Should the Questions Forum only be Answered by Scholars and Clergy again?

[AccountDeleted]

I don't know if this will start a debate or not so I put it here.

Now that any Church Militant can post answers in the Questions &Answers forum, we are getting some opinions that are not solid Church Teaching. Should @dUSt restrict the answers to Church Scholars only again - those with solid theological education or clergy? And perhaps not those who are listed as Religious but who are basically still in formation-not in final vows? That's my view, but what do others think?

 

[Nihil Obstat]

The fact that answers can be downvoted allows us to select out the poorer quality answers. If a Church Militant is not in line with Church teaching then their tag should be removed. I am fine with the current system.

I think we should more strictly enforce the rule that no discussions of answers are permitted on the question thread.

[Gabriela]

The fact that answers can be downvoted allows us to select out the poorer quality answers. If a Church Militant is not in line with Church teaching then their tag should be removed. I am fine with the current system.

I think we should more strictly enforce the rule that no discussions of answers are permitted on the question thread.

I agree with this. There aren't enough clergy and religious and church scholars to handle all the questions. A lot of lurkers and newbies ask questions and good evangelization demands that we answer promptly.

But I also second the no discussion bit. Once a good answer has been posted, leave it alone. People want clarity from the Q&A board, not a debate.

I just reviewed the thread in the Q&A board that sparked this thread, and I see what nunsense is talking about. I'm not sure downvoting really helps, because the offender can just downvote the good posts, especially when they provide a correction (i.e., contradiction of what the offender said). The real problem is that the Q&A board is being used to espouse opinions and hearsay rather than clear Church teaching. There needs to be some kind of strong norm or other means of completely eliminating the bad posts from the board. Preferably without burdening the Mediators of Meh, of course.

[AccountDeleted]

Down voting isn't really the answer because it just expresses one person's opinion of the answer, rather than a real correction. I used it but as Gabriela pointed out, someone else can just up vote what one person down votes and vice versa. Even though Church Militants might agree with all Church Teachings, they still might not be able to answer questions using facts, but only opinions. And if one person's opinion is not factual, then misinformation is being spread and it can lead to confusion. The person who asks the question deserves an answer that is based on actual Church Teaching and not just the opinions of a parish priest or another person. Certain people on phatmass are very knowledgeable and perhaps they could be appointed Apologists or Scholars. But not every CM should be able to answer. I realize that this means I wouldn't be able to post there either, but I acknowledge that I don't know as much as someone like, say CatherineM or Cappie (or many others). For the sake of those who ask the questions, I would think that we want the most knowledgeable people answering- not just anyone.

There are other threads where we ordinary types can give our opinions. Otherwise the whole Q&A thread is a joke.

 

Edited October 11, 2015 by nunsense

[CatherineM]

It doesn't help when I lose my temper. I'm trying to get ready to feed 60 people for Canadian Thanksgiving on Monday, and a tired Catherine has a short fuse. 

[AccountDeleted]

It doesn't help when I lose my temper. I'm trying to get ready to feed 60 people for Canadian Thanksgiving on Monday, and a tired Catherine has a short fuse. 

I don't think it's wrong to make a correction of misinformation. Maybe you felt angry, but it didn't come across that way to me. I appreciate that you took the time to make the correction.

Have fun with your Thanksgiving. I am in Oz now so will miss out on US Thanksgiving. My family tries to get together on the weekend after TG because it isn't a public holiday here, but sometimes it isn't easy to get us all together. 

[veritasluxmea]

I think the answer is to *only* give out the CM tag to people who are seriously aware of what the Church actually teaches, and where they just have a personal opinion. And not present their personal opinion as an answer weighty in the Church's eyes. 

What I'm try to say is- I think the CM tag should be regulated, not necessarily and Q&A forum.

Certain people on phatmass are very knowledgeable and perhaps they could be appointed Apologists or Scholars. But not every CM should be able to answer. 

I'd cautiously agree to opening up that tag to people without degrees, but giving out the tag by ear instead of with a hard and fast rule makes things complicated. We're already facing that with the CM tag, I think. 

a tired Catherine has a short fuse. 

You know what, I have that same problem, except when I'm hungry. In elementary school I had a hard time fasting for hours before and after lunch and the teacher would let me sit to the side and eat a snack so I wouldn't be cranky. 

But I also second the no discussion bit. Once a good answer has been posted, leave it alone. People want clarity from the Q&A board, not a debate.

Maybe after a certain time period has pasted, no new answers? or once an answer gets enough votes, it's locked. 

[AccountDeleted]

The CM tag was always given for people who are loyal to all Church Teachings, but that doesn't make them able to answer theological questions - that's the role of an apologist. Changing the CM tag now would be a bit like trying to change the Religious tag. We have people on here who were given the Religious tag in the days when anyone who entered a convent or monastery was given the tag. But then the rule changed to apply only to those who have made final vows. But there are still several people on here who have not yet made final vows and are still in formation, who still have the Religious tag - they're on a sort of a grandfather clause, I suppose. So if we change the requirements for a CM tag in future, it might be difficult to go back and take away the tag from those who don't necessarily have degrees in theology. I mean, I have a lot of education, and a Masters degree, but it wasn't in theology, so I don't claim to be an expert on Church teaching, just a loyal follower of it. 

I am not saying it is an easy call, and maybe the best thing to do is to do nothing, but the recent Q&A thread made me concerned that someone might become confused if they believed one person's opinion over actual Church teaching. It just made me curious as to whether or not anything should be done about it. But maybe not. That's why I asked the question here - to see what the general consensus is.

[Gabriela]

It doesn't help when I lose my temper. I'm trying to get ready to feed 60 people for Canadian Thanksgiving on Monday, and a tired Catherine has a short fuse. 

I think you showed considerable restraint. No worries, Catherine. 

I think the answer is to *only* give out the CM tag to people who are seriously aware of what the Church actually teaches, and where they just have a personal opinion. And not present their personal opinion as an answer weighty in the Church's eyes. 

What I'm try to say is- I think the CM tag should be regulated, not necessarily and Q&A forum.

I'd cautiously agree to opening up that tag to people without degrees, but giving out the tag by ear instead of with a hard and fast rule makes things complicated. We're already facing that with the CM tag, I think. 

You know what, I have that same problem, except when I'm hungry. In elementary school I had a hard time fasting for hours before and after lunch and the teacher would let me sit to the side and eat a snack so I wouldn't be cranky. 

Maybe after a certain time period has pasted, no new answers? or once an answer gets enough votes, it's locked. 

I agree with the CM tag regulation being the answer. There are a few CMs around here who really raise eyebrows.

I don't think time passage would work, because typically the contested Q&As get posted in quickly, in rapid succession.

Also, you had a great teacher.  

[veritasluxmea]

Also, you had a great teacher.  

Teacher appreciation moment- Thank you, he really was! He was a secular Franciscan who converted from Protestantism later in life, and I had him for a few years as a teacher (he moved with the class). He was really saintly and genuinely loved kids (kids can tell!) and taught me the Faith well. It can be hard to pick up on something like being cranky because you're hungry, especially since I was to young to communicate that and it wouldn't be the same for every kid, but he figured it out quickly and let me eat something. When I first started discerning I first looked Franciscan communities based on his influence. 

[AccountDeleted]

Wow - I missed that thread - sometimes I mark the forum read when I haven't read all the posts because I don't have time, but this one was important. So that has given me some ideas now.  

[CrossCuT]

Coming from a non Catholic, I think just having people with the specific training and education to give definitive answers is best. Otherwise we end up with hearsay and grape vine info. Even if you can down vote the question, why even allow a post like that to be seen by someone who is struggling?

[Basilisa Marie]

If we re-introduced Church Scholars, there should be more of them and/or maybe a better process for giving them the tag. 

It seemed to me that the biggest point of opening up the Q&A was to get more people to answer because the current scholars couldn't really keep up. More scholars would solve that problem.  

But really I just like being able to sometimes answer questions in the Q&A. So if Dust brings back scholars he should make me a scholar.    

[Amppax]

I second Basilisa being a Scholar. I mean, she certainly has the qualifications, at least any I've seen. 

Edited October 12, 2015 by Amppax

[Gabriela]

I would third Basilisa and first Nihil Obstat. These are people who have consistently shown that they know Church teaching well, and when they don't, they know how to research it reliably, in credible sources. What more would credentials get you than that? I think they're qualified.

My concern with eliminating CMs from the Q&A board is cases like this: When I first was made a CM, by the kindness of Nihil and the grace of dUSt, there were several questions in the Q&A board about Judaism that no one had touched for a LONG time. I could answer these questions, not because I know Church teaching so well, but because I know Judaism well. So... what to do in a case like that?