Forum Rules

Started by Kaesekopf, October 08, 2013, 12:03:04 PM

Previous topic - Next topic



Hello and welcome to Suscipe Domine!

Suscipe Domine is a traditional Catholic forum committed to preserving and defending traditional Catholicism.  Our common Catholic faith, as taught and professed throughout history, binds us at this forum.  Any Catholic is welcome here as long as they observe the rules and guidelines. Non-Catholics are also permitted to register, read, and post as long as they, too, observe the rules and guidelines.

Please read the following rules and guidelines and I look forward to seeing you around the forum!


1) It is free to register and post here.
2) We permit users to have only one account.
3) Do not pretend to be another living person.
4) If clergy register for this forum, please email the administrator at to confirm your identity. If you wish, we will be sure to mark you as such on your profile.   
5) VPNs, IP maskers, proxies, etc are not permitted unless cleared with Kaesekopf.  PM him for more information, or with any questions/concerns you might have.

1) All members must be charitable to fellow posters. If you have a concern with another member, use the private messaging feature as a first recourse for addressing said concern. If this does not adequately address your concern, contact one of the forum moderators.
2) Vulgarities are forbidden on this forum.  You are not "in person" here, so you have time to compose and edit your thoughts. Please exercise that ability.
3) No pornography or blasphemy is allowed. You will be banned immediately for failing to adhere to this rule.
4) Do not use Suscipe Domine to disparage other Internet forums or other persons.
5) "Trad-bashing" is not permitted. While raising concerns or making comments about various currents in the Traditional Catholic community is allowed, unfair accusations about individuals or groups who are sincerely trying to practice the Faith is forbidden. Likewise, insinuating that certain trads or groups of trads are not really Catholic will not be tolerated.
6) Do not reveal identities of other members without their permission.
7) Private, personal information about any member which may be deemed as sensitive in nature by the moderating staff is to remain private unless it is willfully offered by the relevant party or parties in a thread. Sensitive personal information revealed in an alternate thread should remain there if it is not again freely offered by the party or parties involved. If you feel it is necessary to resurrect some personal information from a previous thread, do so via private message. 

1) Do not troll the forum. Trolling is defined as "submitting a deliberately provocative posting to an online message board with the aim of inciting an angry response."
2) Do not purposely derail threads.
3) If you wish to discuss a topic that has been inactive for 120 days or more, start a new thread.
4) Use the proper subforums. They all have a purpose.
5) Link your sources when posting news articles.  Conversely, do not link a news story without comment. We want to hear your thoughts and opinions. The best way to encourage discussion is to provide something for people to discuss.
6) This is an English language forum. If you want to post in another language, "The Alps" subforum is available to you. Otherwise keep all posts in English or please provide a translation.

1) Suscipe Domine recognizes Pope Francis as the Supreme Pontiff. Sedevacantists are invited and welcome to join and post. The forum's policy towards sedevacantists is taken from Abp. Marcel Lefebvre, "I do not say that the pope is not the pope... But I do not say that you cannot say the pope is not the pope."
2) It is necessary for every poster, including sedevacantists, to use a pope's regnal name when posting. Even anti-popes are afforded this respect. Immature name-calling will not be tolerated.

1) Error has no rights. As such, anti-Catholic viewpoints are not permitted to be posted here.
2) Do not attempt to sway traditional Catholics away from the Faith.

The Forum Staff:
1) The moderators must be respected. When moderating they will use an italicized dark green font. For example: Please remain calm and charitable during all debates. Arguing with their decisions will not be tolerated. 
2) If you have a concern with a moderator decision, private message a member of the staff to address your concern.
3) The Moderator of Suscipe Domine forum is also the Administrator, Kaesekopf.

Questions or Feedback:
1) If you have any questions or concerns, please bring them to the forum owner via private message or email at 

Disclaimer: This forum is not endorsed, supported, or condoned by any Catholic organization. It is the work of dedicated laymen and laywomen who seek to serve the Catholic Church and further the Catholic Faith.

Wie dein Sonntag, so dein Sterbetag.

I am not altogether on anybody's side, because nobody is altogether on my side.  ~Treebeard, LOTR

Jesus son of David, have mercy on me.


Regarding recent requests for an official forum stance on issues related to race, the administrator and moderators of Suscipe Domine forum offer the following policy:

We assert that all human beings, regardless of race, ethnicity, or cultural heritage, are inherently equal in the dignity bestowed on them by virtue of being children of God, created in His image and likeness. While we acknowledge that God bestows different, unequal benefits and struggles both to individuals and to groups of people, we maintain that no one race nor ethnicity is inherently more worthy of respect or of salvation than any other. We respect and admire the great Catholic heritage of many European nations and we appreciate their ability to spread the Faith to other parts of the world, thus Christianizing the four corners of the Earth as Christ instructed in the Gospels.

We also especially emphasize that the first Christians, including Christ himself and the first clerics of the Church, were of Middle Eastern descent, thus indicating that the people of Europe are not, in fact, inherently superior to those from other parts of the world (which contradicts the unfortunate opinion of a vocal minority in the traditional Catholic world).

We understand and agree that non-Catholic cultures are incompatible with the Catholic Faith and we therefore uphold thoroughly Catholic cultures and societies as paradigms to be both respected and mirrored in our daily lives. We strive to bring members of non-Catholic cultures and societies, who are outside the Church, into the Church, regardless of racial or ethnic backgrounds.

As a related matter, we support and encourage having an interest in and a respect for one's cultural heritage. As Kaesekopf has demonstrated on the forum, he takes pride in his family's German heritage. Likewise, Louis IX has demonstrated his respect for his family's Irish heritage. This is not only acceptable; it is good. However, pride in one's own culture at the disparagement of others' cultures contradicts the universality of the Church and its trans-cultural character.

Furthermore, we assert that, if given the choice between developing a friendship or relationship with a Catholic of a different ethnic or cultural heritage or a non-Catholic of the same ethnic or cultural heritage, the obvious choice is the Catholic. If given the choice between developing a friendship or relationship with one of two Catholics, one from a different ethnic or cultural background and the other from a similar ethnic or cultural background, the choices are equal.

Therefore, any member of Suscipe Domine who posts in such a way that violates the aforementioned principles will be subject to moderator actions per the banning system outlined in the General Information subforum.


Addressing the recent request for a clarification of our forum policies, the staff of Suscipe Domine issues the following:

When writing about canonized saints, please refer to them respectfully at all times. Generally, this would include referring to them by their proper names or some respectful derivatives thereof. For instance, when writing about St. Nicholas, referring to him as "St. Nicholas," "St. Nick," or "Nicholas of Myra" are all examples of respectful titles one could use. Likewise, when referring to St. Thomas Aquinas, he could be called "St. Thomas," "Aquinas," "the Angelic Doctor," and so on.

We understand the conflict regarding saints who have been recently canonized. When referring to saints canonized after Vatican II, using the honorific "Saint" prior to their names is not necessary, but using names that mock the person in question is unacceptable at Suscipe Domine. For example, one could refer to John Paul II as "Pope John Paul II," "Saint John Paul II," "JP2," etc., but not "Jay Pee Deuce" nor "Protector of Islam."

In topics not discussing the canonizations, debating whether or not recent canonizations are valid is unnecessary and therefore not allowed. For example, in a thread about ecumenical abuses that discusses the actions of John Paul II during his lifetime, it would be inappropriate to bring up one's opinions about his status as a canonized saint or to use disrespectful monikers to do the same.


A Definition of Dogmatic Sedevacantism and the Forum's Stance Toward It:

Dogmatic sedevacantism may be said to be a general attitude toward the current crisis in the Church which regards the state of the Seat of Peter to be practically de fide.  This means that one who believes that the Seat is currently occupied has lost their Catholicity (or, at the very least, experiences a dramatically reduced Catholicity) due to grave error which is likely at least materially heretical.

Dogmatic sedevacantism is forbidden on this forum and is subject to moderation.  While Suscipe Domine is a sedeplenist forum, sedevacantists are welcome to post here in all sub-fora.  However, it is also the stance of the forum that the question of the loss of a valid papacy in the occasion of heresy is an open one among Catholics with no binding, universal Magisterial teaching on the subject.  Therefore, Catholics are free to hold varying opinions on the legitimacy of the post-Conciliar papacies.  Any posts which claim or even imply a superiority in the faithfulness or orthodoxy of Catholics who hold a varying opinion on the state of the papacy will be subject to discipline.
IF I speak with the tongues of men, and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.


A Definition of Feeneyism and the Forum's Stance Toward It:
"Feeneyism" is characterized by three errors: a misrepresentation of the dogma "outside the Church there is no salvation", that the doctrine of baptism of desire (and of blood) is optional, and that the Council of Trent teaches that baptism of desire is sufficient for justification "but not for salvation."  These three errors run contrary to the teaching of the Catholic Church. 

Feeneyism is forbidden on this forum and promoting one, two, or all three errors of Feeneyism is subject to moderation.  While Feeneyites are welcome to post here in all sub-fora, they are not permitted to promote, spread, or disseminate information promoting any of the errors of Feeneyism.  Any posts or posters who do so will be subject to moderation. 
Wie dein Sonntag, so dein Sterbetag.

I am not altogether on anybody's side, because nobody is altogether on my side.  ~Treebeard, LOTR

Jesus son of David, have mercy on me.


Due to an apparent increase in confusion about recent banning decisions, the staff of Suscipe Domine issues the following:

We have a schedule that we typically follow when posters break the rules of this forum and are in need of moderation. This schedule has been published here*. We will at times deviate from this schedule when moderators are in consensus that a given situation warrants it. Sometimes this means being stricter than the schedule calls for, while at other times it means being more lenient. Nevertheless, in most cases we follow the schedule. We have a spreadsheet that we update with warnings and bans and links to relevant threads so that we can always be sure that our moderation actions are accurate and reflect the schedule.

Some posters seem unclear on why bans are issued as they are, even though more than sufficient justification (because none is actually necessary) is available in the Banned Members and Reasons thread. Let us offer some clarification:

Each instance of moderation with regard to warnings and bans is usually discussed among the available moderators before action is taken. In cases when immediate action is required or when the necessary action is obvious, this does not occur, but in cases where there could be some debate about the necessary course of action, this discussion takes place. Then, the agreed upon course of action is carried out by one of the moderators.

Issues often occur and are left unmoderated for a time because of our desire to function as a team, and because we are busy people who run this forum as a hobby and as a service to our community, not as a job. However, we do attempt to arrive at decisions and carry out moderation tasks as expediently as possible.

Some people have recently questioned the severity of certain bans, at times comparing them to other bans. We do not believe that this is a useful endeavor, because each situation and each poster is taken on a case-by-case basis and action taken is based on that particular user's posting history. For example, if a user has accrued a number of bans prior to a relatively minor infraction, a month-long ban may seem excessive. However, the history of repeated bans means that, according to the ban schedule and the number of times a user has given us problems, he was due for a lengthy ban. The offense itself may have been minor, but the continued need to moderate a particular user is also taken into consideration when a ban is issued.

On the other hand, if a user commits a minor infraction and should be due for a two-week ban but has not given us any trouble for a very long time, we may decide to repeat a three-day ban instead. Again, the circumstances of the case may supersede the punishment dictated by the ban schedule.

If a user incurs the short-term bans for early offenses but continues to repeat the same offense again and again, then we will consider permanently banning the user, skipping over the longer temporary bans, because the user has made it clear that he will put forth no effort to abide by our forum rules.

We may also try to consider a user's personal circumstances in making moderation decisions. If we happen to be privy to information that, for example, a user has lashed out against another poster because the user has something upsetting going on in his personal life, we may decide to issue a warning when a ban should have been due instead.

All of these are merely examples, but we hope they elucidate the process of moderation a bit and put to rest the continued need for posters to question why so-and-so has received such-and-such ban when he "didn't really deserve it." If we agreed that he didn't really deserve it, we wouldn't have issued it.

All posters are welcome to PM us with questions and concerns, of course, but we hope that this clarification means that fewer of our users will need to question these particular actions of the moderation staff.

*Please note that at our original debuting of the schedule, we intended to "level-down" bans if a user had gone long enough without breaking a forum rule. In practice, this turned out not to be feasible because it was difficult to keep track of and implement; instead, we consider this leniency on a case-by-case basis as described in one of the examples above.


Over the last couple of weeks, there has been a disturbing trend in the content of posts here, focused primarily upon lay rejection and challenging of church-approved private revelation and apparitions.  This has caused tensions to flare up, arguments to run rampant, and a general disturbance amongst the Forum to occur. 

From the Catholic Encyclopedia, "When the Church approves private revelations, she declares only that there is nothing in them contrary faith or good morals, and that they may be read without danger or even with profit; no obligation is thereby imposed on the faithful to believe them."

Given the volatility of posting regarding private revelation recently and in the past, the following is now implemented.

It is not permissible to call into doubt, oppose, or question private apparitions that are approved of by the proper ecclesiastical authorities.  When an apparition is approved, the Church has performed the relevant inquiry and investigation and has found nothing in it contrary to the faith or to good morals.  As laity, our competency does not extend into that realm.

The compliance and humility of all posters is appreciated in advance.
Wie dein Sonntag, so dein Sterbetag.

I am not altogether on anybody's side, because nobody is altogether on my side.  ~Treebeard, LOTR

Jesus son of David, have mercy on me.