BOL's official stance against Sedevacantism

[CelticKnott]

I'm just saying that it hurts me and the few that believe in it, that we can't openly express what it is we believe when we want. instead we get a small monkey cage and are occassionally fed bananas. but yeah, we kind of are being shunned. when they say that all talk about sede (meaning talk FOR our beliefs) is banned. and part of our strong beliefs is that the pope isn't the pope. and that is banned.

its like i want to clap and cry. you are 100% right on asher. simply because a majority has been led astray by an antipope doesnt give them a right to shun the minority on a board that claims to unite all 'Catholics'--whatever that term connotes, since this kinda makes me question what the leaders of this board deem 'Catholic'.

[CelticKnott]

and for clarity's sake, what i meant by being unsure of the leadership's stance, i meant that since the site claims to unite all Catholic homeschoolers worldwide, shunning a portion of them for their beliefs is no more right than if they suddenly decided that there had been all too much discussion of byzantine catholicism and so they were going to confine it to one forum with strict rules.

and if they are truly loyal to benedict, and if they consider sedes to be 'non-Catholic' as some have expressed, then they should be welcoming us with open arms, since benedict seems to so love blurring the lines that keep the Roman Catholic Faith distinct from other 'faiths'.

[greeneyedbeauty]

Sorry agian, Andy. He's right we have a place for this. I think its time to lock this thread!

[Seruphim7]

I don't see why people are getting so mad that DEBATES are being kept to a certain forum. We're not restricting your free speech, or your membership or anything. You want to debate, debate there. Geez. The people who run the site have a right to stick certain topics in certain forums. Be glad they're not kicking you off because they disagree with you.

[CelticKnott]

it *was* in a forum, which was for debates relating to or about the Catholic faith........so uhh. explain to me again why we needed to make a big deal out of basically the only active threads in that aforementioned forum, and make a point of frowning on them in their new cage?

[Seruphim7]

If the site maintains specific beliefs, they have the right to stick certain topics in forums that they believe differs in topic. Simple as that.

[CelticKnott]

which is why, as asher said quite succinctly, that has a certain impact on whether some of us stay or not. its like being told 'well this is a message board for all kids ages 12-20, but not the ones who dont like soup.' it makes no sense except when viewed in its discrimantory context.

[AndAy]

Alright, maybe if I say this one more time before I lock it, ppls will get the idea.

There is now a forum for all this... have at it... there... not in an announcement...

[Zach]

Sorry for getting personal and out-of-topic in this thread. It's just that BoredOnline has always had the same views on religion. The core of the member-base is conservative Roman Catholic. That means respect the Pope and Vatican and the Church and its rules. We have always been accepting of alternate beliefs (daemon13- was proabortion, Tam- was atheist, etc) but be cool in the regular forums and take any faith-related talk to the apologetics forum, and keep it civil.

That's pretty much all anybody or the administration is saying.

[wanboredlatino]

It's interesting that the implicit ramifications of this policy haven't been overtly stated by
anyone except Marie - that sedes are deemed by the administration as heretics.

Thus the need to confine discussions pertaining to sedevacantism to the forum labeled for
inter-religious debates, as opposed to the forum labeled for intra-religious debates.

Quite a strong statement.

[Draper]

Not heretics, schismatics.

[wanboredlatino]

Ach, rhetoric had me in its sway.

schismatics /= heretics

schismatics = non-Catholic

Arriving by a different route at my same intent.

[Draper]

It is the position of BOL that sedevacantists are clearly not in communion with the visible Church since they disavow the head of the Church on earth--its visible principle of unity, this was not a statement I was trying to be subtle about, and a point I thought I already mentioned explicity.

[wanboredlatino]

BoredOnline officially recognizes Pope Benedict XVI as the vicar of Christ on earth, successor of St. Peter the Apostle. BOL also officially accepts all of the teachings of the Church's Magisterium.

That being said, discussion of sedevacantism is hereby banned from the Catholicism forum and from other forums on BOL with the exception of the Apologetics forum, newly resurrected for this purpose. It is not or intent to cease the discussion that has been occuring, but only to clarify the official stance of BOL in favor of Pope Benedict.

These have been your only words in this thread about the subject. Nowhere is it specifically listed that all individuals holding to a sedevacantist viewpoint are considered as schismatic by BOL. However, it is a pretty clear implication/ramification of the policy for those versed in Catholic theology (and BOL politics, perhaps). But it's not explicit. Perhaps you enumerated BOL's position more thoroughly in other discussions. But the end result is that this topic, which is the topic of reference for the policy decisions relating to this issue, wasn't completely enumerating the fullness of the issue. While only a minor issue, since the reason for the topic was to illuminate BOL's position for new members, it follows that this topic should be the only resource a new member needs to accurately gauge the position of the administration. I find that position very revealing, and quite up to the standards of BOL.

[Draper]

I find that position very revealing, and quite up to the standards of BOL.

I can't tell if that means you think it is a good thing or not, but oh well.

[MGibson]

[quote="Sarah"]You all say that this is "BOL's stance," Well aren't Asher and I, or any other sede on the site, part of BOL too? Even if that's not our stance? I agree with Asher...I'd rather be banned than have to pretend that I go along with your beliefs.[/quote]

You could just avoid such discussions or avoid boards pertaining specifically to religion, or the debates board. It isn't necessarily 'BOL's stance', but it is the stance of certain administrators who, frankly, pay the bills. It is their site. If they want to ban the discussion of sedevacantism, or really anything else on the boards, then that is their prerogative. If you still wish to discuss it, then by all means set up an off-site meeting area such as I used to do on AIM with the chatroom creation option. If you are really that intent about discussing such things, then you might be better off going to a forum dedicated to sedevacantism for such topics.

Note that I am not necessarily a Sede.

[MGibson]

*notices that the last post was from 2007*

Oh wow, no wonder this is the first I've heard of this problem here.

[musicislove]

i am glad i misssed this!

[Draper]

Technically, since the restructuring of forums and the elimination of the Apologetics forum, topics on Sedevacantism would be allowed in General Debates (but not elsewhere on the site). The current administration, to my knowledge, has not revisited the issue since it basically died out in 2007.