The Church has absolutely no competency whatsoever to judge whether this or that official seized power legitimately. This is entirely outside the scope of faith or morals, and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. Whether the election was stolen or not is a matter entirely discernible through natural reason, and if it was as we all know it was, we have no moral duty whatsoever to extend deference to the usurpers
Forwarded from Nicholas J. Fuentes
refusing/condemning the vaccine should never under any circumstances be considered disobedience to the Pope’s authority. all he did was declare it licit, and his support for it is outside the framework of what could even in principle fall under the scope of his justification
🔥1
One implication of divine liberty in my view has trinitarian implications. If God was not compelled to create, then under a scenario in which He did not choose to create, He would still of necessity have to be active on account of His nature as pure actuality. But since every activity presupposes an end, the only end to speak of would be none other than Himself. And so there must be some sense of self-relational divine ad intra activity considered wholly anterior to the possibility of ad extra Creation. As I plan to discuss in my next video on the topic, this does not constitute a rational proof for the Trinity but does indicate the Trinity’s tendency to alleviate otherwise insoluble rational difficulties that ensue from pondering divine attributes.
If the Biden admin doesn’t wake people up on transgenderism throughout the course of the next four years I am convinced next to nothing will https://twitter.com/drdavidsamadi/status/1351515589072846848?s=21
Twitter
Dr. David Samadi, MD
Joe Biden just picked Dr. Rachel Levine of Pennsylvania to be his Assistant Health Secretary. What are your thoughts on the pick?
the only things Biden stands for are abortion, sodomy, self-enrichment, and punishing white conservatives but sure let’s pretend he chose the douay rheims Bible to secretly usher in an integralist State
Prominent politically correct (pseudo) Catholic integralists have been reduced to mentally masturbating about the minuscule ways in which Biden executive orders aesthetically cohere with miscellaneous quotations from Fratelli Tutti
These people should be ignored and disregarded not only as cowards but also as thoroughly unreflective of the intellectual milieu out of which integralism came into being in the first place, which was unmistakably reactionary
These people should be ignored and disregarded not only as cowards but also as thoroughly unreflective of the intellectual milieu out of which integralism came into being in the first place, which was unmistakably reactionary
New Video: Clarifying the Natural Knowability of the Trinity
(audio is accidentally off for the intro, but the actual video is fine)
https://youtu.be/CXA7kJk_Ru4
(audio is accidentally off for the intro, but the actual video is fine)
https://youtu.be/CXA7kJk_Ru4
YouTube
Clarifying the Natural Knowability of the Trinity
As per a patron request, I am providing more clarification to an older video I did on how the doctrine of the Trinity saves us from pantheism.
in order to comply with the ruling ideology you have to believe being trans is chrischann’s one perfectly sane and healthy attribute
a thomistic articulation of an e/e distinction would probably go something like this:
God, as the pure act of existence, serves as the perfective end of creatures by virtue of the unique role existence has as a created essence’s principle of actuality, and therefore His energetic procession toward creatures will always be self-manifesting yet proportionate to the creature’s reception
as a result of this, no divine self-manifestation toward creatures can in and of itself be said to communicate the divine essence (considered as divine being in its supre-essential transcendence), but only signify it
God, as the pure act of existence, serves as the perfective end of creatures by virtue of the unique role existence has as a created essence’s principle of actuality, and therefore His energetic procession toward creatures will always be self-manifesting yet proportionate to the creature’s reception
as a result of this, no divine self-manifestation toward creatures can in and of itself be said to communicate the divine essence (considered as divine being in its supre-essential transcendence), but only signify it
Thus, engagement with Divine activity in Creation is real engagement with God, but received according to the finite mode of the recipient. One could even call such processional divine self-manifestations uncreated if this is to refer to the substantial reality of those manifestations on the side of God in His transcendence. What is “created” would be the effect such manifestations have *in the creature*, not the substantial reality of those divine self-manifestations.
This, by the way, is not to disregard other articulations of this mystery. It’s just to get at how a Thomist would approach it. Any relation this has to EO/Roman Catholic polemics is, in my view, incidental and a waste of time, insofar as Rome already permits a plurality of approaches to this question that can be read in light of Her dogmatic pronouncements on divine simplicity and immutability. Whether those dogmatic pronouncements are binding will depend on what one’s position on Papal authority is, not on one’s intellectual leanings on a speculative theological question like divine simplicity.
This, by the way, is not to disregard other articulations of this mystery. It’s just to get at how a Thomist would approach it. Any relation this has to EO/Roman Catholic polemics is, in my view, incidental and a waste of time, insofar as Rome already permits a plurality of approaches to this question that can be read in light of Her dogmatic pronouncements on divine simplicity and immutability. Whether those dogmatic pronouncements are binding will depend on what one’s position on Papal authority is, not on one’s intellectual leanings on a speculative theological question like divine simplicity.