Topic: catholic answers forum bars orthodox dicussion

[JoeS]

That remains to be seen, and I am not entirely sure it is a good thing to be doing...I somehow feel like I have agreed
to "burn just a tiny bit of incense" to avoid consequences, thinking it won't compromise my faith or affect my soul.   


Do you have some inside information? 

No, just going on what you stated:

" I received a message, but can't seem to reply or get any out.  Is this  something that happens before you get banned, or a sign that you are being watched/  prevented from communicating with other CAF members?"

Have you been warned or suspended yet?

[kaarina33]

I can still post as of this moment; but maybe they finally took a close look at my profile picture and are slowly shutting me down.
  Hope this doesn't break any rules here; I don't know if I can post a picture like this.

[maqhth]

I have no clue. There were no warning this morning when I posted. Then when I went to look at the site, I received the lock out notice. Other than the items I listed above, I have no clue what I could have done. The only thing I can THINK of, is that they read on here what I have written.

That is a pattern of their pathos that I have observed - They are very afraid of the truth bursting forth, so when they see someone here who still CAN post, who is definitely NOT sympathetic with their pathos and with their desire to conceal the truth, they make sure, preemptively, to make that person not ABLE to tell the truth...  I got yanked for making comments on Rusty's blog that the admin was reading - I never posted anything on CAF after the beginning of the meltdown, for I had been on a three day suspension by Joe, and had not been stoppered...  But she just couldn't take the comments I was making on a private blogsite of one of her contributors who had been instrumental in the event by having complained...  He had no idea that the admins would do what they did...


3rd World petty dictators do the same thing, except they murder slowly the ones they suspect... CAF merely clicks a mouse...  I am not sure which is worse... :-)

Arsenios

[Alexius]

From it:

Mickey's response:

Oh Mickey! How is it that things have changed so much 

In Jesus Christ,

Gregory Palamas wrote that? And all this time I thought he was Orthodox...

[ialmisry]

That is a pattern of their pathos that I have observed - They are very afraid of the truth bursting forth, so when they see someone here who still CAN post, who is definitely NOT sympathetic with their pathos and with their desire to conceal the truth, they make sure, preemptively, to make that person not ABLE to tell the truth...  I got yanked for making comments on Rusty's blog that the admin was reading - I never posted anything on CAF after the beginning of the meltdown, for I had been on a three day suspension by Joe, and had not been stoppered...  But she just couldn't take the comments I was making on a private blogsite of one of her contributors who had been instrumental in the event by having complained...  He had no idea that the admins would do what they did...


3rd World petty dictators do the same thing, except they murder slowly the ones they suspect... CAF merely clicks a mouse...  I am not sure which is worse... :-)

Arsenios

Sorry, I'm bad with names.  Who was/is Rusty, and what blogspot was that?

I've noticed that the Latins on the ECathF can't keep the Orthodox out of their disputes.  I try to address them in Apologetics and NCR, where I don't have to, at least according to no rule I've seen, hide the Orthodox position.  However, someone in a post publically accused me of questioning moderation action, though I've haven't received anything official. In fact, the only thing I've gotten was a PM about a thread I opened which they said was a duplicate.

Btw, reader: your avatar.  Is that you peeking at us?

[Marc1152]

I have no clue. There were no warning this morning when I posted. Then when I went to look at the site, I received the lock out notice. Other than the items I listed above, I have no clue what I could have done. The only thing I can THINK of, is that they read on here what I have written.

It may  be that you post here and were simply rounded up along with all the usual suspects....

[ialmisry]

It may  be that you post here and were simply rounded up along with all the usual suspects....

Kill them all, God knows His own, let Him sort them out. :knight2: :knight2: :knight2: :knight2:

sigh, I do miss those emoticons they have.

[Hesychios]

Sorry, I'm bad with names.  Who was/is Rusty, and what blogspot was that?

That was a person called tizzidale.

He and Diane are friends. He has a link to his blog in his signature at CAF, he started the first thread in the "reeducation camp" forum and a whole bunch of people found their way individually to his site, it was kind of eery but he became a focal point briefly.

I think a lot of people blame him (and his complaints) for what happened, but it could just as easily be coincidence.

Michael

[Hesychios]

Now I am locked out! I have been playing really nice lately too!

I can't remember seeing a thing you posted...what name was it under...Quinault?

Michael

[Quinault]

I can't remember seeing a thing you posted...what name was it under...Quinault?

Michael

Yep, same username. I have never been a paticularly noticable person in terms of EO. I DID private message a man the addy here because he SPECIFICALLY asked for it in a thread. But, even then I didn't do so publically merely in pm. The only thing that would indicate I am even associated with EO is that fact that my profile on CAF says I am an EO inquirer.

[ialmisry]

That was a person called tizzidale.

He and Diane are friends. He has a link to his blog in his signature at CAF, he started the first thread in the "reeducation camp" forum and a whole bunch of people found their way individually to his site, it was kind of eery but he became a focal point briefly.

I think a lot of people blame him (and his complaints) for what happened, but it could just as easily be coincidence.

Michael

That was my guess (as to Rusty's identy, but I couldn't find confirmation quickly).  I posted a few on his spot after the ax.

Yes, what ever to Diane a/k/a Theodora Zoe?

I notice that a number are posting publicly on some threads I've started that I am breaking forum rules, in particular proselytizing.  Evidently stating the Orthodox position/response is taboo.

[Joab Anias]

That was a person called tizzidale.

He and Diane are friends. He has a link to his blog in his signature at CAF, he started the first thread in the "reeducation camp" forum and a whole bunch of people found their way individually to his site, it was kind of eery but he became a focal point briefly.

I think a lot of people blame him (and his complaints) for what happened, but it could just as easily be coincidence.

Michael

Do you have a link to that blog?

Peace.

[Irish Hermit]

Do you have a link to that blog?

*
becominghinged.wordpress.com/

Add http:// in front.  But there is no www.

[Joab Anias]

*
becominghinged.wordpress.com/

Add http:// in front.  But there is no www.

Thanks Fr.

[wynd]

Do you have a link to that blog?

Specifically, look at the comments of the post entitled "Catholic Answers and the Orthodox" from November 7. I'm not so sure how relevant the rest of the blog is.

[Magicsilence]

*
becominghinged.wordpress.com/

Add http:// in front.  But there is no www.

I really don't understand the rule not allowing direct clickable links, if we are then allowed to post them without the www. or http:// and then tell people to add them in.

What does it achieve?

The only thing I can think of is preventing a rise on google rankings because of an increase of pointer pages.

?

In Jesus Christ,

[Mickey]

Oh Mickey! How is it that things have changed so much 

Much prayer and discernment. 

[stanley123]

There was a thread on the EC forum titled something like: What are you doing for unity? and various issues were brought up by Catholic and Orthodox posters. CAF pulled it for a while, but then decided to retitle it: What are the Catholic and Orthodox Churches doing to get unity? and put it into the non-Catholic forum. So for them unity between Catholics and Orthodox belongs in the non-Catholic religions forum? It doesn't make too much sense to me, but there it is. 

[Heracleides]

There was a thread on the EC forum titled something like: What are you doing for unity? and various issues were brought up by Catholic and Orthodox posters. CAF pulled it for a while, but then decided to retitle it: What are the Catholic and Orthodox Churches doing to get unity? and put it into the non-Catholic forum. So for them unity between Catholics and Orthodox belongs in the non-Catholic religions forum? It doesn't make too much sense to me, but there it is. 

A quite clear statement regarding their efforts towards unity - no? 

[Irish Hermit]

CAF pulled it for a while, but then decided to retitle it: What are the Catholic and Orthodox Churches doing to get unity? and put it into the non-Catholic forum. So for them unity between Catholics and Orthodox belongs in the non-Catholic religions forum?

CAF seems very out of touch with the efforts of Pope John Paul and Pope Benedict for unity.

------------------
2005.06.07 AP:
JUNE 7, 2005

Pope's dream: Healing ancient Christian rift a distant glimmer

BRIAN MURPHY
The Associated Press

ATHENS, Greece - It's a goal that has eluded Christianity for nearly 1,000 years: mending the rifts between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches. Pope Benedict XVI has declared a "fundamental commitment" to heal the divide, and this week will engage in an indirect round of talks with the Russian Orthodox. In spiritual terms, it's an epic invitation to repair the broken foundation of the faith - at a time when the European Union is erasing the last Cold War separations and some Christian leaders appeal for greater cooperation to challenge the rise of militant Islam.

But then comes a reality check. Even the smallest steps toward
reconciliation can kick up disputes that require the finesse of a diplomat and the perspective of a historian to overcome. And, in the end, any serious bids at rapprochement will force the Vatican to confront some core differences such as honoring Orthodoxy's traditions of autonomous leadership and married clergy.

Greek theologian Athanasios Papathanasiou calls it "the pain of brotherly debate." It's made more acute because the ancient divide reaches beyond religious differences, which are mostly over liturgical points and joint recognition of sacraments. The bigger gulf, clerics and theologians say, is one of conflicting perceptions and priorities. When Vatican leaders look east, they see a patchwork of Orthodox churches with a shared fellowship in the roots of Christianity. May 29 in Italy's Adriatic port of Bari, Benedict declared a "fundamental commitment" to advance dialogue with the leaders of the world's 200 million Orthodox [sic] and 1.1 billion Catholics.

The Orthodox view of the West, however, is often shaded by historical grievances - religious and political - and deep suspicion of Vatican motives and power. "It's not an even equation," said Thomas Groome, director of the Boston College Institute of Religious Education and Pastoral Ministry. "The deeper
skepticism to any improved relations resides within Orthodoxy."
No clear vision exists about what type of unity is even possible or desirable. For the faithful, one important landmark would be a formal pact on mutual recognition of baptism, marriage and other aspects of church life. But that would need the Orthodox to speak in a single voice - something that's nearly impossible now. The Orthodox world is divided among more than a dozen autonomous churches and other congregations, each with different views.

The Vatican, too, could be pushed into some unfamiliar spots.
Closer bonds with married Orthodox clergy don't present a distinct problem. The Vatican's priestly ranks include married Eastern Rite clerics and some Anglican priests who converted to Catholicism. It could, however, put added pressure on the Vatican to reconsider its ban on married clergy. A bigger challenge is sorting out the main reason for the split 10 centuries ago: the clout of the papacy versus the Orthodox view of equal distribution of power among its churches.

"Can Rome devise a new way of thinking of primacy that does not lead to dominance over any other churches?" said Anton Vrame, director of the Patriarch Athenagoras Orthodox Institute in Berkeley, Calif. "That is the question only Benedict and the Vatican can answer." It may not be needed for a long time. Church experts from both sides believe any increased collaboration in coming years may be slow and safe - such as possible joint declarations on social issues or sharing resources for aid work and Christian education. A hint of common ground emerged last month in Ukraine, where Catholic and Orthodox leaders put aside their many internal disputes to urge the government to keep Christian-oriented classes in schools.
__________________
The truth will make you odd. -Flannery O'Connor

[Entscheidungsproblem]

I really don't understand the rule not allowing direct clickable links, if we are then allowed to post them without the www. or http:// and then tell people to add them in.

What does it achieve?

The only thing I can think of is preventing a rise on google rankings because of an increase of pointer pages.

?

In Jesus Christ,

If a link is relative to the discussion at hand, nothing is wrong with it.  We just don't want people linking to or advertising a website/blog/etc that offers nothing to the discussion nor holds any relative information.

[Anastasios]

The rules in regards to blogs seemed contradictory so I have brought this up with the team and we will issue a clarification in the board news policy thread soon.

[FrChris]

I've updated the compendium of Board Policies thread in Board News to explain more fully the intention of the policy. Currently it now reads:

2) Links to one's own blog as a means of advertisement, without citing the relevant part of the blog that the author is quoting, are not allowed.  However, alerting users to another blog is acceptable as long as it is relevant to a thread.

*Note: links in your signature are permissible and do not require authorization

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,13455.0.html
reply #1

[Anastasios]

Thank you Fr Chris!

[Jakub]

Would you buy a used car from this smiling and innocent looking young man ?

james

[Irish Hermit]

There was a thread on the EC forum titled something like: What are you doing for unity? and various issues were brought up by Catholic and Orthodox posters. CAF pulled it for a while, but then decided to retitle it: What are the Catholic and Orthodox Churches doing to get unity? and put it into the non-Catholic forum. So for them unity between Catholics and Orthodox belongs in the non-Catholic religions forum? It doesn't make too much sense to me, but there it is. 

*
It makes no sense to me either.  The Eastern Catholic Churches are historically and commonly known as Uniate Churches (but not in the States it seems where the pejorative sense of this word has taken the upper hand.)   But their entire purpose as evidenced by their historical appellation is that of unity, of drawing the Orthodox Churches into a union with Rome.   No thread could be more appropriate on an Eastern Catholic Forum and it is a legitimate question: what are the Eastern Catholic Uniates doing to foster the unity for which they were created?

[Irish Hermit]

Would you buy a used car from this smiling and innocent looking young man ?

The link would make me pause!!

 http://www.hotcar.org   

[Joab Anias]

Off topic:

Merry Christmas to all Eastern Christians!

On topic:

[Irish Melkite]

My first time here in a week or so. If anyone has been reading the EC forum over there at CAF, you can't have missed the 2 latest Latin triumphalists to sign on. These 2 - XtusVictor and Arthur something or other - particularly the former, make some of the others we've endured look like ecumenists by comparison. XV has a real thing for the Melkites, to the point where I've basically ceased bothering to respond to him.

I did learn (surprise to me, Isa, Michael, and several other folk) that the dastardly RO now have a Bishop of Rome. Have you guys no shame 

Someone - I believe XV - had the temerity to refer to Saint Alexis Toth as "Al Toth" - the comment was still there, having passed muster as best I can tell, despite the absolute insult and disrespect demonstrated.

The EC forum is truly a caricature of anything approaching meaningful discussion and the Orthodox threads in the Non-Catholic Forum are as bad or worse.
A sad, sad end to what was a remarkable discussion environment. Yeshua posted something to the effect that there seemed to be a distinct lack of charity afoot, something the revamp was supposed to correct and despite the fact that the purported "offenders" were no longer around. I fear for his continued presence there.

Many years,

Neil
 

[username!]

Neil,
What I don't understand is a Roman Catholic can post on the EC forum over there and literally rip apart the Melkites.  I mean harsh words, distaste, and everything.  I don't understand how he can bash the Melkites, who are a part of his Church and get away with it?   And none of his posts have been removed nor has there been any public warning about bashing Melkites or any other Eastern Catholic Churches as of yet over there.  I didn't know much about the banning until well after it happened.  I didn't know anything more about it until I spent some time today reading this huge thread. 
If it is a place for Catholics to learn about the Eastern Catholic Churches over there, then why are they allowing Latins to literally shred Melkites?  Amazing indeed.

[montalban]

I was a regular poster there till they treated my brothers so poorly.

[stashko]

I was a regular poster there till they treated my brothers so poorly.

Hello brother..nice to see or hear you here..allways liked your posts ....stashko.....

[yeshua]

Yeshua posted something to the effect that there seemed to be a distinct lack of charity afoot, something the revamp was supposed to correct and despite the fact that the purported "offenders" were no longer around. I fear for his continued presence there.

Greetings Neil,

I made the comment to mention how the decision to ban the Orthodox posters was not the source of the choking atmosphere on the forum. I always said the anti-Catholic comments that some Orthodox posters made came about mostly because of the inappropriate and uncharitable behavior of some Latins, the latter of which is rampant on the current EC forum. I will not be participating little if at all once the new year comes about. Thank you for the concern. 

Peace and God Bless.

[montalban]

Hello brother..nice to see or hear you here..allways liked your posts ....stashko.....

Thanks. I tend to hang out more on Christian forums;
http://foru.ms/f76-non-christian-religion.html

Which itself is troublesome. The guy who started this wanted simply to have the biggest religion forum in the world and so has gone for quanitity over quality - hence there's a huge amount of staff that are cultural relativst Christians (weak Christians* ), or non-Christians!


* When Christians believe that Christianity is just one of a number of viable alternative life-style choices I consider them to be weak Christians.

[ialmisry]

Thanks. I tend to hang out more on Christian forums;
http://foru.ms/f76-non-christian-religion.html

Which itself is troublesome. The guy who started this wanted simply to have the biggest religion forum in the world and so has gone for quanitity over quality - hence there's a huge amount of staff that are cultural relativst Christians (weak Christians* ), or non-Christians!


* When Christians believe that Christianity is just one of a number of viable alternative life-style choices I consider them to be weak Christians.

Yes, Christ is the stroll, opinion and the suggestion, and not the Way, the Truth and the Life.

[montalban]

Yes, Christ is the stroll, opinion and the suggestion, and not the Way, the Truth and the Life.

I had a thread on christian forums called "weak Chrisitans" but they pulled it.

They've banned me twice too! Yet somehow I'm able to get back on it, as Montalban!

[the slave]

I'm ending myself laughing at the moment 

I suddenly realised I had not checked some of my web based e-mail accounts recently so went to Hotmail and what did I find there ??

7 [ yes seven ] e-mails from CAF  3 of them AFTER my banning notice [ which BTW is very very detailed ]

One of the ones before it was from a staff member of CAF with some info I had requested which for some unknown reason they felt it was better to send by e-mail.

I have even been offered a place on the CAF lecture trip to Florence at a mere $500 off the original price of $5495 [ plus a single room extra cost of $1500 ]  . The deposit is a mere $1000 AND you still have some meals to pay for as well AND pay for your own flights out to Florence.

Now I really am surprised that as a result of the banning they have not removed my name from all their registers .

Anyone else had this ?

[kaarina33]

still not banned, still walking on eggshells, but stomping my foot every now and then...and I didn't get an invite, full price or discount.

Did they mention what is was they wanted to lecture you about?


I think this is the one that offers a chance at getting partial indulgences for visiting some church or another.  I'd seriously consider it.

[the slave]

Sure they did - it was 10 days in Florence walking round museums  churches etc when they were closed to normal visitors - with a learned guide , of course  and I think some days out too . I suspect that you are paying very handsomely for the lecturers and guides that are accompanying the group - after all if it's like the UK , these visiting lecturers pay for nothing AND get an honorarium for doing the lecturing.

Sorry even at the wonderful exchange rate we have at present I still can't afford $8500+ and fares to Italy and spending money .

I could go on a wonderful cruise for a month for far less than half  that - and it would be all inclusive.

Mind you - it would be very very tempting to go and let out that I was banned from their Forum

[The Iambic Pen]

Mind you - it would be very very tempting to go and let out that I was banned from their Forum

It would be a great conversation starter... 

[montalban]

Anyone else had this ?

Not from that site. I've been banned twice from christianforums, yet somehow, under the same login I'm there again.

I discovered this by accident. I went to that site to pick some quotes out from something I'd argued and discovered I've got full access again.

One time, after one banning, I got an e-mail from a staffer saying I've been banned again, as another UserName, that I'd never used - meaning that they banned someone else thinking it was me!

[prodromos]

Oh the irony.

I just came across a thread on CA forums in their Apologetics sub forum titled
" I got banned from a 'Christian' forum........can you believe it?"

It started halfway through December and is up to 80 posts.

[Peter J]

Oh the irony.

I just came across a thread on CA forums in their Apologetics sub forum titled
" I got banned from a 'Christian' forum........can you believe it?"

Thanks for a good chuckle. 

[ialmisry]

I was banned from at least one forum, a prelude to more?

A number of posters  have all but called for that on the public forum (supposedly against the rules).  I was castigated for the "u" word in a post that predated the ban on the word.

I was told that "not only" did the moderator have to delete one of your posts "for being uncharitable," but that she saw that I was "of the Orthodox communion not the Latin communion."

You don't have to look far over my 4000+ posts to see I belonged to the Orthodox.  The content is quite graphic on that.  But since it says "Orthodox in Communion with the Pope of Alexandria," at the bottom of every post, you wouldn't have to look it up, not even my profile which says Arab Orthodox.

I looked at the forum rules, and I didn't see anything about having to be "of the Latin communion" to post (I also noticed the rules have not been updated, and still has "Eastern Chrisitianity:learn the history, spirituality, and practices of Eastern & Oriental Churches, Catholic and Orthodox ).

The moderator "not only," it seems, had to delete my post: she also closed the thread on which I posted it three minutes later.

The offense:

The thread was "The Legitimacy of Today's Annullments," on which I posted:


"Yes. P-H-A-R-I-S-E-E. They are still good at making null the commandment of God, keeping the letter and ignoring the spirit.  Marriage is a sacrament...." [that's all I was able to recover from google, nor is the post that I was replying to seem to be there].

I don't remember exactly what the post I was responding to said, but the "Yes" was, I think, to something about abolishing the annullment tribunal or some such thing.  (Gotta rember to save things on CAF somewhere else, never know when and what would disappear ).

The moderator further dictated that "since [ I ] obviously have no understanding of Latin liturgy and sacraments, but only want to stir the pot," I am "not to post in the Liturgy and Sacrments forum."

Soooo I can, according to their own canons, receive their sacraments  , just not talk about them.

I received their communion innumerable times when I was Luthe ran, and confession once (went to a Latin school).  And the religious pointed out frequently how I put my classmates (all of that communion) to shame when it came to knowledge of their faith.

That I don't agree with them is NOT evidence that I don't know about their liturgy and sacraments.  I just call them as I see them, and having been involved with two friends about the annullment process and I see similar hypocrisy as the court system (Illinois is technically a fault state.  It used to be said that there is only two grounds for divorce in Illinois, adultery and perjury.  Now there's just perjury).

I was told that if I wanted to talk about "annulment and marriage issues of your own communion"  I should "take [my] opinions" to the Non-Catholic Religions forum.  Since we Orthodox don't have "annulment and marriage issues," there's nothing to talk about.

She ended "Be aware" (typo for Beware!? ), violation would result in my permanent banning. :x (that's tape).

NOTE: I skimmed through the board news to make sure I wasn't violating any rule here. Did I miss one?

[Irish Melkite]

I have been suspended from CA for a period of 2 weeks for commenting that I recollected that the rule enunciated by Joe Monahan regarding the "U" term was that it was only verboten when used in a derogatory manner. Apparently, it was of no consequence that I subsequently edited my post to note that I had just discovered the rule to have recently changed. I added that postscript after I skimmed back thru the thread and discovered a post by Ms Grant containing a link to the forum policy on use of "schismatic, heretic. and uniate". Her policy had been posted the day prior and, on first glance, was seemingly a restatement of the earlier rule - until it made a 90 degree turn about halfway through the text. The new rule, as authored by Ms Grant, appears as a sticky at the top of both the EC and NCR fora. It can be viewed at  forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=208849  (Father Ambrose or Michael, is my memory failing or did Joe not rule as I remembered?)

My offense was to have interfered with Moderator duties - "a serious violation of CAF rules" - regarding which I had been previously warned.

Interestingly, an effort to google Joe's earlier posts on the topic was non-productive, suggesting that CA may have been successful in getting the old EC archives blocked from being searched via Google. I'm wondering if Father Ambrose or anyone else has tried that technique lately and, if so, whether they've been successful or not?

Btw. I got a "suspended" label - guess I should have just cut my losses and signed out after a recent post in which I lamented the necessity of defending the Catholicity of my Church - an Eastern Catholic Church - from attacks by Latins. However, I was involved in posting to several informational threads and thought it only fair to finish the exchanges into which I had entered. Ah well, 10 years on the web and only suspended twice - both at CAF - says something I guess, but I'm not sure what.

Many years,

Neil