The Confession of Cyril Lucaris

The Voice ^ | 1692 | Cyril Lucaris

[trisham]

:)

[Mad Dawg]

Moderatori locutus, causa finita.

lapsis mentis. Shudda bin Moderatore locuto, causa finita. ths first two words make an ablative absolute.

[don-o]

Oh noes! I’m going to agree with Quix? I think I need to lie down for a while. :)>

[greyfoxx39]

Correct. There was a statement very recently regarding this issue. It could not have been more clear.

Yes indeedy Trisham, there WAS such a post....as a reply to MY post.

 

Me thinks that the some folks would like to see more Kumbaya in the religion forum, notwithstanding the effort by the Religion Moderator that has gone into the careful segregation of sub-forums.

HERE

The "OPEN" threads are clearly labeled...

"Open threads are a town square. Antagonism though not encouraged, should be expected

Posters may argue for or against beliefs of any kind. They may tear down other’s beliefs. They may ridicule.

Like the Smoky Backroom, the conversation may be offensive to some."

The constant expectation of seeing "closed" thread rules governing "open" threads leads to threads labeled On intemperate and indiscreet zeal. (The Primary Fault of many Religion Forum posters) when in fact the primary fault may instead be that of an incomplete understanding of or unwillingness to abide by forum rules.

Expect an Executive Order from Obama demanding more "Kumbaya" in all things, but I will wait for the Executive Order from Jim Robinson before I begin to censor myself on FR to suit those who proselytize for it.

127 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 10:03:30 AM by greyfoxx39 (If voters follow the democrat method of 2004 Obama will be named the worst president in history.)

 

Tuesday, July 06, 2010 10:10:27 AM · 138 of 2,297
Jim Robinson to greyfoxx39

There will be no such order from me. I think our Religion Moderator is doing a suburb job. Damn the naysayers, full speed ahead!!

Yes indeedy Trisham, there WAS such a post....as a reply to MY post.

Me thinks that the some folks would like to see more Kumbaya in the religion forum, notwithstanding the effort by the Religion Moderator that has gone into the careful segregation of sub-forums.

HERE

The "OPEN" threads are clearly labeled...

"Open threads are a town square. Antagonism though not encouraged, should be expected

Posters may argue for or against beliefs of any kind. They may tear down other’s beliefs. They may ridicule.

Like the Smoky Backroom, the conversation may be offensive to some."

The constant expectation of seeing "closed" thread rules governing "open" threads leads to threads labeled On intemperate and indiscreet zeal. (The Primary Fault of many Religion Forum posters) when in fact the primary fault may instead be that of an incomplete understanding of or unwillingness to abide by forum rules.

Expect an Executive Order from Obama demanding more "Kumbaya" in all things, but I will wait for the Executive Order from Jim Robinson before I begin to censor myself on FR to suit those who proselytize for it.

[Mad Dawg]

I was only interested in Lucaris’ words and the Orthodox response.

Wait. I think you only get one argumentative stance. You can't say to one person "What is the relevance of motive" right after you've specified a motive, can you?

[Quix]

I’d say a bunch of prayers for you if they were part of my system. It’s clearly a moment of great crisis.

However, I think I’ll just pray quietly in tongues for you for a few minutes.

May you have a quick recovery with no residue of distress or discomfort.

I can appreciate that it would be a very rare and traumatic thing.

[Lorica]

I think you both are awesome. :)

[trisham]

LOL!

[Quix]

Thanks thanks.

I thought that was what was being referred to.

[trisham]

I think all three of you are awesome. :)

[Mad Dawg]

It should be pointed out that, the request of the OP for Roman Catholics to honor the caucus status notwithstanding, it was the Roman Catholics who made Roman Catholicism the issue, explicitly so with wagglebee's first post.

Hitherto, the use made by the thread's participants of a controversial portion of the OP has not been dispositive or even relevant in determining whether an OP had content that precluded Caucus status. The controversial content alone sufficed to disqualify the thread. You are imposing a new standard while another one has been used, by either 'side' in the past.

The RM says the only questionable aspect of Wagglebee's post is that it should have been a private mail to her.

And, as it happens, I almost agree with you. I wish we could establish a formula wherewith the maker of the OP could bracket a potentially controversial part of a document and disclaim any adverse intent -- which would impose upon the participants in the thread a duty not to refer to the bracketed portion.

Or, worst case, an OP with such a post might require a descent to "Ecumenical" protection from Caucus protection.

For me, until we got to the part where we Catholics are all thin-skinned, gnat-straining wussies, this was an academic exercise only.

[the_conscience]

found a but caddish.

I don't know what a but caddish is but I'm pretty sure I don't want to find one. ;P

That should count for something.

And it did. The designation was dropped. I don't expect the RM to be a Historical theologian and have all these questions of history at his/her fingertips. One Orthodox writer I read was fairly sure that Lucaris was not directing any arrows at the Bishop of Rome but rather, because of controversies he was having with other Eastern Bishops, directing them, if at all, toward the East. The problem is that the RM relied upon a Romanist gnat-strainers interpretation. Maybe a little more care is needed not to just react to the first wail and not simply repeat an allegation, "thinly veiled", that the first gnat-strainer trumps up.

[RnMomof7]

The LDS do not believe in the Trinity, the Catholics do - but both LDS and Catholic beliefs are subjected to intense challenges and ridicule on "open" town square format RF threads.

I was not aware that protestants and catholics had a different definition of the trinity..seeing we all affirm the ecumenical councils and creeds

The thought of cutting protestants out of such a discussion would actually be very unfair

I would also point out that members of the LDS would disagree with the assertion they do not believe in the trinity.. they would say they do.. that the father, son and holy ghost are one in agreement ..

[Religion Moderator]

Gee...that sounds very much like the "anti-Trinitarians" may indulge their disbelief of the Trinity under the caucus label with no allowance made for the "Pro-Trinitarians" to object.

In the example, the LDS/Catholic Caucus would discuss Trinitarian belief - one side pro and one side con. Non-members would not allowed to disrupt the caucus simply because they share a belief whether for or against.

Instead, the non-members might post a similar article as "open" - or wait at least four hours and post the same article as "open."

[Lorica]

This thread was a total scam from the get go and the poster was called on it.

Bears repeating.

And 273 posts later, the caucus designation has been removed, it's been hashed out back and forth, (but not necessarily yet to everyone's satisfaction); allegations made and refuted, and the religion moderator has been thoroughly pinged. Another caucus thread subject by the original poster has crashed and burned, and then all will move on to the next thread of the moment. Just another day in the religion forum.

[wmfights]

One of those times we will disagree. I'm all for the devotional threads, but other than that I say lets have at it. Free Speech!

[don-o]

So. How you coming along with that Orthodox / Protestant Caucus Number Two? You did say we would be “surprised” at the Orthodox who would show up. I can hardly wait. I love surprises!

[Mrs. Don-o]

Go for four! Go for four!

[greyfoxx39]

Thanks for the explanation.

In the example, the LDS/Catholic Caucus would discuss Trinitarian belief - one side pro and one side con.

THAT sounds like an "Ecumenical Caucus" to me, just no disagreeing allowed....oh well...;)

I think the Trinity (AND the Bible) will survive it all.

WWJD...or say about all this?

[trisham]

LOL! All four of you are AWESOME!