Religion Forum Guidelines – Ecumenism

May 14, 2008 | Religion Moderator

[annalex]

Second. Religion Forum on FR has been a tremendous source of Catholic education for me, brawls and all.

[Iscool]

Sad about that.

No need to be sad...I'm not ecumenical...I suspect most Protestants on these threads are not as well...Their new ecumenical threads will be just as barren as their caucus threads.

[1000 silverlings]

Well it’s posted on Drudge, must be true

[Uncle Chip]

Okay. Then I am really, positively repelled by the idea that Mary is considered as the "co-redeemer" among any Christian believer.

Now that would make a good Ecumenical Thread!!!

[Marysecretary]

Haha..probably true.

[Gamecock]

***P-Marlowe couild designate a mixed caucus, for example, Calvinist & Methodist caucus if he wants to compare and contrast, but doesn’t want a third perspective.***

By definition Marlowe would be excluding himself from his own thread. He isn't Methodist or Calvinist. ;-)

***We had “Cath-Orth” caucus when we wanted to discuss beliefs shared by Catholics and Orthodox but did not want Protestant input.***

Perhaps the name Cath-EOrth would be better. Many Proddies consider themselves to be Orthodox.

But then again EOrth sounds like a Winnie the Pooh character pronounced with a lisp.

[OLD REGGIE]

It seems that the failed "respectful thread" designation has simply morphed into the "ecumenic thread" designation, only this time the penalty for protesting error will be more severe.

Dr. E. I suspect some threads will die of their own weight and boredom. You may have noted "Caucus" threads have a few "regulars", live a short life, and go away.

If we find the "open" thread to be the only vibrant one it will move to the front and have the most participants.

In some ways it is similar to all the "free" offers available with any new computer. I decline them all and go on my way, choosing only what is meaningful to me.

[annalex]

That “brawl” aside was supposed to have an invisible smiley attached to it, chief.

[Marysecretary]

INDEED!!!

[Iscool]

All three of those threads could have been tagged “ecumenic” or “open” depending on the type of discussion you wished to encourage.

To be fair another religion, we will not be controversial on their ecumenical threads, but we can then duplicate the body of the thread and repost it as an open thread???

[Religion Moderator]

If you cannot post without saying something against another's beliefs, then stay on the "open" threads. It's that simple.

[Quix]

Oh, Dear.

I’m not sure which of us would be tainted the most with such a designation!

LOL.

Thanks. Am humbled.

[Quix]

I knew he felt that way.

Glad he made it public.

Of course, the RC’s seem to have been fumbling . . .

clumsily

with that ball ever since that thread was posted!

LOL.

[Quix]

It’s true.

You can check the thread.

I forget the title . . . let me check

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2015428/posts?page=87#87

It’s old news to those of us well read on the topic.

Those who are . . . super skeptical and light-years behind the learning curve . . . I can appreciate that there’s more skepticism there.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I think Dr.E has a point. Many discussions surround definitions and that a pro- post often has an anti- counterpart (and vice versa). So in the example given by Dr. E, the anti- component (Mary is a co-redeemer) trumps the pro- component (Mary is not because...). Absent the context in which the (or any) reply is given can almost be considered iconoclastic in nature. Thus if one wants to present a "positive" post, there is by definition another post being countered.

Exactly.

Iconoclasm is certainly in the eyes of the beholder.

I think the RM's thankless job has just been made much more difficult.

[Gamecock]

I took it as such.

[Religion Moderator]

No, do not post an exact duplicate. But if you find another, similar article you’d like to post for “open” debate, that is fine.

[Titanites]

Well it’s posted on Drudge, must be true

Did you bother to read it? The Pope isn't mentioned. Neither are UFO's.

[Iscool]

But I will try this format with some theological threads, like my old Cur Deus Homo series. The Caucus designation proved suffocating for them.

You certainly are bold, posting a Homo thread...

[Godzilla]

If you cannot post without saying something against another's beliefs, then stay on the "open" threads. It's that simple.

That is not what I was trying to say, only that posts and counter posts have context in each other. In the example Mary - co-redemptress the counter could be there is no redeemer but Christ (with no reference to Mary). But within the context of the thread either party could view the other as being said against the others beliefs. Which mother would you give the baby to?