girls it's usually an excuse to practice exhibitionism.
(https://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=52919.0;attach=13501;image)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: forlorn on November 17, 2019, 05:08:37 PM
Dear Ladislaus,

Taking into consideration your response today, please asnswer the questions below in red:

(https://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=52919.0;attach=13501;image)
First of all, it'd do you well to actually post the picture he was referring to and not a different one entirely.

(https://secureservercdn.net/45.40.155.175/i6z.8dd.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/73249829_3073852345963676_2357690909518200832_n.jpg?time=1573497264)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 17, 2019, 05:08:50 PM
No, as I said, they would be venially immodest at the grocery store or elsewhere.  They would only be worn during volleyball games and practices.  Wearing them to Mass would exacerbate the sin, although I would not consider this mortally sinful even at Mass.

Why it's wrong for the coach and not the girls illustrates my point exactly.  Coach has no proportionate reason for wearing the outfit (she's not playing), while the girls have the proportionate reason of being able to function properly during a volleyball game and not risk injury.  I've attempted to explain the notion of proportionate reason.  Coach has none, but the girls do.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 17, 2019, 05:22:15 PM
First of all, it'd do you well to actually post the picture he was referring to and not a different one entirely.
He was referring to the picture I posted, it is the picture that started this thread. The picture you posted was brought up later. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 17, 2019, 05:26:04 PM
No, as I said, they would be venially immodest at the grocery store or elsewhere.  They would only be worn during volleyball games and practices.  Wearing them to Mass would exacerbate the sin, although I would not consider this mortally sinful even at Mass.

Why it's wrong for the coach and not the girls illustrates my point exactly.  Coach has no proportionate reason for wearing the outfit (she's not playing), while the girls have the proportionate reason of being able to function properly during a volleyball game and not risk injury.  I've attempted to explain the notion of proportionate reason.  Coach has none, but the girls do.
So you are saying that you would not allow your daughters to wear those outfits to mass and the grocery stores? Is it because of the length or because they are shabby clothes?  
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 17, 2019, 05:29:07 PM
My biggest problem is with the haughty, self-righteous, Pharisaical attitude of standing in judgment over everyone ... whether or not you have all the facts or can present a rational argument.  You refuse to entertain distinctions or degrees of sin or proportionate reasons.  You pretend that moral theology is binary, or at least act like it, that either something is a mortal sin or it's perfect, that there's nothing in between.  You paint moral theology as black-and-white, whereas in actuality it admits of much gray, with prudential considerations being weighed in.  Most of all, you refuse to give anyone of the benefit of the doubt, but immediately stand on your soapbox to denounce these girls as whores ... simply because you can catch a glimpse of knee from their uniforms.

Trust me, God is much more offended by arrogant judgmental self-righteous Pharisaism than by a glimpse of female knee.
You did not address the comment above to anyone, to whom is it addressed? 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 17, 2019, 05:34:51 PM
So you are saying that you would not allow your daughters to wear those outfits to mass and the grocery stores? Is it because of the length or because they are shabby clothes?  

On both counts.  They are above the knee (and shabby).  To say that they are venially immodest is not to say that they are OK.  People confuse venial sin with no sin.  It's still a sin and it offends God, and it's compounded by doing the sin at Mass.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: forlorn on November 17, 2019, 05:36:34 PM
He was referring to the picture I posted, it is the picture that started this thread. The picture you posted was brought up later.
I went back to that thread and checked. He even refers to them wearing knee-pads in the comment. In your pic there are no knee-pads.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 17, 2019, 05:37:01 PM
You did not address the comment above to anyone, to whom is it addressed?

To whomever it may apply.  I'm not so much put off by WHAT is being said as by HOW it's being said ... by some folks.  There's an undertone of "these dirty whores" in some of the posts on this thread.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 17, 2019, 05:40:07 PM
I went back to that thread and checked. He even refers to them wearing knee-pads in the comment. In your pic there are no knee-pads.

Right, I think that they're probably the same uniforms.  When they're sitting down, they're hiked up.  When they're standing up, you can see that they hit barely above the knee AND they are wearing kneepads.  With the kneepads on, I would say that they are not immodest at all.

I've actually seen women wear these somewhat shorter skirts ... several inches above the knee, but then these relatively-thick leggings come down below the knee underneath the skirts ... to the point that it does not appear immodest at all to me.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 17, 2019, 05:48:55 PM
Is this immodest?  My opinion is that it is not.

(https://cdn10.bigcommerce.com/s-sr2gbw/products/679/images/2990/Tulipskirt_Marsala__80962.1519842205.250.250.jpg?c=2)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: forlorn on November 17, 2019, 05:53:41 PM
Is this immodest?  My opinion is that it is not.

(https://cdn10.bigcommerce.com/s-sr2gbw/products/679/images/2990/Tulipskirt_Marsala__80962.1519842205.250.250.jpg?c=2)
The extra-thickness does seem to make a big difference. Normal thin-leggings with a skirt like that would be very distracting, but those aren't really to me. Still, best not to cede ground on cases like that. You give an inch, some girls will take a mile.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 17, 2019, 07:00:55 PM
My biggest problem is with the haughty, self-righteous, Pharisaical attitude of standing in judgment over everyone ... whether or not you have all the facts or can present a rational argument.  You refuse to entertain distinctions or degrees of sin or proportionate reasons.  You pretend that moral theology is binary, or at least act like it, that either something is a mortal sin or it's perfect, that there's nothing in between.  You paint moral theology as black-and-white, whereas in actuality it admits of much gray, with prudential considerations being weighed in.  Most of all, you refuse to give anyone of the benefit of the doubt, but immediately stand on your soapbox to denounce these girls as whores ... simply because you can catch a glimpse of knee from their uniforms.

Trust me, God is much more offended by arrogant judgmental self-righteous Pharisaism than by a glimpse of female knee.
TQuote from: Ladislaus (https://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?topic=52919.msg676022#msg676022)  

Quote
To whomever it may apply.  I'm not so much put off by WHAT is being said as by HOW it's being said ... by some folks.  There's an undertone of "these dirty whores" in some of the posts on this thread.

If it is not addressed to anyone and has no quotes that prove the accusations you are making, then it is just an irrational emotional outburst and a strawman. I have not seen anyone here call those girls whores. I have not seen any "haughty, self-righteous, Pharisaical attitude of standing in judgment over everyone". The outburst is what is totally out of proportion. If it is addressed to someone then it is a detraction, a mortal sin. You and SJ are constantly detracting against each other like little children, one of you needs to grow up and rise above it. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 17, 2019, 07:05:40 PM
I went back to that thread and checked. He even refers to them wearing knee-pads in the comment. In your pic there are no knee-pads.
He refers to the coach being dressed inappropriately, the coach dressed inappropriately is the woman at the right end of the first picture, the discussion started with the first picture.   
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 17, 2019, 07:11:54 PM
Is this immodest?  My opinion is that it is not.

(https://cdn10.bigcommerce.com/s-sr2gbw/products/679/images/2990/Tulipskirt_Marsala__80962.1519842205.250.250.jpg?c=2)
By your own analysis, there is no reason for the skirt to be so short, she is not playing any sport that requires a short dress.

By my analysis, there is not much to see in the picture, it is not clear. The skirt could be tight and thin and she is wearing a G-string that is clearly marked. Maybe the stocking only go up a little past the skirt and when she sits you can see the upper thighs, like French maid outfits.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 17, 2019, 07:28:13 PM
On both counts.  They are above the knee (and shabby).  To say that they are venially immodest is not to say that they are OK.  People confuse venial sin with no sin.  It's still a sin and it offends God, and it's compounded by doing the sin at Mass.
You are doing the same thing as the Cushinites who "say" they don't believe in salvation of Muslims, Jews, etc., but they spend days teaching people that people can be saved somehow outside of the Church. You spent all this time defending what those girls are wearing while now saying that "to say that they are venially immodest is not to say that they are OK.  People confuse venial sin with no sin.  It's still a sin and it offends God, and it's compounded by doing the sin at Mass". Anyone that reads this thread will conclude that you approve of those uniforms and that you would be OK with your daughters and anyone's daughters wearing the same outfits to mass or the store. Your nitpicking about mortal sin vs venial during all of this thread was totally off the subject.  You should have said from the beginning:

I do not approve of the outfits,  "They are above the knee (and shabby).  They are venially immodest. To say that they are venially immodest is not to say that they are OK.  People confuse venial sin with no sin.  It's still a sin and it offends God, and it's compounded by doing the sin at Mass".

Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Seraphina on November 17, 2019, 07:32:21 PM
Is this immodest?  My opinion is that it is not.

(https://cdn10.bigcommerce.com/s-sr2gbw/products/679/images/2990/Tulipskirt_Marsala__80962.1519842205.250.250.jpg?c=2)
Well, I wouldn't wear it.  I wouldn't allow my daughters, if I had any, to wear it.  It looks like black leggings with a black mini-skirt.  It's much too form-fitting.  Why not leggings beneath looser and longer (below knee) culottes?  
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Nadir on November 17, 2019, 08:02:32 PM
Is this immodest?  My opinion is that it is not.

(https://cdn10.bigcommerce.com/s-sr2gbw/products/679/images/2990/Tulipskirt_Marsala__80962.1519842205.250.250.jpg?c=2)
Immodest and UGLY! The tights do nothing to cover anything. And she is dressed "up" wearing high heels. Irrelevent for the topic - sport.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 17, 2019, 08:21:21 PM

Quote
Coach has no proportionate reason for wearing the outfit (she's not playing), while the girls have the proportionate reason of being able to function properly during a volleyball game and not risk injury. 
Playing sports is not a "proportionate reason" to wear immodest clothing.  Women played tennis for centuries (and went swimming) in full dresses.  No one is going to get an injury from a skirt that is past the knees.
.
Secondly, yes, that picture of the mini-skirt with leggings is immodest...borderline mortal sin, imo.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Frank on November 17, 2019, 08:24:02 PM
I have no idea where everyone gets their immodesty standards from. Pius XI settled it already. If the skirt is barely below the knee, then it CANNOT be called decent. What is so complicated about this rule?!
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 17, 2019, 08:35:55 PM
Secondly, yes, that picture of the mini-skirt with leggings is immodest...borderline mortal sin, imo.

:facepalm:
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 17, 2019, 08:40:00 PM
Well, I wouldn't wear it.  I wouldn't allow my daughters, if I had any, to wear it.  It looks like black leggings with a black mini-skirt.  It's much too form-fitting.  Why not leggings beneath looser and longer (below knee) culottes?  

Well, the point is that the reason short skirts are immodest is because they expose the legs.  If the legs are not exposed but covered by thicker leggings that look almost like pants, then that doesn't violate modesty.  It's important to understand the why of immodesty.  This kind of fashion was not around when Pius XI issued his rules, with the assumption of short skirt being the exposure of the legs.  Now one can then say, well, she's wearing pants, and so it's unfeminine, but in this context I don't see it as being unfeminine.  Whether or not one considers it ugly is a different matter altogether.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 17, 2019, 08:41:41 PM
Playing sports is not a "proportionate reason" to wear immodest clothing.  Women played tennis for centuries (and went swimming) in full dresses.  No one is going to get an injury from a skirt that is past the knees.

But we're not talking tennis here, rather, volleyball, where the girls often slide on their knees (thus the knee pads).  To land on you knees with a skirt between the knees and the floor would create a significant risk of injury.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 17, 2019, 08:47:33 PM
Some of you would reject 90% of the Catholic moral theology manuals written before Vatican II ... because you know better.

You can do what you want yourselves, but the problem I have is when you constantly presume to impute sin to others.  You need to mind your own business, and let others works out their consciences with their confessors ... who have actually had real training in moral theology.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Frank on November 17, 2019, 09:10:11 PM
But we're not talking tennis here, rather, volleyball, where the girls often slide on their knees (thus the knee pads).  To land on you knees with a skirt between the knees and the floor would create a significant risk of injury.
Pius XI gave the standard. Pius XII said ladies should not compromise the standard under the pretext of playing sports.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 17, 2019, 09:13:06 PM

Quote
Well, the point is that the reason short skirts are immodest is because they expose the legs.  If the legs are not exposed but covered by thicker leggings that look almost like pants, then that doesn't violate modesty.
Ridiculous.  Skirts are meant to hide women's forms, as men are not attracted to ONLY exposed legs, but to women's curves.  The example you posted, that mini-skirt was not only short but tight.  It was a good 6 inches above the knee.  If a woman was walking or sitting down, she would be very immodest.  But the main problem is the tightness of the skirt.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 17, 2019, 09:15:05 PM

Quote
But we're not talking tennis here, rather, volleyball, where the girls often slide on their knees (thus the knee pads).  To land on you knees with a skirt between the knees and the floor would create a significant risk of injury.
To play volleyball in this way is manly.  You can play fun, recreational, even competitive volleyball without diving and sliding on your knees.  It is not a right for women to play in such a way, and such actions are masculine if they cannot be played properly in a skirt.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Frank on November 17, 2019, 09:24:38 PM
To play volleyball in this way is manly.  You can play fun, recreational, even competitive volleyball without diving and sliding on your knees.  It is not a right for women to play in such a way, and such actions are masculine if they cannot be played properly in a skirt.
Beautiful. Well said!
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 17, 2019, 09:32:22 PM
Quote
Some of you would reject 90% of the Catholic moral theology manuals written before Vatican II ... because you know better.
In the 1950s, most women would've been shamed as whores had they worn the mini-skirt w/ leggings combo you posted.  They also wouldn't have been playing volleyball in gym class (because they would've been doing something more in line with their gender's natural talents, like "Home Econ" classes).  You are the one who is arguing that such dress is "not that bad" and history is not on your side.  You're a fashion revisionist.


Quote
You can do what you want yourselves, but the problem I have is when you constantly presume to impute sin to others.  You need to mind your own business, and let others works out their consciences with their confessors ... who have actually had real training in moral theology.
As you already admitted on this thread that you have little, if any, moral theology training, then your blind accusations of prude-ishness are laughable.  We live in one of the GREATEST most immoral cultures that may have ever existed in history, and you're defending the slow, slippery-slope slide of Trad girls into moral and fashion lukewarmness as if there were some moral imperative that they be able to dress in ways that are "only a venial sin".  This is madness and you are way off on this topic. 
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Incredulous on November 17, 2019, 09:34:38 PM
To play volleyball in this way is manly.  You can play fun, recreational, even competitive volleyball without diving and sliding on your knees.  It is not a right for women to play in such a way, and such actions are masculine if they cannot be played properly in a skirt.
 
PV,

I just realized you are not of this world... :pray:

You should have become a Holy religious Monk.

Not a Monk specializing in beer making, but probably bread or fudge :incense:



Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Frank on November 17, 2019, 09:43:05 PM

PV,

I just realized you are not of this world... :pray:

You should have become a Holy religious Monk.

Not a Monk specializing in beer making, but probably bread or fudge :incense:
I would say that PV is interested in getting to heaven, and refuses to be put to sleep by worldly amusements and liberal standards.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 17, 2019, 09:43:56 PM
Quote
I just realized you are not of this world... (https://www.cathinfo.com/Smileys/classic/pray.gif)

You should have become a Holy religious Monk.
I've been to countless church picnics and graduation parties where volleyball is played by men and women.  The games were filled with athleticism and great play.  Women didn't need to dive around on the ground to help win.  (And most men who were good knew how to anticipate the next shot and moved their feet instead of diving on the ground, which is not that efficient of a play).
.
The overarching question is:  What role does sports play in society?  Is it being played for fun, for exercise...or for some other reason?  You can't bend the rules of modesty (in either gender) just for sport's sake.  "Well, I could play better if I was wearing different clothes."  Ok, probably true.  But how important is competition and winning, as compared to modesty and scandalizing our neighbor, not to mention our own soul?
.
Until we realize that sports is one of the gods of modernism (along with technology, food, health, fitness and entertainment), then we can't see that to lower our modesty standards for sports is a huge problem.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 18, 2019, 05:57:19 AM
I have no idea where everyone gets their immodesty standards from. Pius XI settled it already. If the skirt is barely below the knee, then it CANNOT be called decent. What is so complicated about this rule?!

This is a perfect illustration of what I'm talking about.  I will make this post and then be done with this thread.  This is an utterly ridiculous oversimplification of moral theology ... and that's why laymen should not be imputing sin to others who do not measure up to how they have formed their own consciences.  It needs to be left up to priests who have been properly trained to guide people in their moral lives and who have the authority, right, and obligation to do so.

Catholic Church teaches (based on divine law) that it's sinful to work on Sundays.  I see someone mowing his lawn on a Sunday and proceed to wag my finger (and tongue) at him that "look, a mortal sinner!"

If this isn't exactly what the Pharisees did, then I don't know what is.

But Catholic moral theologians teach that there can be proportionate reasons that justify working on Sundays, and the reason would be proportionate to the amount of work being done.  Is 5 minutes of work a mortal sin?  Is 15 minutes?  Catholic moral theologians generally give about 2 hours as a rule of thumb for when it would become a mortal sin.  But that's if you have no reason to do so.  If you go work 8 hours at a job because, say, you're an ER doctor and someone has to cover the ER, that's not a sin at all.  Or, if a man goes to work at a second job on the weekends (including Sundays) because he's struggling to pay his mortgage or other bills, then he may be permitted to do so.  If a man is mowing the yard of an elderly neighbor and doing it on Sunday because it's the only free time he has left, then that's permitted.  If someone needs to spend 10 minutes taking out garbage because Monday morning is their garbage pickup day, then that's permitted.  Some theologians say that it's permitted to go to a department store to buy things necessary for your own licit activities.

Look, if you want to hire a "Sunday Jew" so that you don't have to lift a finger on Sundays, that's your business, but don't wag your finger at someone and denounce them as a sinner simply because their conscience is not formed as rigorously as your own.

Same kinds of proportionate reason standards apply to modesty.  The greater the immodesty, the graver the proportionate reason must be.  Unless there's some issue with these skirts flying up and showing panties, they are only slightly immodest and do not need a serious proportionate reason to justify doing them.  If some guy gets tempted to impure thoughts by a girl with a skirt/pant (whatever it is they're wearing) one inch above the knee while the knee itself is covered with a knee pad, then he's got bigger issues.  If someone believes that by wearing such an outfit a girl is practically a streetwalker and is being turned into a whore right before our eyes, then the person has some mental issues.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on November 18, 2019, 05:59:51 AM
Apart from trying to form your own consciences, leave moral theology to the priests.  Stop sitting in your theological armchairs denouncing everyone else as sinners, even when you don't know all the facts and details.  It's not your role and it's not your business.  If you wish to make your wife and daughters wear burqas out in public, then that's your business, but don't attempt to impose that on someone else.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Viva Cristo Rey on November 18, 2019, 06:22:03 AM
Padre Pio said skirts and dresses 8 inches below the knee.  He refused to give a woman absolution because she had a clothing shop that sold ladies slacks.  
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Viva Cristo Rey on November 18, 2019, 06:51:30 AM
https://www.outsports.com/2014/5/4/5682104/notre-dame-gαy-athletes-lgbt-you-can-play (https://www.outsports.com/2014/5/4/5682104/notre-dame-gαy-athletes-lgbt-you-can-play)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 18, 2019, 08:28:31 AM
Oh, Ladislaus, now you're attacking those who disagree with you and charging that we're "imputing sin" on others?  You yourself said that, most likely a venial sin was committed by slightly immodest attire.  You discussed venial sin a few times on this thread. 
.
This discussion started off by talking about a REAL LIFE example, but then you muddied the waters by inserting theoretical principles and distracting from the discussion.  Now we're fully talking about theory and the mini-skirt picture you posted, and you've illogically circled back to saying we are "imputing sin" on others?  How, pray tell, does one impute sin on a hypothetical person?
.
You're all over the place on this.  You've gone back and forth between a real life example and theory and this thread could've made more sense if you could stick to one or the other.  ...or at least you could be more clear when you mentally switch, as many times, it's not clear.  Then you unnecessarily fight with people who are talking one vs the other.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 18, 2019, 08:33:37 AM
Quote
 Stop sitting in your theological armchairs denouncing everyone else as sinners, even when you don't know all the facts and details.  It's not your role and it's not your business.
What people wear socially is public knowledge and is plain for all to see.  There are no "facts and details" which explain away immodest dress, except for extreme circumstances.  99% of the time, what people wear is of their own choosing, so the only defense for immodest dress is a faulty conscience, which is not an moral excuse, because it's a form of ignorance that is morally culpable.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on November 18, 2019, 08:35:48 AM
Quote
If some guy gets tempted to impure thoughts by a girl with a skirt/pant (whatever it is they're wearing) one inch above the knee while the knee itself is covered with a knee pad, then he's got bigger issues.  If someone believes that by wearing such an outfit a girl is practically a streetwalker and is being turned into a whore right before our eyes, then the person has some mental issues.
You're arguing against the wind.  No one has said the above in any way.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 18, 2019, 09:39:50 AM
You're arguing against the wind.  No one has said the above in any way.
He's been doing that this whole thread. To each his own, you can't change the way people process what they see in the world and how they react to it. Ladislaus processes what he sees and hears in the world through a moral theology book. I could post so many contradictions that he has posted here that I could start another thread. It is almost like his only source to make a decision is a moral theology book. One contradiction for example is that he says people here play moral theologian, meanwhile that is all he has been doing during the whole thread. Then he says that it is up to priests to tell us how to dress, and someone posts the rules of modesty by a bishop and another the rule of a saint, Padre Pio, and he totally rejects them. From my experience of 65 years of learning something everyday, there is nothing one can do to help a person who every time he has to make a decision has to consult a manual. Needless to say no one will learn anything from them because the muddle up everything so much that at the end the person listening doesn't even know what the teacher believes.  Like I said all along, on this subject of dress for women, he should just listen and just ask questions,but he never will. Like I said, to each his own.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 18, 2019, 10:02:57 AM
What people wear socially is public knowledge and is plain for all to see.  There are no "facts and details" which explain away immodest dress, except for extreme circumstances.  99% of the time, what people wear is of their own choosing, so the only defense for immodest dress is a faulty conscience, which is not an moral excuse, because it's a form of ignorance that is morally culpable.
It is good that he triggered you to respond like you have, I could post here all of your responses from the beginning to teach people modesty, and one would see how you went perfecting the methods of communication to get across to him and others. Keep up the good work.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on November 18, 2019, 10:53:11 AM
He's been doing that this whole thread. To each his own, you can't change the way people process what they see in the world and how they react to it. Ladislaus processes what he sees and hears in the world through a moral theology book. I could post so many contradictions that he has posted here that I could start another thread. It is almost like his only source to make a decision is a moral theology book. One contradiction for example is that he says people here play moral theologian, meanwhile that is all he has been doing during the whole thread. Then he says that it is up to priests to tell us how to dress, and someone posts the rules of modesty by a bishop and another the rule of a saint, Padre Pio, and he totally rejects them. From my experience of 65 years of learning something everyday, there is nothing one can do to help a person who every time he has to make a decision has to consult a manual. Needless to say no one will learn anything from them because the muddle up everything so much that at the end the person listening doesn't even know what the teacher believes.  Like I said all along, on this subject of dress for women, he should just listen and just ask questions,but he never will. Like I said, to each his own.
My religious life consisted of being baptized at birth, First Communion and Confirmation without knowing anything but standing and sitting whenever everyone else did at mass. That was all before the Novus Ordo. I knew absolutely nothing about the faith. Then when I was like 13, I stopped going to mass altogether and went to live in the world till I was 42 years of age, making money and chasing bikini clad girls on tropical beaches. My life was making money, lifting weights to look "buff", and picking up bikini clad girls 18-23 years of age.  One day it dawned on me that I was a bad example to my 19 year old niece, there I was bringing different 19 year old girls to Thanksgiving every year (that's right, still doing it at 42). THEN I changed my life completely. I made a 180 degree turn and went to confession, mass and the books to learn the faith. I amassed  a library of over $5000 over the next 5 years and later met my wife at mass.

I said all of that to show how a person can change their entire life completely. It was only by God's Grace that I changed. I will say that before I converted, all of my life, if someone showed me a better way to do something, I immediately dropped the old way. The only thing in my life that I am proud of is that. Most people never change anything in their lives (even the most minor thing like wearing a skirt a few inches longer) and the way they do things, they hit their heads on the same stone every day till they die.

When I heard Bp. Wiiliamson teach that men should not wear shorts, I listened and stopped wearing shorts. Yesterday, on CI someone said that a priest told him that it is a mortal sin to say bad words, like the F-bσɱb, he asked if that was true. The answer tells it all about how I think about living the faith:

Quote
If a priest said that swearing is a mortal sin, then I would stop swearing and confess my mortal sin. No big deal. You are not going to find me spending even one second finding out what the Moral Theology Books say, I could care less. It is not like he is asking me to cut off my arm.

To answer your question, when I am in doubt about a mortal sin, I go and confess it as a mortal sin, and let God sort it out. And that's the last thought I give it.

"Kill them all, let God sort them out"
"It is not like they are asking me to cut off my arm", THAT is my moral theology book.

Now, if a priest told me that I could wear shorts and flip-flop to mass, that is a laxity and it goes against my common sense, and I would not do it. I would not go to a meeting with a buyer at Home Depot to sell my products in shorts and flip-flops, and who the heck is the buyer compared to gong to God's House?


If Padre Pio and all of the instructions on modest dressing that keep getting posted over and over say that a woman should not wear pants, tight form fitting clothes, dresses that show the knees when they sit, sleeves shorter than the half way between the elbow and shoulder..... what is the big deal? Why do women fight it? They are not asking you to cut off your arm.

My mother (Novus Ordo), at 65 years of age, once asked me what exercise she could do so her biceps would look more firm in her sleeveless tops. I told her that it was a LOT of work, that it was easier to just wear a sleeve. The message is that most women do not have the physique to show off skin, they are not 18 year old fitness instructors or 1 in 1,000,000 teenage models. So, nobody is asking you to cut off your arms.

That is my moral theology book, the real world and my experiences learned in it.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Frank on November 18, 2019, 12:20:55 PM
If you read how strongly St John Vianney opposed dancing 200 years ago, then ask yourself what he would do with a girl in a miniskirt playing sports, you will come to a definitive answer about the whole issue.
The BVM held him up as THE model priest. We should listen to her and him.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on November 18, 2019, 06:16:57 PM
If you read how strongly St John Vianney opposed dancing 200 years ago, then ask yourself what he would do with a girl in a miniskirt playing sports, you will come to a definitive answer about the whole issue.
The BVM held him up as THE model priest. We should listen to her and him.
:applause:
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mark 79 on November 18, 2019, 07:27:29 PM
(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/04/04/04/32D231BA00000578-0-image-a-1_1459740561397.jpg)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Incredulous on November 18, 2019, 08:09:56 PM


Was it three dead horses that we beat  :confused:
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Matthew on January 06, 2020, 10:50:13 AM
I wonder what happened with this.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Matthew on January 06, 2020, 10:57:30 AM
Is this immodest?  My opinion is that it is not.

(https://cdn10.bigcommerce.com/s-sr2gbw/products/679/images/2990/Tulipskirt_Marsala__80962.1519842205.250.250.jpg?c=2)
No offense, Ladislaus, but there is NO WAY in which this could be considered modest by a Catholic, much less a Traditional Catholic.
The skirt doesn't come to the knee, it's not modest. Full stop.
Imagine if that girl sat down! Or better yet, DON'T!

You have to have objective standards. Women (just like men) will always try to skirt the line (pun intended).

I fear that just like with the issue of makeup, you are compromising here out of borderline necessity, because your wife and/or daughters aren't fully operating under your well-educated Trad Catholic ex-seminarian control.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on January 06, 2020, 11:09:17 AM
No offense, Ladislaus, but there is NO WAY in which this could be considered modest by a Catholic, much less a Traditional Catholic.
The skirt doesn't come to the knee, it's not modest. Full stop.

Nope.  This is a combination of pants and skirt where the legs are covered.  Pants are inappropriate because they're not masculine and because they can cling to the behind ... not due to the leg part.  Skirts are immodest because they expose flesh above the knee.  But this combination overcomes both concerns.  You cannot see the behind, nor can you see the bare leg, nor is it masculine like pants. 

People need to understand the PRINCIPLES and the WHYs behind things in order to be able to adapter the principles to new circumstances.  In too many ways, Trads have become very much like the Pharisees ... clinging mindlessly to the letter of the law.  I do not hold this combination to be immodest ... provided that the skirt isn't tight and the leggings are not see-through but cloth-like and on the thicker side.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on January 06, 2020, 11:12:09 AM
I fear that just like with the issue of makeup, you are compromising here out of borderline necessity, because your wife and/or daughters aren't fully operating under your well-educated Trad Catholic ex-seminarian control.

Same bull-crap you get from your slanderous buddy SeanJohnson.  Constant ad hominems when you're incapable of making a rational argument.  My girls do not wear this combination of clothing.  I am not making any points or not taking any positions other than what reasoning leads me to.  I arrived at the conclusion based on reasoning through WHY certain things are considered immodest, why pants are immodest and why shorts skirts are immodest, and explaining how this particular combination does not labor under either concern (when properly executed ... not too tight and leggins on the thicker side).

Did you reprimand Johnson for slandering and clumniating not only myself but the theologians Jone and Merkelbach?  You too are committing slander by making this suggestion, BTW.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on January 06, 2020, 11:53:48 AM
I apologize for the frustration, but I am constantly being attacked personally whenever I make an argument or take a position on anything.  And I'm at my wit's end.  Not because I really care about what anyone thinks, but because my intention is to have a rational discussion and argument, and it's constantly being derailed by this type of nonsense.

People need to stop this nonsense and actually address the argument.

I laid out a rational argument for why I would consider this modest (given certain conditions).  Go ahead with a rebuttal, but stop the personal attacks and insinuations.

Yesterday SeanJohnson called me a sơdơmite simply for defending a theological position held by an approved pre-Vatican II Catholic theologian (and which was in fact the common opinion in his day and which is still the common opinion among Traditional Catholic priests).  Today I am being told that I have taken a position based on a false allegation about my motivations for taking the position.  This is invariably a sign of somebody EMOTIONALLY (rather than rationally) clinging to a position, and when someone is incapable of making a rational rebuttal to an argument challenging their position, they lash out with ad hominems.

I laid out the rationale for why I consider this to be modest.  Go ahead and rebut the argument if you will, but stick to reason.  If you can come up with a rational argument, I am happy to change my mind about any subject.  If you can convince me with reason that it's the proper thing to do, then I might even fly to Rome personally to kiss Bergoglio's ring.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on January 06, 2020, 12:02:36 PM
By the way, like a good Thomist, I can actually anticipate one particular possible objection to this position.  I want to see if someone else can actually come up with it.  This is the method of St. Thomas.  To test your arguments, you anticipate in your mind objections.  You pretend as if you're trying to refute it.  Then either you can refine the argument or abandon it, depending upon whether this leads to.  So you don't beg the question and adopt a conclusion based on some emotional attachment to it.  You simply follow where reason takes you.  THIS is the type of discussion I'm interested in having on this forum, not all the emotional nonsense that seems to be the norm.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on January 06, 2020, 12:11:42 PM
And my primary reason for participating in this forum, and why I have stated that it's a GOOD thing for there to be a variety of positions represented here, is that I think it invaluable (and I enjoy it) when people present objections to an argument that I myself have not anticipated.  We do the best we can presenting potential objections to ourselves, but sometimes, based on various ways of thinking, or not knowing some particular fact, you can miss potential objections.  But in order to get to 1 post with a rational objection, i usually have to wade through 99 posts of emotional nonsense.  Nothing is more valuable to arriving at the truth than objections (the genius of scholasticism); these of course must be joined with a sincere desire for the truth, so that if you honestly find an objection you cannot address, that you must refine your position or abandon it in favor of another.  Nothing undermines sincerity more than emotional attachments.

So, as I have said before, if Matthew were to ban everyone except those who thought exactly like myself, I'd probably quickly drop participation in this forum.  Without this ability to interact with people of opposing positions, this forum would have very little appeal for me.  So, for instance, my sede-doubtist position (nuanced sedeplenism or sedimpoundism) is the direct result of my year of participation on this forum.  I have listened to arguments from both R&R and from the sedevacantists, and have found some of them convincing, and others not convincing.  I have been attacked by both sides, R&R and the sedevacantists, because my position involves having embraced principles from both sides and having rejected others.  I get along very well with the RATIONAL posters, even those who do not agree with my positions.  So, for instance, I enjoy most of my exchanges with ByzCat and with Pax ... despite the fact that they hold positions on some key things that are contrary to my own.  Others, however, the ones that emote and just make ad hominems, I get frustrated by to no end.

I am trying to make a resolution simply to ignore those posts, except they often need to be addressed in order to expose the logical fallacies (or the lack of logic).  But I need to get less frustrated and angry about these.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Matthew on January 06, 2020, 12:13:57 PM
I'm not a Jesuit, and I'll never be one. I'm more Irish. I don't play games. I look at the practical, final result. I look at the big picture, the practical application.
I can't and won't talk millimeters, which men are inflamed to lust by different female body parts and why, or any of that.

I just stick to common man's speech. I call a spade a spade. I'll take good ol' horse sense over highfalutin' book larnin' any day.

I'm also going by standard Catholic teaching here. All Trad chapels, Padre Pio, Marylike standards of dress, etc. have put out guidelines for womens' dress for decades. They always draw the line at the knee. I've never see any of them make allowances for "thick tights in combination with a very short skirt to obscure the butt".

I am a bit frustrated myself. Here you are so educated on all things Catholic, but like a Jesuit you talk yourself into justifying things that most Catholics on-the-street reject for religious reasons. I expressed my FEAR that you compromised your otherwise-solid beliefs and morality on this point, to accommodate some personal need. I'm glad to hear that isn't the case.

I am *solidly* on Sean Johnson's side in your "Jone's Moral Theology" fight, by the way.  I should point out to Sean, however, your paragraph towards the bottom of the thread where you state you personally don't believe spousal sơdơmy is without sin, etc. I can see you were being extremely detached and impartial here, if a bit Jesuitical. But to Ladislaus I would point out: You have to understand why Sean and others react with horror to your conclusions!

I'll take Sean Johnson's "sensus Catholicus" or, "I can't point to a law or reason why you're wrong, but you're just wrong" -- any day. It's that kind of "instinctive", practical, or "emotional" adherence to Tradition that caused almost all Catholics to join the Traditional movement in the first place. Most of us didn't get here because of some rational, dry argument. It was sensational or semi-sensational compilations of abuses, and OTHER emotional appeals (most books of Archbishop Lefebvre swerve into this category, at least to some degree). There are other emotions besides anger by the way: love, satisfaction, fear, joy, nostalgia, appreciation of beauty, honor, nobility, etc.

I still wish you'd stop being a Jesuit. Stick to the timeless mind of the Church and Tradition -- otherwise you're one Modernist book (authored by someone with ",S.J." after their name) away from being led astray with convincing-sounding arguments. I suppose there were many smart, educated men like you in the Church in 1962 -- most of whom were convinced and sold on the New Religion. I guess we should be grateful God placed you later on the Church's timeline...

Seriously -- it wouldn't matter what highly-respected, highly-intelligent, highly-convincing professor got up there and taught my philosophy class how there is no objective reality -- I wouldn't fall for it because of my horse sense. Rational arguments MIGHT or MIGHT NOT do the trick. And looking at the outcome of Vatican II, it looks like rational arguments alone have a POOR track record at best. Again, I thank God for my horse sense/common sense.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Quo vadis Domine on January 06, 2020, 12:17:57 PM
Actually, I think the style is very suggestive and alluring. I don’t believe things have to be revealing to suggest immodesty. Secondly, this type of dress wouldn’t be allowed by any sensible priest prior to Vatican II.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Matthew on January 06, 2020, 12:20:05 PM
if you honestly find an objection you cannot address, that you must refine your position or abandon it in favor of another.  Nothing undermines sincerity more than emotional attachments.

So, as I have said before, if Matthew were to ban everyone except those who thought exactly like myself, I'd probably quickly drop participation in this forum.  Without this ability to interact with people of opposing positions, this forum would have very little appeal for me.

Part of wisdom is knowing when to CLOSE one's mind. I am not open AT ALL to competing worldviews other than Traditional Catholic. Does that make me less than 100% completely dedicated to the Truth? I don't think so.

I would argue that having an emphasis on "the big picture" and emotional attachments to the past makes one much more stable. My history and present are proof of this. I've seen guys who live by your standards and they fly all over the place, as they focus on one or another aspect of the question. Being human they can only focus on one aspect at a time -- each aspect leads them to a different conclusion. They lack the big picture, so they have no mass or ballast to keep them stable. They end up passing through each one of the various Trad groups, never staying in any place very long. They are extremely unstable.

I am Catholic-proud (as in, "all glory be to God") of my stability. I'm unwilling or unable to uproot my whole life, everything I've done thus far, because of a well-written article, book, sermon, or youtube video. And call me crazy, but I'd say that's a good thing.


P.S. Will you stop bringing up banning if I don't bring it up first?
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Frank on January 06, 2020, 12:23:09 PM
Lad,
Am I to consider black yoga pants in combo with a puffy diaper like apparatus on an attractive lady, modest attire?
Based on your reasoning, the answer would have to be yes. Correct?
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Matthew on January 06, 2020, 12:33:18 PM
I would posit:

The more people in the world like Ladislaus, i.e., the more people willing to change or believe anything based on the outcome of a single syllogism or debate, the world becomes a worse place.

Woe unto the world because of a lack of common sense!

If I could make 5 more people have common sense, or 500 more people willing to change their life and thinking to align with the outcome of A rational argument, I'd have to go with the former.

Because the ten million dollar question is: whose rational argument? There is too much error out there. One needs to have a sanity-check ("common sense") to navigate the sea of error, especially in the Modern World.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: SeanJohnson on January 06, 2020, 12:34:30 PM
Ladislaus is a flaming liberal, whose moral permissiveness thus far includes the following:

1) Moderate makeup not a sin

2) Women in pants neither immodest nor unfeminine

3) Marital sơdơmy merely venial

4) Stretch pants and body-cling attire not immodest.

If you add all this together, women will dress and be treated like whores.

Why is this bum allowed a liberal-feminist platform to undermine traditional Catholic morals?
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Matthew on January 06, 2020, 12:36:58 PM
I laid out a rational argument for why I would consider this modest (given certain conditions).  Go ahead with a rebuttal, but stop the personal attacks and insinuations.
Consider my rebuttal:
1. Common sense. An immodestly dressed woman is not modest.
1b. The Blessed Virgin Mary would never wear a skirt like that.
2. Perennial Catholic teaching, i.e., argument of authority. But what an authority! The Catholic Church is an authority to be respected. All conservative/Trad Catholic modesty guidelines have consistently excluded skirts such as the one you pictured.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Matthew on January 06, 2020, 12:39:07 PM
Ladislaus is a flaming liberal, whose moral permissiveness thus far includes the following:


Why is this bum allowed a liberal-feminist platform to undermine traditional Catholic morals?
I should have known you'd smell blood in the water.
We're having a discussion. 
It sounds like you're only going to get through to Ladislaus with reasoned arguments, not common sense. That seems to be Lad's Achilles' heel.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on January 06, 2020, 12:43:02 PM
I am *solidly* on Sean Johnson's side in your "Jone's Moral Theology" fight, by the way.  I should point out to Sean, however, your paragraph towards the bottom of the thread where you state you personally don't believe spousal sơdơmy is without sin, etc. You're being all rational here, if a bit Jesuitical.

In that particular case, the discussion was specifically about whether it was GRAVE sin.  By the way, what you're saying is not precise.  I never said that spousal sơdơmy is not grave sin, but, rather, that the controversial activity was not in fact sơdơmy (in other words, I agreed with Jone's definition of the term).

Nevertheless, there's a much bigger issue here, Matthew, and both you and Sean are both GRAVELY wrong about, assuming that you completely agree with him, as you just said you did, and it's a very pernicious fruit of your R&R position.  What I was most concerned about, rather than the issue itself, and why I kept engaged on the issue, is the false allegation for SeanJohnson that one is morally "in peril" for adopting a position based on an approved Catholic source.  When the majority theological opinion says something, one may (and perhaps should) form his conscience along those lines.  So, Johnson made a big deal about how I'm rejecting St. Alphonsus (i.e. I disagreed with this particular opinion), but ignored the fact that HE was rejecting St. Alphonsus on this point.  St. Alphonsus is perhaps best know for his principle of probabilism, that one may act, without sin, in accordance with any probable opinion (not even necessarily the majority opinion or the common one).  So in defending St. Alphonsus, SeanJohnson was ironically REJECTING St. Alphonsus.

Let's get this straight.  Neither you nor SeanJohnson nor anyone else has the right to impose your conscience on anyone else.  With your R&R position, you reject the authority of the Magisterium to do exactly that, and you end up replacing this authority with your own private judgment.  And then you impute sin to anyone who does not happen to agree with your own personal conclusion.

I'll give you a practical example of what I mean.  As many of you know, I disagree with what Pius XII stated in his Allocution regarding NFP.  HOWEVER ... if I am a priest and confessor, and a married person comes to me and tells me that they are using NFP, and they have a grave reason as understood commonly by Traditional theologians, I absolutely do NOT refuse them absolution based on my opinion.  I might recommend that they reconsider.  But I have NO AUTHORITY to impose my own private opinions on anyone else.  Period.  THAT is where private judgment stops.  If you start crossing over that line, then you are adopting an incredibly pernicious schismatic attitude.  That is why I have rejected the Dimonds.  I told them directly that I disagree with their characterization of BoD as heresy, since the Church has allowed it and has even made Doctors of the Church men who believed it.  For me, then, to say that it's heresy is schismatic.  Schism involves separation not merely from the Pope but also from those in communion with the Church.  When I decide that certain people are not Catholics when the Church receives them as her own, then I am in fact a schismatic.  I have routinely denounced ALL the private excommunicators.  And, Matthew, you yourself established this forum with some of those principles in mind, and I have repeatedly praised this about CathInfo.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Matthew on January 06, 2020, 12:52:51 PM
assuming that you completely agree with him, as you just said you did, and it's a very pernicious fruit of your R&R position.  What I was most concerned about, rather than the issue itself, and why I kept engaged on the issue, is the false allegation for SeanJohnson that one is morally "in peril" for adopting a position based on an approved Catholic source. 
I do not make all of Sean's words my own, however.
I hold back when applying the conclusions. I would not have called you the S word certainly.
I would only call you lacking common sense for giving credence to such an obviously-crazy "probable opinion".
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on January 06, 2020, 12:55:58 PM
Quote
Nope.  This is a combination of pants and skirt where the legs are covered.  Pants are inappropriate because they're not masculine and because they can cling to the behind ... not due to the leg part.  Skirts are immodest because they expose flesh above the knee.  But this combination overcomes both concerns.  You cannot see the behind, nor can you see the bare leg, nor is it masculine like pants. 

People need to understand the PRINCIPLES and the WHYs behind things in order to be able to adapter the principles to new circumstances.
Principles can only take one so far, Ladislaus.  You are correct that such attire fulfills certain requirements but it's still not feminine and it doesn't pass the common sense test.

Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on January 06, 2020, 12:59:38 PM
Quote
Ladislaus is a flaming liberal, whose moral permissiveness thus far includes the following:

1) Moderate makeup not a sin

2) Women in pants neither immodest nor unfeminine

3) Marital sơdơmy merely venial

4) Stretch pants and body-cling attire not immodest.

If you add all this together, women will dress and be treated like whores.
Sean, you are absolutely falsifying Lad's views on the subjects above.  It's either due to lack of emotional control or your lack of understanding of Lad's arguments.  I think it's both.  But you're mischaracterizing his views 100%.  You have not the aptitude nor patience for these discussions, so just stop.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Pax Vobis on January 06, 2020, 01:02:17 PM

Quote
The skirt doesn't come to the knee, it's not modest. Full stop.
.
The Catholic Church is an authority to be respected. All conservative/Trad Catholic modesty guidelines have consistently excluded skirts such as the one you pictured.

Agree totally.  All principles must be filtered through and subservient to the above rule.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on January 06, 2020, 01:13:21 PM
I should have known you'd smell blood in the water.
We're having a discussion.
It sounds like you're only going to get through to Ladislaus with reasoned arguments, not common sense. That seems to be Lad's Achilles' heel.

I need to do better at ignoring stuff like this.  So I'll start now.

And, honestly, I don't even care about what Sean said about me, not really, because I know it's utter nonsense.  I object more to the fact that it's irrational nonsense.

So, for instance, because I defended Jone's opinion, SeanJohnson began referring to me as Ladislaus the sơdơmite.  This was after I had stated that I myself had never engaged in the controversial activity.

Similarly, I also defended another position of Jone, that it was not necessarily sinful to smoke marijuana, under the very conditions Jone laid out.  The equivalent here would be for Johnson to call me a "pothead".  I myself have never in my life used this drug or any other illegal drug.

Similarly, I argued that, to be consistent, if you believe that these Popes and hierarchy are legitimate, then in fact the fast days of Lent (except Good Friday and Ash Wednesday) are in fact no longer binding under pain of sin.  Is this because I am trying to justify my OWN not fasting?  Absolutely not.  In point of fact, I not only kept the Traditional fast, but THEN some.  And I am not convinced of these popes' legitimacy.  Since I am in a state of doubt about their legitimacy, and since doubtful laws do not bind, then I could have in good conscience NOT fasted.  So it is not to justify my own non-fasting (which did not happen) that I made the case.  On this issue, I called SeanJohnson out for a similar position.  He claimed that, despite the fact that the men whom he acknowledged as the legitimate hierarchy had relaxed the obligation, it would still be a mortal sin not to attend Mass on certain Traditional Holy Days that were no longer observed by the Novus Ordo.  So now SeanJohnson sets HIMSELF up as having the authority to impose his conscience on others, but he rejects the authority of the Church to do that by releasing the obligation.  In so doing, he's very clearly usurping the authority of the Church and arrogating it unto himself.  That is PRECISELY what he was doing with this latest controversial issue.

There are lots of things that I would never do or would never be inclined to do, that I would excuse others from sin.  Also, it's very very important to distinguish from imperfection (the Evangelical counsels) and sin.  I had another argument with Sean over this (I can't remember the exact context).  There are things that would be ideal or better, but which are not binding under pain of sin, and therefore I could not bind others with.  So, for instance, if I were a woman, I would probably wear a skirt down as low to the ground as possible while being practical and safe.  But just because I would do it, this does not mean that I can look down on someone else who does not, provided that they are still within the bounds of not being sinful.  In fact, I would never "look down" on someone who even crossed the line into immodesty.  I am not their judge, and I don't know what lights and graces they have received, and what they have not received.  I only know what I have received.  And that is why the greatest saints often considered themselves the greatest sinners, because they tend to excuse (subjectively, that is) faults in others that they acknowledge as blameworthy in themselves.  Even when I see a serial killer, I do not hold the man in contempt, but feel pity for him, since I know full well that, had God not given me the many graces he has, that I'm just a hair's breadth away from doing the same thing myself.

And, finally, you, Matthew, jump to the conclusion that the only way I could possibly defend this position is because of some personal issue (along these lines).  So that was the final proverbial straw with regard to this mode of thinking.  Just as I defended these other two matters in principle without any personal stake in it, the same thing goes here.  I am not perfect, and I myself have indeed made some compromises from the ideal here or there ... based on prudential considerations (whether right or wrong, God will be my judge) ... but I acknowledge when I am making these and I never paper over it with fake arguments.  I never reason backwards from my actions to justify them.

So, in summary, SeanJohnson has a long history, on this latest issue, and with regard to several other issues, to pretend that he has the ability to decide objective moral law and impose his conscience on others.  That prerogative belongs only to the Church, and this mentality that an individual's private judgment can Tɾυmρ that of the Church where it comes to informing consciences, well, that is in fact the clearest example of the harm that can come from the R&R position.  People often talk about the bad fruits of sedevacantism, but this is one foul-smelling rotten fruit from the R&R position.


Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Matthew on January 06, 2020, 01:22:06 PM
Being charitable, compassionate, civil, and/or polite towards others, and knowing what they're doing is sinful and IN NO WAY AN OPTION FOR YOU are two different things.

I am surrounded by everything BUT Traditional Catholics. I don't go around formally condemning anyone. It's not my place. 
I don't live in St. Mary's KS (actually, if I did, it would make little difference! hahaha. The worldliness of St. Mary's is legendary...)

Nevertheless, all the things they do -- being non-Catholic, living in concubinage, using birth control, women wearing pants, sending kids to public schools -- are not options for me, and I consider such actions sinful. I can pray for them, I can be friendly with them -- but they are still not-to-be-imitated in their sins. Just because I don't formally excommunicate them or usurp authority I don't have in condemning them, doesn't mean they aren't committing various public sins.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on January 06, 2020, 01:24:08 PM
So far the two arguments:

1) it violates the strict letter of the law
2) it's un-feminine.

#2 is very difficult to argue one way or the other, since it's at least partly subjective.  I personally think that it's possible for this kind of ensemble to be quite feminine.  But I'm not going to argue with that, since it's not an argument that can be won.  I believe that the flow of a skirt, despite the leggings underneath, suggest femininity.

#1, that it violates the strict letter of the law.  Indeed, this seems to be the case.  Well, I take a step back from that, it was never any kind of law, technically speaking, as in the Church never formally legislated this.  But I accept this in principle, using the term law loosely.

But I did not say that this was in keeping with that rule.  I merely said that I felt that it was modest.  I was digging behind the REASONING for the law, and seeing if it applied to this relatively new type of outfit.  You see, fashions change.  Just as it's conceivable that new fashions would be introduced that are in fact IMMODEST, despite the fact that they are not explicitly condemned by the law (since they were not foreseen), so also it's possible for some fashions to emerge that are not actually immodest, despite being in violation of the letter.  Unfortunatley, the Church has been silent on this matter since I believe the pontificate of Pius XI ... due to the Novus Ordo degeneracy, so we lack the authority of the Church on this particular issue.  So we have to apply the principles to new circumstances that were not foreseen at the time based on the PRINCIPLES behind them, i.e. based on the spirit of the law.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Ladislaus on January 06, 2020, 01:29:51 PM
Nevertheless, all the things they do -- being non-Catholic, living in concubinage, using birth control, women wearing pants, sending kids to public schools -- are not options for me, and I consider such actions sinful. I can pray for them, I can be friendly with them -- but they are still not-to-be-imitated in their sins. Just because I don't formally excommunicate them or usurp authority I don't have in condemning them, doesn't mean they aren't committing various public sins.

But this is now what I'm talking about.  Things like being non-Catholic, birth control, living in concubinage, etc. are universally agreed upon to be sinful by anyone who still has the Catholic faith.  I am NOT talking about a moral relativism.  I am talking about informing one's conscience about matters that are DISPUTED among Catholic theologians and unresolved by the Church.  There's no sense in which several of your issues can be said to be disputed among Catholic moral theologians.

Similarly, with regard to doctrine, if someone comes on here and denies the Immaculate Conception, that's not tolerable as a Catholic option, but if someone wants to dispute R&R vs. sedevacantism, that's not the same thing BY ANY STRETCH.  Similarly, adhering to and holding as objectively sinful something that's universally regarded as such by Catholics is NOT the same thing as adopting a position on an issue that's CONTROVERTED among Catholic theologians.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Matthew on January 06, 2020, 01:36:07 PM
But this is now what I'm talking about.  Things like being non-Catholic, birth control, living in concubinage, etc. are universally agreed upon to be sinful by anyone who still has the Catholic faith.  I am NOT talking about a moral relativism.  I am talking about informing one's conscience about matters that are DISPUTED among Catholic theologians and unresolved by the Church.  There's no sense in which several of your issues can be said to be disputed among Catholic moral theologians.

Similarly, with regard to doctrine, if someone comes on here and denies the Immaculate Conception, that's not tolerable as a Catholic option, but if someone wants to dispute R&R vs. sedevacantism, that's not the same thing BY ANY STRETCH.  Similarly, adhering to and holding as objectively sinful something that's universally regarded as such by Catholics is NOT the same thing as adopting a position on an issue that's CONTROVERTED among Catholic theologians.

I consider dressing modestly as something one can attain (like the Objective Truth) and more like the Immaculate Conception than the Crisis in the Church -- and anyone who has read more than 5 of my posts knows my position on that. (I tolerate just about any position touching on the Crisis in the Church, because I don't have the ability much less the authority to judge anyone on something no one on earth can solve with finality or authority.)

There is no confusion -- at least among those of good will, and who tell the truth -- about what dressing immodestly is. There are various tests: Would you be repulsed by a statue of Our Lady wearing that? Men, would you like your wives to go to a mostly-male gathering dressed in that? Daughters? Sisters? Mother? You get the idea.

Dressing immodestly is like pornography. A famous Supreme Court justice (I think?) famously said: "I know it when I see it."
I'm not going to put ", S.J." after my name and start talking which body parts have to be on the screen, engaged in what activity, etc.

Even if you did that, there would be some individuals skirting the rules and would go JUST SHORT of crossing over into the technical definition of pornography. See the problem?

We need to keep our Catholic sensibilities about what modesty is. Let's not let our daily life in modern-day sơdơm, Gomorrah, or Babel taint our perception of this important virtue.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Mr G on January 06, 2020, 02:24:18 PM


I am surrounded by everything BUT Traditional Catholics. I don't go around formally condemning anyone. It's not my place.
I don't live in St. Mary's KS (actually, if I did, it would make little difference! hahaha. The worldliness of St. Mary's is legendary...)

Speaking of St. Mary's, it made the news today:

https://www.wibw.com/content/news/Two-αrrєѕтed-in-St-Marys-drug-raid-566750021.html
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Matthew on January 06, 2020, 02:25:59 PM
Speaking of St. Mary's, it made the news today:

https://www.wibw.com/content/news/Two-αrrєѕтed-in-St-Marys-drug-raid-566750021.html

That would be funny if it weren't so sad.

I was actually going to mention what I had heard from someone who lived there: that there were no less than THREE drug houses in St. Mary's. Pretty bad considering the size of the town, and the fact that a huge % of the town is Trad Catholic.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Last Tradhican on January 06, 2020, 02:32:32 PM
I'm not a Jesuit, and I'll never be one. I'm more Irish. I don't play games. I look at the practical, final result. I look at the big picture, the practical application.
I can't and won't talk millimeters, which men are inflamed to lust by different female body parts and why, or any of that.

I just stick to common man's speech. I call a spade a spade. I'll take good ol' horse sense over highfalutin' book larnin' any day.

I'm also going by standard Catholic teaching here. All Trad chapels, Padre Pio, Marylike standards of dress, etc. have put out guidelines for womens' dress for decades. They always draw the line at the knee. I've never see any of them make allowances for "thick tights in combination with a very short skirt to obscure the butt".

I am a bit frustrated myself. Here you are so educated on all things Catholic, but like a Jesuit you talk yourself into justifying things that most Catholics on-the-street reject for religious reasons. I expressed my FEAR that you compromised your otherwise-solid beliefs and morality on this point, to accommodate some personal need. I'm glad to hear that isn't the case.

I am *solidly* on Sean Johnson's side in your "Jone's Moral Theology" fight, by the way.  I should point out to Sean, however, your paragraph towards the bottom of the thread where you state you personally don't believe spousal sơdơmy is without sin, etc. I can see you were being extremely detached and impartial here, if a bit Jesuitical. But to Ladislaus I would point out: You have to understand why Sean and others react with horror to your conclusions!

I'll take Sean Johnson's "sensus Catholicus" or, "I can't point to a law or reason why you're wrong, but you're just wrong" -- any day. It's that kind of "instinctive", practical, or "emotional" adherence to Tradition that caused almost all Catholics to join the Traditional movement in the first place. Most of us didn't get here because of some rational, dry argument. It was sensational or semi-sensational compilations of abuses, and OTHER emotional appeals (most books of Archbishop Lefebvre swerve into this category, at least to some degree). There are other emotions besides anger by the way: love, satisfaction, fear, joy, nostalgia, appreciation of beauty, honor, nobility, etc.

I still wish you'd stop being a Jesuit. Stick to the timeless mind of the Church and Tradition -- otherwise you're one Modernist book (authored by someone with ",S.J." after their name) away from being led astray with convincing-sounding arguments. I suppose there were many smart, educated men like you in the Church in 1962 -- most of whom were convinced and sold on the New Religion. I guess we should be grateful God placed you later on the Church's timeline...

Seriously -- it wouldn't matter what highly-respected, highly-intelligent, highly-convincing professor got up there and taught my philosophy class how there is no objective reality -- I wouldn't fall for it because of my horse sense. Rational arguments MIGHT or MIGHT NOT do the trick. And looking at the outcome of Vatican II, it looks like rational arguments alone have a POOR track record at best. Again, I thank God for my horse sense/common sense.
I was wondering why this old thread was brought back to life, so I went back to see who brought it back and why. The answer is that this thread has been taken over to re-hash the "sơdơmy" discussion. so, I will translate for those reading what I read out of this. I have no horse in this race, I see no enemy in Ladislaus, SJ, or Matthew, so, maybe my translation will better get through or break the ice.

First, what Matthew wrote above: He is saying that he is not a Jesuit, meaning he is not an intellectual who studies every detail of a subject like the Jesuits, who by the way, ended losing the faith completely after Vatican II. A lot of good all of the intellectualism got them. Matthew is accusing Ladislaus of getting lost in the minute details and losing his Catholic common sense in the process. I myself had noticed this in Ladislaus when discussing how girls should dress. I thought it was because his wife was more liberal in how she allows her daughters to dress and Ladislaus was revealing his "theological" (for lack of a better word) rationalization of the matter.

Now onto Ladislaus, he gives his answer to the above in another posting which is not tied to the above posting by Matthew:


Quote
But this is now what I'm talking about.  Things like being non-Catholic, birth control, living in concubinage, etc. are universally agreed upon to be sinful by anyone who still has the Catholic faith.  I am NOT talking about a moral relativism.  I am talking about informing one's conscience about matters that are DISPUTED among Catholic theologians and unresolved by the Church. There's no sense in which several of your issues can be said to be disputed among Catholic moral theologians.

Similarly, with regard to doctrine, if someone comes on here and denies the Immaculate Conception, that's not tolerable as a Catholic option, but if someone wants to dispute R&R vs. sedevacantism, that's not the same thing BY ANY STRETCH.  Similarly, adhering to and holding as objectively sinful something that's universally regarded as such by Catholics is NOT the same thing as adopting a position on an issue that's CONTROVERTED among Catholic theologians.
The above posting by Ladislaus answers both Matthew's posting and my underlined observation above.

So, the answer is that when there is some doubt about a subject, Ladislaus goes to the "books", while Matthew and I go to "common sense" (see below*). OK, now I understand Ladislaus better. Now I will give him some aged advice because I can, I think I am almost 20 years older: You should not have picked a subject like sơdơmy to "prove" a point. THAT reveals a lack of common sense. Moral theology manuals are meant for priests, because they have to deal with the matter, you are not a priest and you do not have to deal with the matter with the world, you are not a confessor. BIG MISTAKE!!!!!

We learn something new every day, find a cleaner subject to make your point than a cesspool drain pipe. 


(*) Matthews common sense and LT's all wise, all encompassing, always correct common sense)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Matthew on January 06, 2020, 02:53:57 PM
I was wondering why this old thread was brought back to life, so I went back to see who brought it back and why. The answer is that this thread has been taken over to re-hash the "sơdơmy" discussion.

You made a good post, but you got this point wrong.

I bumped the thread because someone (I believe it was the thread's OP) wrote me an email and said "the thread has run its course and needed to go". I completely disagreed, especially since it was a 19 page thread!

I disagreed so much that I bumped the thread instead. In the process, I read a few posts and I saw the one where Ladislaus posted a pic that he actually said it was not immodest in his opinion. I had to respond.

But as as matter of fact, stirring up the Sean Johnson vs. Ladislaus "Jone" debate was the opposite of what I wanted. I did moderate and lock that thread, remember? If I wanted that hornets nest stirred up, locking the thread was a funny way to do it!

Moral of the story: You don't "own" the threads you start. CathInfo members have ZERO deleting privileges you'll notice -- not even threads or posts that you create. When you post on CathInfo, plan on it being here for a while. A long while. I consider CathInfo a historical archive. I don't delete past threads without a really good reason.

I remember when I was on Fisheaters back in 2005 or 2006, one of the women there was emotionally demanding that I get out of "her" thread. I was posting some Catholic doctrine or other in the thread, being my usual ex-seminarian self. My point: all threads are public, and only the moderator (me) decides when they "need to go". And any member may post in any thread they can view.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Incredulous on January 08, 2020, 07:51:44 PM
Ladislaus is a flaming liberal, whose moral permissiveness thus far includes the following:

1) Moderate makeup not a sin

2) Women in pants neither immodest nor unfeminine

3) Marital sơdơmy merely venial

4) Stretch pants and body-cling attire not immodest.

If you add all this together, women will dress and be treated like whores.

Why is this bum allowed a liberal-feminist platform to undermine traditional Catholic morals?


  Wow!... Sean came close to rending his garments.

(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-r4jeTx8NG2U%2FVJwkur2oE6I%2FAAAAAAAAJ2k%2F0hMvZTRG4J4%2Fw1200-h630-p-nu%2Fpharisees%252Bsadducees.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: claudel on January 10, 2020, 10:14:42 PM

… the ability to decide objective moral law and impose [one's] conscience on others. That prerogative belongs only to the Church …

How could any Catholic, sede or R&R or whatever else, take issue with the quoted excerpt above?

There is, I think, something that is certainly unappetizing and perhaps even un-Catholic in the desire to shape the conscience of another using threats in preference to the persuasion embodied in good example. In this regard, I sincerely suggest that anyone still reading this thread recall the wise words of the Congregation of Rites (1922): "Things that in themselves are licit are not always expedient." Although the issue being commented upon back then was the Dialogue Mass, not what constitutes licit or proper dress and so on, others may agree that the comment could be thought to have equal relevance to the matters being kicked about here.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: MaterDominici on January 10, 2020, 11:02:22 PM
Nope.  This is a combination of pants and skirt where the legs are covered.  Pants are inappropriate because they're not (edit) masculine and because they can cling to the behind ... not due to the leg part.  Skirts are immodest because they expose flesh above the knee.  But this combination overcomes both concerns.  You cannot see the behind, nor can you see the bare leg, nor is it masculine like pants.
Can you please tell me where this information comes from? It is different than other things I've read and I'd like to have a source for this. Thanks.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Angel70 on February 23, 2021, 01:10:30 PM
Please call Holy Family Academy at 602 438-6513 asap to talk to the president/ owner regarding their blatant public disrespect of the holy family name.  Stand up for God and tell them they are scandalizing their students, the Catholic church, and all of God's  families by their support of the girls in sin wearing short skirts.  Ask them to stop offending our Lord and his dear Mother Mary, our holy mother.  They are hurting the entire holy family and their flock and assisting in the impurity of the students souls without repentance, acknowledgement, or regret.
:(
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: Matthew on February 23, 2021, 07:56:23 PM
Another necro bump.
Title: Re: Holy Family Academy - ANOTHER SCANDAL IN PHOENIX
Post by: paxtecum111 on February 23, 2021, 09:45:11 PM
This will be my only comment. Yoga pants are skin tight, so that men may follow the undulations of every millimeter of a woman’s lower body. The immodest mini skirt makes the temptation complete. Most women know that the Blessed Mother would never wear anything like this. 

Rather, many women want men to look at them with lust, because they do not care about men’s Souls, only the Soul-deadening necessity to control men sɛҳuąƖly; while the fallen woman employs an implausibly desperate deniability of her most grave degradation and sin.