Anonymous wrote:For someone who insists on an excruciating level of precision in others statements you are perfectly happy to misinterpret what others say in order not to admit you were wrong.

For example, nowhere did I say Opus Dei is a political actor— although it’s interesting you interpreted it that way— I said there is a strong correlation of its members and right wing politics in the US.

But going back and forth like this is tiresome, made more so by your insistence on using silly sequipedalian vocabulary.

For cripes sake at least spell sesquipedalian correctly. Don't give the pedant more oxygen.

Anonymous wrote:As polling goes, the majority of Catholics voted for Trump. There are culturally conservative Catholics and theologically conservative Catholics. There's no shortage of Catholics who disagree with the liberal wing of the church. The tensions are pretty well known. Not sure why OP is trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. Is she saying people aren't allowed to criticize institutions, even ones they are part of?

Why would the vice president criticize a religion of some of his voters, People take their religions seriously and they could lose votes.

I don’t get these Latinos who are voting for Trump who is deporting 90% of Christian Latin Americans. Unless they’re stupid enough to believe they are only deporting criminals.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I supposed he thinks he's more Catholic than the Pope. These right wing Catholics are SO arrogant.

Also, Refugess are LEGAL immigrants.

I can see his wife having more and more contempt for him. Her face and his face told two different stories when they were listening to the bishop about immigrants.

If she’s actually genuine and has no stomach for what her husband is involved in he will lose his wife soon enough. He’ll really be one of them, Trump, Musk, RFK jr, and the drunk all have at least three divorces.

Anonymous wrote:Well, I supposed he thinks he's more Catholic than the Pope. These right wing Catholics are SO arrogant.

Also, Refugess are LEGAL immigrants.

It’s so odd because the highest percentage of Catholics are in the Northeast. The Northeast is majority Democrat. Rhode Island is 60% Catholic, Massachusetts is about 50% Catholic. Largest amount of Catholics in Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Vermont, Maine. Trump lost all these states.

Texas and New Mexico have large percentages of Catholics too. The difference is the Northeast has mostly Irish Catholic, French Catholics , Western Europeans mostly. Down South there are more Catholics from Latin America.

I’m not sure where the right wing Catholics live.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I supposed he thinks he's more Catholic than the Pope. These right wing Catholics are SO arrogant.

Also, Refugess are LEGAL immigrants.

Oof. This gave me a ghost of Henry VIII chill. When do American Catholics break away from Rome and declare Vance head of the Catholic Church in America and ALL churches.

There are already right wing US sects who consider themselves Catholic. Many of them say Mass in Latin.

Yes and Opus Dei

Today's version of the John Birch Society.

Have you ever met a member of Opus Dei? Attended one of their liturgies or events? Consulted one of their priests? Read any of their publications?

You genuinely don’t know what you’re talking about.

Not PP: But yes I have, and they are cuckoo.

Pejorative epithets may be the safe harbor of the intellectually deficient, but they hardly explain the purported defects in the beliefs and practices of Opus Dei adherents.

Dude, I am a graduate of one of the top SLACs in this country and have two advanced degrees from an Ivy League institution. I am more than intellectually sufficient and I call it like I see it.

LOL. THAT explains things.

I think I first heard of Opus Dei as a teen back in the 80s having dinner with a friend who was a Maryknoll priest and I’m pressure sure he used some variant of cuckoo to describe Opus Dei. And he had a PhD.
I’m another Gen Xer that has attended all sorts of masses in all sorts of languages, and I’ve found that most of the proponents of the Latin mass are the same folks who object to lay Eucharistic ministers and female alter servers. Basically pre-Vatican 2 adherents. My grandmother, who was born in the 19th century, used to like some Latin so I used to take her to a Mexican mass, which she declared basically the same as Latin mass.

Anonymous wrote:For someone who insists on an excruciating level of precision in others statements you are perfectly happy to misinterpret what others say in order not to admit you were wrong.

For example, nowhere did I say Opus Dei is a political actor— although it’s interesting you interpreted it that way— I said there is a strong correlation of its members and right wing politics in the US.

But going back and forth like this is tiresome, made more so by your insistence on using silly sequipedalian vocabulary.

I read your assertion of “correlation” as implying an association between Opus Dei as an entity and the purported views of its members. Given the subject of the thread, and the prior post making the wholly unsupportable assertion that Opus Dei is in some way akin to the John Burch Society, I think that’s a fair reading, and one you didn’t exclude. !

And I don’t think I use long words. You know, like “sequipedalian.”

For someone who insists on an excruciating level of precision in others statements you are perfectly happy to misinterpret what others say in order not to admit you were wrong.

For example, nowhere did I say Opus Dei is a political actor— although it’s interesting you interpreted it that way— I said there is a strong correlation of its members and right wing politics in the US.

But going back and forth like this is tiresome, made more so by your insistence on using silly sequipedalian vocabulary.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And to be clear, the very use of the term “Latin Mass” is imprecise to the point of meaninglessness. There is, as discussed at length, the “Vetus Ordo” (Missal of Paul V), which must be celebrated in Latin; there is also the “Novus Ordo” (Missal of Paul VI), the authoritative text of which is in Latin but which may be celebrated in the vernacular or (as is common) partly in Latin and partly in the vernacular.

Are you suggesting that attending a Novus Ordo Mass at the Basilica of the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, with some of the parts in Latin, is something indicative of political “conservatism?” How about the same Mass in the same place entirely in Latin?

Or is it only the Vetus Ordo and its aficionados you feel entitled casually to label with stereotypes?

My God you are tedious. You must be a blast at parties.

Actually, what’s tedious is people blithely equating liturgical preferences of millions of people they’ve never met with some projected view of political preferences, as if everyone fell into their stereotypical caricature. It’s also tedious when people insist that their extremely narrow personal experience, focused through the prejudiced lense of their own narrow-minded world view, somehow trumps the information that even a cursory web search would reveal. It’s also tedious when people use ambiguous and meaningless terms instead of being precise, even after the precise terms are explained to them. And it certainly is tedious when, instead of presenting substantive information and argument, people degenerate to puerile name calling.

But “man was born to suffer as the sparks fly upward,” I guess.

It is tedious when you insist on being pedantic over and over. It is just inaccurate to say there is no correlation between Opus Dei in the US and right wing politics. No one would ever say that with a straight face.

And I noticed you never even addressed the topic of the thread, which is JD Vance’s assertion that the US Bishops are trafficking illegal immigrants to make money.

It’s not pedantic when one responds to generalized negative stereotyping by pointing out the facts only to be met by contumacious insistence that the stereotypes are accurate. Particularly when the stereotyping is completely irrelevant to the purported thread topic.

I think the idea of Opus Dei as a political actor in the United States is unfounded, to put it mildly.

As for Vance’s view of “the US bishops,” there are 196 dioceses, eparchies, etc., in the United States, each headed by a bishop, who frequently has the assistance of other bishops. I think it is hard to know the precise motives of each one regarding the subject of immigration and the presence of people who unlawfully entered the country. The Church collectively does an enormous amount of good among such people. At the same time a great deal of money is involved in “migrant services” and it seems disingenuous to suggest that no one involved is motivated by at least mixed motives when that is the case. I saw somewhere that at least some people say that regardless of the funding involved, migrant service activities are still a net expense to Church entities. I don’t know if that’s true or not, or if the situation is the same in every single diocese. I don’t know what Mr. Vance knows about the subject either. He’s free to speak his mind and if that makes someone uncomfortable perhaps they would benefit from examining why.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And to be clear, the very use of the term “Latin Mass” is imprecise to the point of meaninglessness. There is, as discussed at length, the “Vetus Ordo” (Missal of Paul V), which must be celebrated in Latin; there is also the “Novus Ordo” (Missal of Paul VI), the authoritative text of which is in Latin but which may be celebrated in the vernacular or (as is common) partly in Latin and partly in the vernacular.

Are you suggesting that attending a Novus Ordo Mass at the Basilica of the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, with some of the parts in Latin, is something indicative of political “conservatism?” How about the same Mass in the same place entirely in Latin?

Or is it only the Vetus Ordo and its aficionados you feel entitled casually to label with stereotypes?

My God you are tedious. You must be a blast at parties.

Actually, what’s tedious is people blithely equating liturgical preferences of millions of people they’ve never met with some projected view of political preferences, as if everyone fell into their stereotypical caricature. It’s also tedious when people insist that their extremely narrow personal experience, focused through the prejudiced lense of their own narrow-minded world view, somehow trumps the information that even a cursory web search would reveal. It’s also tedious when people use ambiguous and meaningless terms instead of being precise, even after the precise terms are explained to them. And it certainly is tedious when, instead of presenting substantive information and argument, people degenerate to puerile name calling.

But “man was born to suffer as the sparks fly upward,” I guess.

It is tedious when you insist on being pedantic over and over. It is just inaccurate to say there is no correlation between Opus Dei in the US and right wing politics. No one would ever say that with a straight face.

And I noticed you never even addressed the topic of the thread, which is JD Vance’s assertion that the US Bishops are trafficking illegal immigrants to make money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:5. And, again, a taste for Latin liturgy is no more an indication of political persuasion than a taste for jelly doughnuts.

Just wrong. I work for the Catholic Church. It's the RWNJ within the Church who are all for the Latin Mass.

Have you discussed the sin of retraction with your spiritual director?

Detraction. Sorry.

If you're sorry, give it a rest already. Go read the catechism or whatever pedantics like you do for fun.

Oh, I’m not sorry for calling out the PP. I’m sorry for the missing the “auto-correct” error.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And to be clear, the very use of the term “Latin Mass” is imprecise to the point of meaninglessness. There is, as discussed at length, the “Vetus Ordo” (Missal of Paul V), which must be celebrated in Latin; there is also the “Novus Ordo” (Missal of Paul VI), the authoritative text of which is in Latin but which may be celebrated in the vernacular or (as is common) partly in Latin and partly in the vernacular.

Are you suggesting that attending a Novus Ordo Mass at the Basilica of the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, with some of the parts in Latin, is something indicative of political “conservatism?” How about the same Mass in the same place entirely in Latin?

Or is it only the Vetus Ordo and its aficionados you feel entitled casually to label with stereotypes?

My God you are tedious. You must be a blast at parties.

Actually, what’s tedious is people blithely equating liturgical preferences of millions of people they’ve never met with some projected view of political preferences, as if everyone fell into their stereotypical caricature. It’s also tedious when people insist that their extremely narrow personal experience, focused through the prejudiced lense of their own narrow-minded world view, somehow trumps the information that even a cursory web search would reveal. It’s also tedious when people use ambiguous and meaningless terms instead of being precise, even after the precise terms are explained to them. And it certainly is tedious when, instead of presenting substantive information and argument, people degenerate to puerile name calling.

But “man was born to suffer as the sparks fly upward,” I guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:5. And, again, a taste for Latin liturgy is no more an indication of political persuasion than a taste for jelly doughnuts.

Just wrong. I work for the Catholic Church. It's the RWNJ within the Church who are all for the Latin Mass.

Have you discussed the sin of retraction with your spiritual director?

Detraction. Sorry.

If you're sorry, give it a rest already. Go read the catechism or whatever pedantics like you do for fun.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:5. And, again, a taste for Latin liturgy is no more an indication of political persuasion than a taste for jelly doughnuts.

Just wrong. I work for the Catholic Church. It's the RWNJ within the Church who are all for the Latin Mass.

Have you discussed the sin of retraction with your spiritual director?

Detraction. Sorry.

Anonymous wrote:5. And, again, a taste for Latin liturgy is no more an indication of political persuasion than a taste for jelly doughnuts.

Just wrong. I work for the Catholic Church. It's the RWNJ within the Church who are all for the Latin Mass.

Have you discussed the sin of retraction with your spiritual director?

Anonymous wrote:And to be clear, the very use of the term “Latin Mass” is imprecise to the point of meaninglessness. There is, as discussed at length, the “Vetus Ordo” (Missal of Paul V), which must be celebrated in Latin; there is also the “Novus Ordo” (Missal of Paul VI), the authoritative text of which is in Latin but which may be celebrated in the vernacular or (as is common) partly in Latin and partly in the vernacular.

Are you suggesting that attending a Novus Ordo Mass at the Basilica of the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, with some of the parts in Latin, is something indicative of political “conservatism?” How about the same Mass in the same place entirely in Latin?

Or is it only the Vetus Ordo and its aficionados you feel entitled casually to label with stereotypes?

My God you are tedious. You must be a blast at parties.