|
Post by micah1199 on Jul 25, 2017 19:43:41 GMT -5
I was not trying to pry into your business. I am not sure how I came off that way. The quote appeared to lack confidence in God's providence to me.
|
|
|
Post by Clotilde on Jul 25, 2017 20:17:40 GMT -5
I was not trying to pry into your business. I am not sure how I came off that way. The quote appeared to lack confidence in God's providence to me. Maybe not, but I'm letting you know that you have no business judging me and that I don't answer to you. Carry on.
|
|
|
Post by micah1199 on Jul 25, 2017 20:24:01 GMT -5
I apologize if I was judging. The demon of pride often gets its claws into me.
|
|
turin
New Member
Posts: 45
|
Post by turin on Jul 25, 2017 20:35:14 GMT -5
I was disappointed to find out that in order to attend Saint Gertrude the Great's "Young Adult Gathering" one must swear to never attend the una cum. I understand why they do that, mainly because it's a basically a matchmaking event and they don't want to cause problems in potential courtships over where to attend mass, but still I disagree with their reasoning for swearing off the una cum altogether.
It's rumoured that some SSPX and Resistance priests are non una cum but not open about it unless you really press them. Does anyone know if there is any truth to this?
|
|
|
Post by Clotilde on Jul 25, 2017 22:15:07 GMT -5
I was disappointed to find out that in order to attend Saint Gertrude the Great's "Young Adult Gathering" one must swear to never attend the una cum. I understand why they do that, mainly because it's a basically a matchmaking event and they don't want to cause problems in potential courtships over where to attend mass, but still I disagree with their reasoning for swearing off the una cum altogether. It's rumoured that some SSPX and Resistance priests are non una cum but not open about it unless you really press them. Does anyone know if there is any truth to this? Wow. Thanks for the warning, I'm preparing my kids for the married state. I've told them they are never to sign their names to documents, swear, or make any promises other than to their legitimate pastors--the Church, in other words. However, it does not surprise me. We've got people out there actively praying for laymen attending the SSPX to convert to Catholicism. It is highly advisable for Catholics to be on guard against sectarianism, like I said, we are walking on a dangerous path.
|
|
|
Post by Clotilde on Jul 25, 2017 22:16:54 GMT -5
I apologize if I was judging. The demon of pride often gets its claws into me. No harm done, just letting you know.
|
|
|
Post by carloscamejo on Jul 25, 2017 22:31:05 GMT -5
I was disappointed to find out that in order to attend Saint Gertrude the Great's "Young Adult Gathering" one must swear to never attend the una cum. I understand why they do that, mainly because it's a basically a matchmaking event and they don't want to cause problems in potential courtships over where to attend mass, but still I disagree with their reasoning for swearing off the una cum altogether. It's rumoured that some SSPX and Resistance priests are non una cum but not open about it unless you really press them. Does anyone know if there is any truth to this? More of that cancerous sectarianism and their eviscerating of the Church. They need to be reminded that if una cum must be avoided, the "Church" is a smattering of chapels near each other in the Midwest. Very little of them have property and most of them meet somewhere, usually in a hotel room, with some priest with maybe one Mass a month. All because of the opinion of a priest. Think about that.
|
|
turin
New Member
Posts: 45
|
Post by turin on Jul 25, 2017 23:01:44 GMT -5
Clotilde - Good advice. How old are your children? You could sign them up to the Tradcircle website, I used to be on there before I was fully ready to accept SVism (I'm not now though for various reasons).
carloscamejo - Agreed. It is a shame. It also says on their website (https://yagincincy.wordpress.com/page/) you must "reject in principle and practice the SSPV policy of (a) refusing communion with the clergy of St. Gertrude the Great Church and its affiliates and of (b) denying sacraments to laymen who receive sacraments from said clergy."
Well, I do reject that position and their denial of sacraments to people who assist at Thuc chapels, but the way they worded it, "and practice," makes it sound, at least to me, like people who attend the SSPV can not attend. I'm not sure, I did not ask for clarification as I do not attend the SSPV.
|
|
MiriamM
TC spellcheck
TC quality control
Posts: 55
|
Post by MiriamM on Jul 26, 2017 0:52:06 GMT -5
Voxx, I do not remember your being banned from TD. I was posting during that controversial period, too. I was following the posts and the responses from administrators.
Also, I think it's important not to categorize with broad brush-strokes. There are those who take the SV position who seem to regard all others as unacceptably ambivalent, but they seem to be the minority among those who hold the position. Those tend to hang out on CI more than they did on TD. Just my never-humble-enough opinion.
At the moment, I'm bothered less by "dogmatism" among SV'ists than by the debate going on about V2 on SD, some of it rather dogmatic in tone and assumptions.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Jul 26, 2017 5:19:08 GMT -5
Voxx, I do not remember your being banned from TD. I was posting during that controversial period, too. I was following the posts and the responses from administrators. Also, I think it's important not to categorize with broad brush-strokes. There are those who take the SV position who seem to regard all others as unacceptably ambivalent, but they seem to be the minority among those who hold the position. Those tend to hang out on CI more than they did on TD. Just my never-humble-enough opinion. At the moment, I'm bothered less by "dogmatism" among SV'ists than by the debate going on about V2 on SD, some of it rather dogmatic in tone and assumptions. You may not remember because they didn't announce it because it only stood 24 hours before I deleted my account. And it was a certain NUC leaning biased mod who caused the problem. Point being because of sectarianism the drama caused the adminTD to fold the forum.
|
|
|
Post by micah1199 on Jul 26, 2017 6:30:14 GMT -5
Voxx, I do not remember your being banned from TD. I was posting during that controversial period, too. I was following the posts and the responses from administrators. Also, I think it's important not to categorize with broad brush-strokes. There are those who take the SV position who seem to regard all others as unacceptably ambivalent, but they seem to be the minority among those who hold the position. Those tend to hang out on CI more than they did on TD. Just my never-humble-enough opinion. At the moment, I'm bothered less by "dogmatism" among SV'ists than by the debate going on about V2 on SD, some of it rather dogmatic in tone and assumptions. What are the highlights of the V2 debate and what seemed upsetting? I am not a member of TD.
|
|
|
Post by Clotilde on Jul 26, 2017 7:59:57 GMT -5
Clotilde - Good advice. How old are your children? You could sign them up to the Tradcircle website, I used to be on there before I was fully ready to accept SVism (I'm not now though for various reasons). carloscamejo - Agreed. It is a shame. It also says on their website (https://yagincincy.wordpress.com/page/) you must "reject in principle and practice the SSPV policy of (a) refusing communion with the clergy of St. Gertrude the Great Church and its affiliates and of (b) denying sacraments to laymen who receive sacraments from said clergy." Well, I do reject that position and their denial of sacraments to people who assist at Thuc chapels, but the way they worded it, "and practice," makes it sound, at least to me, like people who attend the SSPV can not attend. I'm not sure, I did not ask for clarification as I do not attend the SSPV. I was a member of TradCircle so I know what it's all about. Unfortunately, it is too sectarian for my family, being that they profess obedience and affiliation with certain individuals and organizations that my family does not. Our approach will likely to be to continue to meet other families and make real-face-to-face connections as we can, therefore I don't see any of my children having much of an online life, ever. I just encourage them to pray for themselves and their future spouses and really, it's completely up to God.
|
|
|
Post by Clotilde on Jul 26, 2017 8:04:31 GMT -5
I was disappointed to find out that in order to attend Saint Gertrude the Great's "Young Adult Gathering" one must swear to never attend the una cum. I understand why they do that, mainly because it's a basically a matchmaking event and they don't want to cause problems in potential courtships over where to attend mass, but still I disagree with their reasoning for swearing off the una cum altogether. It's rumoured that some SSPX and Resistance priests are non una cum but not open about it unless you really press them. Does anyone know if there is any truth to this? More of that cancerous sectarianism and their eviscerating of the Church. They need to be reminded that if una cum must be avoided, the "Church" is a smattering of chapels near each other in the Midwest. Very little of them have property and most of them meet somewhere, usually in a hotel room, with some priest with maybe one Mass a month. All because of the opinion of a priest. Think about that. That's why when I see this happen, I walk away. I won't be a party to it and I won't look the other way.
|
|
MiriamM
TC spellcheck
TC quality control
Posts: 55
|
Post by MiriamM on Jul 26, 2017 9:37:21 GMT -5
Voxx, I do not remember your being banned from TD. I was posting during that controversial period, too. I was following the posts and the responses from administrators. Also, I think it's important not to categorize with broad brush-strokes. There are those who take the SV position who seem to regard all others as unacceptably ambivalent, but they seem to be the minority among those who hold the position. Those tend to hang out on CI more than they did on TD. Just my never-humble-enough opinion. At the moment, I'm bothered less by "dogmatism" among SV'ists than by the debate going on about V2 on SD, some of it rather dogmatic in tone and assumptions. What are the highlights of the V2 debate and what seemed upsetting? I am not a member of TD. It's SD, not TD. TD was closed. The current thread is here: www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=18251.0A previous similar thread is here: www.suscipedomine.com/forum/index.php?topic=18098.0Boiling down to one non-trad and one reputed trad demanding dogmatically that Catholics "must accept" V2 in all its non-splendors, in all its pomps, in all its works, in all its deceptions, in all its errors. Neither poster has the authority to do so, and both are lacking, i.m.o. and in the opinions of several other posters, a proper understanding of the limits of the Council on the laity and what the Council did and didn't "do." I post this not to bring a conversation from another forum over here (although obviously TC'ers are free to start their own threads on the topic) but because you asked what all the fuss was about, so you can read those linked threads. Those threads are open to non-members to read. If they were in the SV forum, you'd have to be a registered member for access.
|
|
MiriamM
TC spellcheck
TC quality control
Posts: 55
|
Post by MiriamM on Jul 26, 2017 9:38:31 GMT -5
Voxx, I do not remember your being banned from TD. I was posting during that controversial period, too. I was following the posts and the responses from administrators. Also, I think it's important not to categorize with broad brush-strokes. There are those who take the SV position who seem to regard all others as unacceptably ambivalent, but they seem to be the minority among those who hold the position. Those tend to hang out on CI more than they did on TD. Just my never-humble-enough opinion. At the moment, I'm bothered less by "dogmatism" among SV'ists than by the debate going on about V2 on SD, some of it rather dogmatic in tone and assumptions. You may not remember because they didnt announce it because it only stood 24 hours before I deleted my account. And it was a certain NUC leaning biased mod who caused the problem. Point being because of sectarianism the drama caused the adminTD to fold the forum. Thanks for the explanation. I figured earlier that that might be the case, but I wasn't sure.
|
|