amor fati et memento mori
the abyss
Joined March 2024
- Tweets20.1K
- Following1.4K
- Followers3.2K
- Likes108K
Pinned Tweet
I'm well aware of what the catechism states, but you are making a claim about the interior knowledge and disposition of 500k+ people, which you blatantly do not have. I don't even need to get into an SSPX defense here as you're just wrong on your own premises.
CCC 846 is contingent on two things: knowing the Church is necessary, and refusing her anyway. The knowledge is definitionally an interior act, which, as you surely know, while we can judge that an act is gravely wrong, we must entrust judgment of specific persons to God (per CCC 1861).
Even when the matter is grave, a sin is only mortal with full knowledge and deliberate consent, which are both also interior dispositions...
Ignorance, habituation, coercion and the pressure of circumstances can reduce an individuals culpability (according to CCC 1735). You have literally no access to what any of those people know or their interior dispositions or intentions, and neither does literally anyone else.
Therefore; your claim "we can be sure they're in hell" is not a remotely Orthodox application of CCC 846. It is fundamentally a claim to know hearts, which the Church says we cannot do. I'd also highly recommend since you love pulling out quotes from the catechism, to look up catechism 2477 :). Might be instructive!
Go ahead and reblock me now thanks bye!
Read CCC 846. It states that those who know the church is true but refuse to remain in her "could not be saved." That is as blunt as it can get and it perfectly describes the SSPX. I agree with Our Lady of Fatima that we should pray that God "leads all souls to heaven" but I also believe we should believe the CCC.
You can allow your country and community to be taken away, or you can leave your impotent stupor of self-comfort and organize to fix it.
No one else is coming to save you. It's up to you, it always has been, it always will be. We live in one of the most wicked ages imaginable. Simultaneously, there has been no better age to bring Glory to God.
If you do nothing, you'll be nothing. The modern man is the last man, impotent, lazy, whimpering about everything sucking while do nothing to try to fix it.
You can be better. You must be better.
"Why does nobody run for the school board?"
"Why are the Rotary clubs empty?"
"Why does every town meeting feel like it's run by the same motley assortment of terrible people?"
Because the men who ought be doing so--the successful local men of prominence, typically businessmen and lawyers--came to the conclusion in the mid-20th century that participation in and leadership of civic life was someone else's job.
This is the desire of the so-called conservative to simply "work" rather than do all the other things that keep entropy at bay and ensure things function. Their doing so left open the field to the worst among us: spiteful malcontents
It wasn't always like this.
The planters of the Virginia gentry served as vestryman, justice, militia officer and burgess, usually before he turned thirty and usually for no pay, other than perhaps having some travel expenses covered as a burgess.
It was expected of him, and he expected it of himself: as a man whose success made him privileged, he was duty-bound to be the one to show up and lead
That habit can come back. It ought come back. It starts with showing up to the boring meeting, and being the sort of man to whom others listen. The sort of man whose reputation for success and competence, and cultivated but not overdone and always aesthetically pleasing look makes others want to follow him
This is what the great men we look back to did, and is indeed what their whole soceity was geared toward producing: great men who were great leaders at every level of civic life, from the humblest station at the bottom to the greatest at the top
Re-engaging in that way will be critical if we are to retake our country.
Read more about what we can learn from the Virginia gentry here: theamericantribune.news/p/ho…
Majorian retweeted
"Why does nobody run for the school board?"
"Why are the Rotary clubs empty?"
"Why does every town meeting feel like it's run by the same motley assortment of terrible people?"
Because the men who ought be doing so--the successful local men of prominence, typically businessmen and lawyers--came to the conclusion in the mid-20th century that participation in and leadership of civic life was someone else's job.
This is the desire of the so-called conservative to simply "work" rather than do all the other things that keep entropy at bay and ensure things function. Their doing so left open the field to the worst among us: spiteful malcontents
It wasn't always like this.
The planters of the Virginia gentry served as vestryman, justice, militia officer and burgess, usually before he turned thirty and usually for no pay, other than perhaps having some travel expenses covered as a burgess.
It was expected of him, and he expected it of himself: as a man whose success made him privileged, he was duty-bound to be the one to show up and lead
That habit can come back. It ought come back. It starts with showing up to the boring meeting, and being the sort of man to whom others listen. The sort of man whose reputation for success and competence, and cultivated but not overdone and always aesthetically pleasing look makes others want to follow him
This is what the great men we look back to did, and is indeed what their whole soceity was geared toward producing: great men who were great leaders at every level of civic life, from the humblest station at the bottom to the greatest at the top
Re-engaging in that way will be critical if we are to retake our country.
Read more about what we can learn from the Virginia gentry here: theamericantribune.news/p/ho…
Majorian retweeted
Twitter Catholics whenever they touch their penis:
Majorian retweeted
It’s my mum’s 87th birthday. She has no faith in God. Please keep her in your prayers. 🙏
Majorian retweeted
Could've just said "my bad I got too heated" and retract but instead you'll just deflect and run away, which is why people don't respect you.
Majorian retweeted
Let's even say they're wrong about their standing. Being wrong is error, which is not necessarily morally equivalent as knowing refusal, and the Catechism (as I've already pointed out) says error and ignorance can diminish or even remove culpability (1735 & 1860). Your false dilemma of "believe the SSPX and be damned, or leave" leaves out another category of people (which is why your statement is stupid): people who are mistaken in good faith. I hypothesize this is because you repeatedly operate in bad-faith, so you project this behavior on others, but I digress.
And you still haven't answered the question I posed to you initially how can you be certain across the entire group? You can't, and the Catechism says you can't, in CCC 1861. I would again recommend reading CCC 2477.
Could've just said "my bad I got too heated" and retract but instead you'll just deflect and run away, which is why people don't respect you.
Majorian retweeted
When you ask Daily Wire bros "What is a woman" vs when you ask them "What is an American"
