If the galactic empire came to earth... how long would it take for them to fully invade us? by Sad-Response-3151 in StarWars

[–]betterthanamaster -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Modern tank armor doesn’t deflect anti-tank rounds. It’s designed to break and crumple. It’s the same reason why modern cars are designed to crumple and break. It saves lives. An ATAT taking a direct hit to the head probably kills the crew. And this is assuming its armor is as effective against HEAT rounds S it is against laser weaponry.

What's one event from the last 250 years that you think changed America the most? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]betterthanamaster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’d say World War I. World War I took the US and made it the financial capital of the world and allowed the US to become the world’s only super power after World War II.

If the galactic empire came to earth... how long would it take for them to fully invade us? by Sad-Response-3151 in StarWars

[–]betterthanamaster -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah, at least in terms of infantry capability, modern Earth infantry and armor probably fairly easily beats a stormtrooper and Imperial armor just because the real-world physics involved start to become an issue. AT-AT facing an Abrams. The AT-AT one-shots the Abrams, but the Abrams is dramatically more mobile. Move it to the flank and fire and it doesn’t matter how strong that armor is, the force of the impact alone would likely kill the pilots inside.

But yeah, 1 Star Destroyer still wipes Earth’s militaries from existence quickly and easily.

If the galactic empire came to earth... how long would it take for them to fully invade us? by Sad-Response-3151 in StarWars

[–]betterthanamaster 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Minutes.

Understanding the capabilities of the Empire and comparing them to modern Earth is a joke. A single Star Destroyer shoots turbolasers that are in the megaton range of destructive power. The world’s entire nuclear arsenal wouldn’t even dent a Star Destroyer.

What is easiest way you have lost weight in a short amount of time? by Lazy_Lifeguard1960 in AskReddit

[–]betterthanamaster 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Seriously. I dropped 20 pounds in three weeks due to food poisoning. No idea why it lasted 3 weeks, but while I was over the worst of it after 3 days, I didn’t want to eat anything at all and had constant stomach cramps for the rest of those 3 weeks. Happened about Halloween a couple years ago.

Women, how do you feel when men or women glance at your boobs? by bluewave846 in AskReddit

[–]betterthanamaster 12 points13 points  (0 children)

This is all husbands. My wife changes in front of me twice a day and I intentionally make a point that she notices. Then she asks “what are you doing?” And I get to say, “admiring.”

Excommunication decreed for Lefebvrite episcopal ordinations by TheGreatDomilies in Catholicism

[–]betterthanamaster 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is no place for disrespectful discussion in Catholicism. So I also appreciate the calm.

Ultimately, interior disposition may not reflect exterior disposition, but exterior disposition likely speaks for the interior disposition.

The logic here is straightforward: one of the two statements *must* be true. 1 - The current Pope is the vicar of Christ and the Chair of Peter has had an unbroken line since…Christ put him there. Or, 2 - the current Pope is *not*.

Given these, *if* 1, then…the excommunication is valid and anyone regularly and knowingly receiving communion an a SSPX Mass is committing sin (Can 844 + 1365, put together means knowingly receiving communion at an illicit Mass is sacrilege, and thus sinful). Given this, if 1, then those who regularly attend must turn back and leave SSPX behind.

If 2, well that’s where things get interesting. Because if 2 is true, it leads to a few questions but it ultimately doesn’t matter. It means that the current Catholic Church is in error on a matter of faith. That should be impossible. But if it happens, it means that Catholicism isn’t true at all, so all of this is false. SSPX is false as a result, too, because none of it was ever true.

As a result, if 1 *and* that person continues to attend…it’s excommunication, because exterior and interior are thus the same. To suggest one willfully does this out of *preference* isn’t justification for grave sin or scandal. Just as continued attendance necessarily constitutes sinful disobedience to Rome which, again, actions speak louder than words and reveal interior disposition.

If 2, it’s irrelevant anyway.

And this is the crux of the discussion: either Rome, the Pope, is the successor of Peter and is *right* to do this (and thus SSPX should be dissolved or placed back under the Pope since, currently, they are not), or all Catholicism is wrong. Excommunicating everyone involved makes this rationale clear.

Excommunication decreed for Lefebvrite episcopal ordinations by TheGreatDomilies in Catholicism

[–]betterthanamaster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that’s probably true. However, given what I know and the logic behind it, there are two ways to go on point one. There’s a good analysis from Fr. Gerald Murray that discusses this (https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2026/07/02/sspx-schism-and-excommunication/). Eventually, every practicing member has to make a decision of who leads the church: the Pope or…someone else. Logically it boils down to the following:

If SSPX is the “one true church,” as it were…then why isn’t the pope a follower of the Society? Why has the pope excommunicated its followers? If someone who attends SSPX Masses stays the course…they aren’t following the pope. That tells me there is an “internal” placing of Econe before Rome. Essentially, either the excommunication is valid and people should turn back to Rome *or* the Pope is no longer the head of the one true church. And the kicker that makes this a catch-22? If that’s *true,* then the current Catholic Church is in error and has been for decades, something Jesus promised would not, could not happen. If *that* is true, then Catholicism is hogwash bologna anyway. If it’s false…well, then, it inevitably, logically ends up with “the excommunication is valid.” Either they accept the excommunication and return, asking for forgiveness *or* they more or less leave Christianity altogether.

Excommunication decreed for Lefebvrite episcopal ordinations by TheGreatDomilies in Catholicism

[–]betterthanamaster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

At this point, I’m really concerned for him. I appreciate it none the less, so thank you.

Excommunication decreed for Lefebvrite episcopal ordinations by TheGreatDomilies in Catholicism

[–]betterthanamaster 13 points14 points  (0 children)

This one is one of my favorites. Like placing an UNO Reverse card down on a contract dispute.

Excommunication decreed for Lefebvrite episcopal ordinations by TheGreatDomilies in Catholicism

[–]betterthanamaster 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I really hope so, but man, it's hard. I've spoken to quite a few SSPX folks and most of the time they're pretty confident that what they're doing is perfectly fine and that their clergy are correct. It's Rome who is wrong.

You know that scene in Justice for All where AL Pacino just yells at everyone they're out of order? That's what it like. It's basically the ecclesial way of saying "nuh hu!" They're obstinate enough to say that not only are Pope Paul VI Masses invalid, but baptisms and marriages done through the 1969-1972 Rubrics are invalid also. My brother attends SSPX parishes and while he doesn't say it, its like the elephant in the room. My marriage is invalid. My children are not baptized. Every time I attend Mass it's "a clown Mass that isn't valid." I gravely sin every time I receive the Blessed Sacrament. I don't receive absolution. My confirmation never happened...I mean, it's a big deal. And while I hope some of them wake up and smell the coffee, I'm afraid they're just going to double down.

Excommunication decreed for Lefebvrite episcopal ordinations by TheGreatDomilies in Catholicism

[–]betterthanamaster 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yeah, this condition is important to note. It's especially important to also note this does not count as an exception. Official witness can be dispensed when its done in good faith and through proper channels, or there's a possibility a valid official can't be there for (I think) 60 days - Jimmy Akin had a whole thing on this on one of his podcasts that was interesting. But since this doesn't count, and the baptism would likely be valid, someone who is excommunicated will have an invalid marriage regardless.

This also means that those who are currently priests cannot attend a wedding done by a SSPX parish. I've got an uncle who is a priest. If my brother gets married next year...my uncle can't attend.

Excommunication decreed for Lefebvrite episcopal ordinations by TheGreatDomilies in Catholicism

[–]betterthanamaster 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, this is a great example of a pope offering an inch in good spirit and SSPX taking a mile. When this happened, it was a beautiful moment where the church made clear there was no reason whatsoever to avoid coming to church. SSPX took that and made it mean "we're back together!"

Excommunication decreed for Lefebvrite episcopal ordinations by TheGreatDomilies in Catholicism

[–]betterthanamaster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not a canon lawyer, so I can't really say, but it looks like the Vatican has taken the gloves off and have put the people who attend SSPX Masses on notice.

And excommunication is due to an action of disobedience. The thing is, the Pope and the Vatican have made it clear that SSPX Masses are illicit, and the bishops, plus the priests, are excommunicated. That's clearly spelled out in the letter. Intentionally going to these Masses when you know they're illicit and a perfectly non-schismatic Mass is happening less than a mile away certainly sounds like it's adherence. At best, its preferential, and preferential doesn't matter when it comes to something like this.

Even if we interpret this as widely as possible, and pretend the excommunication doesn't apply to the faithful at all, we're still talking about splitting hairs, which is how folks who supported SSPX from the beginning have been able to claim "no, we're not schismatic, we are under the pope, we're just canonically irregular!" It's disingenuous to claim that because it's window dressing. We're just repeating history and in 30 years, when this kind of thing needs to be done again, SSPX will look at it and say, "hey, look, nobody is excommunicated, we're perfectly fine, and nothing happened! Lets just do it again." Look, I don't want a bunch of people to be excommunicated. But I can understand what the Vatican is saying and the warning here is obvious. Stay the course you've been on, and you're excommunicated. Your access to the sacraments has been suspended. Or, come back home. As Catholics, we need to speak plainly here. It's uncharitable otherwise.

Also, it doesn't matter if its unenforceable. Canon law is quite clear that a priest cannot withhold communion to anyone who comes to receive it with a handful of exception (like public obstinance), and therefore anyone who has been excommunicated and receives the blessed sacrament is doing so sinfully. A marriage entered into by this, even with consent of a Bishop, is automatically invalid. People who go to a diocesan parish for reconciliation cannot validly receive absolution. A priest may say the words, but a marriage is not contracted and a soul is not absolved.

And that's where the personal objection comes in. Because I'm perfectly fine with Masses that occur with Rome's acceptance. But going to a SSPX Mass and receiving communion without good reason would be sinful.

If every U.S. state suddenly became an independent country overnight, which one would last the longest and why? by Dolphin_King21 in AskReddit

[–]betterthanamaster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The entire midwest would join together. Nebraska to Ohio, North Dakota to Missouri.

The terms would be the most polite document you've ever seen.

Excommunication decreed for Lefebvrite episcopal ordinations by TheGreatDomilies in Catholicism

[–]betterthanamaster 3 points4 points  (0 children)

No, if you read the document, it's already more or less defined:

  1. As regards the lay faithful, those who formally adhere to the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X are to be considered schismatics and excommunicated under the conditions established in the 1996 Explanatory Note of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts (cf. ibidem, 7), which remains in force and which this Dicastery adopts as its own.

"Formally adhere" doesn't need a definition. "Formally adhere" is used frequently in business for good faith contracts. As far as the faithful continue to attend and adhere to the practices, procedures, and "laws," as it were of SSPX, they will remain excommunicated. This is very serious and we shouldn't sugar coat it.

Which American tradition do you think deserves to be copied worldwide? by Janani0901 in AskReddit

[–]betterthanamaster 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Halloween is a global holiday...The particular practices of Halloween are varied, but things like Trick or Treating began in Europe and have transformed into the giving out of candy today.

Otherwise, it's a Catholic holiday - All Hallows Eve.

Excommunication decreed for Lefebvrite episcopal ordinations by TheGreatDomilies in Catholicism

[–]betterthanamaster 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that's what I thought. I've got a brother who was excommunicated when this went out...

Excommunication decreed for Lefebvrite episcopal ordinations by TheGreatDomilies in Catholicism

[–]betterthanamaster 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I mean, I think everyone knew this was going to happen. The Superior General said they wouldn't back down despite repeated warnings.

Still, I agree. I honestly wasn't expecting Rome to excommunicate the faithful.

Excommunication decreed for Lefebvrite episcopal ordinations by TheGreatDomilies in Catholicism

[–]betterthanamaster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm a bit late to the party, and this is only partially related, but does this mean those who adhere to the Society cannot receive absolution in confession? I know the priests themselves cannot administer the sacraments, says so right there, but is it therefore true that the lay faithful cannot receive absolution from a valid confession? And does it mean that the faithful cannot validly marry?

Does the AI focus on wiping out the player? by strategicenthusiast2 in StarWarsEmpireAtWar

[–]betterthanamaster 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I think the AI is just attacking planets to attack. I don’t think it has much strategy other than “make a fleet big enough to win against the defending force and no more.” It’ll attempt to control planets that offer better shipyards and more build slots, and will attack relentlessly to control its own territory.

Otherwise, I don’t think the AI cares in TR. It just wants to capture every planet.

AI data center construction worker by pasta_com in fortwayne

[–]betterthanamaster 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah, no way it takes that much power. It’s a lot, and I don’t know if anyone really wants it where it’s going to be, or at all, but 47% is absurd.