Max on X

@Ooops_75 @xxChessMaster After black rook takes white rook (Rxe5), white doesn’t have to take the black rook. Instead, white queen can take black rook (Qxh8). From there, black still loses no matter what.

@xxChessMaster Ben siyah olsam şöyle yapardım. Siyah kale, beyaz kaleyi alır. Beyaz kale siyah kaleyi alır. Siyah vezir beyaz veziri alır. Bana bir vezir hediye ettiği için beyaza teşekkür ederdim.

Brilliant or Blunder?? 🤔

@TrmptVc @5Solas2 Jerome is not following the Protestant model. He is the perfect Catholic example. Even if we have doubts, we must remain teachable to God’s revelation, which he gives to us through the visible Church, , founded on Simon whom he renamed to “rock” as a one of the visible signs.

@TrmptVc @5Solas2 When defending the deuterocanonical portions of Daniel, Jerome said: “What sin have I committed in following the judgment of the churches?” The problem is that Protestants don’t submit to the Church that Jesus founded on the rock. So errors have no chance of correction.

There is a way past the absurd and deeply divisive “war” between the President and the Pope, which has been enthusiastically ginned up by the press. And it is indicated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 2309 to be precise. After laying out the various criteria for determining a just war—proportionality, last resort, declaration by a competent authority, reasonable hope of success, etc.—the Catechism points out that “the evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.” The assumption is that the just war principles function, to use the technical term, as heuristic devices, designed to guide the practical decision-making of those civil authorities who have to adjudicate matters of war and peace. The role of the Church, therefore, is to call for peace and to urge that any conflict be strictly circumscribed by the moral constraints of the just war criteria. But it is not the role of the Church to evaluate whether a particular war is just or unjust. That appraisal belongs to the civil authorities, who, one presumes, have requisite knowledge of conditions on the ground. So, is the war in question truly the last resort? Is there really a balance between the good to be attained and the destruction caused by the war? Are combatants and non-combatants being properly distinguished in the waging of the conflict? Do the belligerents have right intention? Is there a reasonable hope of success? The posing of those questions—indeed the insistence upon their moral relevance—belongs rightly to the Church, but the answering of them belongs to the civil authorities. The Pope has said, on numerous occasions, that he is not a politician and that his role is not the determination of any nation's foreign policy. But he has just as clearly said that he will continue to speak for peace and for moral constraint. In making both of these claims, he is operating perfectly within the framework of paragraph 2309 of the Catechism. If we understand that the Pope and the President have qualitatively different roles to play in the determination of moral action in regard to war, we can, I hope, extricate ourselves from the completely unhelpful narrative of “Pope vs. President.”

@ByGraceAL0NE @HumanBeingAlpha @MrCasey62 Stop bearing false witness. Of course Catholics think about what we read. That we allow God to correct us if we are wrong does not mean we do not use our brains. Conversely, not submitting to the Church founded by Jesus Christ means you’re unteachable.

@HumanBeingAlpha @MrCasey62 That only happens if you turn on your brain and think about what you read.

She has no one to blame but herself that people think she’s low-IQ.

@BrianEastwoodx @DrRitaDed If you tax $180K at 100%, they still take home $17.82 million. Let that sink in.

@DrRitaDed Psss, $180k no let’s go after above $80k Those mother fckers need to learn

Here's an idea. Tax the rich. Anyone earning over 180k per year should get taxed at 100% No one needs to be earning that much. Redistribute the wealth.

@artwormm @brimstone_golem @JamesDueck @Pontifex @EWTN @CatholicVote @catholiccom A proper communion with God means that we will take everything that comes with it. If our relationship with God means we should also commune with my neighbours (and vice versa), then we should accept.

@artwormm @brimstone_golem @JamesDueck @Pontifex @EWTN @CatholicVote @catholiccom Christian minimalism tends to be more common among Protestants, perhaps as an ecumenical way of coping with the multitude of theologies being taught. But what Jesus has given us is so rich… it would be tragic if we only want to eat one dish out of many offered in the banquet.

Do not pray to the pope. Pray to Jesus, He is the only one that can save you. @Pontifex @EWTN @CatholicVote @catholiccom

@Jeune50231 @FrMatthewLC Do not choose a religion based on the limits on man, but on the truth it proclaims from God.

@Jeune50231 @FrMatthewLC I think you’re expecting too much of a fellow human being. The Pope has to practise prudence because he cannot solve every political crisis in the world. Did you know that you’re not the only ones suffering?

I recommend everyone become CATHOLIC 🇻🇦.

@Brotherhoodoft5 @AlexDuncanTX You finding a random quote that is contentious, and has actually been clarified by the magisterium, does not suddenly change what the magisterium teaches.

Follow Jesus, not the Pope.

@ChristySimm23 @MaddyStrong3 @JaydenDavisNC Yes, indeed all scripture is God breathed. But that’s not what sola scriptura asserts. Sola scriptura asserts that the ONLY way you can know infallible truth is the Bible. That is not stated anywhere in scripture. Also, there’s no list of the canon in scripture.

Actually, the burden is on you all. The claim was that “the more someone reads the Bible, the more one realizes Sola Scriptura is illogical.” So go ahead, show us. Give us the Bible verses that teach us we need a supposed infallible Pope, an infallible Magisterium, or Catholic inventions centuries later that equal to Scripture. Because here’s what Scripture says: “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17) And Jesus and the apostles constantly appealed to “It is written…” as the final authority.

The more someone reads the Bible the more one realizes that Sola Scriptura is the most illogical and theologically contradicting belief one can hold.

Paul told the Corinthians that some of them were physically sick and dying because of how they took communion. Read that again. 1 Corinthians 11:30: "That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep." If the Lord's Supper is just a symbol, just crackers and grape juice, then Paul is describing God striking people with illness and death over a metaphor. That makes zero sense. But it gets sharper. Look at what Paul says earlier in this section. 1 Corinthians 10:16: "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?" The Greek word is "koinonia." Not "representation of." Not "reminder of." Participation. Sharing in. Real contact with the thing itself. Then Paul draws the parallel in verse 20. Pagans who eat meat sacrificed to idols are "participants" with demons. Not symbolic fellowship. Real spiritual participation. Paul uses the same root word and the exact same logic for the Eucharist and for pagan sacrifice. If one is real participation, so is the other. So the question for every Protestant who holds a symbolic view: Why would God kill people over a symbol? And why does Paul use identical language for demonic participation and eucharistic participation if only one of them is real?

@l_vliet72077 @JamesDueck If sola scriptura meant that the Bible is infallible, the Church wouldn’t have a problem. But sola scriptura asserts the Bible to be the ONLY infallible source of truth, which is false.

@JamesDueck If Sola Scriptura is an error why do Catholics refer to the Bible as the "Canon" (measuring stick)? Why would a carpenter discard his tape measure? Why do Catholics refuse to understand that the phrase "not by works" or "not of yourselves" is the same as "by faith alone"?

I saw the inner workings of the Protestant world for 50 years, which is surprisingly 10% of Protestant history. I’ve been to Mennonite churches, Pentecostal churches, Evangelical churches, Reformed churches, Baptist churches, “non-denominational” churches, and others. I’ve heard the lies about Catholics, and I believed them. It’s a terrible problem, but it’s also solvable. The “Protest” continues because of (generally) well-meaning preachers who want to preach the Gospel but are trapped in a system of thought that requires them to fight against the Catholic Church. The key error is Sola Scriptura, an idea made up by Martin Luther around 1520. Most preachers don’t talk about Sola Scriptura; they silently assume it, as their fathers and their fathers’ fathers did. To actually speak honestly about it would cause a crisis. It makes no logical, historical, or common sense. And the evidence against it increases every time a new denomination is created. There are other big errors, like Sola Fide, but Sola Scriptura is the hinge on which everything else turns. It’s the error that blows up your world if you are brave enough to look. People will twist themselves into all kinds of crazy positions just to avoid taking an honest look at this one thing. Social media pierces through these errors by reaching individual Christians in a non-threatening context. More Catholics need to get on social media and explain the faith, debunk the lies—over and over again, a million times, in a million ways. There is a clear path to Christian unity if we just do the work!