T.D. Barrett

Catholic + Ecumenist (the good kind)

Author = Sola Fide & Merit: The Catholic Perspective on Paul & the Dialectic of Salvation

DM me if you cant afford a copy

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

Wanna be edgelord incels bring out the worst in me. I try to shed a light on their failure to be either a worldly male or a holy male (at least be one), but either I let it out in old worldly ways that are more than they can handle, or I struggle to frame it in a holy way and the point gets lost.

Here the point was rather simple:

Y’all think you’re being men but men love a freak.

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

I was contacting members of the Vatican synod group 10 for help with my dissertation and was informed that their study group report should be published “imminently.” This one is going to be a firecracker. The three sub groups focus on:

(1) re-interpreting Vatican 1 in a way amenable to historic eastern ecclesiology to allow for a more synodal form of the papacy (a decreased papal primacy) to help promote ecumenism

(2) the pastoral best-practices for extending Eucharistic hospitality for baptized Protestants, especially those in mixed marriages with Catholic spouses

(3) studying the attraction of non-denominational and Pentecostal movements and locating places where the Church and these traditions can grow closer to each other and learn from each other

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

@DoorDashThomist If you want holy masculinity, you won’t be calling women with promiscuous pasts “whores.”

If you had any worldly masculinity, you would be quite happy to have found a converted freak.

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

Worship of God is divine law, “regular time” not so much. It’s more “all the time” than “at some discrete time.”

But in truth this is one thing the Church has just seemingly gotten wrong. Sabbath was never about worshipping God. It was almost the exact opposite of that. It was about rest, about Yahweh being unlike the pagan gods who demand that people serve them, rather Yahweh provides everything for us and needs nothing from us. Sabbath was an attempt to teach Israel that they depend on God, that they need to set aside a day from work to rest and let God provide, that they don’t need to offer and do anything to appease God to get God on their side, that He is the one who does everything for us.

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

@EcclesiaAntiqua Once you start positing stuff like evolved telepathy, your spiritual evolution logically leads to one day manifesting an infinite eternal omnipotent being which was always there and which gave rise to everything. And then you’ve just refuted your own attempted escape route.

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

@Duke_Danny_5 @EvanSus96 Understandable but if I wasn’t Catholic I’d be non-denominational before I’d be anything else 😂

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

@Duke_Danny_5 @EvanSus96 I’m a Catholic who greatly appreciates the charismatic movement and its fruits but whom has not personally received any charismatic gifts (yet?)

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

The Church talks about Sunday as a fulfillment of the moral principle which laid behind the Sabbath command, not as an extension of the Sabbath command itself per se. It readily admits that in divine law there is no strict grave obligation to worship on one day of the week, but it has decided that it feels its so important that we do, that it has it mandated as an ecclesial law.

See from St Augustine in his work “Spirit and Letter”:

_________________________________

Well, now, I should like to be told what there is in these ten commandments, except the observance of the Sabbath, which ought not to be kept by a Christian — whether it prohibit the making and worshipping of idols and of any other gods than the one true God, or the taking of God's name in vain; or prescribe honour to parents; or give warning against fornication, murder, theft, false witness, adultery, or coveting other men's property? Which of these commandments would any one say that the Christian ought not to keep?….

….But the commandments themselves are so useful and salutary to the doer of them, that no one could have life unless he kept them. Well, then, is it owing to the one precept about the Sabbath day, which is included in it, that the Decalogue is called the letter that kills? Because, forsooth, every man that still observes that day in its literal appointment is carnally wise, but to be carnally wise is nothing else than death? And must the other nine commandments, which are rightly observed in their literal form, not be regarded as belonging to the law of works by which none is justified, but to the law of faith whereby the just man lives? Who can possibly entertain so absurd an opinion as to suppose that the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, is not said equally of all the ten commandments, but only of the solitary one touching the Sabbath day?…

…And perhaps it is a part of this hiding of grace, that in the Decalogue, which was given on Mount Sinai, only the portion which relates to the Sabbath was hidden under a prefiguring precept. The Sabbath is a day of sanctification; and it is not without significance that, among all the works which God accomplished, the first sound of sanctification was heard on the day when He rested from all His labours. On this, indeed, we must not now enlarge. But at the same time I deem it to be enough for the point now in question, that it was not for nothing that the nation was commanded on that day to abstain from all servile work, by which sin is signified; but because not to commit sin belongs to sanctification, that is, to God's gift through the Holy Spirit. And this precept alone among the others, was placed in the law, which was written on the two tables of stone, in a prefiguring shadow, under which the Jews observe the Sabbath, that by this very circumstance it might be signified that it was then the time for concealing the grace, which had to be revealed in the New Testament by the death of Christ — the rending, as it were, of the veil. Matthew 27:51 For when, says the apostle, it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away. 2 Corinthians 3:16

What then is God's law written by God Himself in the hearts of men, but the very presence of the Holy Spirit, who is the finger of God, and by whose presence is shed abroad in our hearts the love which is the fulfilling of the law, Romans 13:10 and the end of the commandment? 1 Timothy 1:5 Now the promises of the Old Testament are earthly; and yet (with the exception of the sacramental ordinances which were the shadow of things to come, such as circumcision, the Sabbath and other observances of days, and the ceremonies of certain meats, and the complicated ritual of sacrifices and sacred things which suited the oldness of the carnal law and its slavish yoke) it contains such precepts of righteousness as we are even now taught to observe, which were especially expressly drawn out on the two tables without figure or shadow

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

@Duke_Danny_5 @EvanSus96 You would both enjoy listening to Fr Raneiro Cantalamessa speak on this. He has led the Catholic/Vatican outreach to Pentecostals for almost 50 years, and was personally appointed by the last 3 Popes to serve as the preacher to the papal household.

https://t.co/wG9QADqxMy

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

It is a long standing Catholic truth that the one command of the ten which was symbolic and not literal was sabbath. When it had literal application, it was to rest on Saturday, not worship on Sunday. Wrong day, wrong practice. Its symbolic meaning was always the coming of Christ, who rested in the tomb on Saturday, and who provides us eternal rest in Him.

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

@Immaculata_City The broader thread gives more context. He isn’t completely on point re: women but he has more sense about relationships than the incels who are always complaining about women.

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

The responses to this are always off. They either don’t realize that this is a matter of ecclesial law and not divine law, and argue as if it’s divine law, or that merely pound the gavel about the authority of the Church to make ecclesial law, as if the fact it’s ecclesial law means it’s infallibly guaranteed to be a good and wise expression of divine law. In reality we know mere ecclesial law can be unwise, foolish, imprudent, and erroneous. We should obey when it’s not a call to sin, but we don’t need to defend it in all cases. The Church deciding to mandate something as a grave obligation when it knows God does not mandate it as a grave obligation just seems like an entirely backwards, pragmatically unproductive, and ideologically blasphemous/arrogant thing to do. We don’t know better than God.

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

In 1928 the Pope expresses concerns about the need for reforms in the old liturgy to prevent people from being mere spectators. Among the suggested reforms includes an emphasis on people participating by verbal responses in the vernacular.

“IX. In order for the faithful to participate more actively in divine worship, Gregorian chant—insofar as it pertains to the people—should be restored to popular use. Indeed, it is absolutely essential that the faithful not attend sacred functions as outsiders or silent spectators but, truly immersed in the beauty of the liturgy, participate in the sacred ceremonies—even in solemn processions where the clergy and pious associations participate—in such a way as to alternate, according to the appropriate norms, their voices with those of the priest and the choir . If what is desired comes to pass, it will no longer happen that the people will not respond at all, or will respond only with a low murmur, to the common prayers proposed in the liturgical language or in the vernacular.”

Pope Pius XI, in 1928’s Divine Cultus.

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

@IFFFMEISTER @AbaddonSpeaks You are responding to an account named after a demon..

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

@thomaesplendor @AngAesthetics I deny that God has an infallibly efficacious grace He can use in such manner. I’m not a Thomist.

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

@crean_fr @HilarityjaneArt No it’s not

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

@thomaesplendor @AngAesthetics In my view it could only be instant if the person instantly released all desire and will for the venial sin. I do not think God ever forces that.

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

Faith is required as faith is the mind and heart directed towards union with God, but there is no strict need for explicit knowledge of special revelation. God is more than able to move the person to perfect contrition so long as their heart and mind are directed towards Him in faith.

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

@crean_fr @HilarityjaneArt *reception of

[T.D. Barrett @TD_B89]

@crean_fr @HilarityjaneArt No, there only need be a movement of the will towards God, enabled by grace, and the redemption of infused charity before passing into the next life.