The Modern Boethius

Prayer for the Canonization of Pope Francis Dear God, I thank you for the life and ministry of our Holy Father Pope Francis. Through his example, I have learned to appreciate simplicity, to embrace fraternity with all, and most importantly, to be a missionary for Christ in my own unique way. If it be according to your will, I ask you to glorify your humble servant Francis for the good of our holy Catholic Church. Amen.

@ByzCat O Tempora o mores

People are complaining that there is no Latin version of the encyclical, but we can just use AI to read it in Latin

Pope Leo just condemned the idea that "work dignifies man". We. Are. So. Back!

@GamerMydden It really is a major problem of our time. I’m glad likewise he called it out with his papal authority

@ModernBoethius I've been beating this war drum for years now. Glad I have the weight of the Pope's words to point to now!

“Public opinion is gradually being shaped and conditioned by polarizing media narratives, which are often amplified by algorithms that prioritize conflict and confrontation.” -Pope Leo The pope just exposed the entire grifting social media influencer class

@AP @ImJustALayMan Yeah slavery is bad. I don’t know what all comments are expecting like they wanted the pope to come out and say yeah guys we should have slavery again like lmao?

BREAKING: Pope Leo XIV makes historic apology for Holy See's own role in legitimizing slavery and for failing to condemn it for centuries. apnews.com/article/pope-a…

Many media narratives will tomorrow cast Magnifica Humanitas in moralistic terms that focus on the tech: Pope condemns, Pope warns, etc. But its deeper purpose is to tell a story about what it means to be a human in this time. Get that right, and the moral choices become clear.

@EricLDaugh Gigachad Rubio

🚨 NOW — Q: "There has been a lot of racism, racist comments coming from the US against Indians. What is your response?" MARCO RUBIO: "Every country in the world has stupid people. I'm sure there are stupid people here." "There are stupid people in the United States that make dumb comments all the time. I don't know what else to tell you other than the United States is a very welcoming country." "Our nation has been enriched by people who come to our country, have come from our country, from all over the world, have become Americans, have assimilated into our way of life, and have contributed greatly."

@ChemBearEsq Yes it is lmao. Ask your priest if you think that’s not.

@ModernBoethius Hating on Indian culture and practices isn't racism

For the Christians replying negatively in the comments, have you all forgotten that racism is a sin? (Catechism of the Catholic Church 1935) Submit to Rome

@kotIDget Are you even Christian?

@ModernBoethius when you say "submit to rome" what you really mean is "submit to jews"

@IncredPapist_ @Pontifex He is the norm, by definition, for Catholicism though

@ModernBoethius @Pontifex I’m not quite sure one can classify the pope as a normie tbh

Any good normie Catholic accounts on here I should follow? I kinda want to get away from the trad space.

@CharlesTingler @padraig55825802 Congrats!

I am officially a Catholic! Truly blessed to receive the body and blood of my Lord Jesus Christ and to be confirmed into the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Photo of my priest, Father Dave, me, and my sponsor Tom.

@CharlesTingler Welcome!! I will keep you in my prayers

Tomorrow is the day I officially become a Catholic. Pray for me.

@RexAustralianus Honored to follow the future King of Australia btw lol

@ModernBoethius Presumably He will speak about the risk of surrendering our intelligence and our social humanity to AI I hope He will also address blasphemy slop

I can’t wait, Pope Leo’s AI letter is going to be a masterpiece

@CathsAgainstJws I’ve read your response and have considered it, I don’t have time to keep replying though. Thank you for the conversation

Fair enough on tone, although in all honesty I was never really objecting to your tone in the first place. Regardless, the “living magisterium” does not mean every opinion currently dominant among bishops automatically overrides prior Catholic teaching, Scripture, or the Fathers. The Church does not teach that truth changes according to the current episcopal consensus. Otherwise, Catholics during the Arian crisis would have been obligated to side with the many bishops who compromised with Arian or semi-Arian formulas. The magisterium must be understood in continuity with prior Tradition, not in isolation from it. And there is simply no way to reconcile prior Catholic tradition with your interpretation regarding the Jews. And again, you keep shifting the argument away from the actual issue. The question is simple: where did the Church ever revoke or condemn the traditional teachings of the Fathers regarding what they wrote about the Jews? St. John Chrysostom’s homilies are traditionally known as Adversus Judaeos, or Against the Jews. Do you condemn Chrysostom for writing these homilies? “Against the Jews” does not mean hatred of Jews as persons, nor does it mean a denial of charity. That phrase has existed since the early centuries of the Church. You also referred to these as “my views on Jews,” which I find interesting because 75% of my tweets are simply quotations from Church Fathers, Saints, councils, Catholic authors, or previous Popes. These are not uniquely “my views.” And how exactly should St. Paul’s words in 1 Thessalonians 2, where he describes the Jews as “enemies of the entire human race,” now be interpreted in light of Evangelii Gaudium? This is exactly my point. Your interpretation of Vatican II and Evangelii Gaudium simply cannot be reconciled with Scripture, the Fathers, and the broader tradition of the Church. And as far as bishops who may agree with me, Bishop Athanasius Schneider has spoken about the Jews in a similar way. I’ve attached several quotations from His Excellency.

Massie did not lose because of Jews or Jewish influence. He lost due to a complicated web of socio-political factors, not due to Jews I write today to rebut the tendentious claim, common from last night, that Massie’s defeat results from Jewish control over American society👇 First, it is undeniably true that pro-Israel groups spent large amounts of money in primary to defeat Massie. They’ve spent about $9 million, about 28% of the total $32 million spent on each side. So this is freely granted. Second, I freely grant that AIPAC often stands for very problematic positions, such as the genocide of Gazas/Palestinians, as our departed Pope Francis indicated. Freely granted—and in general, I myself do not support Israel’s actions in Gaza, Palestine, or Iran. I probably would have voted for Massie against his challenger, were I a Republican in that district. However, one should be extremely careful to draw certain conclusions from those two facts alone. The fact is, there were a lot of other things Massie did completely unrelated to Israel that made him unpopular. And no, I am not just talking about the Epstein files, which his work in was a good thing. Conservative commentator Michael Knowles mentioned a number of instances in which Massie bucked the GOP party line: the leadership vote, the BBB, and procedural rules on the SAVE Act. Massie only voted with the GOP 75% of the time. And that might be a good thing in itself. But it also means that it makes him a maverick who tend to be controversial, and often frustrated what the GOP wanted (which again, could be good thing, but increases the risk of getting voted out). And because he was frustrating what the GOP wanted, Trump, the de facto leader of the GOP, set out to defeat Massie. Again, as mentioned above, his stance on Israel was one reason for this, but there were a lot of other reasons for the GOP leader to want Massie out. And the average GOP voter might have wanted him out for those same reasons. Now let’s look at the race itself. Massie spent about $13.5 total while the anti Massie coalition spent about $18.5 million total. That means 57% of money went to anti-Massey candidate, while 43% did not. That is a notable difference but is not a huge difference that some think it to be. In fact, Donald Trump only spent about 1.5 billion to Kamala Harris’s 2 billion in 2024, almost exactly the same percentage difference as Massie (Kamala 57% of money compared to Trump’s 43%), and Trump won in a landslide. So it would probably be mistaken to say that Massie lost merely because he was outspent. Clearly, some people didn’t like him for his positions. And who are those people? Exit polls indicate the Massie lost the 65+ and older group by a large margin. These are not Jews but mostly white Protestant boomers. In conclusion from what we’ve discovered so far, Massie lost due to a web of socio-politico factors that included his Israeli stance but also included many other issues/factors. And he lost thanks to Protestants voting bloc. Now addressing the so called problematic “Jewish influence.” Many people have a big confirmation bias where they think Jews run society in a harmful way, and distort events according to that bias. You will naturally ignore the other factors for which Massie lost, or fact that he wasn’t outspent by that much or that Trump won with similar spending challenges. Rather, harmful language about Jews as a religious/racial group is not helpful and clearly goes against what the Vatican has mandated, which says we should speak of Jews as our friends. Instead of constantly interpreting events according to a foundation that has been condemned by the Vatican, it’s better to shift to criticizing Israel as a political government made of fallible men, and not to criticize Jewishness as the boogeyman that is cause of all evil in society, a historically anti semitic trope. And as I’ve shown, blaming Jewishness does not account for the full complicated reality.

The SSPX’s new “Declaration of Catholic Faith” may sound orthodox at first glance. But much of it subtly attacks the Church’s living Magisterium — and some parts directly contradict it. In this video, I break the document down point by point. youtu.be/4OAtZ0aM2Pw

First, let’s back up. You were one who started this polemical dialogue. You accused me as follows “You would condemn the Church Fathers. Stop calling yourself Catholic” This is uncharitable at worst or at best simply not exactly the best and appropriate way to start a dialogue (I will assume the latter for now). I just made a post arguing my thoughts on Massie and the Jewish question, and if you wanted to rebut that, you could have said, “hey, I disagree because of these church fathers. Do you accept those fathers?” I have no problem engaging in polemical tones but I do have a problem if you all of a sudden take issue with mine, because that strikes me as possibly hypocritical given you were the first aggressor. Now, I will try to reply to substance of what you wrote. Correct, I did not cite at Vatican 2. Although I do not believe your beliefs against Jews can be reconciled with Vatican 2’s directive to “to foster and recommend . . . mutual understanding and respect” with Jews, and that your account tile would fall under antisemitism rejected by Nostra Aetate. This is is not a bad faith opinion, there are bishops in the Church hierarchy who would repeat exactly what I said. See bishops Rhoades letter here, which denounces the type of language you use to Jews on basis of Nostra Aetate itself. So if you want to accuse me of ignoring church fathers or demand I stop calling myself Catholic, you should say the same to Bishop Rhoades. todayscatholic.org/friendship-wit… This leads to my final point. We can agree and disagree all day about the true teaching. I do not think your position at all accords with Nostra Aetate, and is not actually backed by Tradition , and you think my position does not at all accord with Tradition, and is not actually backed by Nostra Aetate. I find this harder to maintain on your side given the very clear language of Evangelii Gaudium, which is a development of Nostra Aetate and further sheds light on its clear meaning. But that’s not the main point My main point is that the Catholic Church has living bishops, united with the pope, who interpret Tradition and settle disputes. This way, the Church can guard against false teachings that claim are based on tradition but actually aren’t . Any one can claim to have the real tradition of the church, but only one can claim support of actual living bishops. The fact of the matter is this: there is not a single bishop in good standing with Vatican alive today who shares your views on Jews. That should really prompt you to reconsider your position. If you want to prove me wrong, by all means write to your bishop and ask for his blessing for your apostolate “Catholics United Against the Jews”. I await the response. Even if you cannot get support of your own bishop, I doubt there is a single bishop alive today who would similarly endorse your work/views. But again, this is an open challenge, you are more than welcome to prove me wrong and I will reconsider my position if you can do so.

Let’s be clear. You started this by accusing me of being unable to “be against the Jews” while also accepting Vatican II. Yet when asked to cite Vatican II, you instead appealed to an Apostolic Exhortation written barely 10 years ago by Pope Francis, while refusing to cite anything in Vatican II itself, because nothing in Vatican II actually says what you are claiming it says. But I'll be charitable and answer your question. I accept Evangelii Gaudium according to its proper authority. But it is not Vatican II, and it does not erase Scripture, St. Paul, St. John the Evangelist, St. John Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, St. Thomas Aquinas or any of the other Fathers or Doctors who spoke on this topic. Charity toward individual Jews does not require Catholics to deny the Church’s traditional teaching on the Jews. The real question is whether you interpret Evangelii Gaudium in continuity with tradition? or do you try and use a document like this to silence tradition?

@cowtow222 Exactly

@ModernBoethius He lost because of the Israel lobby, which is made up of SOME Jews AND Evangelicals. Plenty of Jewish people supported Massie, heck his biggest donor was Jewish. It’s not “the Jews”, it was a foreign lobby. Unlike the groypers, I’d be just as mad if it was Belgium or China