Skip to main content

@FeserEdward..some wonder why I pay a moment’s attention to lightweights like Annett, Lewis, et al..because..they are the best the “progressive” “Catholic” side has to offer..latest illustration...

I’m aware that some wonder why I pay a moment’s attention to lightweights like Annett, Lewis, et al. The reason is precisely because they are lightweights – because it is important for all to see that they are the best the “progressive” “Catholic” side has to offer. The latest illustration of how breathtakingly unserious these people are is this remarkable exchange with today, which I’ve screencapped. In a pair of tweets, I had cited several passages from Pope John Paul II, the Catechism, the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, and Pope Francis himself, acknowledging that it is legitimate for governments to restrict immigration, and to do so for the purpose of preserving the culture and economic stability of the receiving nation. Annett’s response is, apparently, peremptorily to dismiss all of this as incompatible with Pope Francis’s Fratelli Tutti (though he never explains exactly how they are incompatible). When I ask him to confirm whether this is indeed his view, he responds that “doctrine develops” and that if I have a problem with his assertions, then I must be a Lefebvrist. When I point out in response that his position entails that not only the magisterium in general, but Pope Francis in particular, have contradicted themselves within the space of just a few years, his only reply is to fling the “Lefebvrist” accusation once again. To any reader who is neither ignorant nor blinded by ideology, I probably don’t need to point out all the problems with this. But here they are anyway. First, and again, Annett never explains how the earlier statements I cited conflict with Fratelli Tutti. He just asserts that they do. Second, he refuses even to entertain the possibility that he should accept those earlier statements and read Fratelli Tutti in light of them, rather than dismissing them out of hand. Certainly he offers no justification for refusing to do so. Third, he ignores the consideration that a true “development” of doctrine never contradicts earlier doctrine, but merely draws out implications of earlier doctrine in a way that is consistent with it. This is the teaching of St. Vincent of Lerins, of Newman, of Benedict XVI, of Vatican I, etc. etc. Fourth, even if there really were a contradiction between Fratelli Tutti and the earlier statements, he does not explain why this should cast doubt on the earlier statements rather than on Fratelli Tutti. Or how we can trust anything the magisterium says if it really has contradicted itself. Fifth, his position commits him to dismiss the teaching of the Catechism, even though the Church has never said that that teaching is obsolete. Yet he frequently labels others “dissenters” for merely objecting to the wording of the recent change to the Catechism vis-à-vis the death penalty. Annett does not explain how he can justify this double standard. Sixth, Annett never tells us how he would deal with all the obvious problems his apparent position entails. Should borders be abolished entirely? Should all immigrants be taken in, no matter how many? If not, exactly what is the upper limit, and under what conditions can immigration be halted? If so, then how is it practically even possible to take in absolutely all who want to enter, given economic limitations, security concerns, cultural cohesion, etc.? The statements I quoted from John Paul II, Francis, the Catechism, and the Compendium acknowledge these as serious issues. Exactly how do these problems disappear simply by uttering “Fratelli Tutti”? (Are those magic words or something?) Naturally, in a sane world this would all too blindingly obvious to have to be said, and a crank like Annett could be ignored entirely. But this is where we are with the “progressive” “Catholic” “intelligentsia” in 2023.


Popular posts from this blog

Fr. Chad Ripperger's Breastplate of St. Patrick (Modified) & Binding Prayer ("In the Name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and God, and by the power of the Most Holy Catholic Church of Jesus, I render all spirits impotent...")

    Deliverance Prayers II  The Minor Exorcisms and Deliverance Prayers compiled by Fr Chad Ripperger: Breastplate of St. Patrick (Modified) I bind (myself, or N.) today to a strong virtue, an invocation of the Trinity. I believe in a Threeness, with a confession of an Oneness in the Creator of the Universe. I bind (myself, or N.) today to the virtue of Christ’s birth with his baptism, to the virtue of his crucifixion with his burial, to the virtue of his resurrection with his ascension, to the virtue of his coming to the Judgment of Doom. I bind (myself, or N.) today to the virtue of ranks of Cherubim, in obedience of Angels, in service of Archangels, in hope of resurrection for reward, in prayers of Patriarchs, in preaching of Apostles, in faiths of confessors, in innocence of Holy Virgins, in deeds of righteous men. I bind (myself, or N.) today to the virtue of Heaven, in light of Sun, in brightness of Snow, in splendor of Fire, in speed of lightning, in

Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: "212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted...Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden"

  William Binney Binney at the Congress on Privacy & Surveillance (2013) of the École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) Born William Edward Binney September 1943 (age 77) Pennsylvania , U.S. Education Pennsylvania State University (B.S., 1970) Occupation Cryptanalyst-mathematician Employer National Security Agency (NSA) Known for Cryptography , SIGINT analysis, whistleblowing Awards Meritorious Civilian Service Award Joe A. Callaway Award for Civic Courage (2012) [1] Sam Adams Award (2015) [2] Signature [ ] Former intelligence official with the National Security Agency (NSA) and whistleblower , William Edward Binney, whose occupation is cryptanalyst-mathematician explained that Joe Biden's "win" was impossible because "Biden Claims 13 MILLION More Votes Than There Were Eligible Voters Who Voted in 2020 Election" according to Gateway Pundit. Binney revealed "With 212Mil

Is the RINO/Biden's Proxy War for the Ukrainian apparent Dictatorship which "Abolish[ed the] Opposition Party" going to be their next Afghanistan Disaster?

What is the Real Agenda of the corrupt Joe & Hunter Biden's Russiagate backing of the Trudeau-like Obama corrupt Ukraine Operatives in their Warmongering Posturing? "If President Trump had survived the election coup in 2020 we would have no Ukraine war (because he respects Russia’s legitimate security interests and wants to disband NATO)." - Scott Lively Robert Barnes @barnes_law Name the President that imprisoned the leader of the opposition party, stacked the courts, banned opposition media, empowered secret police & armed units against his people, and whose country made top 10 lists in corruption in the world? Putin? Nope. That answer is #Zelensky . [] Putin is dangerous to the Ukrainians, but do you know who is more dangerous?  Michael Matt of Remnant TV points out that the globalist communists from the West who are stoking this war are much more dangerous to Ukrainians than anyone