Question on the Statement of Faith for OBOB

Do you want the change

  • No, no change at all.

  • Yes, change it for both the general area and political subforum

  • Change it for just the general area

  • Change it for just the Political Subforum


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Davidnic

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 3, 2006
33,112
11,337
✟788,337.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
I do not want to see decent people who do not have the Catholic cross excluded from discussions and debates on general issues. Nor do I want to see anybody excluded from discussions or even debates about church teaching as long as their contributions are not attempts to tear down what the church teaches. It would be a shame to lose people like LoAmmi and Antigone; they are positive contributors who benefit us all.

Kind of confused as to your vote then, because you voted the opposite way.
 
Upvote 0

LoAmmi

Dispassionate
Mar 12, 2012
26,944
9,715
✟209,533.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
I do not want a Baptist to come in here and make threads telling us what we should do

this is a Catholic subforum

I believe you may be mistaken about what is being said. Nobody can come here and tell you anything against Church teaching or that you shouldn't be a Catholic whether this change happened or not. It would mean that someone who is not a Catholic could discuss freedom of speech with a Catholic but have a differing point of view.

If you are against that, I completely understand.
 
Upvote 0

MoreCoffee

Repentance works.
Jan 8, 2011
29,850
2,841
Near the flying spaghetti monster
✟57,848.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Kind of confused as to your vote then, because you voted the opposite way.
I might have misunderstood the meaning of a "no" because I thought it was a vote for keeping the simple affirmation of the creeds (Apostles and Nicene) as the statement of faith. I am all for the creeds. But I don't want anybody to get booted out of OBOB just because they want to discuss some political or news issue and don't have a Catholic cross. That'd be a real shame.

Can I change my vote?
 
Upvote 0

Davidnic

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 3, 2006
33,112
11,337
✟788,337.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
I might have misunderstood the meaning of a "no" because I thought it was a vote for keeping the simple affirmation of the creeds (Apostles and Nicene) as the statement of faith. I am all for the creeds. But I don't want anybody to get booted out of OBOB just because they want to discuss some political or news issue and don't have a Catholic cross. That'd be a real shame.

Can I change my vote?

I can note your vote changed. Basically no change is that no one can debate anything in OBOB even if it is not related to Catholic dogma.

Yes means they can have discussions where they have a counterpoint if the issue is not a matter of Authoritative teaching.

And the options are no change, change it general and political area, change it in only one or the other.
 
Upvote 0

MikeK

Traditionalist Catholic
Feb 4, 2004
32,104
5,649
Wisconsin
✟90,821.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I do not want a Baptist to come in here and make threads telling us what we should do

this is a Catholic subforum

That would not be allowed under the proposed revision, assuming they're telling you what to do with regards to religious belief or practice.
 
Upvote 0

Rhamiel

Member of the Round Table
Nov 11, 2006
41,182
9,432
ohio
✟241,111.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
I believe you may be mistaken about what is being said. Nobody can come here and tell you anything against Church teaching or that you shouldn't be a Catholic whether this change happened or not. It would mean that someone who is not a Catholic could discuss freedom of speech with a Catholic but have a differing point of view.

If you are against that, I completely understand.
you have allways been most respectful
and I do love when people come here and fellowship or ask questions


also, it is understood that some Catholics do not use the Catholic Icon because they prefer the black Christian Cross icon
that is also ok

but I do have a problem with Protestants and/or lapsed Catholics coming into OBOB and debating
because then the thing will be "is this a Church teaching that they are debating or just something that happens to be popular with Catholics that they are debating"
or they will debate Politics with us
they HAVE their own forums!
a Baptist Forum, a Lutheran Forum, a Liberal Forum
let us have our forum

I normally do not report people, but i think that it is good to have this as a rule so it can be delt with easily if it does get out of hand

so many times I have seen members of the EO come in to OBOB and debate
 
Upvote 0

MoreCoffee

Repentance works.
Jan 8, 2011
29,850
2,841
Near the flying spaghetti monster
✟57,848.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
I can note your vote changed. Basically no change is that no one can debate anything in OBOB even if it is not related to Catholic dogma.

Yes means they can have discussions where they have a counterpoint if the issue is not a matter of Authoritative teaching.

And the options are no change, change it general and political area, change it in only one or the other.
Do that please. Change my vote to a vote that supports non-catholic cross bearers being able to debate for or against any topic except Authoritative Church Teaching.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MikeK
Upvote 0

Davidnic

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 3, 2006
33,112
11,337
✟788,337.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Do that please. Change my vote to a vote that supports non-catholic cross bearers being able to debate for or against any topic except Authoritative Church Teaching.

I will see if I can physically change it. If not I will count it as you want when the poll is over.
 
Upvote 0

AMDG

Tenderized for Christ
May 24, 2004
25,362
1,286
74
Pacific Northwest, United States
✟47,022.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I believe you may be mistaken about what is being said. Nobody can come here and tell you anything against Church teaching or that you shouldn't be a Catholic whether this change happened or not. It would mean that someone who is not a Catholic could discuss freedom of speech with a Catholic but have a differing point of view.

If you are against that, I completely understand.

LoAmmi, I have always felt that you have posted as one who fellowships, and I really, really like your posts because of that--they inform and do not prosyeltize. That wouldn't change, as far as I can see. However this is an oasis for Catholics--one where other Catholics understand where we are coming from and that our Faith intergrates *every* part of our lives. We don't even need to defend it. It is just known. Our Faith will color what we say. I would hate to see that end in the name of "tolerance" and "freedom of speech". I really fear that we would not only be seeing many different Faith icons, we would be subject to prosyeltizing, and OBOB would no longer be a peaceful oasis for most of us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pdudgeon
Upvote 0

Fish and Bread

Dona nobis pacem
Jan 31, 2005
14,109
2,389
✟60,685.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I think Davidnic correctly identifies a lot of the problems with the current rules. In the end, what they lead to is not these idealized concept of total harmony that people undoubtedly had in mind, but rather a situation where people of good will, some of whom even self-identify as Catholic or have strong ties to the Catholic Church from earlier years, face interrogations, persecutions, and generally are made to feel unwelcome and like they have to constantly justify their presence here, or that they can only post when their views reflect the views of the people who like to report stuff (And I'm not talking about debating Catholic teaching, I'm talking about matters ranging from politics to music to fish sticks to religious things that the Catholic Church has not definitively defined).

OBOB, at least a couple years ago, had a horrible reputation with the rest of the site and beyond the site for that sort of thing. Not sure if that's still the case. It does seem to be more open now than it once was. However, it sounds like what the original post is saying is that we're getting ready for another crack down unless the rules open up more.

I used to literally wind up being "accused" of being non-Catholic on a regular basis, and mods would have long private discussions with me every six months, basically determine that I counted as a Catholic, and then completely reopen the matter six months later as though we hadn't just gone through the same long correspondence previously.

The whole "show me your papers" stuff or "prove you are a Catholic as we define Catholic (never mind what the Church says) and reprove it constantly" seems like something straight out of an authoritarian regime. And the people who report stuff they disagree with purely because they disagree with it or because it makes a good point they can't counter are, well, let's just say not people I think are behaving well. However, the rules create the environment that makes that sort of behavior possible.

Also, I saw, I think it was Mike, post a thread where he mentioned that it bothers him when people seem to not be fully honest here, or to side step some issues. What I pointed out there, and I think is worth pointing out again, is that when you have a whole cadre of people with too much time on their hands who sneak around looking for any little thing that can use to "prove" you "don't belong", and then report you constantly, it's hard not to watch what you say and how you say it.

In the end, if we look at one function of this forum as potentially being to enrich people's spiritually lives and allow them to grow closer to God, I inhibiting people from being honest, and inhibiting people who don't meet the orthodoxy police's strict definitions of Catholic from participating, is actually preventing the forum from fulfilling that function or meeting that goal.

If the concept of the forum is to a gathering for ultra-right wing Catholic Republicans to say "Me, too" and bash everyone they view as outside their group, then, sure, the current rules work fine. But that'd be a sad little forum, and I don't think it would even allow the people who fit into that group to grow spiritually. It'd just close them off in a stagnate circle of regurgitated versions of hearing the same thing over and over again.

Of course, I fully realize that this post will probably actually cause more people to vote to keep the current rules, even as I argue for changing them, but I felt it was important to express my views. And if people are motivated to do the opposite of what I am advocating for, well, it's their loss.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JCFantasy23
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Davidnic

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 3, 2006
33,112
11,337
✟788,337.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
you have allways been most respectful
and I do love when people come here and fellowship or ask questions


also, it is understood that some Catholics do not use the Catholic Icon because they prefer the black Christian Cross icon
that is also ok

but I do have a problem with Protestants and/or lapsed Catholics coming into OBOB and debating
because then the thing will be "is this a Church teaching that they are debating or just something that happens to be popular with Catholics that they are debating"
or they will debate Politics with us
they HAVE their own forums!
a Baptist Forum, a Lutheran Forum, a Liberal Forum
let us have our forum

I normally do not report people, but i think that it is good to have this as a rule so it can be delt with easily if it does get out of hand

so many times I have seen members of the EO come in to OBOB and debate

I have a question then, what about when the non-Catholic or lapsed Catholic is the one defending authoritative teaching.

Should they be given a violation then for debating?
 
Upvote 0

LoAmmi

Dispassionate
Mar 12, 2012
26,944
9,715
✟209,533.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
LoAmmi, I have always felt that you have posted as one who fellowships, and I really, really like your posts because of that--they inform and do not prosyeltize. That wouldn't change, as far as I can see. However this is an oasis for Catholics--one where other Catholics understand where we are coming from and that our Faith intergrates *every* part of our lives. We don't even need to defend it. It is just known. Our Faith will color what we say. I would hate to see that end in the name of "tolerance" and "freedom of speech". I really fear that we would not only be seeing many different Faith icons, we would be subject to prosyeltizing, and OBOB would no longer be a peaceful oasis for most of us.

Thank you very much. I wouldn't proselytize anyway because we don't believe in seeking converts. Seriously, talk to a rabbi about it one day.

"I want to become a Jew"
"Oy. Are you sure? Maybe you should go have a sandwich and think about it for a decade or two". ^_^
 
Upvote 0

Fish and Bread

Dona nobis pacem
Jan 31, 2005
14,109
2,389
✟60,685.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I have a question then, what about when the non-Catholic or lapsed Catholic is the one defending authoritative teaching.

Should they be given a violation then for debating?

This is a good point.

Worth keeping in mind, too, is that according to the universal magisterial teaching of the Catholic Church, a lapsed Catholic is still a Catholic, albeit one not in good standing in some respects. The theology of baptism is such that it can not truly be revoked. It's similar to the way that a priest is a priest forever, even if said priest is laicized and asked not to exercise priestly functions.

If God and the Church consider a lapsed Catholic a Catholic, who are the collective members of OBOB, an Internet forum, to argue the point?

The other thing is that I think people lose track of, is that posting on an Internet forum is in no way the equivalent of presenting oneself for communion. An Internet forum is not a parish or a duly erected chapel. An Internet forum has no bishop overseeing it or priest assigned to it. Some Protestants on the site may feel that an Internet forum meets some sort of definition of being a congregation or a church, but that is not Catholic theology or discipline.

Once we divorce the idea of an Internet forum from the idea of a parish or some other sort of ecclesistial community, I think it becomes more obvious that it's simply a place to post news, discuss ideas, and to share. It's more of a coffee shop model than a church model. Would you tell someone sharing a table with you at a coffee shop that he or she is not allowed to discuss something because he or she doesn't meet some completely arbitrary definition of what a coffee shop patron should be or what views a coffee shop patron should hold? You might switch tables if someone verbally personally attacked you, but not over someone discussing something in a friendly way, or over the person not holding your exact views.

To be honest, if I had my druthers, I'd open up this place completely. Baptists, Lutherans, the more the merrier. If they want to debate things, let them debate. But that's not an option in the poll. The poll is talking about a very slight change to stop the backbiting and the accusations that fly around, and people trying to conduct Stalinistic purges of fellow Catholics they don't like through frequent use of the report button. I'd like to think most of us could at least agree to that very moderate reform, which would do a lot to change the atmosphere here for the better (i.e. vote yes).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Davidnic

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 3, 2006
33,112
11,337
✟788,337.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
The change would mean this: A post that opposed Catholic teaching or mocks Catholics would be a violation no matter who makes it...Catholic or not. A post that supported or did not oppose Catholic teaching or mock Catholics would not be a violation...no matter who makes it, Catholic or not.

there are pros and cons to this; I could argue both pro and con. Poll closes Sunday. respectfully discuss it as a community until then.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Fish and Bread

Dona nobis pacem
Jan 31, 2005
14,109
2,389
✟60,685.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
The change would mean this: A post that opposed Catholic teaching or mocks Catholics would be a violation no matter who makes it...Catholic or not. A post that supported or did not oppose Catholic teaching or mock Catholics would not be a violation...no matter who makes it, Catholic or not.

I like the idea of this more objective approach. Let's face it, we don't really know who the Catholics and non-Catholics are anyway, not truly. We can only judge people by their words. So let's moderate based on words and not on what we think we know about people we don't really know. :)
 
Upvote 0

Martinius

Catholic disciple of Jesus
Jul 2, 2010
3,573
2,915
The woods and lakes of the Great North
✟60,225.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Right now, as written non-Catholics can fellowship but they can not debate any issue in OBOB; even if it not opposing dogma or teaching. That is as written.

In practice the members have let many people debate issues that are not dogma or teaching. Some of these threads have gone on hundreds of posts and no reports. No problems.

Then at other times someone beats someone in an argument and blam...report because they are non-Catholic. Or someone just does not like someone and reports them while have no trouble with other non-Catholics doing the same thing. At times non-Catholics are even being given warnings for defending the Catholic faith from the Catholics who are opposing it.

So I have a poll, do you want to make the SOP fit the practice and non-Catholics can engage in some debate here as long as it does not oppose dogma or teaching. Or do you want strict enforcement of no debate on anything only fellowship.

If you want to loosen it...do you want it for the main area and the political area or just the political area.

Because it can not continue in inconsistency and spite being how it is decided who is given what privilege and not.

Remember this is not about dogma and teaching. People can not in any way oppose what is proclaimed by the Magisterium or mock Catholicism. And Abortion can never be promoted.

This concerns debating issues that are not Teaching.

So only Catholics vote in the poll. Do not make the thread a battle ground. Vote. If you want to...post stating your opinion.

But currently it is more of a who we like and who we don't to report them and that is not going to continue. Either you allow respectful debate on issues of non-Dogma and Teaching or we do not. We do not allow it for some and not for others.

the change would read (highlighted):
if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues that are Dogma or Authoritatively taught by the Magisterium or teach against Catholic theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic.
It currently reads:
if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues or teach against it's theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic.

Problem #1: Where do we go to discuss and debate Catholic teachings if not here? It sounds like there will be no debate here at all, since no one will be able to dispute any "official" Catholic teaching, whether they are Catholic or not. And you shut down the "Table of the Lord" sub-forum, effectively discouraging any freedom of speech regarding many issues that millions of Catholics (including the ordained, scholars and theologians) are discussing.

Problem #2: I agree with your point that sometimes Catholics and non-Catholics who argue FOR actual Church teaching are reported by those who think they are in tune with current Catholic teaching but are not, and condemn someone for defending current teaching against the Catholic position from the Council of Trent. And many people interpret that teaching, such as found in the Catechism, differently. So who is to decide what the actual and correct teaching of the Church is, and therefore what is allowed here?

Problem #3: Who is a member of this faith group? People can self-report what they will. Some people are in the process of entering the Catholic Church or exploring it, but are not yet full members. What about them? Some Catholics choose not to identify themselves as such in their on-screen profile (me, for example); will they be shut out as well?

Problem #4: Almost everything in the Church is covered by a dogma, doctrine or rule of some kind, so what would be left to discuss? The appropriate attire your children should wear to Mass? And people who discuss something may not know that the Church has a teaching about it; even a lot of Catholics are quite clueless about what their Church teaches. It sounds like instead of reducing the reporting and warnings, they will increase.

Problem #5: What does "post in fellowship" really mean?

Final Point: The Catholic Church has been spectacularly unsuccessful in controlling and limiting debate on "settled" doctrinal topics; I doubt that this forum will have better success, unless the members are restricted to only those who think exactly alike. And that will make it about as interesting, informative and exciting as a basket weavers' forum.
 
Upvote 0

AMDG

Tenderized for Christ
May 24, 2004
25,362
1,286
74
Pacific Northwest, United States
✟47,022.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Catholics already know that there is no debate concerning official Catholic teachings. They are simply to be obeyed. Was it Therese the Little Flower that said that "understanding comes later".

Table of the Lord. Was that the liberal Catholic board? That's what's being suggested for OBOB? For it now to be liberal and not the members who are loyal to the Magesterium? Oh dear. (Clutches miraculous medal in lieu of pearls)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Davidnic

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 3, 2006
33,112
11,337
✟788,337.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Problem #1: Where do we go to discuss and debate Catholic teachings if not here? It sounds like there will be no debate here at all, since no one will be able to dispute any "official" Catholic teaching, whether they are Catholic or not. And you shut down the "Table of the Lord" sub-forum, effectively discouraging any freedom of speech regarding many issues that millions of Catholics (including the ordained, scholars and theologians) are discussing.

Problem #2: I agree with your point that sometimes Catholics and non-Catholics who argue FOR actual Church teaching are reported by those who think they are in tune with current Catholic teaching but are not, and condemn someone for defending current teaching against the Catholic position from the Council of Trent. And many people interpret that teaching, such as found in the Catechism, differently. So who is to decide what the actual and correct teaching of the Church is, and therefore what is allowed here?

Problem #3: Who is a member of this faith group? People can self-report what they will. Some people are in the process of entering the Catholic Church or exploring it, but are not yet full members. What about them? Some Catholics choose not to identify themselves as such in their on-screen profile (me, for example); will they be shut out as well?

Problem #4: Almost everything in the Church is covered by a dogma, doctrine or rule of some kind, so what would be left to discuss? The appropriate attire your children should wear to Mass? And people who discuss something may not know that the Church has a teaching about it; even a lot of Catholics are quite clueless about what their Church teaches. It sounds like instead of reducing the reporting and warnings, they will increase.

Problem #5: What does "post in fellowship" really mean?

Final Point: The Catholic Church has been spectacularly unsuccessful in controlling and limiting debate on "settled" doctrinal topics; I doubt that this forum will have better success, unless the members are restricted to only those who think exactly alike. And that will make it about as interesting, informative and exciting as a basket weavers' forum.

Matters of Dogma can not be debated. The Lords Table was shut down for lack of use. Five years and only an average of 0.44 posts a week with more than 15 posts. Around an average of one thread a week in five years with any responses at all. For a faith community area that's pretty low.

Catholics can debate with each other on matters of free opinion or on application of Teachings as long as they are not advocating an application the Church says can not happen.

Anyone who self identifies as a Catholic in union with Rome. That includes all Liturgical Rites and groups in Union with Rome. We do not Icon hunt. Some Catholics wear the Black Cross, some the Catholic Icon. Members here are those who are in union with Rome and would self define as such.

Not everything is covered by Dogma, there is much left to discuss...including the application of that which is dogma. Just because something is true does not mean that those who whole it as true might not have equally valid ways of going about implementing the Truth in their lives. I can provide a list of dogmatic grades of certainty if you want. But there is much that is free opinion. Just not what many want to be free opinion.

fellowship is (according to what we used to use to define it):

DEFINITION OF A FELLOWSHIP POST

1) It is not debate or apologetics (defense).

Those who disagree with a congregation’s Statement of Faith will not discuss reasons for or against any subject being discussed on this sub-forum. This includes questions that essentially are rebuttal or argumentative in nature. Those who disagree will not engage in theological discussions that defend their particular point of view on scriptural, theological, doctrinal, social, or political issues.

2) It is not answering questions or teaching.

Only a member of the congregational forum may give answers to and instruct on doctrinal questions. While there may be many very good ideas on the subject from non-members, they may not give instruction. Earnest questions are always welcome, from anyone.

3) What Fellowship is:

Essentially fellowship is defined as the discussion of topics of association, of companionship - i.e. discussions of things like friends, family, work..... these topics are fellowship. Posts that offer friendship would certainly be described as fellowship. Also no matter the discussion, messages posted to this board must be polite.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.