I see that Isa has had his account placed "Under Review" - in looking at his posts, I don't see any clear indication as to what triggered it - but, the post may have been deleted.
No, to their credit, it is still up and unedited. When I pull it up, it shows a red note with infraction on my screen.
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?p=3163827&highlight=Latin#post3163827The thread is the old one argument that the Orthodox have gone astray because it "allows" divorce, whereas Rome's annullments presreves the sanctity of marriage.
A lot of people involved I think won't see a difference from a divorced from a "anullled" couple. I am sure the children won't.
Some say that the anullment process was "healing." I hope it is, but how mystifies me, as the decison rests not on the events of what led to the breakdown of the marriage (and only broken, not invalid marriage, go into the tribunal), but on the events BEFORE the marriage (which admittedly might be the source of the problem, but the analysis is stopping short). I don't see any follow up to make sure one doesn't get into another "invalid" marriage. Catharsis by denying the marriage existed.
I can see how the process might make one reflect.
The review and then suspension was over the final comment:
"And I haven't. Now we can talk Catholic to Latin."
which I was told was uncharitable and disappointing coming from someone "we know" to be of "deep faith" (were that I merited such a description. Little Faith is more like it).
Laka posted a "things that ought to/need to change" type of thread, which I note was edited by Ms Grant, suggesting that he either crossed or ran too close to the line also - but, for now, his account appears to be intact.
I noticed that Iambic Pen's post.
They are moving much faster nowadays.
It will be interesting to hear what the suspended notice gives for the length of his exile
Yes.
It might have been waiting for me to open the PM from the moderator (btw, not katherine grant
).
I saw the "under review," opened the PM, and then the "suspended" came up shortly afterwards.
Then I saw the Happy Birthday message from CAF.
My penance was two weeks.
I believe that the entire change comes as a directive from Karl Keating to Therese Martin. I always respected the CAF for having a very open forum, and posted several times (in those days) that I appreciated what Karl Keating and his organization had done with the Eastern Christianity section. Give credit where it is due I say 
I was of like mind.
I might just as well recognize the fact that the new policy comes straight from the top as well. The old forum must have either come as an embarrassment to them, or it threatened the flow of money. I refuse to cooperate with that new management style, becoming a foil for their dominating arguments. Clearly now there is an agenda to tightly control the flow of information, Isa was posting some astounding things on there up to these last few days and it made someone somewhere uncomfortable.
Yes, I think the comment was somewhat of a last straw. I have posted several times that the bragging of the anullment process turns my stomach (as does the thought that Orthodoxy "allows divorce"). I think every anullment is a tragedy, as is every divorce. The divorce industry has done quite a job selling divorce as a solution, even a diserable growing process (remember the comment that the cause of the "gender gap" was that George Bush Sr. reminded every woman of her "first husband," assuming of course that every woman should have more). That the anullment tribunal should provide a source of pride stuns me.
Hypocrisy: the tribute vice pays to virtue. I have not shyed away from calling it as I see it. And I can tell many don't like that type of bare knuckled scrutiny of it.
I would hope he can spend more time here, but there does not seem to be the same level of activity (or number of challenging perspectives) on this site, I am sure you can see what I mean.
I'm not much of a singer to the choir. Nor telling people what they already know. I talk too much already. The rules here allow for longer editing time, which cuts down on posts.
CAF presents a more dire need of education.
Isa has made a few comments on there that some people found insulting, although I'm not quite sure anything that he said merited being banned. Personally, I think CAF is just being a little uptight about not wanting anymore arguments of the scale that often occured on the EC forum. The fights often went far beyond theology into personal insults, and you must acknowledge that the guilty parties came from both sides.
Issue of Catholic vs. Latin came, as one can see on the thread in question, by the "this-is-our-forum" trump card.
The issue of the use of terms has been a sticking point for me. The rules here are spelled out, and I use what terms in good conscience I can use. I can't use "Catholic" in reference to those now in Rome, as many of their appologist use the mere identity of terms to that used by St. Ignatius as proof of their position the last 1900 centuries. And of course the problem that we Orthodox everyday confess that we believe in "One, Holy, CATHOLIC, and Apostolic Church," by which we mean us, not the present administration of Rome. So it (in English, not in most other languages) confuses rather than clarifies. I try to be 100% Catholic, but I won't bend my knee to Rome until he confesses the Orthdox Faith.
I don't use Roman because 1) the so called Byzantines (I term I NEVER use) were the Romans, 2) my ex-wife is Romanian, and although she is not Orthodox (she was told never to come back) many of the Romanians thoroughly are, and they are also 100% Roman (I refer to the Romans to my sons as "your ancestors" stramosii vostri).
I trust I don't have to explain papist (though in my protestant days, that was on the table).
As I have posted both here and there numerous times that I accept the validity of sacraments of those under Rome (except baptism of desire), and went after a couple of swipes against their church a number of times and swipes against things we have in common. And my admiration for JP II the Great, and B XVI.
So my comment came in the context of the particular thread. I thought that according to the new regime, the thread was misposted. But then I don't think much of the change of rules: indeed for some time I would not post there, and still would hesitate. Only when I felt that something point cried out to be made, such as the OP saying they were considering Orthodoxy or John Pipe (don't recall an Apostle by that name), I jumped in.
The issue was presented that the Orthodox will remarry the divorced, as a sure sign of deviation from the Fathers, and that "since anullment doesn't equal divorce," that Rome was "in the clear" and all is well. 60,000 a year in this country alone is not well (thought better than the divorce statistics overall. But how many bother with an annullment?). The intent of this was to show the potential Orthodox convert (who stated they
had, past tense, left Rome) had to "come to grips" that the Orthodox had deviated.
As I stated "I've always found it odd to decide a church based on what it says is bad things (the Latin church does say anullments are bad, like the Orthodox say divorce is bad, nay evil, no?)" and "If this issue wasn't brought up with such triumphalism and sanctimony, the issue of annulments being Latin divorces wouldn't come up." For that, I was reminded that this was a "Catholic" forum (meaning, I wasn't expressing Catholic thought).
By the time they posted this, though, the mods had gotten a hold of the thread, and moved it in Non-Catholic Religion. So I noted that we were now where a "non-catholic" could express his views, for which I was reminded that it was still a "Catholic forum" and that I couldn't be left to my "own devices."
Hence the comment.
Looking back, on a second thought, I thought that the comment might be misconstrued and thought of changing it. But the deadline had passed, so I thought, "so be it."
That said, I think that CAF is actually doing a disservice to its members by shutting down the alternate viewpoints. I learned a lot fro the old EC forums and although I will never be convinced that Catholicism is not the true Church, I thoroughly enjoyed the theological dialogue over there. Maybe one day CAF will come back nto its senses when it realizes what it has lost.
One can only hope.
Yet I am still perplexed by something.....
I'm not. I think Arsenios/maqth hit the nail on the head (perhaps a bit too caustic though): many posters under Rome I see ended up on the other side.
The RC /protestant debates can get very inflamatory--as much if not more so than any RC/Orthodox debate. Yet there is much tolerance for the protestants. And I have not heard of any secret non-labeled banning of the protestant membership.
Yes, I've jumped in on a couple to the defense of Rome (one of my recent posts shot down a protestant who numbered Vatican among the Seven Hills of Rome, proof that she was the Whore of Babylon. I pointed out that the Vatican was NOT one of the seven, and was outside the city walls at the time of Revelation.
I must have been really bad. After all, didn't they tell Fr. Ambrose that they didn't want to embarass him?
The PM I got said that the status would be visible to me and the mods, but no one else. Evidently not (though they might have mean the mark on the "offending" post).
I am wondering why Karl and the gang are so fearful of an educated Orthodox participation.
I've gotten several kind PMs stating that they are embracing Orthodoxy in part because of my posts. Although it's easy to sell a product that sells itself, still this is the reason why I continued to post. (I can't access my PMs now, so I'm wondering what's happening with them now).
Not to proselytise, but that Orthodoxy's message and image gets out: the Holy Spirit must take full responsibility if that gets out of hand.
Hang on a bit - it's not just educated Orthodox who are being banned - it's anyone with the label of Eastern whatever
Yes, it seem the message to those loyal to both Roman and the Traditions of their Fathers are being told "this church isn't big enough for the two of us."
Look at the action last night - in a space of 2 hours Isa went from being under review to being suspended- and at a time when , as far as I know, all good Americans are in their beds . So some Mod/Admin/whatever on CAF is doing things overnight
sorry I have just realised that I used the word banned when he was suspended - I have made the correction . Hopefully he will be permitted to post once he has served his term in exile - though as yet we have not heard from Isa how long this is to be .
I knew I would have to take some time (that I don't really have) to respond. So I had to wait for the opportunity.
