Ordo

Now, Aquinas is not perfect. No human is, but his reasoning corrects his own occasionally flawed conclusions. He was a pure realist - and objectively the best guide to navigate the swamp. So, unless you've got some bombshell info to share, you can save your calories.

Last engagement with the dialectic. If you're going to debate the meaning of Bible verses with me, you'll have to explain why your favoured interpretation is better than Aquinas's. Is it your own take (arrogance) or someone else's? Start there or it's a waste of our time.

@TemporalStrife I think when people people are working from entirely different starting points - and not addressing the root cause of that divergence first - then the disagreement cannot be resolved. Bad faith conversations that deal with symptoms, not causes, are endless. Blocking solves that.

@OnlyFormHolds I’ve been on the receiving end of blocks by anti-Catholics lately. I’m always baffled as to why, because I try to maintain a respectful attitude in spite of disagreements.

Over the past 24 hours, I've had to block some anti-Catholic accounts who thrive on the dialectic & so are annoyed they can no longer do that with me. I've read some nasty comments, confirming my suspicions that they were never operating in good faith. Please do your own research

@akohftw No worries. I can tell when someone is asking in good faith. I only have to read their posts/replies. Someone like yourself or another account called @ClassicLibera12 are good examples. We will have some disagreements, but it's obvious that good faith undergirds the interaction.

@OnlyFormHolds The concept of the dialectic is central the thinking of Engels and Marx, which to me says enough. I've stroven to think better rather than to reconcile maintained dissonance. I'm still spread thin, but your posts are so interesting. Probably can't debate, but can listen.

If a conversation reaches a dead end with no possibility of resolution, it's best to move on. We all have an 'end' and this account is focused on the end stated in the bio. I have no interest in changing someone's worldview or debating pointlessly. That's no benefit to anyone.

@saltypsych @akohftw @ClassicLibera12 I think we’re working from different assumptions about what those passages imply about human nature, so we may just be talking past each other. I’ll leave it there.

I understand you're coming from a Thomist background (I am not a Thomist for various reasons I think are quite serious theologically, but don't have the time to get into that now). I agree that our nature, as we were created, was good, scripture makes that clear. However, scripture also makes a very clear distinction between that and fallen nature - by nature the unregenerate are children of wrath and slaves to sin, as all believers once were as Paul explains speaking to the believers in Ephesus. This doesn't mean people are as bad as they could be, because of course this does not destroy the image of God (and God actively restrains human evil as scripture also consistently shows).

1/ I still can't reconcile the “infiltration” narrative with Thomistic & Catholic doctrine. It seems to imply, at least in practice, that some humans are fundamentally aligned with the good and others with evil. But this seems to contradict the Church’s teaching on human nature.

@saltypsych @akohftw @ClassicLibera12 3/ So a person can be profoundly shaped by sin, even habitually, without being evil in themselves. That’s why Scripture can both say that 'all have sinned' and still affirm the goodness of creation and the possibility of redemption.

@saltypsych @akohftw @ClassicLibera12 2/ According to Thomism (not sure about other interpretations of Scripture), human nature remains good because it is created by God, while sin is a disorder in our acts, will, and habits - not something that constitutes what we are at the level of our nature.

Following the underlying metaphysical account, the Ordo Community Framework defines the structure required for a community to function as a coherent, enduring whole - and provides a way to analyse, diagnose, and build it. olivernotes.substack.com/p/the-ordo-com…

If you have the time and inclination, I highly recommend signing up to this course run by @Panagiotou90St of @lotuseaters_com Few people know this subject so well, and few subjects are as important to understand in this day and age. courses.lotuseaters.com/products/cours…

@Panagiotou90St Very true. Well said, Stelios.

The ideologue’s lack of realism often manifests in a lack of situated comparative judgment. Reality is more complex than the ideologue who reduces every decision to a choice between absolute good and absolute evil, wants to think.

@TimMurphy916 @PowerOwn45 @ljnarnia 100%.

I consider myself a normie Catholic, less devout than my wife, this shit infuriates me when I see it. When I tell her about what is being done it upsets her as well. As far as I can tell it’s a fringe movement designed to pit different groups against each other. The Christian Nationalists are a similar thing on the Protestant side. A lot of this is our foreign adversaries finding ways to fuck with us. It’s tragic the extent to which it’s working.

I have wondered this as well. I know many great Catholic people IRL so perhaps it’s just an online Catholic thing, but it is a thing.

@ma34845 No, no - not at all. I appreciate the feedback. If you spot anything wrong, please do let me know. I'd be grateful to hear it.

@OnlyFormHolds This principle, in the case of a unity of order, is not a single substantial form but an ordering of relations grounded in a common end. Mea Culpa…we agree!

This article sets out the foundations for how communities actually hold together and act over time. Although I did this mostly for myself (I need this for my work), I hope others who see this post also find it useful. open.substack.com/pub/olivernote…

@ma34845 The unity comes from the end, not from form. Form explains what each participant is. But since a community isn’t one substance, it isn’t unified by a single form. In Section III: the unity is a unity of order grounded in a common end, not a substantial unity.

@OnlyFormHolds I read it quickly…it seems like you state that the final cause( end) is source of unity but you kept saying form so I’m a lil confused