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.

>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.

Nate still hasn't answered the question about Dignitatis Humanae and the Syllabus of Errors

Why? Because he can’t without saying that it’s heresy.

Since we know that Quanta Cura is infallible now and that Vatican II directly contradicts it, the council contains heresy; and is, therefore, a heretical council that is not of the Church.

Here's the proof:

"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 recognised in the constitutional law whereby society is governed. Thus it is to become a civil right." (Declaration on Religious Liberty Dignitatis Humanae, paragraph 2)

"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)

"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)

This heresy was also condemned by Pius X, Gregory XVI, Leo XIII, and Pius VII

"Vatican II's declaration on religious liberty was without question the most notorious of all the documents of Vatican II. This is because its teaching on religious liberty was so heretical, so contrary to the teaching of the Catholic Magisterium, that even the most liberal heretics had trouble rationalizing it." - Fr. Raymond Taouk

"“Religious freedom” or “religious liberty” has been condemned by Popes Gregory XVI, Pius IX, St. Pius X and Pius XI. You are not free to choose your religion. You are bound in conscience to become a Catholic and to join the Catholic Church in order to save your soul. If you choose not to, you go to hell. Nobody can coerce someone into thinking something they do not want to think or believing something they do not want to believe. But the laws of a Catholic state can prevent the followers of a false religion from practising in public, from trying to make converts, from trying to spread their false doctrine and false morals, etc. Look at the catastrophic numbers of millions of souls today leaving the Church to join ‘evangelical’ protestant sects in countries where before the council everyone was Catholic: South America, the Philippines, etc. These formerly Catholic countries were forced to change their constitutions so as to no longer give the Catholic religion pride of place. All this disaster as a result of just two paragraphs in one of the sixteen documents of this robber council. As noted above, just one error is enough. One heresy makes the whole document heretical, and one heretical document makes the whole council heretical." - Fr. Hesse

People like this just need to be prayed for. Rarely do they ever listen. They don’t even listen to priests; only the ones they agree with.