Posted on 03/20/2014 7:13:19 PM PDT by Rashputin
The entire point is to find a way the poster of a caucus can avoid disruption.
I was happy as a clam when the term "Catholic" included "Orthodox." And it would be fine with me if the further distinctions in post #8 were dropped or if the usual caucus posters agree that excluding FSSP was not their intent.
If the other poster in question claims to be a member of FSSP (which is likely, as has been mentioned, a misnomer) then he is in violation of the Constitutions of that Society:
6.Founded in the spirit of the apostolic letter Motu proprio Ecclesia Dei Adflicta of Pope John Paul II (2 July 1988), the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter professes its fidelity to the Roman Pontiff, who, according to the words of the First Vatican Council (Pastor æternus), is the “successor of Blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, Vicar of Christ, head of the whole Church, the Father and Doctor of all Christians” (see Vatican Council II, Lumen Gentium, n. 22). “Each one of its members is held to obey the Supreme Pontiff as his highest superior” (Can. 590, §2).
Of course, though, dealing with that would be a matter between the member and his superior.
I would propose that if there is a poster or a FReeper (there is a difference) who is causing problems, then that poster should be the one receiving fraternal correction, a medicinal remedy, or expiation...rather than messing with your very well considered caucus definitions.
For example, how many people could be routinely attending an SSPX or similar Mass even if they wanted to ? More fleas want to ride a well cared for old hound than can find one but they're still fleas whether they can find a hound or not.
Basically, some folks aren't happy unless they get to nail their own list of complaints about the Catholic Church to any door they see.
Like you, I can only look at a posting history and get an idea of where someone is coming from. I suppose that as long as someone says they're Catholic in full Communion with the Church the same way Nancy Pelosi echos John Hus but claims to be a faithful Catholic, then that's how they see their Self.
I wasn't actually thinking about whether or not a given poster should be commenting when a asked, "SSPX much?", I was wondering how someone believes they're helping anything by trying to read their viewpoint into even a really trivial bit of news.
I run across a lot of little things I feel would be useful, or very useful, to refer to when dealing with more complete treatments of topics in the news but which in and of themselves don't prove much of anything. Having all that available on FR seemed like a good idea as long as posting it didn't just add more noise than signal. Obviously, there's no real way to post such things and therefore no need to.
I am sorry for the hassle this has caused you and thought I had taken steps to avoid the need for your involvement. I stand corrected.
With respect, that isn't going to be possible, believe it or not sometimes people will disagree for the sheer sake of disagreeing... especially Catholics. If you suppress disruption in caucus threads by members of the caucus you'll end up stifling discussion. I suppose there could be a Novus Ordo caucus and a traddy caucus but that just seems silly.
It is not unusual for religious groups to caucus on the Religion Forum based on a doctrine or interpretation, e.g. Dispensationalist Caucus. Sometimes posters want to discuss their own views without outside noise.
Thanks, sitetest. You’ve pegged me pretty well about my concerns about Pope Francis and Pope John Paul II. I do miss Pope Benedict and his too short reign as the Vicar of Christ.
How is it "outside" noise if it's amongst the Caucus members?
Or more to the point, if the caucus wants to discuss Novus Ordo liturgical matters, it may consider other Catholics to be "outsiders" in that discussion even though it considers them "insiders" in discussing Daily Mass Readings, etc.
**What are your opinions? **
It is distressing in some cases when trying to post a Catholic Caucus thread about a current event and labeling it only Catholic Caucus, since these supposed sedevacantists also choose to post on such a thread, demeaning the Pope and the Vatican.
Just my opinion.
I understand the concentric spheres concept. But who defines the spheres?
Take for instance your example of “Daily Mass Readings”. Traditional Roman Catholics, e.g. FFOTI, FFSP, ICK follow the traditional Catholic calendar; their daily Mass Readings are not the same as those posted on this forum; but I don’t see anybody complaining.
Who are “these supposed sedevacanists”? Please name them and list the reasons you accuse them of such a title.
The spheres are defined by the ones posting caucus threads and by the moderators enforcing them.
The problem with the “concentric circles” idea is that folks who even fit within various “concentric circles” might not all agree with each other.
I'm not a traditionalist, just an ordinary Catholic. So, I'm certainly eligible for the Catholic Caucus, or even a narrower “Novus Ordo” Caucus. I am, at times, critical of the words and deeds of the current pope. Are you going to have a “Catholic Novus Ordo - Uncritical of Pope Francis Caucus” label to exclude my joining a thread about Pope Francis in which I might offer criticisms? Or how about the fact that I don't like most modern liturgical music? Are you going to have a “Catholic Novus Ordo - Love Haugen & Haas Music Caucus”? I prefer to receive in the hand. A “Catholic Novus Ordo - Communion Reception on the Tongue Caucus”? I don't like to hold hands at the Our Father. A “Catholic Novus Ordo - Our Father Hand-Holders Caucus”?
And then, among those Catholics who like the newer music, if one dislikes “On Eagles Wings,” and another takes offense, are we going to see a label of “Catholic Novus Ordo - Post-VII Liturgical Music, ‘On Eagles Wings’ Lovers Only Caucus:?
C’mon. This is silly.
The reason why a Catholic Caucus label works is that there is something identifiable as the Catholic Church, and there are objective criteria which define one as a Catholic. Nonetheless, that group of persons which properly belong to the Catholic Church are not monolithic, all of one opinion on every topic.
Like markomalley said, if someone otherwise violates the posting rules by personal attack, etc., then deal with that person. But as you said, the caucus label is to prevent EXTERNAL disruption of the talk of the labeled group, not to prevent disagreement within the labeled group.
Excluding actual Catholics in complete communion with the Bishop of Rome from Catholic Caucus threads is not a good idea at all.
sitetest
You’re welcome.
So please define the spheres. Do you consider traditional Catholics to be “Catholics”?
The decision is that the Religion Forum guidelines remain unchanged. FSSP is part of the "Catholic Caucus" as are all other identities in full communion with the Pope.
ebb tide, you are a member of the Catholic Caucus.
To all of you who post "caucus" labeled threads on the Religion Forum:
If you or other posters engage him, then when I pull every post he wrote and all the ones pinging him, the thread will look like Swiss cheese.
In the same way, if you have a trouble-maker on the caucus, DO NOT engage him except perhaps to ask him to quiet down. Let me know by Freepmail and I will deal with it as soon as possible.
If you need more immediate relief, then use the Abuse button.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.