In certain things unity; in doubtful things liberty; in all things charity

[NoelFitz]

I read Matt Nelson’s article ‘St Anselm’s God’ with interest and care, but not complete understanding. It reminded me of St J H Newman’s ‘Tamworth Reading Room’.

To most men argument makes the point in hand only more doubtful, and considerably less impressive. After all, man is not a reasoning animal; he is a seeing, feeling, contemplating, acting animal. He is influenced by what is direct and precise …

Life is not long enough for a religion of inferences; we shall never have done beginning, if we determine to begin with proof. … I would rather be bound to defend the reasonableness of assuming that Christianity is true, than to demonstrate a moral governance from the physical world. Life is for action. If we insist on proofs for everything, we shall never come to action: to act you must assume, and that assumption is faith.

When I think of Anselm I think of; “For I do not seek to understand in order that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand.

I also think of what my good friend Prof Wikipedia who quotes Anselm Fides quaerens intellectum (faith seeking understanding)

However reading Matt’s article encouraged me, as I was very upset and perturbed at being suspended from CAF, without warning or satisfactory explanation, after years of participating and financially supporting it. When suspended I could not, without great difficulty, contact CAF for satisfactory explanations. Was it the woke environment of the present or lack of understanding of European Catholic thought that led to my suspension? However, support, especially from one contributor, whom I admire greatly recommended I put the insult behind me and continue in CAF, as he himself was suspended.

But now I find it hard to be open and honest in my posts knowing I face suspension, I feel that in this age of great polarization in the Church some may complain and have me suspended again, because I differ from them.

In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas (in certain things unity; in doubtful things liberty; in all things charity).

 

[Limoncello4021]

Most likely you were not banned because someone merely differed with you. I have not seen that happen here, but perhaps it has. Have you spoken with a moderator to ask why you were banned so that you are aware if it happens again and can avoid it?

 

[NoelFitz]

My account was blocked and I found it difficult to get someone in CAF to respond. A communication sent to me seemed very much like a pro forma one. It was pointed out to me that due to circumstances those suspended have no right of appeal.

Life is too short to make issues of minor things. I have decided, if allowed, to continue here, and if my views, as a Catholic for almost 80 years, are unacceptable in CAF, so be it.

The main point of my post was:
In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas (in certain things unity; in doubtful things liberty; in all things charity).

 

[Beryllos]

But now I find it hard to be open and honest in my posts knowing I face suspension

It is sad that you feel oppressed in this way. You mentioned “in all things charity,” and this is the key to avoiding suspension. I don’t think we get suspended for open and honest posts, per se, but we could be suspended for open and honest uncharity, even if it’s inadvertent. I didn’t see the post(s) in question so I can’t comment specifically or even speculate on the reason for your suspension.