Something Promising From The Clergy

[puellapaschalis]

No one here knows in the first instance how much anyone is praying for the clergy.

We all surely know priests who were in Rome last week; that a confraternity is established at least in part to counter heresy in the most dangerous places might be seen as non-ideal, but circumstances are rarely ideal to start anything.

[Ash Wednesday]

No one here knows in the first instance how much anyone is praying for the clergy.

 

Sorry, that was not my intent to presume anything and I worded it poorly. I think I'd just like to see more active promotion of prayer for our clergy given that it's badly needed right now.

[Lil Red]

This place is certainly very difficult to understand. I wonder if it gets better over time?

 

the jury is still out on that. 

 

Welcome to phatmass. :)

[franciscanheart]

This is an ad hominem and is against the rules. Your attitude isn't particularly promising, given the fact you have so far succeeded in doing nothing but questioning a person's views due to age and following that up by making an ad hominem, both of which are logical fallacies and the latter of which is against the rules.
 
I'm arguing logically. I'm giving a view and backing it up with examples. I'm not sure what it is that I haven't answered and what exactly you think I'm not being sensible about other than the fact that I don't agree with you.

Hypocrisy aside, this is still misguided. Ad hominem is the fallacy of discrediting an argument by saying that the person making it is, essentially, a moron. (Well, it's not exactly that, but I've put it in terms I think you can understand.) Our new friend has not attacked your character, nor has he completely discredited your viewpoint based solely on some character flaw. He has noted, as many others have, that perhaps some of your "crazy" (veralux's words, not mine) stems from lack of maturity or brain formation.
 
 

What I meant by tone is that: when I read your post, I could tell you were being serious. If someone else had said that, or stated it differently, they might have just been being sarcastic. That's... kind of the phatmass tone, I guess. It's hard to explain. I've been here a few months and I still don't know if it gets easier with time. 
 
If you want to read and respond to people who you think can't debate sensibly, go for it. Since I don't really have anything to say about it I usually just ignore it. However, I'd recommend not announcing that you're dismissing their views based on their brain. You went beyond stating a biological fact to claiming that fact is a reason to dismiss someone's point of view. That doesn't seem like sensible debate to me. There are plenty of people, here and in the world, who feel that way about younger people. If that is seriously what you think, that's ok. Just know that I read that and think it's a little rude as well as a bit of a fallacy. 
 
As for Not a Real Name, I think he was just joking and trying to lighten the mood or something. Jury's still out on that post. 
 
(Also, you're mistaken about the "brain fact" as well. Biologically speaking, people are capable of reason and higher thinking usually finishing around age 10 to 12. The rest of the development is related to impulses, emotions, and future decision making, frontal lobe stuff, not logic and reasoning.)

I think the external sigh was a joke. I laughed. Passive aggressive posting will usually elicit varied responses, but the one you can always count on, is the joke.
 
 

Like the young future priest, you misread my original post as well. what I actually said to him was:
 
"You misread my post completely but that's just part of being on the Internet of course.
 
Actually, I am quite familiar with the state of the clergy today, and reading your profile it seems that you are still quite young, so that might explain some of the things you have posted. Not to say that the young don't have much to offer - they are the future after all, but your brain won't even be fully formed until you are around 25-26, so I will take that into consideration in my replies."
 
 
Where you read that I was being dismissive of his opinion, in actuality, I was stating that because of his age, I would be more lenient of his views, whereas in an adult poster, I might be more critical if I felt they were being inconsistent and off-track in their arguments (which we all do, of course). I do acknowledge in my reply as well that the youth are the future, so instead of simply dismissing their views, it is important that we try to be understanding of them, even if we disagree or wonder how or why they came to such concrete thinking in response to an abstract comment. In fact, it is my views that are being dismissed in his statement that I must not be aware of the state of the clergy. From what did he draw this assumption? I am new and have not posted of my experience (or lack thereof) with the clergy. So wasn't he just trying to belittle my opinion by making it seem as if I had no experience and he was well versed in the topic? That comment alone made me wonder about his age, so that I went to look at his profile.
 
As for the human brain - there have been many studies done on this, but the one from MIT on the Young Adult Development Project  very clearly states that:
 
...
 
I also know that I need patience when a person does not address the issues I raise, but tries to take the conversation off onto a tangent because they are just trying to prop up their own beliefs without considered thought. But that is something I need to work on. With the young (and this is not meant derisively, as I have worked quite extensively with young adults) I try to be even more understanding. If, as you say, phatmass is a place where it is more PC not to mention a person's youth, then I will certainly try, but then one who is declaring their age on their profile might want to be a little less 'know-it-all' in their posts, as it certainly is surprising (at least to me) to see someone so young claiming to be an authority on almost everything.
 
But of course, as this is my first day here, I have much to learn about the culture of the place. It may be that I won't fit in, but I will give it a little while to see if I can learn the politics and 'tone' of the place.

Welcome to Phatmass! I'm afraid you've stepped on a land mine. Please don't let it deter you from posting here in the future; you will learn to ignore the ridiculous or you'll engage it and be fine with being hated by a few. There's no easy way around it outside of the ignore feature, and you'll decide for yourself if it's worth the effort.

I have appreciated your level-headed, thoughtful comments -- even if completely unrelated to the initial post -- and look forward to engaging with you more in the future, hopefully about something other than the personalities that be.


As an aside, I think it's hilarious that we're trying to crucify Ash Wednesday, now, for reminding us to pray. Ash is one of the most uncontroversial members we have and we're trying to make HER the bad guy? lulz.

[Not A Real Name]

 I am not quite sure how to read some of these subtle comments yet. This place is certainly very difficult to understand. I wonder if it gets better over time?

 

The phorums are like quicksand.  If you fight them you wont last long  However, if you just chill and accept you're going to be taken over by them some day, like death, then you get a little bit more time to enjoy your sanity.

[Ash Wednesday]

Time for some of whatever St. Bernard is toting.

 

:drunk:

[Not A Real Name]

[Ash Wednesday]

In all seriousness, I do know some British clergy that were very involved in the Papal Visit to the UK and they are at a prominent oratory here in the UK -- and I will ask them about this confraternity because they likely would know about it. I'd be interested to hear their thoughts, so if I hear anything I'll report back.

 

Needless to say this thread got my ears burning because of the UK's involvement. :)

[puellapaschalis]

I know several clergymen who are involved in the Confraternity, no, they're not all trads, and yes, they are all solid, faithful and constant men. Catholicism is in no way in danger from this group as it is and is intended to be.