"

I feel bad, too, JG. I know I can have a real smart, sarcastic mouth when I get totally frustrated, and when it gets going, look out! I apologize... Seriously. I don't want bad blood between us.

I do have a POV, of course. We all do. But in an entry that is explaining the traditionalist POV (where there is ""the"" trad POV), it matches. And when it comes to external links/further reading (not ""sources""), then traditionalist websites deserve to be represented as much as others. I mean, on a page on Hannukah, there might be a link to ""An Orthodox Hannukah"" or ""Reformed Readings for Hannukah,"" but with Dominick it seems to be only his way or no way. He can't add a link for balance, or add ""a traditional Catholic site"" tag, or group links under headings as you did; he removes and replaces and mischaracterizes in the edit summaries.

I am totally fine with any links to my site being labelled ""a traditional Catholic site"" or what not (though I think the same thing ought to work in the other direction such that EWTN, for ex., is labelled a ""conservative"" or ""neo-conservative"" site  not that I am worked up about going through Wiki and making it so, but the point remains). 

I'm glad you liked at least most of the page on the Rosary! (I think if you looked at the links mentioned in my RfC, you will actually like them, too  at least most of them. Seriously, check this section of the site out, and the sub-sections inside of it, like the ""Customs of the Liturgical Year"" section. There is nothing like it out there on the Net, and I'm not finished yet!) But your words show the key differences between traditionalists and conservatives/neo-conservatives: you use the phrase ""attacks on Pope John Paul II"" with regard to the footnote about trads' opinions that changing the Mysteries of the Rosary was unwise, but we don't see it as an ""attack"" but a criticism. Even St. Paul himself resisted St. Peter, our first Pope, ""to the face"" when His Holiness did an unwise thing (Galatians 2), and St. Catherine of Siena used to write letters to the Pope, basically telling him to act like a man LOL Our differences pretty much come down to different understandings of infallibility, to perceptions of our ability to criticize and resist prudential, pastoral decisions, and to our different notions of Christian obedience (and here different trads have different opinions as to what should be obeyed or rightfully resisted, because that is a prudential concern in itself, one that each Catholic has to study and pray about).

But no matter whether you and Dominick and I agree or not (we don't have to agree to be decent to each other, and some of my favorite people are conservative Catholics!), there is a trad ""movement"" out there, and we have as much ""right"" to be heard as anyone else. Or imagine that we're not even Catholic at all and there's a page on the Rosary: no one would remove a link to ""Anglican Rosary practices."" I just feel as if the traditional viewpoint is being censored, and it frustrates me (it doubly frustrates me when links like this aren't only removed, but are labelled ""blog"" or ""[[monograph|monographs]"". It's beyond belief, really, that he is allowed to get away with it).

I will promise you this: from here on out, if I add any links to the site (only on relevant pages, of course), I will use the word ""a traditional Catholic site"" or some such after it, or will group links so that the fact that it is a trad site is clear. If I come across any older links that have already been added (and not all have been added by me, BTW), I will edit to do the same. Sound good? 

I am glad you wrote; I feel TONS better already...  "