I am back for a bit

[ServusMariae]

Btw St Columba, please accept my (very belated) confetti shower for you. Welcome back!

[St. Columba]

As always, I am grateful for the kind words.  But QMR far, far exceeds me in his greatness as a poster.  I haven't a tenth of his intellect.  There is, however, something tragic about him—and that probably makes him even all the more special.  More than anyone I have ever come across, he is able to pick apart every essential flaw in traditional Catholicism with a ruthless proficiency and exactitude.  When he argues against it, he does so with such a vociferousness, a confidence, a razor-sharp clarity, and sometimes a wicked rooster-strut arrogance. 

But this comes with a curse, because when he tries to argue in favor of his "semi-trad" position and pro-Vatican II apologia, he is unfortunately limp, ineffectual, and inept.  In a way he exemplifies the dreaded Catch-22.  It's disquieting to watch someone try to defend the indefensible: that truth is relative.  If that was credible, no one would've become a traditional Catholic in the first place.  But we are all fallible in the end.  It reminds me of the scene in Return of the Jedi when Luke finally unmasks Darth Vader (his father, his nemesis, the indefatigable Dark Lord of the Sith—every fearsome paragon of strength and power) and gazes on the face of a fragile and withered old man.

You are too modest my friend.  You are one smart cookie Pon.

Well, I suppose I should disclose that his semi-trad position is precisely my own, and always has been.  I just don`t get why he hangs out here so much, if traditionalism is such a weak premise. 

[Mono no aware]

It reminds me of the scene in Return of the Jedi when Luke finally unmasks Darth Vader (his father, his nemesis, the indefatigable Dark Lord of the Sith—every fearsome paragon of strength and power) and gazes on the face of a fragile and withered old man.

I just discussed that with the kids of a fellow parishioner-friend in the car some hours back. They say he's akin to overlord Kylo Ren.

I would actually agree with those kids.  I thought that new Star Wars movie was just rehashing a lot of the old characters from the earlier installments; there was too much of the familiar, it seemed like a retread.  But when George Lucas was conceiving the original movies as a young man in the 1970s, he was an avid reader of Joseph Campbell.  The classic Star Wars movies are steeped in archetypes.

[St. Columba]

As always, I am grateful for the kind words.  But QMR far, far exceeds me in his greatness as a poster.  I haven't a tenth of his intellect.  There is, however, something tragic about him—and that probably makes him even all the more special.  More than anyone I have ever come across, he is able to pick apart every essential flaw in traditional Catholicism with a ruthless proficiency and exactitude.  When he argues against it, he does so with such a vociferousness, a confidence, a razor-sharp clarity, and sometimes a wicked rooster-strut arrogance. 

But this comes with a curse, because when he tries to argue in favor of his "semi-trad" position and pro-Vatican II apologia, he is unfortunately limp, ineffectual, and inept.  In a way he exemplifies the dreaded Catch-22.  It's disquieting to watch someone try to defend the indefensible: that truth is relative.  If that was credible, no one would've become a traditional Catholic in the first place.  But we are all fallible in the end.  It reminds me of the scene in Return of the Jedi when Luke finally unmasks Darth Vader (his father, his nemesis, the indefatigable Dark Lord of the Sith—every fearsome paragon of strength and power) and gazes on the face of a fragile and withered old man.

You are too modest my friend.  You are one smart cookie Pon.

Well, I suppose I should disclose that his semi-trad position is precisely my own, and always has been.  I just don`t get why he hangs out here so much, if traditionalism is such a weak premise.

or for that matter, you Pon....why do you come here so often? 

[ServusMariae]

I would actually agree with those kids.  I thought that new Star Wars movie was just rehashing a lot of the old characters from the earlier installments; there was too much of the familiar, it seemed like a retread.  But when George Lucas was conceiving the original movies a young man in the 1970s, he was an avid reader of Joseph Campbell.  The classic Star Wars movies are steeped in archetypes.

yeah, the classics are always the best with the archetypes, but the whole Star Wars storyline is crazily complicated to go through in 1 mere car ride. I need to brush up my knowledge of the franchise to stay competitive with the interests of those kids ...

[Mono no aware]

You are too modest my friend.  You are one smart cookie Pon.

Well, I suppose I should disclose that his semi-trad position is precisely my own, and always has been.  I just don`t get why he hangs out here so much, if traditionalism is such a weak premise.

Gracias again, mi amigo (and welcome back).  Whatever QMR's reasons are for staying here, I for one am glad he does.  He is a crisp tonic to all the bleating triumphalism and the going around in epistemological circles.  Unfortunately the weakness of the "semi-trad" position is most exposed when it comes up against Eastern Orthodoxy, and on a recent thread QMR is fighting a losing battle against one of my newest favorite posters, Livenotonevil.

or for that matter, you Pon....why do you come here so often? 

That is the ultimate question, and I wish I knew.  Part of it is probably that I'm on my computer when I'm writing, and the internet is an irresistible form of procrastination.  But why this corner of the internet, I don't know.  Hopefully I'm on my way out, though.  I think I got most of my objections out of my system on the theodicy thread; I even made a post on there where I cracked myself up ("no St. Leonard of Port Maurice, he"), and was even more gratified when no one "thanked" it.  But I will doubtless still lurk.  I guess I spent such a massive chunk of my life on this stuff, it's always going to have some sort of strange allure.  The crass ideology of some posters repulses me, but with some others (a "few" as opposed to the "many"—shades of St. Leonard) there is a sublime expression of faith that can be captivating; a "divine spark."  To that end, it might be something like how The Imitation of Christ was one of Aldous Huxley's favorite books, even though he wasn't a Christian.

[St. Columba]

"It's disquieting to watch someone try to defend the indefensible: that truth is relative."

But perhaps, Pon, truth is multi-faceted, and at times paradoxical....like the basis of Christianity itself, the Holy Trinity.  To the myopic, the Trinity is dismissed as a contradiction, when in fact, it can be appropriated as a most subline truth (or truths).

Not the place, necessarily, to discuss this here, but I think ecumenism can logically co-exist with extra ecclesia nulla salus; religious liberty with the duties of the state; and collegiality with the Roman primacy.  For those who want to see contradiction, they will.  For those moved to see truths paradoxically coexisting, they can and will.  As your beloved Dostoevsky once remarked, "the will moves the intellect".

Some look at the cross and scoff, and say that deicide is illogical.  But when the necessary distinctions are made, deeper layers of truth reveal themselves.  To claim that Jesus on the cross is God may seem to many like defending the indefensible, but, beyond the paradoxes, is at bottom still true.

[Vetus Ordo]

I think ecumenism can logically co-exist with extra ecclesia nulla salus

Ecclesiam.

Extra requires the accusative. It cannot logically co-exist with any other grammatical case.

Vetus, I noticed your spelling of humour.  Are you Canadian like myself?

I'm afraid not.

English is not my mother tongue. It's more of a foster parent.

[Matto]

Unfortunately the weakness of the "semi-trad" position is most exposed when it comes up against Eastern Orthodoxy, and on a recent thread QMR is fighting a losing battle against one of my newest favorite posters, Livenotonevil.

I also like Livenotonevil. He says he is young and a college student but he sure knows a lot about religion. The Eastern Orthodox must school their catechumens much better than what I have received which was very little. I was raised in the Novus Ordo and now attend an SSPX Mass but it is a small mission with a visiting priest so I have never received any schooling from the SSPX except for listening to sermons (which I forget most of because I have a bad memory). When he posts it is almost like he is being told what to say by an Orthodox priest who has spent years studying the schism between the West and East. I am sympathetic to Eastern Orthodoxy (but I do not believe it). I think it makes more sense than sedevacantism or the Novus Ordo right now and if I ever abandoned traditional Catholicism (which I am not close to doing) it would probably be for Eastern Orthodoxy.

The crass ideology of some posters repulses me, but with some others (a "few" as opposed to the "many"—shades of St. Leonard) there is a sublime expression of faith that can be captivating; a "divine spark."

I think there are some interesting posters on this forum with a diversity of opinions and some very good posters who I believe would consider each other to be unorthodox. It is not a forum where a couple of dozen people beneath a moderator all say the same thing in unison and "thank" each others' posts.

Edit: More about Livenotonevil, I have read some of his posts on an Eastern Orthodox forum he is also a member of that I recently discovered and he asks tough questions there also.

[Carleendiane]

St. COLUMBA, Yerba Mate,  can this be used by a person with high blood pressure?

[St. Columba]

St. COLUMBA, Yerba Mate,  can this be used by a person with high blood pressure?

Well, it does have caffeine.  But it is said to lower and help with hypertension.  But consult your doctor to be on the safe side.

[Carleendiane]

Well, I think it is  bit less than coffee and I do drink coffee. I really want to order this, what type, fashion do you buy?

[St. Columba]

You are too modest my friend.  You are one smart cookie Pon.

Well, I suppose I should disclose that his semi-trad position is precisely my own, and always has been.  I just don`t get why he hangs out here so much, if traditionalism is such a weak premise.

Gracias again, mi amigo (and welcome back).  Whatever QMR's reasons are for staying here, I for one am glad he does.  He is a crisp tonic to all the bleating triumphalism and the going around in epistemological circles.  Unfortunately the weakness of the "semi-trad" position is most exposed when it comes up against Eastern Orthodoxy, and on a recent thread QMR is fighting a losing battle against one of my newest favorite posters, Livenotonevil.

Well, I suspect QMR is not that well versed in most matters orthodox.  It is no shame....we can't be masters at everything!

There was a poster, named Saint_Augustine, who used to post here.  You might remember him.  I would like to see him lock horns and colloquy with livenotonevil.

Here is a post he made in Sep, 2016, as found in the SD archives:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I apostatized from the Roman Catholic Church to Eastern Orthodoxy for three years. It is false, it is not the one holy catholic and apostolic Church, it is a local Byzantine Tradition appealing to a select group of fathers to form Dogmas that have no universal consensus in the Church.

On the contrary, every LATIN Dogma can be backed up by an appeal to the eastern AND western fathers and even the Orthodox practice attests to this itself (Just ask them about the indulgences their churches offered in the 17th century and later! lol.). In contrast, many Eastern Dogmas are called "Patristic" but the correct term is "Local." For example, Gregory of Palamas distinction in teaching that the energies of God are pluriform and truly distinct from his essence (Even though an energy pertains to a single essence, meaning that if they exist in plurality, how many nature are there in the godhead? Ergo, leads to pantheism). He alone taught this in his day, and many bishops opposed him on the issue.

It's all just foreign glitter. There is no substantial advantage over Roman Catholicism in eastern Orthodoxy, NONE at all. Unless you think vague mystical explanations and an abandonment of organically developed theology (SCHOLASTIC theology BTW) are ADVANTAGES... to say nothing of the political drama, the hero worship (Elder Ephraim's Monasteries), the endless internal schisms...

...Which I have belonged to as well... Are you a member of GOAA? Or do you dislike the New Calendar and have you joined the breakaway group HOCNA? Or have you decided the sexual perversions of their Charismatic "Elder" are too much and now you have joined the group that left HOCNA for HOTCA? Or are you tired of being a HOTCA Florinite and have decided that Bishop Matthew Karpathakis of Vresthena was REALLY the one the FLORINITES abandoned and so you have now become a Matthewite? But among the Matthewites, do you adhere to the Synod of Archbishop Stephanos, Metropolitan Kirykos, Chrysostom of Thebes, or are you wingin it with Chrysostomos of Thessaloniki? Nah, you want to go rogue and join with metropolitan Christopher of Mesogaias! Is he a Florinite, a Matthewite? No one knows! least of all him.

Or maybe the Greek Schisms are too confusing. You want to just settle for ROCOR, the Russian Orthodox Church outside of Russia. But wait, do you agree they should have reunited with the Moscow Patriarchate in 2007? If not you better consider Joining with Metropolitan Agathangel. But wait, he created his own russian synod by getting the GREEK schismatic bishops to consecrate bishops for him...hmmm...well, how about the Old Calendarist Church of Romania! Surely they can have no serious problems...Unless you think that Metropolitan Galaktion was UNJUSTIFIED in consecrating Metropolitan Glycherie (SAINT Metropolitan Glycherie!) Alone and without other bishops. But then you turn to bishop Victor Leu which leads you right back to the Matthewites...

Well, what about the...Moscow Patriarchate. Ok, fine. Have they repented of their Sergianism and denounced it as a heresy? Nope. Many are Stalin worshippers and make icons of him. Have they ceased to participate in ecumenical dialog? Nope, and neither have ANY of the Offical 14 Autocephalous Churches. Which means no matter how far you run from "papism" to Orthodoxy, you are really just running back into the embrace of Pope Francis, who wants union with you anyway. The only escape is down the rabbit hole of schisms and self-justified synods created out of thin air. And don't even START me on the Catacomb Church...is it in existence or not? Is it REALLY ROAC? Or is it the RTOC? Or the ROTC? Is it the Seraphimo-Gennadites or the Other various branches most likely extinct?

So what are you going to seriously do?

THe only sensible thing: Reject the bitter fruits and suffer with the only NON-Schismatic Church in the world: The Roman Catholic Church.

[mikemac]

Well, I think it is  bit less than coffee and I do drink coffee. I really want to order this, what type, fashion do you buy?

I've been reading that Yerba Mate is addictive and that people get headaches when they don't get their fix.

[St. Columba]

Well, I think it is  bit less than coffee and I do drink coffee. I really want to order this, what type, fashion do you buy?

I've been reading that Yerba Mate is addictive and that people get headaches when they don't get their fix.

Actually, I think those are hallmarks of coffee.  I have heard the exact opposite, and my experience is also different.  People are amazed at how non-addictive it is (one can often go days without it, and not notice).