The Modern Boethius

@RussianPapist Answer in your own words what I first wrote about why God wills all religions, see second paragraph below. You still haven’t addressed it

@ModernBoethius Sure son

@ModernBoethius Google should show this reply when someone asks what weaponized casuistry is

@Lurkinin I write an article a while back explaining his words

@ModernBoethius In believing that observing the ceremonies, rites, etc of the OT after the resurrection one (a jew) would sin mortally, yet this is also a path to God? If you're saying that observing the OT ceremonies, etc could point one to Christ then I guess thats fine, but that's a quibble

@Lurkinin Where is the contradiction?

@ModernBoethius in a self-contradictory mess?

This chart is clearly made by a “trad” who thinks there is a contradiction between post Vatican 2 popes and past popes. For example Cantato Domino is true AND all religions are paths to God. They’re not in contradiction.

@malyavochka1776 @IncredPapist_ BASED

@IncredPapist_ Bc you think that Vatican II is error

@ClassicalTheis Exactly. Well put

Horribly worded chart with false presuppositions about which positions are or aren’t reconcilable

@TruthofAugust @Darthjimscott41 The st. Pius x quote you’re thinking of is fake. Doesn’t appear anywhere in official Vatican archives, just secondhand source of someone who was unreliable and trying to create from memory or fabricate an account

@Darthjimscott41 @ModernBoethius Of course the Zionist representatives would lie, it is in their nature. I didn’t even mention Pope St. Pius X, but that is more evidence against your lies: Also—

Open challenge to my critics who I think I’m modernist or heretical: Please quote or cite any magisterial church teaching that you think I reject and ask me if I do. Actual modernists/heretics don’t accept all the Church’s teachings.

It’s also completely different bases. Man has free will pursuant to his God given dignity. One cannot unduly overpower this free will, unless in recognized exceptions right like actual crimes. Imagine situation which this wasn’t the case. You would be coercing someone to force them to be Christian. But even the ancient church recognized no one can be coerced to be baptized, it may the free. Differences in actual political laws throughout history can be explained via different types of states throughout history. Secular America is very different from say medieval Catholic Liechtenstein

@ChevalierBlock If there was a right to teach error, any infringement upon it would be absolutely null. If there is a negative right to be immune from coercion, then there could “due limits” to, as Dignitatis Humanae says. So I would say there is there a substantive difference between the two

@RussianPapist Some of these aren’t incompatible though. Like I agree with things in both sides God definitely wills the plurality of the religions *in his permissive will*. To deny otherwise would ironically make one a liberal heretic denying God’s omnipotence

Today I have for you the Catholic alignment chart I tried not to include the questions on which we have consensus, and included only those that are ongoing/often disputed Have fun :)

Because it’s based in human dignity which is inviolable regardless of what the person does. Hence Cain murdered Abel but God prohibited any wine from killing Cain. The language says “immunity” right? Immunity from coercion. It doesn’t say the absolute right to seek error. Just the right to be immune from coercion because of one’s inherent dignity.

@ModernBoethius If I may, then please reconcile what you just said with 'The right to this immunity continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth and adhering to it' (Dignitatis Humanae, 2)

@Michaeldudufudu Is everything alright my friend? I don’t really know the context behind everything the last few days, but it might best to just take a break from Twitter and reset if it’s bothering you rn

Brb locking in.

Error non habet ius. There is no fundamental right for protecting one’s right to teach error. There is a right based in human dignity to be free from civil coercion, that can give ground the freedom of religion or freedom of speech more commonly found today. But that means such right is limited since this is a negative right as opposed to a positive right to error

@ModernBoethius Just for fun: please discuss the 14th paragraph of Mirari Vos. papalencyclicals.net/greg16/g16mira…

@JohnBrown______ So is rash judgment, which is also a worse sin

@ModernBoethius Lying is also a sin.

You may not like this but this is the Mass of All Ages

@JohnBrown______ @XboxLiveGOP Your analysis is imprecise “ Robert objects saying we can’t know know which level of censor is being applied to censure 33” He actually did not say that

@ModernBoethius @XboxLiveGOP This “response” makes no sense. It is internally incoherent. Robert objects saying we can’t know which level of censor is being applied to censure 33, so it’s wrong to assume the level of censor is heresy, but then he goes on to himself assign it “offensive to pious ears.”

@BeSaintly Tbf I literally just saw clip like yesterday where the goat mistimed his jump and just tumbled to his death lol

Saint Paul’s advice on combating lust illustrated

@ChrisGeorgeBerg But to answer your question, no I don’t think he should have burned it. The church has been clear and even in magisterial teachings what our disposition toward Judaism should be. It does not entail burning their books

Did you read the question? “Please quote or cite any magisterial church teaching” If you give me some other than a teaching, that is beyond the scope of the question. If I ask you if you agree with Traditionis Custodes, I take it you agree you would not be bound to agree with it, right? Which btw I agree is your right by the way, it’s not a teaching.