Proposed additions to the SOP

[Tallguy88]

No one has offered any realistic alternatives. This area won't be opened up to be a general liberal theological forum. We already have one that is decently active, Whosoever Will May Come. This is a Catholic forum, it was started that way, it will stay that way. Doesn't mean it's shooing away non Catholics or limiting discussion, but the forum has to have an identity. Right now, it's identity is questionable. Theological threads go mostly unanswered. Political threads get decent attention. You don't need a Liberal Catholic forum for that. There's AP, GP, OBOB Politics, etc. And a problem that causes is that liberal politics are not protected under the current SOP. So if an anti-Trump thread starts attracting Trump supporters to defend him, it's not an SOP vio. I know reports get archived on that technicality, I've archived some of them myself.

 

[Tallguy88]

I don't remember the other two, but I would never have called geocajun's behavior liberal or accepting of liberalism.

Note this is a reflection on behavior, not the person.

That was mostly before my time, so maybe David can clarify it.

 

[Fantine]

Hmm...I just searched under his name, and geocajun was last active in 2008, and in the few posts I looked at his behavior would have fit somewhere in the range of TLT.

I wouldn't have characterized his posts as being liberal, but they were better than what I remembered.

 

[Davidnic]

Not sure how you can not remember boughtwithaprice or Protinus. Geo was the staff member who wrote it from the decisions made in the wiki by the founders. It was then approved by the members.

He did not create the content he wrote the sop from what was decided by members.

 

[Davidnic]

We are trying to avoid the scattered identity and inability to enforce the rules that resulted in TLT closing before. That happened because changes like you are requesting we're allowed.

TLT is back due to Talls efforts to make sure everyone had a chance for a voice. But I did not help reopen it to make the same mistakes that closed it before.

 

[Fantine]

It does seem as if the rules are rules the site users don't want, although I haven't studied the issue that closely. Same thing about identity. It seems more as if you aren't happy with the identity we have, while none of us is complaining.

I sometimes post on the political forum of an unmoderated board. You would think it might be a free-for-all of crazies, but it isn't at all. Yes there's one who's a complete know-it-all, but there isn't a single one who has a tenuous grip on reality and less than a nodding acquaintance with facts. They are grownups who act like grownups, very much like the people who post on TLT.

I know I am more liberal than you or Tallguy. My opinion of theological speculation is that it took the Church more than 500 years to acknowledge Galileo, and several decades to appreciate Teilhard de Chardin.

How do any of us know whether Richard Rohr (a priest whose writings I am quite fond of--who has not been censored in any way) won't finally be appreciated in 2500, and isn't just a few centuries ahead of his time?

 

[Tallguy88]

As far as I'm aware of him, I see no reason why Rohr wouldn't be permitted here in TLT.

 

[tadoflamb]

I'm still fuzzy on why a forum with only a handful of active posters would need an addition to the SOP but, then again, I'm still fuzzy on what it meas to be a liberal Catholic. TLT, for me, has always been more about a vibe than an SOP. True, we discuss some of the more neglected aspects of Catholic social doctrine, but really, TLT is more about treating each other with respect than far out theological opinions.