@FrTotleben92742 Why so much 'nuance' on usury? Aquinas (ST II-II q.78), Lateran II, Vix Pervenit, and the Fathers all condemn the taking of any interest as intrinsic evil and an injustice. Why are you pushing doctrinal reversal? Are you saying something sinful in 1250 is morally good today?

@mfjlewis This is such a stupid and uninformed thing to say. Why don't you read a book for once in your life before you start typing and revealing to the world that you don't know what you are talking about. In fact, I literally posted a link to a standard work of moral theology on this

@FrTotleben92742 Dude, chill out. I was just messing with you. As with the death penalty, I accept that the doctrine on usury has developed.

@mfjlewis The "I was just messing with you" defense is as unconvincing from you as it is from the other adolescents who typically use it. This isn't the first time you have tried to back out of trouble you started but couldn't finish by pretending that you were just playing around. And

@FrTotleben92742 Are you going on record here in rejecting the premise of Cardinal Ladaria's letter in 2018 on the death penalty?

@mfjlewis @FrTotleben92742 Yeah, putting aside the acerbic personal attacks you guys throw at each other, I’m actually curious Fr, do you disagree with Cardinal Ladaria’s dev of doctrine he describes in his letter?

@Foolhardy561441 @mfjlewis I have literally already answered this dozens of times, including in this thread.

@Foolhardy561441 @mfjlewis If "inadmissible" means "intrinsically evil", then it is a doctrinal error, and I don't accept it. If "inadmissible" means "not needed to accomplish the aims of punishmenr", then this prudential judgment is righr, except perhaps in the case of some really horrible crimes that

@FrTotleben92742 @mfjlewis Ok TY. I knew your view on DP & critique of the sausage making process, it was the last bit about Ladaria’s note I was curious abt, when he claims in no uncertain terms it is “an authentic dev. of doctrine that is not in contradiction with the prior teachings of the Magisterium”

@Foolhardy561441 @mfjlewis If he claims that the DP is intrinsically evil, then it isn't. It is also not true that a judgment about when capital punishment may be applied according to the Church's traditional criteria is a development of the doctrine itself. Strictly speaking, it is obvious that

@FrTotleben92742 @mfjlewis “But inasmuch as the church is teaching something that she hadn't taught before, that there is a new act of reasoning/judgment being placed, there obviously has been a development in the wider sense of that term.” I think that’s very much in line with what the CCC is saying.

@Foolhardy561441 @mfjlewis The problem is that this is not how activists in the Church see the matter. And those activists are the people whom Francis chose as his collaborators. This is what more orthodox/conswrvarive defenders of Francis overlook: Feancis' own handpicked collaborators openly say that

@FrTotleben92742 @Foolhardy561441 His teachings certainly break with prior formulations. But they do not deviate from any essential doctrinal principles. In Amoris Laetitia, for example, those in a state of mortal sin are still to refrain from the Eucharist. AL allows discernment of subjective culpability in some

@FrTotleben92742 @Foolhardy561441 In the case of the death penalty, the past four popes have called for its abolition, and have argued against it as a licit means of punishment. But obviously, there are people like Feser who were championing it. Francis wanted to close that "loophole."

@FrTotleben92742 @Foolhardy561441 I am not an "activist" on the matter any more than JP2 was. I remain firmly opposed to it because it is a particularly cruel form of punishment that disregards the dignity of the person, is unevenly applied and is completely unnecessary.

@mfjlewis @FrTotleben92742 Maybe I’m wrong, but at the end of the day, I’m not even sure you guys even disagree on the fundamental interpretation of what Pope Francis and Cardinal Ladaria said and taught here.

@Foolhardy561441 @FrTotleben92742 He never said anything about Ladaria's letter (just the unverified claim that Ladaria was responsible for not describing it as intrinsically evil. Ladaria wrote about why it was a legitimate development of doctrine, which Totleben denies.

@Foolhardy561441 @FrTotleben92742 He also seems to suggest that the teaching on the death penalty only warrants respectful consideration or whatever. He hasn't shown any indication that he considers it magisterial (which it is, by the Church’s standards, and he said there are exceptions to the teaching.