• UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not fucking heresy ffs this guy has less theological knowledge than a 13th century peseant.

      It may very well be Warhammer 40k brain, the kind that cryptofascist dipshits get when they get excited about Exterminatus and want to say “heresy/xeno/witch” a lot to justify their genocide fantasies.

    • StalinForTime [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Honestly when you look at the medieval peasant religious movements in the 13th and 14th centuries the presence of visionary women is really striking, of which Joan of Arc is only the most obvious. Many of the most important mystic writers were women. Probably were also the best. So I expect many of them would have known far more about Christianity that this fuckhead.

      • Mardoniush [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        Broadly, the sacraments are “required” for salvation but in the sense that a) engaging in them sincerely is a pretty good way to ensure salvation and b) Catholicism insists both faith and works are needed for salvation and confession etc are required for that.

        You can be saved via private prayer or divine intervention, because stop telling god what to do.

        Tradcaths disagree with this because of the doctrine of “no salvation outside the church”. This is due to a very limiting view of what the church is (and of what Jesus is, but that’s another post).

        Firstly the above sentence is a tautology, since the church is by definition the community of saints on earth. Secondly it’s the universal church, and calls to all peoples through god’s grace regardless of how much water was sprinkled on their head.

        Finally a person who honestly seeks gods truth and salvation and fails to find it has what is called invincible ignorance (a much broader concept than “never saw a bible” and in fact a state some tradcaths are probably in.) and will be saved regardless. And there is always direct personal revelation right up to death, of course.

        This is not apologetics and I am not a theologian, just an attempt to explain church doctrine as actually given to people who don’t think the only valid council was Vatican I

        • MerryChristmas [any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Do you know how many years of religious trauma you’ve just undone by teaching my apostate ass about the concept of invincible ignorance?

          • Mardoniush [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            There are good reasons they don’t teach it, since it generally quickly leads to universalism without some other theology backing it up, and certain (rather than hopeful) universalism is a heresy.

            But most of the time they’re just trying to instill the sad grimdark Irish Catholic thing where you must be sad and guilty all the time because the British spent 200 years preventing you from going to mass.

            I also want to add that I have any number of issues with “normal” catholic doctrine. Church is fucked and needs a full clean out and reset. I’m just trying to give the centrist doctrine a fair shake.