Veiling in Mass

[Peace]

On 2/8/2022 at 6:23 PM, fides' Jack said:

Feminism is the cause of much war, poverty, hatred, racism, greed, and violence.  Most especially hatred, racism, greed, and violence.  So absolutely it is a greater evil than any of those things, individually.

Well I don't know about all that. It sounds like more @fides' Jack logic, which is the absence of logic. The Church clearly defines racism as sin. Nowhere does it broadly define "feminism" as sin. JP2 even wrote that Catholics should promote a new feminism.

There are certainly many aspects of current feminist thought that I disagree with, but it depends on the definition of "feminism" that you are applying, and the specific aspects of it that you are discussing. Heck the first wave of feminism simply wanted things like giving women things like the right to vote. I suppose you think that giving women the right to vote is right up there with racism?

On 2/8/2022 at 6:23 PM, fides' Jack said:

You won't be excused from your radicalism when you meet your maker just because you listened to your confessor who did nothing to curb your prideful, feminist attitudes.  You have a duty to find a good confessor.

Now that is down right hilarious. When I looked up "a good confessor" in the Catholic dictionary it did not state "a confessor who follows the teachings of @fides' Jack a random person on the internet".

On 2/8/2022 at 6:23 PM, fides' Jack said:

I mean, socialism has been condemned by the Church too.  That'd be like me saying, "I'm a proud socialist".  How can you be proud to be at odds with Holy Mother the Church?  I don't understand...  I will pray for you.

Well that's going a bit too far. It depends on what definition of socialism is being applied, and what aspects of it are being discussed. Some of you radical right people think that things like universal health care, medicare, social security, and numerous other public welfare programs are "socialism" and the Church does not condemn any of these things.

[fides' Jack]

3 minutes ago, Peace said:

It sounds like more @fides' Jack logic, which is the absence of logic.

Thanks, dude.  

Maybe instead of throwing insults you could say that you don't understand my logic, or you don't see my logic, which is a far cry from this.

4 minutes ago, Peace said:

The Church clearly defines racism as sin. Nowhere does it broadly define "feminism" as sin. JP2 even wrote that Catholics should promote a new feminism.

I said it's the cause of racism.  And it is.  Ever hear of Margaret Sanger?

Pope Saint John Paul II was not right about everything.  That statement was his opinion.  But the "New Feminism" he espoused has nothing to do with the idea of feminism in modern culture, which has been condemned, repeatedly, by many priests and bishops.

7 minutes ago, Peace said:

There are certainly many aspects of current feminist thought that I disagree with, but it depends on the definition of "feminism" that you are applying, and the specific aspects of it that you are discussing.

Precisely.  If it's just the statement that women should be treated equally under the law to men, there is nothing wrong with that.

7 minutes ago, Peace said:

Heck the first wave of feminism simply wanted things like giving women things like the right to vote. I suppose you think that giving women the right to vote is right up there with racism?

Actually, that's not true.  They fought for the right to vote, but they also fought for sexual liberation, which was and is condemned by the Church.

9 minutes ago, Peace said:

Now that is down right hilarious. When I looked up "a good confessor" in the Catholic dictionary it did not state "a confessor who follows the teachings of @fides' Jack a random person on the internet".

You have a Catholic dictionary that actually has a specific definition for "good confessor"?

No, you need to read writings of saints and mystics or look to moral theologians to find this.

13 minutes ago, Peace said:

Well that's going a bit too far. It depends on what definition of socialism is being applied, and what aspects of it are being discussed.

Socialism in general has been condemned by the Church, so no, it's not too far.  I agree it depends on the definition you're using.  But of course there are aspects of shared society (which could be defined as socialism) that are necessary: police, military, etc...  

15 minutes ago, Peace said:

Some of you radical right people think that things like universal health care, medicare, social security, and numerous other public welfare programs are "socialism" and the Church does not condemn any of these things.

Those things are indeed socialism.  Whether or not the Church has condemned those things, individually, is not really the debate.  

But you have to admit that ALL of those programs are complete failures, which should be evidence enough that they should be condemned, even if the Church has not done so, specifically.

Something tells me you'll argue on that point.  If you do, I can't take anything you say or think on the matter seriously.  They are complete failures, and only someone who is willfully blind on the matter would disagree.

[Peace]

5 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

Thanks, dude.  

Maybe instead of throwing insults you could say that you don't understand my logic, or you don't see my logic, which is a far cry from this.

Oh that was not an insult. It was merely a statement of fact.

Just like when you accused @Nunsuch of being prideful no?

5 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

I said it's the cause of racism.  And it is.  Ever hear of Margaret Sanger?

Every hear of Susan B. Anthony and the Tooth Fairy?

Your random name drop proves nothing. I am still searching for this supposed logic of yours. Please let me know where I can find it.

5 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

Pope Saint John Paul II was not right about everything.  That statement was his opinion.  But the "New Feminism" he espoused has nothing to do with the idea of feminism in modern culture, which has been condemned, repeatedly, by many priests and bishops.

This is precisely why many trads are functional Protestants for all practical purposes. No, it is not merely an "opinion". It is a teaching of the pope in Evangelium Vitae. This is exactly what many trads do - they only recognize infallibly defined statements by a pope as authoritative. Everything else is relegated to an "opinion" that they are free to reject or follow, just like the Protestant is free to church hop from one parish to the next, until he finds a pastor who agrees with his own conclusion.

5 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

They fought for the right to vote, but they also fought for sexual liberation, which was and is condemned by the Church.

By "sexual liberation" I assume you refer to the right to have pre-marital sex. Some feminists have advocated for that, some have not. There is nothing that prevents one from being a feminist and adhering to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

5 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

You have a Catholic dictionary that actually has a specific definition for "good confessor"?

Yes. In the same dictionary if you look up "Peace" it states "He who is almost always correct when writing on the internet".

5 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

No, you need to read writings of saints and mystics or look to moral theologians to find this.

But only the ones you agree with you, no doubt. The ones who disagree with you, they are all wrong, naturally.

5 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

Those things are indeed socialism.  Whether or not the Church has condemned those things, individually, is not really the debate.  

Look, you are the person on here who is personally accusing other Catholics as having sinned and having disagreed with the Church. You should recant what you wrote, or you should back it up. If you are going to back it up, then you need to clearly define what aspects of feminism, socialism, or whatever, that you think contradicts the Church, and then establish that @Nunsuch holds that view contradictory view.

We don't want to engage in rash judgment now do we?

5 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

But you have to admit that ALL of those programs are complete failures, which should be evidence enough that they should be condemned, even if the Church has not done so, specifically.

Something tells me you'll argue on that point.  If you do, I can't take anything you say or think on the matter seriously.  They are complete failures, and only someone who is willfully blind on the matter would disagree.

I find this amusing. Extremely amusing. The vast majority of Catholic bishops have openly supported those programs for about the past 100 years. Yet we are to condemn them because Pope @fides' Jack the First thinks that they are "complete failures"?

I've lived in a country with universal health care for over 5 years, and have had multiple serious medical procedures performed both there and in the USA. I'd take that system over the system here in the USA 7 out of 7 days of the week. As for medicare, my mother likely would have died many years earlier than she did were it not for the medical care that she received under that program.

[Nunsuch]

On 2/8/2022 at 6:23 PM, fides' Jack said:

Feminism is the cause of much war, poverty, hatred, racism, greed, and violence.  Most especially hatred, racism, greed, and violence.  So absolutely it is a greater evil than any of those things, individually.

You won't be excused from your radicalism when you meet your maker just because you listened to your confessor who did nothing to curb your prideful, feminist attitudes.  You have a duty to find a good confessor.

I mean, socialism has been condemned by the Church too.  That'd be like me saying, "I'm a proud socialist".  How can you be proud to be at odds with Holy Mother the Church?  I don't understand...  I will pray for you.

Thanks. I'll leave my judgment to God, and not to an arrogant and pretentious (and ignorant) blowhard online. You must be so very pleased with yourself--knowing the mind of God with such depth and certainty. But isn't that plank in your eye really annoying?  

Meanwhile, please cite ANY evidence that feminism "causes" any of the things you allege. Really amazing that it can do so, since men pretty much control the world's governments. Some stupidity is breathtaking. 

[Hna.Caridad]

7 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

8 hours ago, Peace said:

The Church clearly defines racism as sin. Nowhere does it broadly define "feminism" as sin. JP2 even wrote that Catholics should promote a new feminism.

I said it's the cause of racism.  And it is.  Ever hear of Margaret Sanger?

 

Yeah, because the theft of Indigenous people's lands and the enslavement of generations of Black people in America had NOTHING to do with racism and everything to do with feminism.  fides' Jack, I can't tell if you're really that ignorant or if you're just trying to troll people.  I hear that the Russian government has an entire building full of workers on the payroll who just sit around trolling English-language forums for the sole purpose of sowing division.  Please explain your intentions?

[Peace]

18 minutes ago, Hna.Caridad said:

 

Yeah, because the theft of Indigenous people's lands and the enslavement of generations of Black people in America had NOTHING to do with racism and everything to do with feminism.  fides' Jack, I can't tell if you're really that ignorant or if you're just trying to troll people.  I hear that the Russian government has an entire building full of workers on the payroll who just sit around trolling English-language forums for the sole purpose of sowing division.  Please explain your intentions?

Interesting theory.

Actually I’ve wondered for quite some time if he’s actually a highly developed bot.

[fides' Jack]

3 hours ago, Peace said:

Just like when you accused @Nunsuch of being prideful no?

No, absolutely not.  She had already accused me of being uncharitable.  Calling out someone's vice is not the same as outright insulting people.

3 hours ago, Peace said:

This is exactly what many trads do - they only recognize infallibly defined statements by a pope as authoritative. Everything else is relegated to an "opinion" that they are free to reject or follow, just like the Protestant is free to church hop from one parish to the next, until he finds a pastor who agrees with his own conclusion.

Just because you don't understand truth or Church teaching doesn't mean you can make stuff up like this.

But we've been around this circle already many times.

3 hours ago, Peace said:

Look, you are the person on here who is personally accusing other Catholics as having sinned and having disagreed with the Church. You should recant what you wrote, or you should back it up. If you are going to back it up, then you need to clearly define what aspects of feminism, socialism, or whatever, that you think contradicts the Church, and then establish that @Nunsuch holds that view contradictory view.

We don't want to engage in rash judgment now do we?

Which Catholics do you mean, specifically, and in what context?  I did not accuse nunsuch of sinning.  

Here's some backup against feminism: 

https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19301231_casti-connubii.html

And here on socialism:

https://taylormarshall.com/2017/09/catholic-condemnation-socialism-5-papal-quotes.html

3 hours ago, Peace said:

The vast majority of Catholic bishops have openly supported those programs for about the past 100 years.

This is a false statement.  And to prove it you'd have to show an awful lot of evidence.

Maybe the last 30-50 years.  I'd buy that.  Not 100.

3 hours ago, Peace said:

I've lived in a country with universal health care for over 5 years

That explains a lot.

3 hours ago, Peace said:

I'd take that system over the system here in the USA 7 out of 7 days of the week.

Well, I've never advocated for the current system in the US, which is socialized.  But even with that, many millions of others would disagree with you.  Your personal opinion proves nothing.

3 hours ago, Peace said:

As for medicare, my mother likely would have died many years earlier than she did were it not for the medical care that she received under that program.

I'm glad she had some extra time, and I'm sorry that you lost your mother. 

You seem to be suggesting that I think that medicare hasn't done anything good, ever.  I mean, I suppose if you take the phrase "complete failure" to its absolute extreme you can jump to that conclusion...

Maybe I should get you a "jump to conclusions" mat?

1 hour ago, Nunsuch said:

You must be so very pleased with yourself--knowing the mind of God with such depth and certainty. But isn't that plank in your eye really annoying? 

There are some aspects of God that I do know with absolute certainty.  As should all Catholics.  I'm not pleased with myself, though.  

2 hours ago, Nunsuch said:

But isn't that plank in your eye really annoying? 

Speaking from experience?

2 hours ago, Nunsuch said:

Meanwhile, please cite ANY evidence that feminism "causes" any of the things you allege.

Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, who is often thought as one of the pioneers of modern feminism:

Quote

"We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don't want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." -- Margaret Sanger's December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in Linda Gordon's Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America . New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976.

In actuality, this is the tiniest fraction of the readily-available evidence if you want to open your eyes.  Feminism is one of the chief causes of the sexual revolution.  

2 hours ago, Nunsuch said:

Really amazing that it can do so, since men pretty much control the world's governments.

This is such a false and tired reading of the current state of affairs.  Although it's slightly more true today than it was in the past, I think.  Back when women didn't have the right to vote, and they actually submitted to and respected their husbands, they had far more control, and far more love and respect from men.

[fides' Jack]

1 hour ago, Hna.Caridad said:

Please explain your intentions?

Regarding what, exactly?

If you mean in this now-hijacked thread, my original intention was to defend @ACatholicWifesLife3 against @Nunsuch's unwarranted hostility.

1 hour ago, Hna.Caridad said:

Yeah, because the theft of Indigenous people's lands and the enslavement of generations of Black people in America had NOTHING to do with racism and everything to do with feminism.

Another case of "needs a jump to conclusions mat"?  

Why do you think that I think that the enslavement of generations of black people in America had nothing to do with racism and everything to do with feminism?

I said feminism has caused racism, and I've proven it so through one of the founders of modern feminism, Margaret Sanger.  I did not claim that feminism is the ultimate cause of all racism.  

I suppose you could argue (as I'm sure @Peace will, if he wants to continue his pointless argument), that Margaret Sanger being a really, really racist person, and a murderer, and also a founder of feminism doesn't mean that it was the feminism that caused the racism.  But I can certainly offer more evidence showing how feminism itself DID cause much racism.

But racism is not the greatest evil of this world.  There are many things worse than racism.  Abortion is one.

[Peace]

7 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

No, absolutely not.  She had already accused me of being uncharitable.  Calling out someone's vice is not the same as outright insulting people.

Just because you don't understand truth or Church teaching doesn't mean you can make stuff up like this.

But we've been around this circle already many times.

Which Catholics do you mean, specifically, and in what context?  I did not accuse nunsuch of sinning.  

Here's some backup against feminism: 

https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19301231_casti-connubii.html

And here on socialism:

https://taylormarshall.com/2017/09/catholic-condemnation-socialism-5-papal-quotes.html

This is a false statement.  And to prove it you'd have to show an awful lot of evidence.

Maybe the last 30-50 years.  I'd buy that.  Not 100.

That explains a lot.

Well, I've never advocated for the current system in the US, which is socialized.  But even with that, many millions of others would disagree with you.  Your personal opinion proves nothing.

I'm glad she had some extra time, and I'm sorry that you lost your mother. 

You seem to be suggesting that I think that medicare hasn't done anything good, ever.  I mean, I suppose if you take the phrase "complete failure" to its absolute extreme you can jump to that conclusion...

Maybe I should get you a "jump to conclusions" mat?

There are some aspects of God that I do know with absolute certainty.  As should all Catholics.  I'm not pleased with myself, though.  

Speaking from experience?

Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, who is often thought as one of the pioneers of modern feminism:

In actuality, this is the tiniest fraction of the readily-available evidence if you want to open your eyes.  Feminism is one of the chief causes of the sexual revolution.  

This is such a false and tired reading of the current state of affairs.  Although it's slightly more true today than it was in the past, I think.  Back when women didn't have the right to vote, and they actually submitted to and respected their husbands, they had far more control, and far more love and respect from men.

This is silly. Does someone who is “completely good” do evil?

As for the US having socialized medicine, then applying your “logic” every medical system in the world is socialized. Well, again, you can go live in Antartica and build yourself a hospital on the ice. That’s private. Or you can join Boko Haram and have a witch doctor sew you up the next time you need surgery. No government involvement there either. I hope it works out for you.

[fides' Jack]

3 hours ago, Peace said:

This is silly. Does someone who is “completely good” do evil?

I honestly have no idea what you're talking about.  You're replying to my entire post.  What specifically is this comment attempting to refute, and in what way have you used your best (and seemingly only) debate tactic of straw man?

3 hours ago, Peace said:

As for the US having socialized medicine, then applying your “logic” every medical system in the world is socialized.

At this point, that's possible.  I'm not an expert on healthcare in all countries.  Clearly all countries are at least influenced by the same evil medical associations.  I've brought that up elsewhere.  That's why billions of people are being forced to take immoral jabs right now, and wear muzzles.  It's also (partially) why most of those same billions of people are unable to discern the moral principles behind why those jabs and muzzles are evil.

Medicine used to be private in the US.  It was largely provided by various Catholic organizations.  A number of religious orders provided medical services, and often free-of-charge.  Many other countries were the same.  Let's get back to that system.  It was better for everyone.

It became bad when government got involved, as almost everything does.

3 hours ago, Peace said:

Or you can join Boko Haram and have a witch doctor sew you up the next time you need surgery. No government involvement there either. I hope it works out for you.

There's no middle ground for you, is there?  Either someone trusts ONLY in the government for healthcare or they can trust in witch doctors?  Really?

Will you at least admit that this is a silly argument?

[Peace]

51 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

I honestly have no idea what you're talking about.  You're replying to my entire post.  What specifically is this comment attempting to refute, and in what way have you used your best (and seemingly only) debate tactic of straw man?

At this point, that's possible.  I'm not an expert on healthcare in all countries.  Clearly all countries are at least influenced by the same evil medical associations.  I've brought that up elsewhere.  That's why billions of people are being forced to take immoral jabs right now, and wear muzzles.  It's also (partially) why most of those same billions of people are unable to discern the moral principles behind why those jabs and muzzles are evil.

Medicine used to be private in the US.  It was largely provided by various Catholic organizations.  A number of religious orders provided medical services, and often free-of-charge.  Many other countries were the same.  Let's get back to that system.  It was better for everyone.

It became bad when government got involved, as almost everything does.

There's no middle ground for you, is there?  Either someone trusts ONLY in the government for healthcare or they can trust in witch doctors?  Really?

Will you at least admit that this is a silly argument?

What, you think the little sisters of the poor can provide effective health care for 300 million Americans?

You want to take us back to the “good old days” when hundreds of millions of people died from the bubonic plague?

You want to go back to systems that produced such great results as the average person dying at age 50 or younger?

Whatever fantasy medical system that you are advocating for that has no government involvement whatsoever exists nowhere in the world, because it does not work. 

But like I said, if you want that, put your money where your mouth is, move to Antarctica or the desert and create your fantasy society in which the government has no role in the provision of healthcare.

When you die of polio in this fantasy land of yours, I will pray for you.

Look, you are blowing smoke. You won’t do that because you know plenty well that it’s a pipe dream. You are simply complaining and offering a fantasy as a solution, which you won’t do yourself.

Edited February 11, 2022 by Peace

[fides' Jack]

9 hours ago, Peace said:

What, you think the little sisters of the poor can provide effective health care for 300 million Americans?

If people still believed in God, and loved God the way they did , we would absolutely have enough religious and affiliates in the US to care for 300 million people, much more effectively than the government does right now.

9 hours ago, Peace said:

You want to take us back to the “good old days” when hundreds of millions of people died from the bubonic plague?

Straw man.  You realize that was hundreds of years ago, right?  And there was a period afterward when civilization flourished, largely thanks to the Catholic Church.  Ironically, it was the Catholic Church that saw civilization through that crisis.  When everyone else was shunning each other (like they do today), it was the Catholics who cared for the sick and started building up immunity that made it possible for the world to recover from that.

But back then the kings didn't tell their people, "Stay 6 feet away and wear a mask or we'll put you in prison".  They weren't as evil as we are.

9 hours ago, Peace said:

You want to go back to systems that produced such great results as the average person dying at age 50 or younger?

That's the result of better living and access to clean food and water much more so than government healthcare.

9 hours ago, Peace said:

Whatever fantasy medical system that you are advocating for that has no government involvement whatsoever exists nowhere in the world, because it does not work. 

You can deny history all you want.  You do it regularly, anyway.

9 hours ago, Peace said:

But like I said, if you want that, put your money where your mouth is, move to Antarctica or the desert and create your fantasy society in which the government has no role in the provision of healthcare.

There is no reason for me to.  That's not "putting my money where my mouth is".  Nor is it possible.  The world governments don't allow anyone to go live in Antarctica.  There is nowhere in the world right now where you can go create a society that you want to.  All land, save for a few uninhabitable areas, is owned already.  And even if there were a place to do so, you don't even understand my position, so your point makes no sense at all.  You are reduced to making ad hominem attacks and creating straw men and throwing other insults because you are incapable of making a rational, decent argument.  All you're capable of is attacking people, which is absolutely a sign not just of the insanity of the left, but of the blindness that satan pulls people into.  You talk about a lack of logic and then spew garbage like this...  I really feel sorry for you.  

10 hours ago, Peace said:

When you die of polio in this fantasy land of yours, I will pray for you.

If vaccines work, then I am immune to polio.

10 hours ago, Peace said:

Look, you are blowing smoke. You won’t do that because you know plenty well that it’s a pipe dream. You are simply complaining and offering a fantasy as a solution, which you won’t do yourself.

I agree that it's a pipe dream.  I wish it weren't.  It was possible in the past.  It's not possible now - not because it doesn't work (it does), but because there's nowhere to do it.  It's too late to save this country.  It's too late to save any country in the world.  I'm not offering any solution.  Nor am I even complaining.  All I'm doing is pointing out the faults of the existing system, and trying to convince readers here who actually have open minds and who are willing to consider opposing viewpoints why the existing system is evil.

In fact, the ONLY reason I'm still here on phatmass is to warn people.  The medical system that currently rules our world is evil to the core.  If people don't wake up and see that, they will lose their souls very soon.