Fighting Among Yourselves

[jkaands]

well, I see that while y'all have been fighting among yourselves, Belinda has left.


A few weeks ago, there was a thread, prob. on Voc Station, about how terrible the non-habited orders were, how awful the nuns looked without their habits, and how you should NEVER consider any order that wasn't listed with Inst for relig life or CMSCL (Council of Major Superiors of Consecrated Life), etc etc and one member, a NOVICE it turned out, in a well-established order with a habit-optional rule, not listed in inst relig life, left phatmass. Just announced that she was leaving. No explanations. I felt that she had probably been insulted.

Edited May 15, 2007 by jkaands

[Lil Red]

i know no one has responded yet, but here's my penny:

i do think it's a little ridiculous that a lot of people on pm assume that because a nun/sister isn't habited that she is totally liberal and hates the Church. i think it's beautiful when nuns/sisters do wear a habit, but we must remember that some orders do have it optional.

but i do think that if you have a problem with something that is said on pm, you should speak up about it, so maybe it can be changed.

[cappie]

[quote name='jkaands' post='1273962' date='May 15 2007, 11:43 PM']well, I see that while y'all have been fighting among yourselves, Belinda has left.
A few weeks ago, there was a thread, prob. on Voc Station, about how terrible the non-habited orders were, how awful the nuns looked without their habits, and how you should NEVER consider any order that wasn't listed with Inst for relig life or CMSCL (Council of Major Superiors of Consecrated Life), etc etc and one member, a NOVICE it turned out, in a well-established order with a habit-optional rule, not listed in inst relig life, left phatmass. Just announced that she was leaving. No explanations. I felt that she had probably been insulted.[/quote]

Yep gotta be careful and charitable

Reminds me of a story I read:

When I was five years of age, an elderly Sister of Charity of Mt St Vincent in New York taught me a memorable lesson. She had caught me accusing a playmate of a "crime." She told me to point my finger at him one more time. I did. Then she asked none too sweetly, "Do you see that while one finger is pointed at the boy, three fingers are pointed at you yourself?" As young as I was, she had made her point indelibly.

The next time you find yourself pointing a finger in accusation at someone, do steal a look at the three fingers that are accusingly pointing themselves at your own honorable self. Then put the wagons in a circle and reconsider your accusation.

[prose]

I don't get the point you are trying to make with this thread.

If someone leaves with no explanation, then there is no way for us to fix it.

Belinda left because we were not "Accepting" of her choice of religion. I don't think there was anything anyone could have or should have said differently. Except for myself. I was a bit harsh.

HOWEVER, if someone gets upset about one thread and leaves with no explanation, they are missing out on a great, supportive community.

That nun (if she even left from offense - which you don't know) would have found plenty of support to live as a nun without a habit here.

[Mateo el Feo]

Agreed with Prose...I'm also unsure of the point of this new thread.

Belinda wasn't shy about listing her reasons for rejecting my religion. I fail to see how I or any other Catholic should feel guilty for not accepting hers. If she isn't open to a Catholic perspective, then all we can do is pray for her...and that's how most here chose to respond.

As far as the "fighting among yourselves" comment, the only real disagreement that I noticed on Belinda's threads was with carrdero, who is guided by the counsel of space aliens.

[Ash Wednesday]

I think the problem when it comes to religious discussion on the internet (and other sensitive subjects for that matter) is that the lack of vocal intonation and body language can cause people to take written words the wrong way. I knew a woman who online came across as an intolerant, over the top traditionalist Catholic, but meeting her in person I had no problem with her at all. I don't know if I totally saw things in the same light as she did, but we had a lot of fun together and really enjoyed sharing our faith together.

Just taking a breather for a minute or a day -- posting with a little more reason and a little less emotion, and not flying off the handle when handling touchy subjects -- goes a long way. I try not to come on here when I'm in a really spiteful, awful mood and in a position where controlling my emotions would be more difficult.

So, I dunno. Gonna go drink a soda or somethin'.

People have seemed a bit bickery on here -- it's usually like this during Lent -- so c'mon y'all. It's spring and Easter. Smile a little!

Edited May 16, 2007 by Ash Wednesday

[Ash Wednesday]

I'm going to examine the other side of the coin for a moment, because I think there might be something that warrants consideration: I am a bit concerned about the public "dogpile effect" when dealing with someone who may be of a differing or questionable viewpoint compared to the majority of people on phatmass, and members of Church Militant. I think this is especially the case with people who are relatively new to phatmass or just not as well acquainted with us.

Two examples in the last couple of days that I think we had this problem with is not just with Belinda, but also with St. Benedict. I myself have wrongly taken part in the "dogpile" at times.

If two or three people are in a debate, and someone defends the faith and you agree with their opinion -- first decide if it is it really necessary for you to chime in and essentially state what has already been said. Will this help the situation any if three or four people have already said the same thing? If you really feel that you have some advice to give, perhaps consider giving it in a private message. There might be something a bit more charitable and personable about that. The person might not feel like you are just ganging up on them like everyone else. If someone in the wrong has already been admonished once and called on their actions or statements, they don't need to be admonished by twelve other people. If it's someone you have just met and you don't think you can bring anything new to the table but still would like to say something or help out in some way -- there is no harm in saying hello to them and just simply welcoming them to phatmass and encouraging them to stay. We cannot help it if someone is offended by a person's opinion -- but I think we can try to avoid overwhelming someone with a barrage of responses when they all aren't necessary.

Defending the Church in groups can be really effective -- I think especially when visiting and debating in forums that aren't Catholic, there is such thing as "safety in numbers." However, on here, I think we have a tendency in our love and zeal for the church, and the fact that we are a phamily and so very tight knit, we get to a point where "when you mess with one, you mess with the rest of us." Remember, we are the Church, not the mafia.

Of course this isn't something that can be "enforced" -- and this is absolutely not a criticism of anyone in particular. If anyone can be called on this, it's me. I think it's just something we all need to think about.


[img]http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/Assets/cybersisters.jpg[/img]

(For a laugh, check out the Flame Warriors! [url="http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/index.htm"]http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/index.htm[/url] )

Edited May 16, 2007 by Ash Wednesday

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Ash Wednesday' post='1274543' date='May 15 2007, 09:16 PM']I'm going to examine the other side of the coin for a moment, because I think there might be something that warrants consideration: I am a bit concerned about the public "dogpile effect" when dealing with someone who may be of a differing or questionable viewpoint compared to the majority of people on phatmass, and members of Church Militant. I think this is especially the case with people who are relatively new to phatmass or just not as well acquainted with us.

Two examples in the last couple of days that I think we had this problem with is not just with Belinda, but also with St. Benedict. I myself have wrongly taken part in the "dogpile" at times.

If two or three people are in a debate, and someone defends the faith and you agree with their opinion -- first decide if it is it really necessary for you to chime in and essentially state what has already been said. Will this help the situation any if three or four people have already said the same thing? If you really feel that you have some advice to give, perhaps consider giving it in a private message. There might be something a bit more charitable and personable about that. The person might not feel like you are just ganging up on them like everyone else. If someone in the wrong has already been admonished once and called on their actions or statements, they don't need to be admonished by twelve other people. If it's someone you have just met and you don't think you can bring anything new to the table but still would like to say something or help out in some way -- there is no harm in saying hello to them and just simply welcoming them to phatmass and encouraging them to stay. We cannot help it if someone is offended by a person's opinion -- but I think we can try to avoid overwhelming someone with a barrage of responses when they all aren't necessary.

Defending the Church in groups can be really effective -- I think especially when visiting and debating in forums that aren't Catholic, there is such thing as "safety in numbers." However, on here, I think we have a tendency in our love and zeal for the church, and the fact that we are a phamily and so very tight knit, we get to a point where "when you mess with one, you mess with the rest of us." Remember, we are the Church, not the mafia.

Of course this isn't something that can be "enforced" -- and this is absolutely not a criticism of anyone in particular. If anyone can be called on this, it's me. I think it's just something we all need to think about.
[img]http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/Assets/cybersisters.jpg[/img]

(For a laugh, check out the Flame Warriors! [url="http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/index.htm"]http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/index.htm[/url] )[/quote]
Great post, good to keep all this in mind.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Ash Wednesday' post='1274543' date='May 15 2007, 07:16 PM']If it's someone you have just met and you don't think you can bring anything new to the table but still would like to say something or help out in some way -- there is no harm in saying hello to them and just simply welcoming them to phatmass and encouraging them to stay.[/quote]
often i have typed out a response to a thread to just realize it's not worth getting worked up about. so then i usually just say 'hi' or 'i'm praying for you'.

[quote name='Ash Wednesday' post='1274543' date='May 15 2007, 07:16 PM']Remember, we are the Church, not the mafia. [/quote]
then why am i in witness protection?









:

[puellapaschalis]

There may be a danger of conflating two separate people here. Belinda (In His Light) has apparently left Phatmass because she no longer feels welcome now that she no longer calls herself a Christian. The sister who left (presumably) because of comments made about orders and congregations with no or an optional habit is Sr. Mary Helga (Incarnate word postulant).

PP

[prose]

To clarify: the sister who left did not say why she left. She may have left because she had no time to come here. She may have left because she forgot to bookmark Phatmass and couldn't get back. She may have left because she is on an extended prayer retreat. She may have left because he computer broke down. No one knows. All of this is speculation.

[puellapaschalis]

[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=67135&st=0&p=1253172&#entry1253172"]This[/url] is the post I was thinking of. Prose is entitled to her reading of it, and in the main I agree with her; where I do not agree is that this is [i]all[/i] speculation. Reading the entire thread is, I think, quite instructive.

PP

[thessalonian]

I recommend you don't judge when someone leaves. Belinda has issues. Here goddess is likely a demon. Charity is not always about being nice.

[Veritas]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1274081' date='May 15 2007, 11:26 AM']i know no one has responded yet, but here's my penny:

i do think it's a little ridiculous that a lot of people on pm assume that because a nun/sister isn't habited that she is totally liberal and hates the Church. i think it's beautiful when nuns/sisters do wear a habit, but we must remember that some orders do have it optional.

but i do think that if you have a problem with something that is said on pm, you should speak up about it, so maybe it can be changed.[/quote]

+

Except, Lil'Red, do you realize that the Pope specifially called for religious to wear a "recognizable habit"? No, not all non-habited nuns are "bad" but, obviously if the Pope asks you to do something, it's better to do it! And, it's okay to talk about that. Another big part of this conversation was the almost unanimous belonging of said sisters in the LCWR, which if you look on their website, promotes a number of issues contrary to Church teaching in their RESOLUTIONS e.g. the homosexual lifestyle and homosexual behaviour.

Edited June 29, 2007 by Veritas

[XIX]

Just a tip in internet etiquette:

Do not type words in all caps. It comes across as being brash and angry. Or at the very least, it's not indicative of good writing skills.

That is not an attack on any one person (even though it looks like I'm only talking about the person above me, I'm not). It's just a bit of advice to everyone else.