If a Pope says something heretical, it's not infallible. The same as a council. Sure, a Pope or a council can non-definitively and fallibly teach heresy, that just means we dismiss it. Plus, I've already answered your dumb indefectibility argument. If you teach something that's heretical, then that makes it fallible (obviously), not infallible like you just admitted.

I never said the Church taught heresy, as it can't. I'm saying Vatican 2 did, which is not a part of the Church.

#books #vaticanii #modernism #SSPX

It's funny how the tardcaths get super ass hurt when you criticize their sacred cow and point out that their arguments completely undermine any case for the validity of the Catholic church. Oh well, cope more.

Why would I be ass hurt about some heretic that defends the documents of V2 like a rabid dog and says I'm coping? Put away the pride, you will merit more from that than defending heresy. Trust me.

Ignorance is a sin

I'm calling you a heretic because this is literally what you're defending lol

"The Council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person... This right to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed. Thus it is to become a civil right." (Declaration on Religious Liberty Dignitatis Humanae, paragraph 2)

https://t.me/GadoligNadzee/1240

Right, because there is absolutely no way that could be squared with previous declarations. I swear it's like you tardcaths have the exact same understanding of V2 as the liberals, but you just think it's bad. Still havent formed a coherent position to argue from, and you apparently don't understand what heresy is.

https://t.me/ModernistsGoToHell/2871

There is absolutely no way that it can be squared with these

"15. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true." (Syllabus of Errors)


"And from this wholly false idea of social organisation they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, especially fatal to the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by our predecessor, Gregory XVI, insanity, namely that the liberty of conscience and worship is the proper right of every man, and should be proclaimed by law in every correctly established society... Each and every doctrine individually mentioned in this letter, by Our Apostolic authority We reject, proscribe and condemn; and We wish and command that they be considered as absolutely rejected by all the sons of the Church." (Quanta Cura)

Give me a break man 😂😂

According to Vatican2 Nazi, defending a document that contains heresy doesn't mean that you're guilty of heresy.

Oh, while we are playing the "you agree with (insert retard)" game, piss drinker Catheterwaffen is SSPX and agrees with you on V2. In fact, he is the guy who introduced me to Bishop Williamson, and got me thinking about joining an SSPX parish. Why do you agree with a literal piss drinking jew lover?

I have no idea who that is

>no response

Do you agree with this statement condemned in the Syllabus of Errors or not?

“15. Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true." (Syllabus of Errors)

If you don’t, then you’re saying Dignitatis Humanae contains heresy. If you do agree, than you are a heretic. Also, what you said has nothing to do with whether or not people have the right to religious liberty and to worship whatever they want, including Satan and Allah.

https://t.me/GadoligNadzee/1250

I just showed you that religious liberty is condemned by the Church and you’re response has nothing to do with what I’m talking about 😂

I really don't know how to explain it to you bud. All people have a duty to worship God, but we cannot force them to do so. If you don't see how that applies then maybe stop being an e-theologian and make an act of the will to ascent to the Catholic church even though you can't understand the teaching and pray for understanding?

https://t.me/ModernistsGoToHell/2881

My question is whether they have the right to, not whether they should be forced to or not. And you failed to answer the question. I don't care what you think, I care what the Church teaches. It just so happens that the Church, as per Quanta Cura, Libertas Praestantissimum, Mirari Vos, Mortalium Animos, Immortal Dei and the Syllabus of Errors teaches that this idea of religious liberty is condemned.

Here's a great quote to settle the score.

“Some have tried to argue that while error has no rights, persons inculpably holding erroneous doctrines have the right to hold them. But it must be borne in mind that error can be believed, spread, and activated only by persons and so it is difficult to see what it would mean to say “error has no right to be spread” if one held at the same time “persons can have a right to spread error” that is if “right” be taken in the same sense in both statements . . . . How can one have a genuine right to believe, spread, or practice what is objectively false or morally wrong? For a genuine right is based on what is objectively true and good” (Fr. Connell, American Ecclesiastical Review, No. 151, February 1964, p.128).

Fr. Hewko on the matter of religious liberty. Nobody has a right to promote error, to hold a heretical belief, or to be indifferent toward doctrines which go against Christ and the Church.