You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
2
CrusaderPepe on scored.co
1 day ago2 points(+0/-0/+2Score on mirror)1 child
So I haven't responded to most of your comments before, but I have read them. And I noticed a pattern, and I want to say something to help you.
Whenever you comment on my video posts, you usually start with something like "I didn't watch your video and haven't done the research myself, but here are my thoughts..." And then you give your thoughts.
Here's the good thing: Your thoughts are generally correct!
Here's the bad thing: You undermine your own credibility, so many people will probably dismiss your comments.
There's an old saying: Opinions are like buttholes: Everyone has them, and they all stink!
Now, in your case, your opinion is actually correct.
But when you clarify that you haven't researched things or didn't watch my videos...
(And let me make a point on the latter really quick: It's your prerogative not to watch my videos. That being said, if you've never seen my videos, I am not a talking head, that just faces the screen and gives my "hot take". No. Instead, what I do in my videos is put the sources on screen, like Scripture, Church Father/Doctor writings, Magisterium, etc. and read it with the viewer, as I prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, what the Church teaches. Thus, nobody can walk away from my videos doubting my credibility, and this is what I am trying to help you with here).
When you act as if you haven't looked into something deeply yourself, you undermine your own credibility, and that makes people likely to dismiss your comments because, even though they are very logical, they don't have the facts needed to back up your sound and valid logic.
So this is why I am encouraging you to watch my videos, not just as shameless self-promotion, but to show you how I demonstrate credibility in what I teach.
Likewise, since I have sourced, and continue to source, so many authoritative writings from Scripture, Saints, and the Popes, regarding the Jewish question on my website (and yes, I always include citations to demonstrate credibility) you are free to use my resources to use at any time to have a foundation of credibility in your posts and comments.
Again, your comments are great in that they are often correct and use sound logic. I just think you often undermine your own credibility, and I hate to see that. If you added credible quotes and sources to prove your credibility, I think you would be a very good educator when it comes to the Catholic understanding of the JQ.
Hopefully, this helps. Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and God bless!
but usually I'm just trying to be honest on if I watched the vid or not and about commenting on the title (as you say, a lot of comments I put in may be correct, but if they're not, I've noted in advance possibly why)
and also almost no one is commenting anyway so my comment usually adds something
(one side note is that the site's video embeds are broken so I cannot actually watch the vid here!)
regarding the title though, again without watching, the main problem we have to deal with with the modernists is probably the contention that "theology evolves":
> "yeah Innocent III said that, but the Church accepted slavery at one point, and doesn't anymore. Recent 'popes' have been friendly towards Jews, ergo now Jews are our friends. Only schismatic excommunicated traditionalists lacking credibility would say otherwise! What are you, some kind of sedevacantist?!"?
I just said what I did because your comments are really good, except that you tend to undermine your credibility sometimes. That being said, your commenting is your business. It just seems like you could offer a lot more if you brought research, facts, and citations to the table, since you are usually spot on. Hopefully, you take my advice in understanding that I am delivering it with love and the understanding that I see potential in you. God bless!
I got caught up in an autistic reply to this because I do think the topic of credibility can be expanded on, but I think I can summarize what I wanted to say
people might talk smack on your own credibliity. we cant see his face, who is this crusaderpepe anon dude. he has no "ADVANCED THEOLOGIEZ DEGREE" so why should we listen. he has no official authority! these might be legit criticisms in normal times but our "official Catholic authorities" today can be proven often to be wrong by people without any credibility or degrees, so imo all bets are off. I consider you as "credible" insofar as you share info that I think is correct.
trads also lack credibility today, both in disputes among themselves they can't resolve (sedevacantism vs. sedeplenism and so on) and demonstrable public errors made. maybe mostly though we're fighting a one-sided battle where the "official authority in Rome has decided against traditional Catholic views being acceptable". Hence to be traditionalist is automatically thought to not be credible.
so, I think maybe instead of trads striving to be credible (probably not going to win anyone over, besides maintaining basic moral integrity), we have to tear down the modernists' credibility, and then insert trad credibility into the aftermath of that demolition: "no, modernism is not credible: traditionalism is".
in any event it feels like boomer trads are just leaving the youth abandoned to modernist chaos instead of there being much active dismantling of credibility going on. Traditionalism isn't quite as activist as say MAGA is in politics (just yet anyway). I mean the papal elections since 1958 are basically from a sedevacantist viewpoint "stolen" just like Trump claims the u.s. presidential 2020 election was stolen. But we hardly have the same kind of "stop the steal" "movement" like we see with Trump / MAGA as attacking the credibility of the 2020 u.s. presidential election.
Yeah, I pretty much agree with everything you are saying. A big part of what I talk about though is the ontological war on reality. And the biggest problem in this war is the metaframe our society takes that subjective experience is more important than objective reality. That's a big reason why I, as a warrior defending the Truth, strive to prove things objectively, instead of giving "hot takes" or "my opinion" or being a "talking head". Who I am is not important. My opinion or "hot take" is not important. All that is important is objective reality and subjective perspectives are just flawed simulacrums, and our side needs everyone to buy into this metaframe, because it's objectively true and winning people over based on "hot takes" without appealing to objective reality keeps people in this false egregore and focused on the dialectics and spectacle, instead of humbly and dispassionately focusing on objective Truth, which is what we all ought to be doing.
Whenever you comment on my video posts, you usually start with something like "I didn't watch your video and haven't done the research myself, but here are my thoughts..." And then you give your thoughts.
Here's the good thing: Your thoughts are generally correct!
Here's the bad thing: You undermine your own credibility, so many people will probably dismiss your comments.
There's an old saying: Opinions are like buttholes: Everyone has them, and they all stink!
Now, in your case, your opinion is actually correct.
But when you clarify that you haven't researched things or didn't watch my videos...
(And let me make a point on the latter really quick: It's your prerogative not to watch my videos. That being said, if you've never seen my videos, I am not a talking head, that just faces the screen and gives my "hot take". No. Instead, what I do in my videos is put the sources on screen, like Scripture, Church Father/Doctor writings, Magisterium, etc. and read it with the viewer, as I prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, what the Church teaches. Thus, nobody can walk away from my videos doubting my credibility, and this is what I am trying to help you with here).
When you act as if you haven't looked into something deeply yourself, you undermine your own credibility, and that makes people likely to dismiss your comments because, even though they are very logical, they don't have the facts needed to back up your sound and valid logic.
So this is why I am encouraging you to watch my videos, not just as shameless self-promotion, but to show you how I demonstrate credibility in what I teach.
Likewise, since I have sourced, and continue to source, so many authoritative writings from Scripture, Saints, and the Popes, regarding the Jewish question on my website (and yes, I always include citations to demonstrate credibility) you are free to use my resources to use at any time to have a foundation of credibility in your posts and comments.
Again, your comments are great in that they are often correct and use sound logic. I just think you often undermine your own credibility, and I hate to see that. If you added credible quotes and sources to prove your credibility, I think you would be a very good educator when it comes to the Catholic understanding of the JQ.
Hopefully, this helps. Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and God bless!
but usually I'm just trying to be honest on if I watched the vid or not and about commenting on the title (as you say, a lot of comments I put in may be correct, but if they're not, I've noted in advance possibly why)
and also almost no one is commenting anyway so my comment usually adds something
(one side note is that the site's video embeds are broken so I cannot actually watch the vid here!)
regarding the title though, again without watching, the main problem we have to deal with with the modernists is probably the contention that "theology evolves":
> "yeah Innocent III said that, but the Church accepted slavery at one point, and doesn't anymore. Recent 'popes' have been friendly towards Jews, ergo now Jews are our friends. Only schismatic excommunicated traditionalists lacking credibility would say otherwise! What are you, some kind of sedevacantist?!"?
people might talk smack on your own credibliity. we cant see his face, who is this crusaderpepe anon dude. he has no "ADVANCED THEOLOGIEZ DEGREE" so why should we listen. he has no official authority! these might be legit criticisms in normal times but our "official Catholic authorities" today can be proven often to be wrong by people without any credibility or degrees, so imo all bets are off. I consider you as "credible" insofar as you share info that I think is correct.
trads also lack credibility today, both in disputes among themselves they can't resolve (sedevacantism vs. sedeplenism and so on) and demonstrable public errors made. maybe mostly though we're fighting a one-sided battle where the "official authority in Rome has decided against traditional Catholic views being acceptable". Hence to be traditionalist is automatically thought to not be credible.
so, I think maybe instead of trads striving to be credible (probably not going to win anyone over, besides maintaining basic moral integrity), we have to tear down the modernists' credibility, and then insert trad credibility into the aftermath of that demolition: "no, modernism is not credible: traditionalism is".
in any event it feels like boomer trads are just leaving the youth abandoned to modernist chaos instead of there being much active dismantling of credibility going on. Traditionalism isn't quite as activist as say MAGA is in politics (just yet anyway). I mean the papal elections since 1958 are basically from a sedevacantist viewpoint "stolen" just like Trump claims the u.s. presidential 2020 election was stolen. But we hardly have the same kind of "stop the steal" "movement" like we see with Trump / MAGA as attacking the credibility of the 2020 u.s. presidential election.