This books contains my defense and clarification of the Angelic Doctor’s arguments against usury and my argument against several common and traditional excuses for usury.
https://t.co/ZHMRoIRtBv
It is true that there is a problem with people who try to exalt a defect, eg blindness is actually a superpower. It’s not. It’s a privation, the absence of something that ought to be there. Bearing that evil in union with Christ crucified is the Christian path, not maximizing one’s agency, power and potency.
It is a little strange how many Christians respond significantly more viciously to those who choose to abort a down syndrome child as compared to a normal one. Obviously neither is justified but one can understand why the former situation is more difficult for the parents.
Nietzsche was absolutely correct when he pointed out that many modern Christians have turned the real obligation to care for the sick, poor, disabled, etc, into a quasi-veneration or idealization of those traits. But in reality there’s no virtue in weakness or helplessness. The real Christian path is to strive to maximize one’s human potential, cultivating strength, vitality, agency etc, while still acting justly to protect the weak and the vulnerable. Neopagans and atheists calling to abort down syndrome children neglect the latter, while many modern Christians, in their bizarre virtue signalings about the joys of a genetic disorder, reject the former.
I really hate "What is your greatest weakness" questions. Either it ends up with:
1. Oh, your greatest weakness is a strength. You lack self-awareness.
2. Oh, you have a weakness. You will be terrible at this job.
I'm just the GOAT. I don't know how to answer your question.
@theblessedsalt The trite response "It's not mortal sin without knowledge and will" is endlessly obnoxious. Yes, but all that means it is a less properly human act. You are acting like a child or slave. This is not a good place to be.
I don't think Wagner is correct that RZ equivocates.
RC's hold that whoever eats the sacrament eats the body and blood.
Reformed hold that only those who eat the bread with faith eat the body and blood.
Since the disputed proposition is "Whoever eats my body..." there is no equivocation. RC and RZ are both talking about eating the body, but RZ holds there is a condition on when the body is eaten.
Wagner is correct about the distinctions Catholics make to resolve the difficulty, because RZ's position does not explain the "This is my body" but ignores it. Indeed, his position is logically impossible, because Jesus does not say "This is not my body but you receive my body through it if you have faith."
Faith is the seed of eternal life while refuting errors is only a temporal good. Consequently, persevering in faith is a greater good than refuting the errors of others and we know by faith that what they say against the faith is error even if we don’t know why.
I watched his recent video on transubstantiation. Even if he is right about the Catholic position, this doesn't make the Reformed position right. He just doesn't deal with the logical consequences of Jesus saying "This is my body" instead of "This is not my body unless you eat it with faith in me."
Some Christians are martyred immediately for the faith. Most Christians are martyred through long suffering keeping the faith against the world, devil and the flesh every day for years.
This guy targeted his friends, family and members of his church in a ponzi scheme and defrauded them out of thousands of dollars but sure let's listen to him finger wave when the pope wants to consecrate a recreational activity to God