joseph

/

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@OrthodoxOrigen Don't forget the massive quotes around apologist lol

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@IncredPapist_ Ok let's play your goofy game, and even then, Vatican II is part of the Ordinary, non-authentic magisterium, so it falls under your protection of indefectability.

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@IncredPapist_ You know he was both dead, and Leo II explicitly explained the reality of the anathema and how he himself did not hold heresy. It's the same charge to a different spiritual reality, but of course you can't fathom having an ounce of faith, as this is again, a big game for you.

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@IncredPapist_ No you actually treat this as a large scale cognitive exercise and hold zero faith in the religion. Instead of trusting in certain things such as councils and from there develop an understanding confirmed by said council you demand the council prove it's reasoning to you.

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@RorateCaeli He set an age limit, and you call him horrible. This is the pure idiocracy that happens when dumbass people get on the internet and decide they know better than people who physically take part in 2000 years of Apostolic tradition, St. Paul VI included.

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@IncredPapist_ @biemelneus Now I know your point; you're conflating how the Church operates. Vatican II never said the religions have an inherent right to exist, but rather the human persons, in a world where religious freedom is unavoidable, mustn't be coerced and they themselves have rights.

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@IncredPapist_ So when is your SSPX baptism scheduled for.

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@IncredPapist_ Then you have a flaw in your submission. If you believe that every document must be convicted to you, and that your judgement is above St. Paul VIs, alongside the College of Bishops, and God's indefectable promise, you can not and will not be able to submit. It's either/or.

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@IncredPapist_ Well that's fun to see a catchumen judge the Holy See. Regardless, it's not a core issue, though it does require submission of mind and will to the Magisteriums authority. If you want to personally prefer or hold to the old teachings, that's generally okay, though not rejection.

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@ChudThomist But it was BASED!

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@KoramProNobis No you just are too stupid to read the document

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@Wolfgruberson @Sensus_Fidelium Ok, sure, Paul IV wrote those words, touching on the Pontiff, validly elected, becoming a heretic, even though it elaborates only on void ab initio elections. These have zero effect since Paul didn't explain, the interpretation could be two ways, and the document itself is light.

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@TradCathKeng Of course! Schism is horrible.

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@Wolfgruberson @Sensus_Fidelium One could write "deviating from the faith... In which the election of said Pontiff be invalid from the beginning." This conclusion fits with the rest of the document. And even then, Cum Ex isn't even doctrinal.

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@kimmonismus Vibe coder can't fathom that people who have jobs or school also use the same AI they do

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@Wolfgruberson @Sensus_Fidelium You're writing infinite quotes but you're forgetting the premise that you have to prove the Pope is a heretic. And Cum ex only lays out what happens if a Pope becomes a heretic, not saying they can or can't. Although it assumes it, it doesn't positively/negatively define.

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@_BattleForTruth Lol the pride to include SSPX over any mention of being Catholic

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@HazThomist Big difference between doctrinal error and public heresy.

[joseph @josephlikesX]

@rezoundous How do you run out of all your banked resets already