The Devine Herald

Essays, Culture, Theology.

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

If you're trying to quit pornography, read this presentation: https://t.co/KFupw7wkFF

#nofap #pornfree #nnn #nnnchallenge

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

@MarcusAnde7903 SSPX aren't Catholic https://t.co/ejyAsDg6gt

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

What an embarassing response--it was literally refuted in the video you didn't watch. Why should I waste any time responding to you? Pope Benedict lifted the excommunications, which is the punishment for schism, but he didn't have the power to end the schism on his own. Schism is a sin comitted by the person doing the act. The only way for the schism to end would be for the SSPX to repent of their sin and return into full communion with the Pope, which they've refused to do. Pope Benedict explicitly said when he lifted the communications that the SSPX "had no jurisdiction within the Church" (that means their ministry is OUTSIDE of the Catholic Church, dummy). Pope Francis wrote in his letters that Benedict and John Paul II weren't granting legitimacy to the Society, but were hoping to end the schism. The SSPX liturgy is valid but illicit, similar to the Eastern Orthodox.

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

@reddit_lies If anyone wants to quit porn, check out this presentation https://t.co/KFupw7wSvd

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

@DrFrankTurek Yes, even if I left the true worldview when I was younger by mistake 😉

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

@MarcusAnde7903 @Catholic_bro Three Popes have explicitly stated they are in schism / have comitted a schismatic act.

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

The SSPX aren't Catholic, they split from the Catholic Church after Vatican II, just like the "Old Catholics" split after Vatican 1. The FSSP are because they split from the SSPX and returned to communion with Rome, so the FSSP are Catholics but the SSPX aren't.

https://t.co/O0ipPqIehe

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

Lol even the robot concludes by saying these are developments and not wholesale inventions that the Catholic Church made up out of nowhere. You know Saint Augustine explicitly called the Papacy "supreme," right? And both Scripture and the Church fathers taught that celibacy was ideal? Bragging that your church never inched closer to sanctity is not a flex.

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

@MarcusAnde7903 @Catholic_bro Yes! The use of Marian titles has nothing to do with the legitimacy of the Pope. Hope this helps!

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

@richtidwell @uribrito https://t.co/671obhmNjI

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

The article's claim that polygamy (polygyny) is biblically ordained crumbles under scrutiny; it's built on selective proof-texting, ignoring the Bible's monogamous ideal from Genesis 2:24 ("one flesh") that Jesus affirms in Matthew 19:4-6 as God's original design, not a post-fall concession like Rich suggests.

God regulating polygyny in laws like Exodus 21:10 or Deuteronomy 21:15-17 doesn't mean endorsement; these were accommodations for a flawed culture, akin to divorce allowances Jesus called out as due to "hardness of heart" in Matthew 19:8. Deuteronomy 17:17 explicitly warns kings against multiplying wives to prevent heart-turning, directly countering the idea of divine approval.

Examples like God "giving" David Saul's wives (2 Samuel 12:7-8) or Jacob's unions are descriptive history, not prescriptive commands. David's polygamy fueled family chaos, adultery, and murder (2 Samuel 11-13), portraying it as a source of sin, not blessing. Biblical narratives consistently show polygamous strife: Abraham's with Hagar bred jealousy and exile (Genesis 16-21), Jacob's wives rivaled bitterly (Genesis 29-30), and Solomon's many wives led to idolatry (1 Kings 11:1-8).

Rich's twisting of 1 Corinthians 7:2, claiming Greek words allow shared husbands is a linguistic stretch; it's about mutual exclusivity to flee immorality, aligning with Jesus' monogamy restoration. New Testament silence on banning polygamy reflects cultural context, but church leader qualifications as "husband of one wife" (1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:6) set monogamy as the maturity standard, implying the norm. Early fathers like Tertullian and Saint Augustine condemned polygamy outright.

Metaphors of God as a polygamous husband (Jeremiah 3) or the Ten Virgins parable are allegorical for divine faithfulness, not HUMAN marriage models. Distinguishing rebuked "hypergamy" (serial divorce/remarriage) from allowed polygyny misreads Jesus' anti-divorce stance in Matthew 19:9, which upholds permanent one-flesh bonds.

Interpreting "husband of one wife" as just anti-divorce (not anti-polygamy) ignores Greek "mia" meaning "one," promoting monogamy in the Church. (There's a reason the Greek Orthodox also condemn polygamy as adultery, Richie). Procreation arguments cite Genesis 1:28 but overlook polygamy's conflicts (e.g., Absalom's rebellion from David's dysfunction, 2 Samuel 13-18); and levirate marriage (Deuteronomy 25:5) was widow-specific, not general polygyny.

Appeals to Saint Augustine or Luther are laughable--Saint Augustine defended the patriarchs as being under the Old Covenant, but later explicitly taught that under the NEW Covenant Christians could NOT have more than one spouse. Even Martin Luther himself only allowed bigamy rarely as an exception, never as a good idea. Overall, the Bible's arc moves from cultural tolerance to Christ's renewal of Edenic monogamy (Ephesians 5:31-32, mirroring Christ's singular union with the church), rejecting polygyny as distortion. Christianity has long affirmed this.

And you live with vulnerable young women who are in the foster care system? Is that where you found your current mistress? Your sin has brought shame and scandal on your whole family; to love your spouse and your children is to put their needs above your own.

You've done the opposite by placing your sexual appetites above the best interest of your family, which is why you have to go church-to-church begging them to accept your adultery as "biblical."

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

@MarcusAnde7903 @Catholic_bro By definition Catholics submit to the Pope or they aren't Catholic. like saying "Vegans can't agree on whether they can eat meat or not." If they eat meat then they aren't vegan.

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

@rispydippums @ComradeDoyIe Is the irrelevancy in the room with us right now?

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

@DefiantLs Hidetaka Miyazaki

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

They were never given faculties for giving the Eucharist, only confession. SSPX liturgies are valid but illicit (like the Eastern Orthodox). Also, you didn't address a single point in the video, which shows you're not a serious person, and you know nothing about this topic. This is something I've studied very in-depth. But don't take my word for it, ask your local bishop if the SSPX liturgy fulfills the Sunday obligation. The answer is "no."

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

@Devra9823 The existence of false religions, false deities, and falsely attributed titles does not negate the existence of the true God, or His mother who is the true Queen of Heaven.

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

TBYS is pointing out something that is generally true--if you're virtuous, evil people will hate you. Socrates and Plato basically predicted the Crucifixion with that observation; Socrates had this idea (more than 300 years before Jesus was born, mind you) that if a perfectly virtuous person ever existed, he would be violently tortured to death by an angry mob, and that's exactly what happened. Jesus lived a perfect life and they killed Him for it because it exposed their own corruption.

Not all the time, of course--sometimes evil people will point out the evil in others--but generally, you can't be a good person unless evil people hate you. If evil people don't hate you and project their own moral depravity onto you, then you aren't doing anything substantially disruptive.

Trump is far from holy, but at least he's doing some things right that are disruptive enough to make the swamp hate him.

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

@pleomorph55 @MxLangston Sperging out and having a meltdown yelling at people to "fuck off" when you can't answer basic questions is a "win"? 🤣

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

Wrong. Pope Francis literally said that he was granting faculties for confession for the sake of the faithful, and made it clear that this doesn't change the Society's canonical status. On the contrary, the SSPX wouldn't NEED special permission to carry out sacraments if they weren't in schism.

Also, your claim is wrong lol. Numerous Popes have granted faculties to churches and groups in schism in an effort to bring them back into communion, such as the Melkite Catholics, Eastern Orthodox churches that showed promise to becoming Eastern Catholic, the Coptic Catholics, thr Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church during Soviet persecution, and even some of the clergy of the Old Catholics who split after Vatican 1 were granted limited faculties.

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

@pleomorph55 @MxLangston Is this the "winning" you were talking about?

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

On paper yes, but we don't live in a meritocracy. Corporations install women into positions of power that they didn't earn and aren't qualified for. Studies have repeatedly shown that when you submit the same resume to companies, but one with a man's name and another with a woman's name, the women's applications are accepted far more often, because most companies have diversity quotas. Because of affirmative action, qualified men are being displaced in the name of diversity. Women aren't outcompeting men in the workplace, workplaces are artificially raising women to positions of power which discourages honest competition.

Carl Benjamin said it best: https://t.co/ve5jtMc486

[The Devine Herald @DevineHerald]

I would, though "far right" is very vague and subjective. If by far-right you mean Groypers, then I'm not a Groyper. But I would argue that Groypers aren't actually "far right," because to be right-wing by definition is to be traditional and conservative, which means embracing conservative Christian values such as chastity--values which "far right extremists" align more with the Left on. It's the horse shoe theory; the extreme "left" and the extreme "right" end up essentially espousing the same beliefs.