Terlikowski is either moving towards any form of apocalypse, where everyone will be saved, independent of how they lived, or – reaching back to post-sobor times – he advocates the explanation of the fundamental option, in which the fundamental choice of the Lord, alternatively than individual actions, counts. Wrong, due to the fact that the concept of fundamental option was run over by John Paul II in Veritatis splendor — writes in PCh24.pl Krzysztof Kasprzak.
Honestly, I'm tired of the writing kind of editor Terlikowski. Many of his texts are for the pain of the stacks, made according to 1 scheme:
“This is not Christianity / Catholicism” – this is the manner in which in conservative environments Tomasz Terlikowski is referred to as a “excession”, individual standing above the pope, who by the power of self-appointed authority determines what Christianity / Catholicism is and what is not.
Then – randomly inserted expected heresy found in opponents;
Immediately thereafter, the individual insert, “me, father / husband / Christian”, which is to strengthen points 1 and 2.
And so around Maciej. This time Kaja Godek and Paweł Chmielewski were targeted. But first things first.
Editor Terlikowski is not a theologian, but a philosopher – he has no thought about Christian heresies. And this is seen in the allegation of pelagianism by Kai Godek and ed. Chmielewski. The essence of pelagianism, which fought St. Augustine, is the belief that human nature is not tainted by first sin, and that man can choose from himself good without the engagement of grace.
And if individual closer to pelagianism, it is Terlikovsky or Father Matthew Filipowski who wants to accompany LGBT.
‘Dicere hominem sine grata Dei non posse esse sine peccato blasphemia est; quia si peccatum vitare non post, extractatur.’ – To say that a man without the grace of God cannot be without sin is blasphemy – for if he cannot avoid sin, he is justified. These are the views of Pelagius criticized by Augustine in Contra duas epistolas Pelagiorum.
So forgive me, gentlemen Terlikowski and Filipowski, but you are the pelagians – with your companionship, your discernment. due to the fact that Godek and Chmielewski's views can be closed in a message without conversion and adherence to God's grace you can't handle your own inclination, and the Catholic Church is the only place you can do it.
Besides, the passage about justification that is characteristic of pelagicism is heard even in Terlikowski's last post, where he leans over the necessity of choosing between orthodoxy and relation, as it were, justifying that any LGBT-egot chooses a relationship.
Okay, let's keep going.
Yes, grace is free, but a man has to do something. He must respond to this grace and cooperate with it. Terlikowski is either moving towards any form of apocalypse, where everyone will be saved, independent of how they lived, or – reaching back to post-sobor times – he advocates the explanation of the fundamental option, in which the fundamental choice of the Lord, alternatively than individual actions, counts.
Well, that's wrong, due to the fact that the concept of the fundamental option was run over by John Paul II in Veritatis Splendor, clearly indicating that the moral actions practiced are a confirmation of the fundamental option chosen and that this cannot be torn apart. In another words, 1 cannot live as a practicing homosexual and be God-oriented, as 1 cannot live as a practicing thief, adulterer or extortioner and be God-oriented. We come to Jacob, religion without works is dead.
Terlikowski's full argument is to truly argue the rigid orthodoxy of human happiness: “They know all of these stories about how to fight, and they face a choice: right (the Catholic, orthodox, correct ecclesiastical) or relationship?”.
And here we truly go to the foundations of Catholicism: orthodoxy, among another things, is the orthodoxy that best serves man. What the Church teaches and proclaims is best for man – in this planet and in the future.
And to conclude, it's truly exhausting that LGBT-centralism, expressed in the presumption that only they suffer, having to conflict with their inclination. It is I who will remind you that the Church requires her faithful to live in purity according to the condition—and there is simply a much larger crowd of lonely or abandoned people, frequently without their fault, by their spouses—and these people the Church requires to live in purity and without a fresh relationship.
But it is known – only LGBT people be in the modernist Church...
Krzysztof Kasprzak, Foundation of Life and household (www.RającZycie.pl)
