What is missing from so many conversations is Jesus’ call to repentance and to “go and sin no more”. I have a disordered attraction to food. It was on the way to killing me until I found a 12 Step program to help me. There I found the mercy and power of God to give me the Grace (God’s power) to overcome my urges (temptations). Thank God no one suggested I could go on overeating and even seek a blessing for it! Lord, keep speaking the truth through Your loving Word made flesh.
Every time someone writes 'sin no more', I need to remind them that passage doesn't concern the sin of the adulteress, it concerns the hypocrisy of the judgement of those wanting to stone her, it's about you rather than her.
@@mission4christ17 I'm saying that they are using a passage in the bible that was intended to warn against judgement, to judge. It's not about the sinner, it's about those standing in judgement of her (let him without sin throw the first stone). That's the point of the text.
@@lormorgrj3893 not when you're questioning biblical and infallible teaching on the abominations of cross dressing and homosexuality. of all things clear, these are in the top of clarity.
It is not excusable that the leadership of the Church is neglecting the needs of the Faithful during a very disturbing and confused time in history. We need clarity, and a restatement of the Truth that is not only charitable, but forceful and confident as well.
And you really need to stop abusing children. Can you imagine how it looks to an outsider to see child abusers arguing over if they will give a blessing to homosexuals?
@@nadreb13It's not about us being entitled to these things, it's about them having the responsibility to do those things. It's in their JOB DESCRIPTION to provide clarity, firmness, direction, and teaching.
What is sad is that humanity seems to forgot that, “The beginning of wisdom is the fear of The Lord” and we are more worried about pleasing others than pleasing The Lord, God Almighty😏
Not everyone feels obligated, or chooses to live, under Christian or any other form of Shari'a - and get over worrying about what someone else does in bed, it's none of your business. You are lying to yourself when you promote such notions which can bring about targeted violence on innocent people, and you pretend "they're asking for it." At five (5) years of age I was targeted by a totally terrified family member, a gay or bi closet case obviously out of his head, and trying to act out some version of 'manliness'' on an innocent child, for at that tender age not displaying sufficient macho tendencies to please him as his nephew. I'd committed the great crime of running his car battery down and he wanted that I never forget it. He began where no one could hear his anxiety ridden vituperation which consisted of displaying hatred, and varying versions "Get out of here!" or of "Go away!" an often repeated verbal assault that lasted from perhaps mid-June to February of the following year. When in early September My aunt told me he'd drive me to register for kinder I fretted at the thought of being alone with him. On Christmas Day he snatched my simple war era wooden truck gift out of my hands as I opened my gifts, and handed it to my destructive younger brother, encouraged him to sit on it, and flattened the wheels before my eyes. I fled from the house to my grandparents spacious back yard, as often.My wonderful aunt didn't know about his abuse, but noted "you never hold Tony and demonstrate affection towards him," and placed me on his lap. I freaked out but maintained long enough to sit there, mindful of the respect my young uncle Joe deserved, and after a proper elapse of time to slip off of his lap "because Grandma is calling me." I concerned myself not to disrespect him, while he was busy destroying my psyche. I knew nothing of reporting this treatment. Abusers if not stopped will escalate the abuse. Sure enough his next gambit was now a public continued assurance of my family that "Tony is weird." The next year I was sexually abused by two aunts and another younger uncle. I don't blame my poor suffering uncle, I blame his male peers, including family males who constantly say ugly things about gay men, when it's often a closet case protective cover, as it may well be with YOU. Four years later during my visits he'd switched from abuse to ridicule which I tried to ignore. By nine years of age I'd already noted that his jokes were seldom funny, but instead quite lame. Some forty three years later we encountered again at Grandma's, when both of us were visiting her. When I went out to look at his new car he followed me, opened the trunk and handed me a two way radio, one of his interests, without a word. I took it from him vaguely understanding that he wished to apologize. The following year he was killed in an automobile accident sparing himself the long talk that I surely would have had with him. He'd caused my first memorable dream. I was sitting next to a bed upon which was another young boy my age, somehow knowing that he'd been injured. Make sure you know your family members well, when leaving them in charge of children. I was fortunate not to have been battered. Your precious patriarchy is not an innocent bystander get that through your head. Saludos, Antonio Perales del Hierro-Valdés
..All the Vatican 2 catholics say it's too confusing, I don't understand, it's confusing ! Or the mass is enough, No, it's not enough. You must have the true Traditional Catholic Faith. There is nothing Confusing about it !!! Pope Eugene IV, Council Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441 : therefore the Catholic Church condemns Rejects excommunicates and declares to be outside the body of Christ which is the Catholic Church whoever holds opposing or contrary views. Pope Pelagius II, Quod ad dilectionem 585: If anyone however either suggests or believes or presumes to teach contrary to this faith, let him know that he is Condemned and also anathematized, excommunicated, according to the opinion of the same Fathers. Pope Gregory the 16th 1831 - 1846 : let nothing of the truths that have been defined be lessened, nothing altered, nothing added, but let them be preserved intact in word and meaning !! Vatican Council of 1870 session 3 chapter 4 part 13 and 14 EX cathedra -- for the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward not as some philosophical Discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence but as a Divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be Faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated hence to that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding. Pope Leo 13 - Satis Cognitum # 13, 1896. You are not to be looked upon as holding the true Catholic faith if you do not teach the faith of Rome is to be held. Pope Pius10th syllabus condemning the errors of the modernists 1907 article 62 : the proposition the chief articles of the Apostles Creed did not have the same sense for the Christians of the first stages as they have for the Christians of our time is hereby condemned as erroneous. St John of the Cross 1591 wherefore if there be revealed to us anything new or different we must in no way give consent to it not even though it were spoken by an Angel. St. Thomas Aquinas doctor of the church 1274 all those who deny one Article of Faith regardless of their reason are by that very fact excommunicated. Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence Session 8, 1439 - Ex Cathedra - Whoever Wills to be saved before all things it is necessary that he holds the Catholic Faith. Unless a person keeps this Faith whole and undefiled without doubt He Shall Perish eternally. Pope Leo 13th 1896 the practice of the church has always been the same as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the fathers who were want to hold as outside Catholic communion and alien to the church whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of Doctrine proposed by her authoritative magisterium. Council Florence session 11 February 4th 1442 ex cathedra the Holy Roman Church condemns reproves anathematize has and declares to be outside the body of church which is the Catholic Church whoever holds opposing or contrary views. Pope Saint Leo the Great, Doctor of the Church, 440- 461 A.D. - the faith shall never vary in any age for one is the faith which justifies the just of all ages it is unlawful to differ even by a single word from Apostolic Doctrine. Pope Leo 10th, 5th lateran Council session 8th 1513 EX cathedra and since truth cannot contradict the truth we Define that every statement contrary to the enlightened truth of the faith is totally false and we strictly forbid teaching otherwise to be permitted we decree that all those who cling to erroneous statements of this time thus sowing heresies which are wholly condemned should be avoided in every way and punished as detestable and odious Heretics and infidels who are undermining the Catholic faith. Saint Athanasius,died 373 AD. God's word is one and the same in the doors forever unchanged always the same Pope Pius 9th, Qui Pluribus I'm faith and religion November 9th 1846 paragraph 20 never cease to instruct all men in it never tolerating and letting pass anyting which could in the slightest degree defiled the purity of this faith. What the same great strength of Mind Foster and all men their Unity with the Catholic church outside of which there is no salvation. Pope Saints Sixtus 3,432 A.D. nothing new is to be allowed for nothing can be added to the old look for the faith of the elders and do not let our faith be disturbed by a mixture of new doctrines St Vincent of Lerins 445 A.D., all novelty in faith is a sure Mark of heresy. Saint Paul Cried Out aloud again and again to all men to all times and to all places that if anyone announces a new doctrine let him be anathematized excommunicated. Ecclesiastics 18:5 - nothing maybe taken away or added. Pope Pius X, 1903-1914 A.D., Oath against Modernism - and so I retain most firmly the faith of the fathers and shall retain it until the final Breath of Life regarding the certain Gifts of Truth which is was and will always be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles not so that what may seem better and more fitting according to each one's period of culture may be held but so that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed otherwise may never be understood otherwise !!! Galatians 1:8 - but though we are an angel from heaven preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you let him be anathema excommunicated from the church Proverbs 30:6, add nothing to his words lest you be reproved and found a liar. St Thomas Aquinas doctor of the church died 1274 A.D - Our faith is identical with that of the ancients. Deny this and you dissolve the unity of the church !! we must hold this for certain that the faith of the people at the present day is one with the faith of the people of past centuries !!! were this not true then we would be in a different Church then they and literally the church would not be one !!! Saint Cyril of Alexandria doctor of the church died 444, A.D. - for it is not allowable for anyone to change even one word, nor allow one syllable to be passed over mindful of the saying : past not beyond the ancient bounds which thy fathers have set !!! Pope Leo XIII,Satis Cognitum (# 9)June 29,1896: Can it be lawful for anyone to reject any one of those truths without by that very fact falling into heresy ?!! without separating himself from the Catholic Church ? Without repudiating in one sweeping act the whole of Christian teaching ? For such is the nature of Faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others !!! b But he who dessents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all the faith, since he thereby refuses the honor God as the Supreme truth and the formal motive of Faith. Pope Leo XIII,Satis Cognitum # 9, June 29,1896: the Catholic Church found it on these principles and mindful of her office has done nothing with greater Zeal and Endeavor then she has displayed in guarding the Integrity of the Catholic faith hence she regarded as Rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of Doctrine different from her own. If there is a change YOU ARE NOT TO SUPPORT IT OR embrace it IN ANY WAY !!! There is no confusion unless you're a heretic and belong to the vatican 2 fake church, there is no confusion for true Catholics, I'll say that again there is no confusion for the true Catholics the teachings of the church are simple and clear. Nothing is to be changed !!!!! Nothing !! If you disagree with this your excommunicated from the church you no longer are Catholic you no longer have a father in Heaven !!!
Unless this issue is clearly addressed without ambiguity, those clerics who want to bless same sex relationships will do so and those that believe to do so is wrong and sinful, will not.......and the Church will continue in confusion and de facto schism.
Sin cannot be blessed. That is his teaching. If this truth is taken as context to his answer, what exactly was ambiguous? You have to read into this letter by ignoring his magisterial teaching to say it is ambiguous.
@@paulmualdeave5063"Pastoral prudence must therefore properly discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more people, that do not convey a misconception of marriage. Because, when a blessing is requested, it is a request for help from God, a plea to be able to live better, a trust in a Father who can help us to live better."
It isn't ambiguous. He has said you can't bless sin. He has also said marriage can only be between a man and a woman. There are different types of blessings in the Church. One of those blessings you are asking God for help and strength to live better and to fight sin. So, there is a section in the dubia response talking about how there needs to be discernment about these types of blessings in regard to people who are asking for them. That's it. The problem that I quite often see is that people are consuming reactionary material. The other problem that I see is that there are people who view everything that Pope Francis does through the hermeneutics of suspicion and not charity. I recommend, "Pope Francis Opens Door to Blessing Gay Unions?," at Reason and Theology. He goes over line by line the dubia response and all the Pope's prior responses on the topic.
Well done! Very charitable. I’ve resolved to not really talk about our Holy Father this month, and just offer a rosary for him and our church every day. It’s helped me a lot this far.
I basically try to ignore Francis except when someone thinks church teaching is changing or can change because of what he says. Then I have to speak up to set the record straight.
Dear Brian, many people have reached their own conclusions about the pope's answers: it is alright to sin. I do not judge his intentions, but his actions are leading many people to worse sins. Christ forgave the sinners who repented, but He did not spread confusion about what sin is. It is alright to try to save Francis' face, but the Church mission is saving peoples' souls.
@@glennherron9499 answer that question yourself now after the blessing of the irregular couples. Why dont you see what you have in front of your eyes? Why do people insist on denial of facts?
..All the Vatican 2 catholics say it's too confusing, I don't understand, it's confusing ! Or the mass is enough, No, it's not enough. You must have the true Traditional Catholic Faith. There is nothing Confusing about it !!! Pope Eugene IV, Council Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441 : therefore the Catholic Church condemns Rejects excommunicates and declares to be outside the body of Christ which is the Catholic Church whoever holds opposing or contrary views. Pope Pelagius II, Quod ad dilectionem 585: If anyone however either suggests or believes or presumes to teach contrary to this faith, let him know that he is Condemned and also anathematized, excommunicated, according to the opinion of the same Fathers. Pope Gregory the 16th 1831 - 1846 : let nothing of the truths that have been defined be lessened, nothing altered, nothing added, but let them be preserved intact in word and meaning !! Vatican Council of 1870 session 3 chapter 4 part 13 and 14 EX cathedra -- for the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward not as some philosophical Discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence but as a Divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be Faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated hence to that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding. Pope Leo 13 - Satis Cognitum # 13, 1896. You are not to be looked upon as holding the true Catholic faith if you do not teach the faith of Rome is to be held. Pope Pius10th syllabus condemning the errors of the modernists 1907 article 62 : the proposition the chief articles of the Apostles Creed did not have the same sense for the Christians of the first stages as they have for the Christians of our time is hereby condemned as erroneous. St John of the Cross 1591 wherefore if there be revealed to us anything new or different we must in no way give consent to it not even though it were spoken by an Angel. St. Thomas Aquinas doctor of the church 1274 all those who deny one Article of Faith regardless of their reason are by that very fact excommunicated. Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence Session 8, 1439 - Ex Cathedra - Whoever Wills to be saved before all things it is necessary that he holds the Catholic Faith. Unless a person keeps this Faith whole and undefiled without doubt He Shall Perish eternally. Pope Leo 13th 1896 the practice of the church has always been the same as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the fathers who were want to hold as outside Catholic communion and alien to the church whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of Doctrine proposed by her authoritative magisterium. Council Florence session 11 February 4th 1442 ex cathedra the Holy Roman Church condemns reproves anathematize has and declares to be outside the body of church which is the Catholic Church whoever holds opposing or contrary views. Pope Saint Leo the Great, Doctor of the Church, 440- 461 A.D. - the faith shall never vary in any age for one is the faith which justifies the just of all ages it is unlawful to differ even by a single word from Apostolic Doctrine. Pope Leo 10th, 5th lateran Council session 8th 1513 EX cathedra and since truth cannot contradict the truth we Define that every statement contrary to the enlightened truth of the faith is totally false and we strictly forbid teaching otherwise to be permitted we decree that all those who cling to erroneous statements of this time thus sowing heresies which are wholly condemned should be avoided in every way and punished as detestable and odious Heretics and infidels who are undermining the Catholic faith. Saint Athanasius,died 373 AD. God's word is one and the same in the doors forever unchanged always the same Pope Pius 9th, Qui Pluribus I'm faith and religion November 9th 1846 paragraph 20 never cease to instruct all men in it never tolerating and letting pass anyting which could in the slightest degree defiled the purity of this faith. What the same great strength of Mind Foster and all men their Unity with the Catholic church outside of which there is no salvation. Pope Saints Sixtus 3,432 A.D. nothing new is to be allowed for nothing can be added to the old look for the faith of the elders and do not let our faith be disturbed by a mixture of new doctrines St Vincent of Lerins 445 A.D., all novelty in faith is a sure Mark of heresy. Saint Paul Cried Out aloud again and again to all men to all times and to all places that if anyone announces a new doctrine let him be anathematized excommunicated. Ecclesiastics 18:5 - nothing maybe taken away or added. Pope Pius X, 1903-1914 A.D., Oath against Modernism - and so I retain most firmly the faith of the fathers and shall retain it until the final Breath of Life regarding the certain Gifts of Truth which is was and will always be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles not so that what may seem better and more fitting according to each one's period of culture may be held but so that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed otherwise may never be understood otherwise !!! Galatians 1:8 - but though we are an angel from heaven preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you let him be anathema excommunicated from the church Proverbs 30:6, add nothing to his words lest you be reproved and found a liar. St Thomas Aquinas doctor of the church died 1274 A.D - Our faith is identical with that of the ancients. Deny this and you dissolve the unity of the church !! we must hold this for certain that the faith of the people at the present day is one with the faith of the people of past centuries !!! were this not true then we would be in a different Church then they and literally the church would not be one !!! Saint Cyril of Alexandria doctor of the church died 444, A.D. - for it is not allowable for anyone to change even one word, nor allow one syllable to be passed over mindful of the saying : past not beyond the ancient bounds which thy fathers have set !!! Pope Leo XIII,Satis Cognitum (# 9)June 29,1896: Can it be lawful for anyone to reject any one of those truths without by that very fact falling into heresy ?!! without separating himself from the Catholic Church ? Without repudiating in one sweeping act the whole of Christian teaching ? For such is the nature of Faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others !!! b But he who dessents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all the faith, since he thereby refuses the honor God as the Supreme truth and the formal motive of Faith. Pope Leo XIII,Satis Cognitum # 9, June 29,1896: the Catholic Church found it on these principles and mindful of her office has done nothing with greater Zeal and Endeavor then she has displayed in guarding the Integrity of the Catholic faith hence she regarded as Rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of Doctrine different from her own. If there is a change YOU ARE NOT TO SUPPORT IT OR embrace it IN ANY WAY !!! There is no confusion unless you're a heretic and belong to the vatican 2 fake church, there is no confusion for true Catholics, I'll say that again there is no confusion for the true Catholics the teachings of the church are simple and clear. Nothing is to be changed !!!!! Nothing !! If you disagree with this your excommunicated from the church you no longer are Catholic you no longer have a father in Heaven !!!
To bless the same sex. It's toleration to commit a sin. The cause of subdivision of Catholic faith. I hope as early pope Francis will withdraw the document.
First time seeing you, and as a newcomer to the faith I appreciate your language and ability to harness words to explain concepts. Will be watching more, thank you.
Yea, we are all in the same boat but how did we get to this point? Because over time we became more and more lenient to sinful ways! You have to call sin what it is! It’s a sin, and not be afraid of hurting anyone’s feelings! The fact that the pope is not being straightforward and calling it what it is, it’s proof that he’s more worried about hurting peoples feelings than saving souls! It’s simple, what do you think Jesus would say? That’s all the pope has to do and he can’t do it, and only God knows why!
Great. But eb you sound like a Baptist christian like me. Although I read to about a baptist church closed after they embraced lgbt rights. We have no rights besides offering our whole bodies to God. Romains 12... And offering up all brings everlasting fruit. Shalom.
@@johnisaacfelipe6357 No - SODOMY is a sin... living in the same house as someone you could be attracted to might be a "near ocassion"... a union is a SCANDAL, but not a sin. The Pope wants people who are homosexual to have a point of contact Think about it, conversion is GRADUAL, a homosexual is hardly going to have an immediate conversion WITHOUT some point of contact with Christ & His Church.
I absolutely agree with this interpretation of the Pope's answers to the Dubium. I work with my archdiocese & have encountered a lot of different pastoral styles among our priests. With these answers, the Pope seems to be upholding traditional Church teaching, but pastorally he sincerely believes that there are situations in which a priest may need to do something "unorthodox" in the course of bringing someone to Christ...leaving open the hypothetical possibility of blessing a same-sex union for that purpose. I've seen this sort of good-intentioned liberality in a good number of priests who are just foolishly open hearted, believing every act done in the name of loving the sinner will bring that sinner to the Church. Unintentionally, all this behavior does is justify and encourage behaviors that are dysfunctional and sinful.
“For this reason the Church avoids any kind of rite or sacramental that could … give the impression that something that is not marriage is recognized as marriage. In dealing with people, however, we must not lose the pastoral charity that must permeate all our decisions and attitudes. The defense of objective truth is not the only expression of this charity, which is also made up of kindness, patience, understanding, tenderness, and encouragement. Therefore, we cannot become judges who only deny, reject, exclude. For this reason, pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more persons, that do not transmit a mistaken conception of marriage.” *This is the quote from Francis where I get the impression I laid out above. I absolutely disagree with this approach to ministry...but that doesn't mean the pope is a revolutionary progressive hell-bent on destroying the Church. It just means he is wrong and, as Brian points out, a bad communicator of Church teaching.
He may be, seems to be, open to the hypothetical possibility of blessing people in a same-sex union. He absolutely is leaving open the possibility of blessing people who potentially could have been in a same-sex union -- gay people. I don't see how you can possibly read that answer as permission to every bless the union itself. I guess I'll go back and read it, but it seems extremely clear on that point.
@@StuartHamilton-r9v Just opened this reply, this is the part I read, I really don't see how a priest could read that and think it's o.k. to bless a union. At a stretch, in some tortured scenarios, maybe two people in one -- for example, two people who are civilly married but trying to understand and discern what they should do ongoing. But blessing the union itself? To me, it seems obvious he is leaving enough space for prudential judgment in specific situations but gently telling people who want the union itself to be blessed, "no". If a priest who doesn't like that "no" does it anyway, he'd have done it with or without the Pope's answer here. The Pope is not the father of a toddler, he is the spiritual father of grown men who know very well they cannot bless a civil gay marriage, he is trying to direct them on what they should do, guide them, bring them to understand that if they think their only choices are to bless the union or to reject those in it, that's a false dichotomy. If they refuse to take that guidance, that's on their souls.
@@Ryan-zv6xwYour reading is valid. However, I still think you could validly read that last line in a way that does not definitively exclude some hypothetical blessing in which a priest says he means "to bless the genuine, mutual commitment between two same-sex attracted, consenting adults in an openly loving relationship, NOT the union itself." or something to that effect which is, practically speaking, the same thing as the blessing of a same-sex union or, at least, tacit public approval of same-sex unions. You may disagree with that being the same thing, but regardless, I was only stating that his motivation does not appear to be to maliciously destroy the Church as some claim; as though Pope Francis is an evil person who is part of a global cabal attempting to shove some Catholic version of identity politics down our throats. He seems genuinely pastorally-minded in his approach. Perhaps we both agree on that. I would only add, that if two adults (you and I) can read the same statement and come away with two different views of what he means, his answer to the Dubium is ambiguous and did little to clarify to anyone what they should or should not bless other than to say they should be careful not to give the impression a same sex union is the same as a marriage. This is wide open for interpretation and as I said in the earlier post he is wrong in this approach and a bad communicator of Church teaching.
If and when you do convert, it’s better to know what your getting yourself into. If you do decide to take the leap, than you’ll have greater faith than I did coming into the Church as things weren’t quite this bad. God bless you friend.
Since when does what the world thinks matter? The world misinterpreted many of the popes and it was simply wrong. The problem is as much (or more) with the media reporting badly and people trusting the media as it is with Pope Francis.
Pope stated that homossexual acts are still sin. Also any other of representations that tries to be equal to marriage, between man and woman, is also wrong, plus the church cannot bless sin. By his last paragraphy in response of dubia, people are fighthing for ambiguiosity, in short: cases which you bless one or more people as long they dont misunderstang/try equivalency with marriage concept and value, between man and woman, as a sacrament. First, for one person, a bless can be understandable as a grace for chastity to walk in the road alone, against temptations. Second, for "or more people" can imply two situations: a group of people amoung all society (that have atraction to same sex) and want to have a grace for chastity OR a pair of people in a mess situation that expose ocasion of sin. I personally will wait until the end of synod, as the Pope will firm down the resolution of final the document. We still need to be near the bible, tradition and magisterium, that always specified for centuries/millenias about the intrisec wrong and related to sin acts of sodomy, regardless of any final word of any bishop.
Thank you for doing a video about this so quickly - and thank you for linking the info so we may do our own “ due diligence” rather than taking on the thoughts of others without careful consideration of the actual document. I am just praying harder everyday for the wonderful parish priests- arch bishops- basically the Pope’s underlings who are really going to bare the biggest burden from the ambiguous ways he chooses to use. Of course….. I am praying for our Pontiff and All of our political leadership as well 🤦♀️❤️🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻 “Most Precious Blood of Jesus Christ Save Us and the Whole World.”
I agree with you. Many of us are praying for Pope Francis and all of our leaders participating in the synod. What drives me crazy is the fact that most of what this Pope says in public is so often confusing and ambiguous. We, the laity, in these evil times are desperately in need of clarity from our shepherds. Why is it that our Conference of Bishops here in the US are not leading the fight to defend against the erosion of Dogma and Tradition that we have held so dear for ages?
@@joanneperque8649 it helps to avoid media and read the source like Brian suggests and just keep being a good Catholic practitioner, away from all the noise, if possible.
As a parent I always viewed a large part of my job as being consistent and clear in raising my kids…..if we look to the Pope as the father of our church, why can’t we expect the same when delivering his messages? His failure to give clear cut responses seems to fuel confusion and sometimes anger in the faithful. In a world that is in such turmoil, I turn to the church looking for peace and stability and at this point it appears to be missing….
@@joanneperque8649 I used to think Francis was just a well-meaning derelict. But now, after all these years, he is CLEARLY acting from a deliberate, calculated agenda. He is an evil man. I don't see how anyone can see any other interpretation at this stage.
..All the Vatican 2 catholics say it's too confusing, I don't understand, it's confusing ! Or the mass is enough, No, it's not enough. You must have the true Traditional Catholic Faith. There is nothing Confusing about it !!! Pope Eugene IV, Council Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441 : therefore the Catholic Church condemns Rejects excommunicates and declares to be outside the body of Christ which is the Catholic Church whoever holds opposing or contrary views. Pope Pelagius II, Quod ad dilectionem 585: If anyone however either suggests or believes or presumes to teach contrary to this faith, let him know that he is Condemned and also anathematized, excommunicated, according to the opinion of the same Fathers. Pope Gregory the 16th 1831 - 1846 : let nothing of the truths that have been defined be lessened, nothing altered, nothing added, but let them be preserved intact in word and meaning !! Vatican Council of 1870 session 3 chapter 4 part 13 and 14 EX cathedra -- for the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward not as some philosophical Discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence but as a Divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be Faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated hence to that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding. Pope Leo 13 - Satis Cognitum # 13, 1896. You are not to be looked upon as holding the true Catholic faith if you do not teach the faith of Rome is to be held. Pope Pius10th syllabus condemning the errors of the modernists 1907 article 62 : the proposition the chief articles of the Apostles Creed did not have the same sense for the Christians of the first stages as they have for the Christians of our time is hereby condemned as erroneous. St John of the Cross 1591 wherefore if there be revealed to us anything new or different we must in no way give consent to it not even though it were spoken by an Angel. St. Thomas Aquinas doctor of the church 1274 all those who deny one Article of Faith regardless of their reason are by that very fact excommunicated. Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence Session 8, 1439 - Ex Cathedra - Whoever Wills to be saved before all things it is necessary that he holds the Catholic Faith. Unless a person keeps this Faith whole and undefiled without doubt He Shall Perish eternally. Pope Leo 13th 1896 the practice of the church has always been the same as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the fathers who were want to hold as outside Catholic communion and alien to the church whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of Doctrine proposed by her authoritative magisterium. Council Florence session 11 February 4th 1442 ex cathedra the Holy Roman Church condemns reproves anathematize has and declares to be outside the body of church which is the Catholic Church whoever holds opposing or contrary views. Pope Saint Leo the Great, Doctor of the Church, 440- 461 A.D. - the faith shall never vary in any age for one is the faith which justifies the just of all ages it is unlawful to differ even by a single word from Apostolic Doctrine. Pope Leo 10th, 5th lateran Council session 8th 1513 EX cathedra and since truth cannot contradict the truth we Define that every statement contrary to the enlightened truth of the faith is totally false and we strictly forbid teaching otherwise to be permitted we decree that all those who cling to erroneous statements of this time thus sowing heresies which are wholly condemned should be avoided in every way and punished as detestable and odious Heretics and infidels who are undermining the Catholic faith. Saint Athanasius,died 373 AD. God's word is one and the same in the doors forever unchanged always the same Pope Pius 9th, Qui Pluribus I'm faith and religion November 9th 1846 paragraph 20 never cease to instruct all men in it never tolerating and letting pass anyting which could in the slightest degree defiled the purity of this faith. What the same great strength of Mind Foster and all men their Unity with the Catholic church outside of which there is no salvation. Pope Saints Sixtus 3,432 A.D. nothing new is to be allowed for nothing can be added to the old look for the faith of the elders and do not let our faith be disturbed by a mixture of new doctrines St Vincent of Lerins 445 A.D., all novelty in faith is a sure Mark of heresy. Saint Paul Cried Out aloud again and again to all men to all times and to all places that if anyone announces a new doctrine let him be anathematized excommunicated. Ecclesiastics 18:5 - nothing maybe taken away or added. Pope Pius X, 1903-1914 A.D., Oath against Modernism - and so I retain most firmly the faith of the fathers and shall retain it until the final Breath of Life regarding the certain Gifts of Truth which is was and will always be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles not so that what may seem better and more fitting according to each one's period of culture may be held but so that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed otherwise may never be understood otherwise !!! Galatians 1:8 - but though we are an angel from heaven preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you let him be anathema excommunicated from the church Proverbs 30:6, add nothing to his words lest you be reproved and found a liar. St Thomas Aquinas doctor of the church died 1274 A.D - Our faith is identical with that of the ancients. Deny this and you dissolve the unity of the church !! we must hold this for certain that the faith of the people at the present day is one with the faith of the people of past centuries !!! were this not true then we would be in a different Church then they and literally the church would not be one !!! Saint Cyril of Alexandria doctor of the church died 444, A.D. - for it is not allowable for anyone to change even one word, nor allow one syllable to be passed over mindful of the saying : past not beyond the ancient bounds which thy fathers have set !!! Pope Leo XIII,Satis Cognitum (# 9)June 29,1896: Can it be lawful for anyone to reject any one of those truths without by that very fact falling into heresy ?!! without separating himself from the Catholic Church ? Without repudiating in one sweeping act the whole of Christian teaching ? For such is the nature of Faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others !!! b But he who dessents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all the faith, since he thereby refuses the honor God as the Supreme truth and the formal motive of Faith. Pope Leo XIII,Satis Cognitum # 9, June 29,1896: the Catholic Church found it on these principles and mindful of her office has done nothing with greater Zeal and Endeavor then she has displayed in guarding the Integrity of the Catholic faith hence she regarded as Rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of Doctrine different from her own. If there is a change YOU ARE NOT TO SUPPORT IT OR embrace it IN ANY WAY !!! There is no confusion unless you're a heretic and belong to the vatican 2 fake church, there is no confusion for true Catholics, I'll say that again there is no confusion for the true Catholics the teachings of the church are simple and clear. Nothing is to be changed !!!!! Nothing !! If you disagree with this your excommunicated from the church you no longer are Catholic you no longer have a father in Heaven !!!
This was too charitable. Questions were asked with the intention of creating clarity. They were answered in an intentionally vague way. When the same cardinals sent a follow-up with yes or no questions, the Vatican instead posted the intentionally vague responses. So, they knew they were vague and could be interpreted in various ways according to bias of the reader. It goes against the spirit and purpose of the dubia. Instead we are left with no doubt of the intentions.
You're being very charitable. It does not appear to me as if these questions were asked with the intention of creating clarity. The answers given were perfectly clear. Which begs the question, what do people gain by acting as if they aren't? I know folks who would advocate for a change in Church teaching about gay unions want to pretend the Pope is on the fence here when he clearly isn't, but why are these cardinals joining those advocates in characterizing a perfectly clear answer as vague?
5:57 This is exactly my problem with Pope Francis' response to this dubia. It is in fact so vague that it even leaves the Cardinals with more questions than they started with, hence them seeking clarification through the means of "YES OR NO" answer for their reformulated questions. Not only his holiness response wasn't anywhere near as easy to understand as it should have been(at least from my perspective of a newcomer to the faith and an ESL individual), his avoidance of the second request for clarification allowed the Media to run away with the interpretation that they went with and I can't blame them. I started my journey for finding God to try to make sense of all the craziness that we see in the modern world and have to deal with on our day to day lives but the more I try to understand the Church's teachings post second Vatican council, it leaves me more and more defeated and discouraged as I can't shake off the feeling that the Catholic church is headed for the same exact transformation that the Anglican church has went through in the past century.
Let’s be honest, the “go DIGGING for the most positive possible interpretation” is SO vulnerable to people taking advantage of you, and if people know you’ll refuse to see the wicked interpretation, they’ll just laugh at how naive you are as they promote their evils. MAYBE Francis is just profoundly-naive-to-a-fault, but that’s hardly better than willful-pawn-of-evil-men
I forget which pope (one of the Pius's or Leo XIII?) said about interpreting modernists/heretics (even those only suspect of heresy)...but we are NOT to interpret in a generous, charitable way. Quite the opposite in fact. This spin of Brian's is why so few Catholics have embraced the truth of Sedevacantism .
"But the truth is, a variety of interpretations of what he said are possible… and that’s a problem because the whole point of his role, is to bring clarity - to teach us and to uphold those teachings. " But he [The Pope] has absolutely no intention of doing that. In fact, it looks like the Magisterium has no intention of doing that either.
I understand what Brian is proposing here regarding motives Pope Francis may have for not Being more "dogmatic", But, while excusing the Pope as not being intentionally evil, it does not help to compensate for the millions of souls he is confusing. Since he is the Pope, his responsibility is to be very clear when discussing faith and morals. By failing to do so, he is blaspheming against the Holy Spirit, the only unpardonable sin. Francis is the biblical fig tree bearing no fruit. No attempt should be made to excuse or understand his motives.
@@kiukubless4329 Doesn't mean he is immune to criticism. We've had bad popes in the past. Doesn't mean we won't have any bad ones in the future. On the contrary, it means that we will and we should be aware of it.
Ok so as a new Catholic are you aware of his outrages and insults ? look up his betrayal of our Chinese brethren to the ccp using the excretia mccarrick as his toady. Look up his contempt of the Chilean abuse victims seeking justice ,his wrath toward traditional religious and laity show he is neither holy nor a spiritual father. He is a hireling and a moral imbecile.
@@lll19977 do you personally need to criticize him, or should other laypeople personally be criticizing the pope on the internet? I think not. That is NOT our job. We are to be faithful
Two thoughts - First, thank you for the use of history to expand your point. I think it is good for us to realize that this will not be the first or last time the church will be placed in the middle of sticky, awkward situations. So pray for our leaders in moments of confusion and chaos, because that when they need the support the most. Second, as much as I can't fault the average Catholic person on understanding the present Pope and his teachings, I wish we would stop taking our initial thoughts from the wrong parties. Some of the loudest voices that have been talking about what is being said have other intentions, some openly malicious, that must be taken into consideration.
Sometimes we can bend over backwards so far to show how charitable and reasoned we are, that we forget Truth is paramount. We needn’t be coy about it, the bishops in Germany have not been reprimanded for “blessing“ homosexual marriage. Instead, the Vatican goes after Bishop Strickland, and the TLM. “Let your yes be yes, and your no be no.”
In the case of Bp. Strickland, he has signed a formal letter accusing the pope of heresy, and hasn’t retracted it since (to my knowledge). I think that this is a serious issue that ought to be addressed since if the pope is teaching heresy in his magisterium then arguably the gates of hell have prevailed against the church, which leads the faithful away from the church. I do think there ought to be reciprocal consequences for the progressive dissenters as well. Also not all questions can be answered with a simple yes or no and require a bit more nuance, lest people take a simple yes/no and run with it in the wrong way. For instance “is it okay to eat meat sacrifices to idols,” the answer is technically yes since those pagan gods don’t really exist to defile the food, and yet doing so imprudently could scandalize others into thinking (wrongly) that Christians endorse pagan sacrifices.
These people will not be satisfied with just a blessing anyways. They seek to undermine the church, plain and simple. An uncharitable view, perhaps. But we've witnessed time and again what happens when they're given an inch.
He's definitely opened the door. He seems always to be deliberately ambiguous, giving the "progressives" wiggle room to interpret what he says in a manner favorable to their agenda. He's given pastors the go ahead to formulate blessings for gay sexual relationshops as long as it's clear they're not the same as marriage. That contracts the moral teaching of the Church on this topic. He's in error as the Vatican made clear in 2021 - God cannot bless sin, period, the end.
@@wambaofivanhoe9307 yes it is. Being a gay is a sin. Dwelling in gay thoughts are impure thoughts and sodomy is sin wich cries to Heaven. But liberal Catholics would not know that fact. And if child turns out to be a gay then it does not make in OK (not sin) because it is your child in question.
@@wambaofivanhoe9307 I would love them, but I would not tell them that what they were doing was right, if they engaged in a homosexual relationship. I do happen to have a son who did some things that were not right. I was very clear that I was not happy with what he had done, but I continue to love him. He knows what he did was not good, and he has done his very best to turn away from that behavior and turn to Christ. I have grandchildren. I love them dearly, but they do not always do what is right. I do not stop loving them, but what I want is for them to choose the good. I think that we focus too much on making people feel good about themselves instead of helping them to be good. The basic mistake that is made about same-sex attraction is to make it an ontological identity rather than a matter of emotion, desire, and action.
@@wambaofivanhoe9307 same-sex attraction is not a sin; sexual activity outside of heterosexual marriage is, and that includes adultery and fornication.
You are right to say that Pope Francis is ambiguous. But only when it comes to these issues in particular. He is iron fisted when it suits him, unconcerned by criticism. Leads me to think his ambiguity is malicious.
Just talking about this issue today shows the level of the Church. And it’s totally obvious that this Pope is not a determined person to clarify and fight back and that’s why we are stubbed over and over while he keeps talking about “dialogue”.
Thank you for this!! Finally a traditional catholic who read the documents in full and offered a reasoned and measured criticism! I feel like I’ve been taking crazy pills all week!
@@bryanwalters9574If the have not, they look as if they have. The pope is allowing confusion. Many people around me believe that Francis has changed dogma. And many are being led to sacrilege. We are striving to save the pope's face, and I always thought that catholicism was about saving as many souls as possible.
@@bryanwalters9574 Not just that, but apparently most bishops too. There are very little bishops who speak up against modern heresies, so most of them silently support the heresy.
On my way to Mass last Sunday, an announcer on the local Christian radio station mentioned that Church isn't a club, and the goal isn't to increase membership in a social group. I think that's a nugget of gold. It gave me a great deal to pray about during the Mass. It's mainly a Protestant radio station, but I listen to that station because it takes a "Mere Christianity" approach. Catholics are a large minority here, and we don't have a Catholic radio station.
The ironic thing about your statement here is that it resonates with the video where he states "I care about your relationship with the church". As a Christian myself, who is mocked by Catholics, I must say that our church community and pastor always emphasize the importance of having a relationship with Jesus, not the church. On a side note, we don't need a leader making changes to what is and isn't allowed, we only follow God's word and that is enough. I wish everyone well and a blessed week.
I’m not the “sit and watch what happens” type of guy, especially when the laity has no line of recourse if the Synod creates harm to the greater group of faithful. We’ve already seen the consequences of Vatican 2 with it’s clear failures to the faithful, we don’t need a Vatican 3 that will further destroy what remnant we have left.
As an ex Roman Catholic who became Orthodox, how many more centuries of innovation and contradiction are you willing to endure until you realize that this is now how the first millennium Church was run?
Which orthodox church are you in? Which calendar are you using? Were you recieved by baptism or chrismation? How do you know which way if reception is correct? We believe in one baptism so if a baptism can be valid outside the church, then being rebaptized is rebellion against the Creed. Meanwhile, if all baptisms outside of orthodoxy are invalid then everyone outside of orthodoxy will go to hell, as baptism is necessary for salvation. Also, all the orthodox who were recieved by chrismation are also going to hell if all baptism is invalid outside the church. How many ecumenical councils are there? 7? 8? 9? How do you define them and how would you know if any future council is ecumenical? Russia and Greece are in schism (you are coping if you deny this). Orthodoxy is not one church, simply put
@@cheeseface6328 Your entire comment belies the fact you believe the Church is a political institution, when Our Lord said that His Kingdom is not of this world. Only someone who thinks Christ left His Church or that the Holy Spirit rests on one "infallible" man (or, worse yet, an "infallible" Platonic ideal of a "chair" held by such a man) would let any of those supposed criticisms detract from their faith. You are materialists that worship power just as Protestants are materialists that worship a book.
Just read the whole “blessing lgtv” people thing. In question 2 section (e) states: “(e) Pastoral prudence must therefore properly discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more people, that do not convey a misconception of marriage. Because, when a blessing is requested, it is a request for help from God, a plea to be able to live better, a trust in a Father who can help us to live better.” This sounds pretty clear, especially the last two sentences. The others sections still sound pretty vague, so please continue to pray for the church.
Excellent, thanks. Please keep your comments coming when the purposes of this Synod come to light. Here in Canada, what we would expect from our bishops is to help us keep our children safe from the lgbt madness. Rome, on the other hand, seems eager to send them to the wolves.
Very well articulated. Being generous of thought and humble in outlook - Pope Francis doesn’t have the luxury of playing it safe. His church is seeking leadership in a difficult era and time is not on his side. He really needs to be definitive
I'm sorry, but there's no "explaining away" this Pope's behavior anymore. Call a spade a spade. Look at both his actions and his words, and it's abundantly clear he is a liberal man. Pope or not, he's not a good man, and we need to continue to pray for his conversion. May Our Lord and Our Lady protect this Synod from spreading error and confusion!
I just need to say that I gave him benefit of the doubt until he proved his intentions by canceling holy priests and bishops who were telling the truth and teachings of Jesus and then promoting child sex offenders known for years and committing blasphemy against our Lord through ungodly art. Just too many obvious behaviors and decisions to have any doubts about his position and direction he is trying to lead the Holy Church. It’s just indefensible.
It's never charitable to affirm sin. Sin has real negative temporal affects on people. Telling them what they want to hear to their own detriment is just deceitful and of the devil.
Thank you so much for your videos. Your points about excessive generosity are really the crux of many issues the church and even the west as a whole is facing. Keep doing your good work. I joined the catholic church and started attending Latin mass because of people like you.
..All the Vatican 2 catholics say it's too confusing, I don't understand, it's confusing ! Or the mass is enough, No, it's not enough. You must have the true Traditional Catholic Faith. There is nothing Confusing about it !!! Pope Eugene IV, Council Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441 : therefore the Catholic Church condemns Rejects excommunicates and declares to be outside the body of Christ which is the Catholic Church whoever holds opposing or contrary views. Pope Pelagius II, Quod ad dilectionem 585: If anyone however either suggests or believes or presumes to teach contrary to this faith, let him know that he is Condemned and also anathematized, excommunicated, according to the opinion of the same Fathers. Pope Gregory the 16th 1831 - 1846 : let nothing of the truths that have been defined be lessened, nothing altered, nothing added, but let them be preserved intact in word and meaning !! Vatican Council of 1870 session 3 chapter 4 part 13 and 14 EX cathedra -- for the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward not as some philosophical Discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence but as a Divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be Faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated hence to that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding. Pope Leo 13 - Satis Cognitum # 13, 1896. You are not to be looked upon as holding the true Catholic faith if you do not teach the faith of Rome is to be held. Pope Pius10th syllabus condemning the errors of the modernists 1907 article 62 : the proposition the chief articles of the Apostles Creed did not have the same sense for the Christians of the first stages as they have for the Christians of our time is hereby condemned as erroneous. St John of the Cross 1591 wherefore if there be revealed to us anything new or different we must in no way give consent to it not even though it were spoken by an Angel. St. Thomas Aquinas doctor of the church 1274 all those who deny one Article of Faith regardless of their reason are by that very fact excommunicated. Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence Session 8, 1439 - Ex Cathedra - Whoever Wills to be saved before all things it is necessary that he holds the Catholic Faith. Unless a person keeps this Faith whole and undefiled without doubt He Shall Perish eternally. Pope Leo 13th 1896 the practice of the church has always been the same as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the fathers who were want to hold as outside Catholic communion and alien to the church whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of Doctrine proposed by her authoritative magisterium. Council Florence session 11 February 4th 1442 ex cathedra the Holy Roman Church condemns reproves anathematize has and declares to be outside the body of church which is the Catholic Church whoever holds opposing or contrary views. Pope Saint Leo the Great, Doctor of the Church, 440- 461 A.D. - the faith shall never vary in any age for one is the faith which justifies the just of all ages it is unlawful to differ even by a single word from Apostolic Doctrine. Pope Leo 10th, 5th lateran Council session 8th 1513 EX cathedra and since truth cannot contradict the truth we Define that every statement contrary to the enlightened truth of the faith is totally false and we strictly forbid teaching otherwise to be permitted we decree that all those who cling to erroneous statements of this time thus sowing heresies which are wholly condemned should be avoided in every way and punished as detestable and odious Heretics and infidels who are undermining the Catholic faith. Saint Athanasius,died 373 AD. God's word is one and the same in the doors forever unchanged always the same Pope Pius 9th, Qui Pluribus I'm faith and religion November 9th 1846 paragraph 20 never cease to instruct all men in it never tolerating and letting pass anyting which could in the slightest degree defiled the purity of this faith. What the same great strength of Mind Foster and all men their Unity with the Catholic church outside of which there is no salvation. Pope Saints Sixtus 3,432 A.D. nothing new is to be allowed for nothing can be added to the old look for the faith of the elders and do not let our faith be disturbed by a mixture of new doctrines St Vincent of Lerins 445 A.D., all novelty in faith is a sure Mark of heresy. Saint Paul Cried Out aloud again and again to all men to all times and to all places that if anyone announces a new doctrine let him be anathematized excommunicated. Ecclesiastics 18:5 - nothing maybe taken away or added. Pope Pius X, 1903-1914 A.D., Oath against Modernism - and so I retain most firmly the faith of the fathers and shall retain it until the final Breath of Life regarding the certain Gifts of Truth which is was and will always be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles not so that what may seem better and more fitting according to each one's period of culture may be held but so that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed otherwise may never be understood otherwise !!! Galatians 1:8 - but though we are an angel from heaven preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you let him be anathema excommunicated from the church Proverbs 30:6, add nothing to his words lest you be reproved and found a liar. St Thomas Aquinas doctor of the church died 1274 A.D - Our faith is identical with that of the ancients. Deny this and you dissolve the unity of the church !! we must hold this for certain that the faith of the people at the present day is one with the faith of the people of past centuries !!! were this not true then we would be in a different Church then they and literally the church would not be one !!! Saint Cyril of Alexandria doctor of the church died 444, A.D. - for it is not allowable for anyone to change even one word, nor allow one syllable to be passed over mindful of the saying : past not beyond the ancient bounds which thy fathers have set !!! Pope Leo XIII,Satis Cognitum (# 9)June 29,1896: Can it be lawful for anyone to reject any one of those truths without by that very fact falling into heresy ?!! without separating himself from the Catholic Church ? Without repudiating in one sweeping act the whole of Christian teaching ? For such is the nature of Faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others !!! b But he who dessents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all the faith, since he thereby refuses the honor God as the Supreme truth and the formal motive of Faith. Pope Leo XIII,Satis Cognitum # 9, June 29,1896: the Catholic Church found it on these principles and mindful of her office has done nothing with greater Zeal and Endeavor then she has displayed in guarding the Integrity of the Catholic faith hence she regarded as Rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of Doctrine different from her own. If there is a change YOU ARE NOT TO SUPPORT IT OR embrace it IN ANY WAY !!! There is no confusion unless you're a heretic and belong to the vatican 2 fake church, there is no confusion for true Catholics, I'll say that again there is no confusion for the true Catholics the teachings of the church are simple and clear. Nothing is to be changed !!!!! Nothing !! If you disagree with this your excommunicated from the church you no longer are Catholic you no longer have a father in Heaven !!!
We don’t demonstrate generosity and goodwill to our enemies so that they ‘return the favour.’ We do it because Christ taught it, and we are Christians. It does not matter if we suffer. That is the point of the crucifixion surely?
Rush :Limbaugh said 3 weeks before gay marriage passed that if gay marriage passes the Supreme Court we will see a Pandora’s box opens to which we can not make up at this (past tense) time. Said the prophet that has past.
This was so tedious. Yet again, another Catholic spokesman grapples with Bergoglio's ambiguity and is critical of this lack of clarity given the role of the Pope. It's unbelievable how naive so many Catholcs are. The ambiguity is deliberate. It is a stratagem Bergoglio has used for many years. It is a stratagem intended to confuse amd divide, and to further erode the function of the papacy itself. It truly is shocking how wilfully dim and naive too many Catholics are. No wonder the coup that happened to Rome was so easy to achieve.
What gets me is who else would you accept this level of ambiguity from ?, your doctor, lawyer, your parish priest ?. He has a staff that can help craft a clear, direct and catholic response , his years and office alone should be sufficient for this simple task, but like your state's this is deliberate.
Scripture says that you will know them by their fruits. I have seen these fruits from Francis. Confusion. Idolatry, him saying that the death penalty is immoral, its ok for people in mortal sin to receive the blessed host, and that its ok to bless sinful acts etc. All these fruits lead souls to destruction. The "benefit of doubt" is long past. The fruits speak loudly.
Benedict XVI had a lot of experience of dealing with the media as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith before he became Pope. He knew the media's tricks and how to make his statements so there was no way for them to twist them - short of them outright lying about what he had said. Francis does not have the same ability. That is the most charitable explanation I can put on it.
not a fan of the reflexive call to "constructive criticism." that phrase drives me bonkers. what would constructive criticism look like in this context? "maybe next time the pope should be clear, and not open the door to the blessing of sin"? do critical words just need to be wrapped in a sandwich of niceness so no one ever feels bad upon hearing?
It is important to realize that we live in unprecedented times inasmuch as life experience goes. Here's what I mean. All faithful and practicing Catholics alive today have zero experience much less any categories to even comprehend how to live as a Catholic while a bad pope sits on the chair of Peter. Our Lord himself tells us to be wise as serpents and simple as doves. Hence I agree with you Brian that we should not be overly angry about the pope but we should not be naive about it too. The pope may have good intentions, which means he is ignorant at best, and so we must put into practice one of the spiritual works of mercy - to instruct the ignorant. At worst the pope is a wicked man, and so we (or rather his brother Bishops) should admonish him. In the church's eyes, these are all acts of mercy. My primary fear is where many well meaning orthodox Catholics would err on thinking the best of Francis' intentions to eventually discover that too little was done too late, leading to many souls being led astray. Our Lord warned of this when he told us to beware of false prophets, who come in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You know... I am so heartbroken: when Bergoglio came up to the loggia and announced that he took the name Francis, I immediately thought of the image of St Francis taming the wolf at Gubbio and that Bergoglio would do what Benedict XVI has struggled to do. Today I fear that my vision was indeed true, only that I misplaced the wolf because it was adorned in white and wool was over my eyes. I am heartbroken.
Your voice is so helpful, Brian. You always do such a good job of avoiding jumping to extremes or using exaggerated rhetoric, while also acknowledging the mess we're in as a Church. I read Pope Francis's message in the original Spanish and it's true that much of what he says is being left out of the media narratives. That's obviously happening in the mainstream media, but even also in conservative media. Ben Shapiro did a short video about this that makes it sound like the Pope is essentially allowing homosexual unions. Morning Wire said that he wrote the letter in response to a German LGBT event last week, when in reality the letter was written in July. Lots of sloppy reporting all around.
Pope Francis stated, "... (1 Corinthians 11:3-10; 1 Timothy 2:11-14) and other texts of Scripture and testimonies of Tradition [that] *_cannot be materially repeated today._* This is peculiar in that it takes away from Scripture. If he cannot explain the Hermeneutics related to the verses, but rather, extracts the verses to not offend modern cultural sensitivity, then he fails to teach historical, cultural lessons and misleads Ppl in the present.
I'm a confessional Lutheran and a subscriber, so obviously I have a different theology. I read the Dubia, Response, and reDubia. You guys have a problem on your hands.
When there is a consistent repeated pattern of behavior that consistently pushes a global agenda according to WEF values, it's justified to assume those are the intentions in Francis answers
Intention can only be determined by asking the person in question. If the person replies in an ambiguous manner to a question that has a simple answer then we do not trust that person because that is not consistent with an honest person. We therefore have a right to distrust that person. That person cannot fault us for second guessing and distrusting him.
What Francis says as compared to what he does reveals his intentions. He talks of extending love in exceptional situations, which has validity, yet he will not take the necessary actions to stop the German Bishops or people like James Martin. To me he is being devious. Give him an inch and he will take a mile. I don’t trust him
There in is the problem. Our Pope answers simple questions like all politicians with ambiguity and never a simple yes or no so the Faithful are freed from rampant confusion.
How about this hypothetical. Two pairs of people come to a parish priest. One is a pair of gay men who are in a romantic and physical relationship and are married in the eyes of the laws of their nation. They want the priest to bless their union, preferably in front of everyone. He says, with charity, no. The other pair are two men who are each gay. They are close friends. They have both committed to Catholic teaching on homosexuality, and committed to lead chaste lives. They have asked the priest to privately say a blessing over them, or over each of them, to help them stay faithful Catholics, avoid sin, resist temptation, and deepen their friendship *as* a friendship. He says, with charity, yes. That's completely consistent with what the Pope has written here, and with Catholic teaching, and with what many gay men and women who want to stay in the Catholic Church and be fully welcome there would ask. Can you think of a more simple way for him to communicate that? It's a nuanced situation, as many are. He's trying to cover a lot of bases in a few paragraphs, I think he's done fairly well.
@@Ryan-zv6xwit is not necessary for gay men to present themselves as a pair or a couple for a blessing because as single unmarried men it implies a potential for a relationship. They can receive an individual blessing and still be friends.
I do not understand the need for two gay men looking for an individual blessing to stay chaste etc. Surely they can rely on Mass, the sacraments and prayer for this. Also we all receive a blessing from the priest at the end of Mass. I am divorced and it would never have occurred to me to seek a blessing from a priest to help me remain chaste, I turned to Mass, the sacraments and prayer to seek God's grace . If we all looked for individual blessings the priest would have huge demands in him . I can understand a blessing for a specific event, I received a blessing for a safe delivery on one if my pregnancies.I did not seek it, the priest offered it to me.
@@SydneyCarton2085 They can receive individual blessings. The question is whether there are not some situations where they might legitimately ask to be blessed together or in a group instead, without that implying a sexual or romantic relationship, and I imagine there are. It's not normally the place of the Church to create overarching rules against acts that aren't in themselves sinful because they might lead some people to misuse or misrepresent that freedom. For example, the Church does not say that wearing a short skirt, gambling, or drinking alcohol is forbidden (as other religions do). She recommends prudence, avoiding the near occasion of sin, and warns about scandal, of course, but she doesn't ban things based on their potential for misuse. Banning priestly blessings because they could be misused would be a much more grave matter than banning (for example) alcohol use, as a blessing is inherently good and should never be denied without good reason.
I'm not so sure I agree that what he said could be interpreted multiple ways, because to do that you have to disregard other parts of his response. And I think you may have overplayed how he seemed to advocate for softening our message, as it seemed more like he was addressing the issue of some people who may even refuse to bless the individuals within a homosexual relationship.
Yes, the answers are not unclear, and they are not in contrast with Church teaching. These cardinals are certainly intelligent enough to understand the answers they have been given, and to understand that this does not contradict teaching -- if any part of it did, they'd certainly be the first to point that out. This isn't really that different from other times in history when bishops wanted to increase their power by challenging the Pope. It's just a power struggle, led largely by American bishops, and the American bishops have had issues for decades. In fact, they were some of the first to start the whole pronoun confusion by for years allowing and even encouraging "inclusive language" in the Bible -- changing "Him" to gender-neutral terms in actual Scripture is much worse than anything some secular transgender advocate is doing today.
His Holiness was correct to call out the schism in the US Church. Cardinal Burke is the epitome of inappropriate and wayward behavior executed for his own ego. Shame on him. He has a sour soul.
I wonder if our being charitable to the pope is exactly the same mistake pope Pius made to his enemies. I think we have to face the fact that Francis is deliberately trying to destroy the church. There is no way he is this naive and the way he has dealt with his opponents with the iron fist of a tyrant shows he is not really that charitable.
This strikes a balance between clarity and charity! But seeing Francis’ previous diplomatic strategy, especially his relationship with China, I think it is another disaster coming.
I've never really got the whole motive of being soft on sin. It almost feels like there are some people who want to trick unrepentant sinners into coming into the church, by casting it as something other than what it is.
Brian - I don’t fully understand your nuance. Is it wrong what he has done or not? I made it “this far” but I actually don’t know what your opinion is other than “don’t jump to conclusions” which is great but doesn’t actually go very far in helping me to understand unambiguously what he wrote concerning same sex blessings.
All we really need to know about this document, is that, this pope is allowing the blessing of same sex couples, at the same time. No interpretation necessary. No explanation needed. Please don't tell us that nothing has changed. Obviously it has. The more people try to explain it ---- the more it seems there is something to hide. Just be honest. The damage is done. Major damage, and its going to be a mess.
What I got from Pope Francis’s response was that it may be possible to bless individuals who recognize their sinful nature and want the grace to overcome it, but that there’s no way to bless a sinful union in a way that can be mistaken for an actual marriage. A nuanced criticism refers to the biblical question of eating meat sacrificed to idols, in one sense we can because it’s not like these gods exist to defile the food, but on the other hand we don’t want to scandalize others who will misinterpret whats happening as an endorsement of the pagan sacrifice.
Then why present themselves as a pair and not individually for a blessing? If some John and his escort wanted to repent they are welcome to but why would they present themselves as a pair?
Surely it’s not wrong for a group of platonic friends to present themselves as a group for a blessing rather than one by one. Practically it saves time to bless two people at the same time. However, I do think it’s possible that a SSA couple may present themselves as a pair precisely so they can nefariously distort the blessing later as being a blessing for their disordered union, and that is the question of prudence.
This is such a breath of fresh air on this topic. All I hear nowadays is gossip and blame from Christians talking about other Christians. I respect that you analyze the topic, share considerations for criticism, but also are humble enough to seek understanding. Nowadays people act as they are either in full support or full condemnation, but we as humans are far more complex than that.
I’m reading a book called “The Tremendous Lover” by Fr Eugene Boylan, and its actually helping me to see a little clearer what Pope Francis ‘may’ be thinking and intending by some of his more controversial remarks. I do believe his heart is in the right place, I don’t think he is being purposefully divisive or destructive
It's purposefully ambiguous. The motivation behind it being ambiguous doesn't seem clear to me either. It doesn’t *literally* give authorization but it does leave too much room for interpretation.
No he's answering the direct private Dubia question... i.e. does blessing equate it to marriage... then it speculates on pastoral approaches to homosexuals given that the cardinals ALREADY KNOW "the Church can't bless sin".
@@nuca5104 The issue is and remains his response saying one or more persons and it is for the bishop to discern. If he had been so wise as to limit it to an individual then we would not have this issue.
@@BouncingZeus Can't bless the union. Can bless the person or (in situations left to the discretion of the bishop or priest who is there and knows the specific situation) persons. Not going to make a general policy because those situations where a blessing is appropriate are going to be the exception, not the rule, so making a general policy doesn't work. Gentle language to not be hurtful to gay men and women that were hoping he would say you can bless the unions or that he would announce a policy that all priests can always bless gay couples. Is that not pretty clearly what it says? Is that not clear enough? Sure, people of ill will can lie about what he "really" means, but they will do that no matter what he writes.
@@BouncingZeus The trouble is (to get theoretical); we know for a fact that the Church CAN bless one or more people (in general)... so it would not be correct for the Pope to say there is NO siutation where more than 1 person can be blessed. And this is where 'pastoral prudence' fills in the blank => if it's discerned to be a bad situation, don't bless them, if good, bless them. The Pope alludes to this in the Dubia, how there'a a tug of war between factions who want to take away the power from the priest on the ground JUST to have a culture war by arguing for wide-spread practice & mandates. Germany has a big GAY PROBLEM, and needs a pastoral approach that DOES NOT involve blessing unions => Pope Francis is trying to achieve the pastoral solution for them that validates dignity of homosexuals and keeps the entire German Church from schism.
I'm Orthodox and I don't hate the LGBT community and I love them. However, I'm confused about what they are receiving blessings for. Are they being blessed as a couple or as individuals within that relationship? Is the hope that the relationship will lead to an end and to obedience to God's commandments? Because if the blessings are intended for them as a couple, I can easily see how people might abuse that
press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2023/12/18/0901/01963.html read 39, 40, 41. It's a blessing on the union, they're saying that blessing the union is not the same as validating it. Straight up heresy.
I was with you until you mentioned the papacy is just naivety. What Francis is doing to the TLM is not naivety it’s downright intentional to limit and prevent any further growth in the TLM.
No Blessing of same sex relationships advocated at all. It is very clear that individual people can receive a blessing to help and give strength in life, but relationships between the same sex persons are not permissible. How is it that people have not understood this? I suspect mischief abounds unfortunately.
I primarily blame secular news stations for the missguided view on what the Holy Father said. I also put the blame on Rad Trads like Taylor Marshall who jumped at the chance to put doubt into people's minds about the Pope and what he "said".
An Australian Catholic Priest and friend told me he spent years in Rome and they could not believe the ambiguity coming from the Pope. He is meant to clarify. Look at his actions too, audiences with abortion supporters etc. The rot was there before him, but he has accellerated it exponentially. God Bless.
Ever the diplomat. Which is good, and we need more diplomats than warriors. However, I’m afraid this might be one of those times, or ultimately this road, lead to warriors. Not now or tomorrow may be three years 10 years? As the saying goes hard times, make strong man, strong man, make easy times, easy times, make weak men, weak men make hard times.
Hey Brian, your video exemplifies a Jesuit concept called 'the presupposition!' It's all about giving people the benefit of the doubt, assuming their positive intentions. The Church could use more of this approach nowadays, but we need to mix in some prudence, as you mentioned. That bit about the evangelical pastor hits the mark too - maybe we've been too harsh on certain sins and too lenient on others. Time and discernment will show whether this path is genuine. Another ex-evangelical, St. John Henry Newman, no doubt has some wisdom to share about that. He spent the first half of his life fighting liberalism in the Church of England and the second half being slandered as a liberal and marginalised in the Catholic Church, before the Pope made him a cardinal! St John Henry Newman pray for us🙏.
You exemplify a true dignified Catholic. It is easy to watch you as many other so called Catholic channels are so quick to create a cycle of hostility and rage and feed off scandal. You spoke about this in a intellectual and constructive way. not aiming to simply yap, tear down, point out the obvious and repeating gossip yet challenging us to view things with an open mind while also taking heed. This left me wanting to pray instead of wanting to click on more gossip. Your channel is a blessing. such great examples regarding excessive generosity at times when i was ready to argue against brian in thought, he brought up another example that made me think nope he's right. giving things away at the expense of your family drove your point home again.
which exactly? after years about ppl saying "pope does not condemn gays", only this year i found out he still says its a sin, regardless not being a crime in majority of countries, in other words, LIES. By many unfair jugdment i suppose media cannot be trusted at 100% of cases, as sedevacants/protestants are everwere in media and love to hate many popes, being Francis or not.
Have you seen the intervention from the Swiss Bishop (from Chur , I think)? “May your yes be a yes and your no a no. Anything else comes from the ???” This Pope IS a disaster!
What is missing from so many conversations is Jesus’ call to repentance and to “go and sin no more”. I have a disordered attraction to food. It was on the way to killing me until I found a 12 Step program to help me. There I found the mercy and power of God to give me the Grace (God’s power) to overcome my urges (temptations). Thank God no one suggested I could go on overeating and even seek a blessing for it! Lord, keep speaking the truth through Your loving Word made flesh.
Every time someone writes 'sin no more', I need to remind them that passage doesn't concern the sin of the adulteress, it concerns the hypocrisy of the judgement of those wanting to stone her, it's about you rather than her.
You sound more clear-headed and articulate than the pope...
@@adambrocklehurst4211 wait? Are you saying he didn't say "Neither do I, now go and sin no more" to the woman?
👉She said👈, “No one, Lord.” And 👉Jesus said👈, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and 👉from now on sin no more.” 👈
@@mission4christ17 I'm saying that they are using a passage in the bible that was intended to warn against judgement, to judge. It's not about the sinner, it's about those standing in judgement of her (let him without sin throw the first stone). That's the point of the text.
Let your yes mean yes, let your no mean no. Confusion is of the Devil.
Questioning is spiritually healthy.
@@lormorgrj3893 not when you're questioning biblical and infallible teaching on the abominations of cross dressing and homosexuality. of all things clear, these are in the top of clarity.
@@bigdogboos1do you eat pork or have tattoos or wear earrings or wear mixed linens
@@BlackAmericanVetthose are not moral laws. Homosexuality is morally sinful in the Old Testament and the New Testament.
@@BlackAmericanVetThose aren't in the 10 Commandments.
It is not excusable that the leadership of the Church is neglecting the needs of the Faithful during a very disturbing and confused time in history. We need clarity, and a restatement of the Truth that is not only charitable, but forceful and confident as well.
And you really need to stop abusing children. Can you imagine how it looks to an outsider to see child abusers arguing over if they will give a blessing to homosexuals?
@@kevinkelly2162Troll
No guidance at all.
@@nadreb13It's not about us being entitled to these things, it's about them having the responsibility to do those things. It's in their JOB DESCRIPTION to provide clarity, firmness, direction, and teaching.
@@kevinkelly2162Which exact child abuser has been arguing over homo weddings?
What is sad is that humanity seems to forgot that, “The beginning of wisdom is the fear of The Lord” and we are more worried about pleasing others than pleasing The Lord, God Almighty😏
Not everyone feels obligated, or chooses to live, under Christian or any other form of Shari'a - and get over worrying about what someone else does in bed, it's none of your business. You are lying to yourself when you promote such notions which can bring about targeted violence on innocent people, and you pretend "they're asking for it." At five (5) years of age I was targeted by a totally terrified family member, a gay or bi closet case obviously out of his head, and trying to act out some version of 'manliness'' on an innocent child, for at that tender age not displaying sufficient macho tendencies to please him as his nephew. I'd committed the great crime of running his car battery down and he wanted that I never forget it. He began where no one could hear his anxiety ridden vituperation which consisted of displaying hatred, and varying versions "Get out of here!" or of "Go away!" an often repeated verbal assault that lasted from perhaps mid-June to February of the following year. When in early September My aunt told me he'd drive me to register for kinder I fretted at the thought of being alone with him. On Christmas Day he snatched my simple war era wooden truck gift out of my hands as I opened my gifts, and handed it to my destructive younger brother, encouraged him to sit on it, and flattened the wheels before my eyes. I fled from the house to my grandparents spacious back yard, as often.My wonderful aunt didn't know about his abuse, but noted "you never hold Tony and demonstrate affection towards him," and placed me on his lap. I freaked out but maintained long enough to sit there, mindful of the respect my young uncle Joe deserved, and after a proper elapse of time to slip off of his lap "because Grandma is calling me." I concerned myself not to disrespect him, while he was busy destroying my psyche. I knew nothing of reporting this treatment. Abusers if not stopped will escalate the abuse. Sure enough his next gambit was now a public continued assurance of my family that "Tony is weird." The next year I was sexually abused by two aunts and another younger uncle. I don't blame my poor suffering uncle, I blame his male peers, including family males who constantly say ugly things about gay men, when it's often a closet case protective cover, as it may well be with YOU. Four years later during my visits he'd switched from abuse to ridicule which I tried to ignore. By nine years of age I'd already noted that his jokes were seldom funny, but instead quite lame. Some forty three years later we encountered again at Grandma's, when both of us were visiting her. When I went out to look at his new car he followed me, opened the trunk and handed me a two way radio, one of his interests, without a word. I took it from him vaguely understanding that he wished to apologize. The following year he was killed in an automobile accident sparing himself the long talk that I surely would have had with him. He'd caused my first memorable dream. I was sitting next to a bed upon which was another young boy my age, somehow knowing that he'd been injured. Make sure you know your family members well, when leaving them in charge of children. I was fortunate not to have been battered. Your precious patriarchy is not an innocent bystander get that through your head. Saludos, Antonio Perales del Hierro-Valdés
Fear is never an instrument of love. not sure how you read Jesús backwards.
..All the Vatican 2 catholics say it's too confusing, I don't understand, it's confusing ! Or the mass is enough, No, it's not enough. You must have the true Traditional Catholic Faith.
There is nothing Confusing about it !!!
Pope Eugene IV, Council Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441 : therefore the Catholic Church condemns Rejects excommunicates and declares to be outside the body of Christ which is the Catholic Church whoever holds opposing or contrary views.
Pope Pelagius II, Quod ad dilectionem 585:
If anyone however either suggests or believes or presumes to teach contrary to this faith, let him know that he is Condemned and also anathematized, excommunicated, according to the opinion of the same Fathers.
Pope Gregory the 16th 1831 - 1846 : let nothing of the truths that have been defined be lessened, nothing altered, nothing added, but let them be preserved intact in word and meaning !!
Vatican Council of 1870 session 3 chapter 4 part 13 and 14 EX cathedra -- for the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward not as some philosophical Discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence but as a Divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be Faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated hence to that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.
Pope Leo 13 - Satis Cognitum # 13, 1896. You are not to be looked upon as holding the true Catholic faith if you do not teach the faith of Rome is to be held.
Pope Pius10th syllabus condemning the errors of the modernists 1907 article 62 : the proposition the chief articles of the Apostles Creed did not have the same sense for the Christians of the first stages as they have for the Christians of our time is hereby condemned as erroneous.
St John of the Cross 1591 wherefore if there be revealed to us anything new or different we must in no way give consent to it not even though it were spoken by an Angel.
St. Thomas Aquinas doctor of the church 1274 all those who deny one Article of Faith regardless of their reason are by that very fact excommunicated.
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence Session 8, 1439 - Ex Cathedra - Whoever Wills to be saved before all things it is necessary that he holds the Catholic Faith. Unless a person keeps this Faith whole and undefiled without doubt He Shall Perish eternally.
Pope Leo 13th 1896 the practice of the church has always been the same as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the fathers who were want to hold as outside Catholic communion and alien to the church whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of Doctrine proposed by her authoritative magisterium.
Council Florence session 11 February 4th 1442 ex cathedra the Holy Roman Church condemns reproves anathematize has and declares to be outside the body of church which is the Catholic Church whoever holds opposing or contrary views.
Pope Saint Leo the Great, Doctor of the Church, 440- 461 A.D. - the faith shall never vary in any age for one is the faith which justifies the just of all ages it is unlawful to differ even by a single word from Apostolic Doctrine.
Pope Leo 10th, 5th lateran Council session 8th 1513 EX cathedra and since truth cannot contradict the truth we Define that every statement contrary to the enlightened truth of the faith is totally false and we strictly forbid teaching otherwise to be permitted we decree that all those who cling to erroneous statements of this time thus sowing heresies which are wholly condemned should be avoided in every way and punished as detestable and odious Heretics and infidels who are undermining the Catholic faith.
Saint Athanasius,died 373 AD. God's word is one and the same in the doors forever unchanged always the same
Pope Pius 9th, Qui Pluribus I'm faith and religion November 9th 1846 paragraph 20 never cease to instruct all men in it never tolerating and letting pass anyting which could in the slightest degree defiled the purity of this faith. What the same great strength of Mind Foster and all men their Unity with the Catholic church outside of which there is no salvation.
Pope Saints Sixtus 3,432 A.D. nothing new is to be allowed for nothing can be added to the old look for the faith of the elders and do not let our faith be disturbed by a mixture of new doctrines
St Vincent of Lerins 445 A.D., all novelty in faith is a sure Mark of heresy. Saint Paul Cried Out aloud again and again to all men to all times and to all places that if anyone announces a new doctrine let him be anathematized excommunicated.
Ecclesiastics 18:5 - nothing maybe taken away or added.
Pope Pius X, 1903-1914 A.D., Oath against Modernism - and so I retain most firmly the faith of the fathers and shall retain it until the final Breath of Life regarding the certain Gifts of Truth which is was and will always be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles not so that what may seem better and more fitting according to each one's period of culture may be held but so that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed otherwise may never be understood otherwise !!!
Galatians 1:8 - but though we are an angel from heaven preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you let him be anathema excommunicated from the church
Proverbs 30:6, add nothing to his words lest you be reproved and found a liar.
St Thomas Aquinas doctor of the church died 1274 A.D - Our faith is identical with that of the ancients. Deny this and you dissolve the unity of the church !! we must hold this for certain that the faith of the people at the present day is one with the faith of the people of past centuries !!! were this not true then we would be in a different Church then they and literally the church would not be one !!!
Saint Cyril of Alexandria doctor of the church died 444, A.D. - for it is not allowable for anyone to change even one word, nor allow one syllable to be passed over mindful of the saying : past not beyond the ancient bounds which thy fathers have set !!!
Pope Leo XIII,Satis Cognitum (# 9)June 29,1896: Can it be lawful for anyone to reject any one of those truths without by that very fact falling into heresy ?!! without separating himself from the Catholic Church ? Without repudiating in one sweeping act the whole of Christian teaching ? For such is the nature of Faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others !!! b
But he who dessents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all the faith, since he thereby refuses the honor God as the Supreme truth and the formal motive of Faith.
Pope Leo XIII,Satis Cognitum # 9, June 29,1896: the Catholic Church found it on these principles and mindful of her office has done nothing with greater Zeal and Endeavor then she has displayed in guarding the Integrity of the Catholic faith hence she regarded as Rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of Doctrine different from her own.
If there is a change YOU ARE NOT TO SUPPORT IT OR embrace it IN ANY WAY !!!
There is no confusion unless you're a heretic and belong to the vatican 2 fake church, there is no confusion for true Catholics, I'll say that again there is no confusion for the true Catholics the teachings of the church are simple and clear. Nothing is to be changed !!!!! Nothing !! If you disagree with this your excommunicated from the church you no longer are Catholic you no longer have a father in Heaven !!!
@@MrSanbonsakura please read the bible
Unless this issue is clearly addressed without ambiguity, those clerics who want to bless same sex relationships will do so and those that believe to do so is wrong and sinful, will not.......and the Church will continue in confusion and de facto schism.
Sin cannot be blessed. That is his teaching. If this truth is taken as context to his answer, what exactly was ambiguous? You have to read into this letter by ignoring his magisterial teaching to say it is ambiguous.
@@paulmualdeave5063"Pastoral prudence must therefore properly discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more people, that do not convey a misconception of marriage. Because, when a blessing is requested, it is a request for help from God, a plea to be able to live better, a trust in a Father who can help us to live better."
It isn't ambiguous. He has said you can't bless sin. He has also said marriage can only be between a man and a woman. There are different types of blessings in the Church. One of those blessings you are asking God for help and strength to live better and to fight sin. So, there is a section in the dubia response talking about how there needs to be discernment about these types of blessings in regard to people who are asking for them. That's it. The problem that I quite often see is that people are consuming reactionary material. The other problem that I see is that there are people who view everything that Pope Francis does through the hermeneutics of suspicion and not charity. I recommend, "Pope Francis Opens Door to Blessing Gay Unions?," at Reason and Theology. He goes over line by line the dubia response and all the Pope's prior responses on the topic.
@@paulmualdeave5063
He could have said yes or no, but he weaponizes ambiguity intentionally.
@@HenryBonesJr
Priests and bishops are blessing same sex unions qua same sex unions. That’s the problem.
Well done! Very charitable.
I’ve resolved to not really talk about our Holy Father this month, and just offer a rosary for him and our church every day. It’s helped me a lot this far.
How many of the faithful does he want to push them into hell?
@@alexisrodrigues4767 pray for our pope and the Church.
He's not your holy father.
Only Yah is
Is the best option for our own mental health and spiritual one. I almost fell into a discussion over this but I stopped myself and let it go.
I basically try to ignore Francis except when someone thinks church teaching is changing or can change because of what he says. Then I have to speak up to set the record straight.
Dear Brian, many people have reached their own conclusions about the pope's answers: it is alright to sin.
I do not judge his intentions, but his actions are leading many people to worse sins. Christ forgave the sinners who repented, but He did not spread confusion about what sin is.
It is alright to try to save Francis' face, but the Church mission is saving peoples' souls.
Is leading people away from scripture to teachings that have zero scriptural support really saving people's souls?
@@glennherron9499 answer that question yourself now after the blessing of the irregular couples.
Why dont you see what you have in front of your eyes? Why do people insist on denial of facts?
@@rebeccadanvers884 Perhaps you could expand on what you've asked?
..All the Vatican 2 catholics say it's too confusing, I don't understand, it's confusing ! Or the mass is enough, No, it's not enough. You must have the true Traditional Catholic Faith.
There is nothing Confusing about it !!!
Pope Eugene IV, Council Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441 : therefore the Catholic Church condemns Rejects excommunicates and declares to be outside the body of Christ which is the Catholic Church whoever holds opposing or contrary views.
Pope Pelagius II, Quod ad dilectionem 585:
If anyone however either suggests or believes or presumes to teach contrary to this faith, let him know that he is Condemned and also anathematized, excommunicated, according to the opinion of the same Fathers.
Pope Gregory the 16th 1831 - 1846 : let nothing of the truths that have been defined be lessened, nothing altered, nothing added, but let them be preserved intact in word and meaning !!
Vatican Council of 1870 session 3 chapter 4 part 13 and 14 EX cathedra -- for the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward not as some philosophical Discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence but as a Divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be Faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated hence to that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.
Pope Leo 13 - Satis Cognitum # 13, 1896. You are not to be looked upon as holding the true Catholic faith if you do not teach the faith of Rome is to be held.
Pope Pius10th syllabus condemning the errors of the modernists 1907 article 62 : the proposition the chief articles of the Apostles Creed did not have the same sense for the Christians of the first stages as they have for the Christians of our time is hereby condemned as erroneous.
St John of the Cross 1591 wherefore if there be revealed to us anything new or different we must in no way give consent to it not even though it were spoken by an Angel.
St. Thomas Aquinas doctor of the church 1274 all those who deny one Article of Faith regardless of their reason are by that very fact excommunicated.
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence Session 8, 1439 - Ex Cathedra - Whoever Wills to be saved before all things it is necessary that he holds the Catholic Faith. Unless a person keeps this Faith whole and undefiled without doubt He Shall Perish eternally.
Pope Leo 13th 1896 the practice of the church has always been the same as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the fathers who were want to hold as outside Catholic communion and alien to the church whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of Doctrine proposed by her authoritative magisterium.
Council Florence session 11 February 4th 1442 ex cathedra the Holy Roman Church condemns reproves anathematize has and declares to be outside the body of church which is the Catholic Church whoever holds opposing or contrary views.
Pope Saint Leo the Great, Doctor of the Church, 440- 461 A.D. - the faith shall never vary in any age for one is the faith which justifies the just of all ages it is unlawful to differ even by a single word from Apostolic Doctrine.
Pope Leo 10th, 5th lateran Council session 8th 1513 EX cathedra and since truth cannot contradict the truth we Define that every statement contrary to the enlightened truth of the faith is totally false and we strictly forbid teaching otherwise to be permitted we decree that all those who cling to erroneous statements of this time thus sowing heresies which are wholly condemned should be avoided in every way and punished as detestable and odious Heretics and infidels who are undermining the Catholic faith.
Saint Athanasius,died 373 AD. God's word is one and the same in the doors forever unchanged always the same
Pope Pius 9th, Qui Pluribus I'm faith and religion November 9th 1846 paragraph 20 never cease to instruct all men in it never tolerating and letting pass anyting which could in the slightest degree defiled the purity of this faith. What the same great strength of Mind Foster and all men their Unity with the Catholic church outside of which there is no salvation.
Pope Saints Sixtus 3,432 A.D. nothing new is to be allowed for nothing can be added to the old look for the faith of the elders and do not let our faith be disturbed by a mixture of new doctrines
St Vincent of Lerins 445 A.D., all novelty in faith is a sure Mark of heresy. Saint Paul Cried Out aloud again and again to all men to all times and to all places that if anyone announces a new doctrine let him be anathematized excommunicated.
Ecclesiastics 18:5 - nothing maybe taken away or added.
Pope Pius X, 1903-1914 A.D., Oath against Modernism - and so I retain most firmly the faith of the fathers and shall retain it until the final Breath of Life regarding the certain Gifts of Truth which is was and will always be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles not so that what may seem better and more fitting according to each one's period of culture may be held but so that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed otherwise may never be understood otherwise !!!
Galatians 1:8 - but though we are an angel from heaven preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you let him be anathema excommunicated from the church
Proverbs 30:6, add nothing to his words lest you be reproved and found a liar.
St Thomas Aquinas doctor of the church died 1274 A.D - Our faith is identical with that of the ancients. Deny this and you dissolve the unity of the church !! we must hold this for certain that the faith of the people at the present day is one with the faith of the people of past centuries !!! were this not true then we would be in a different Church then they and literally the church would not be one !!!
Saint Cyril of Alexandria doctor of the church died 444, A.D. - for it is not allowable for anyone to change even one word, nor allow one syllable to be passed over mindful of the saying : past not beyond the ancient bounds which thy fathers have set !!!
Pope Leo XIII,Satis Cognitum (# 9)June 29,1896: Can it be lawful for anyone to reject any one of those truths without by that very fact falling into heresy ?!! without separating himself from the Catholic Church ? Without repudiating in one sweeping act the whole of Christian teaching ? For such is the nature of Faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others !!! b
But he who dessents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all the faith, since he thereby refuses the honor God as the Supreme truth and the formal motive of Faith.
Pope Leo XIII,Satis Cognitum # 9, June 29,1896: the Catholic Church found it on these principles and mindful of her office has done nothing with greater Zeal and Endeavor then she has displayed in guarding the Integrity of the Catholic faith hence she regarded as Rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of Doctrine different from her own.
If there is a change YOU ARE NOT TO SUPPORT IT OR embrace it IN ANY WAY !!!
There is no confusion unless you're a heretic and belong to the vatican 2 fake church, there is no confusion for true Catholics, I'll say that again there is no confusion for the true Catholics the teachings of the church are simple and clear. Nothing is to be changed !!!!! Nothing !! If you disagree with this your excommunicated from the church you no longer are Catholic you no longer have a father in Heaven !!!
To bless the same sex. It's toleration to commit a sin. The cause of subdivision of Catholic faith. I hope as early pope Francis will withdraw the document.
First time seeing you, and as a newcomer to the faith I appreciate your language and ability to harness words to explain concepts. Will be watching more, thank you.
You will know them by their fruits.
Yea, we are all in the same boat but how did we get to this point? Because over time we became more and more lenient to sinful ways! You have to call sin what it is! It’s a sin, and not be afraid of hurting anyone’s feelings! The fact that the pope is not being straightforward and calling it what it is, it’s proof that he’s more worried about hurting peoples feelings than saving souls! It’s simple, what do you think Jesus would say? That’s all the pope has to do and he can’t do it, and only God knows why!
I wonder why I'm happy to be at a PCA church, even though I'm a Baptist.
100% Pope Francis is the probable result of V2. Incremental degradation of the faith. It’s definitely picking up speed
Being in a disordered union is a sin
Great. But eb you sound like a Baptist christian like me. Although I read to about a baptist church closed after they embraced lgbt rights. We have no rights besides offering our whole bodies to God. Romains 12... And offering up all brings everlasting fruit. Shalom.
@@johnisaacfelipe6357
No - SODOMY is a sin... living in the same house as someone you could be attracted to might be a "near ocassion"...
a union is a SCANDAL, but not a sin.
The Pope wants people who are homosexual to have a point of contact
Think about it, conversion is GRADUAL, a homosexual is hardly going to have an immediate conversion WITHOUT some point of contact with Christ & His Church.
The term I heard applied to the pope, “weaponized ambiguity” seems like a bullseye.
I absolutely agree with this interpretation of the Pope's answers to the Dubium. I work with my archdiocese & have encountered a lot of different pastoral styles among our priests. With these answers, the Pope seems to be upholding traditional Church teaching, but pastorally he sincerely believes that there are situations in which a priest may need to do something "unorthodox" in the course of bringing someone to Christ...leaving open the hypothetical possibility of blessing a same-sex union for that purpose. I've seen this sort of good-intentioned liberality in a good number of priests who are just foolishly open hearted, believing every act done in the name of loving the sinner will bring that sinner to the Church. Unintentionally, all this behavior does is justify and encourage behaviors that are dysfunctional and sinful.
“For this reason the Church avoids any kind of rite or sacramental that could … give the impression that something that is not marriage is recognized as marriage. In dealing with people, however, we must not lose the pastoral charity that must permeate all our decisions and attitudes. The defense of objective truth is not the only expression of this charity, which is also made up of kindness, patience, understanding, tenderness, and encouragement. Therefore, we cannot become judges who only deny, reject, exclude. For this reason, pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more persons, that do not transmit a mistaken conception of marriage.” *This is the quote from Francis where I get the impression I laid out above. I absolutely disagree with this approach to ministry...but that doesn't mean the pope is a revolutionary progressive hell-bent on destroying the Church. It just means he is wrong and, as Brian points out, a bad communicator of Church teaching.
He may be, seems to be, open to the hypothetical possibility of blessing people in a same-sex union. He absolutely is leaving open the possibility of blessing people who potentially could have been in a same-sex union -- gay people. I don't see how you can possibly read that answer as permission to every bless the union itself. I guess I'll go back and read it, but it seems extremely clear on that point.
@@StuartHamilton-r9v Just opened this reply, this is the part I read, I really don't see how a priest could read that and think it's o.k. to bless a union. At a stretch, in some tortured scenarios, maybe two people in one -- for example, two people who are civilly married but trying to understand and discern what they should do ongoing.
But blessing the union itself? To me, it seems obvious he is leaving enough space for prudential judgment in specific situations but gently telling people who want the union itself to be blessed, "no". If a priest who doesn't like that "no" does it anyway, he'd have done it with or without the Pope's answer here. The Pope is not the father of a toddler, he is the spiritual father of grown men who know very well they cannot bless a civil gay marriage, he is trying to direct them on what they should do, guide them, bring them to understand that if they think their only choices are to bless the union or to reject those in it, that's a false dichotomy. If they refuse to take that guidance, that's on their souls.
@@Ryan-zv6xwThis answer is so good I wish I could hug it!
@@Ryan-zv6xwYour reading is valid. However, I still think you could validly read that last line in a way that does not definitively exclude some hypothetical blessing in which a priest says he means "to bless the genuine, mutual commitment between two same-sex attracted, consenting adults in an openly loving relationship, NOT the union itself." or something to that effect which is, practically speaking, the same thing as the blessing of a same-sex union or, at least, tacit public approval of same-sex unions. You may disagree with that being the same thing, but regardless, I was only stating that his motivation does not appear to be to maliciously destroy the Church as some claim; as though Pope Francis is an evil person who is part of a global cabal attempting to shove some Catholic version of identity politics down our throats. He seems genuinely pastorally-minded in his approach. Perhaps we both agree on that. I would only add, that if two adults (you and I) can read the same statement and come away with two different views of what he means, his answer to the Dubium is ambiguous and did little to clarify to anyone what they should or should not bless other than to say they should be careful not to give the impression a same sex union is the same as a marriage. This is wide open for interpretation and as I said in the earlier post he is wrong in this approach and a bad communicator of Church teaching.
I was hoping you would respond. As someone who is discerning Catholicism, the current Pope is making it very difficult
I'm guessing it's the fake news or harsh commentaries on this Pope that's making it hard, not the Pope himself
consider Eastern Orthodoxy
@@Agora42069 Orthodoxy is not without its problems, plus Pope Francis is misrepresented on this point anyway.
@@Brian17177delusional
If and when you do convert, it’s better to know what your getting yourself into. If you do decide to take the leap, than you’ll have greater faith than I did coming into the Church as things weren’t quite this bad.
God bless you friend.
It doesn’t matter whether he formally accepted the blessing or not. The problem is that the whole world thinks he did.
The world thinks that Jesus was just some cool guy. They need to be taught to call Him Lord
No matter what Pope Francis says it’s going to be taken out of context. It’s not really his fault. Do you seriously think the media won’t just lie.
Since when does what the world thinks matter? The world misinterpreted many of the popes and it was simply wrong. The problem is as much (or more) with the media reporting badly and people trusting the media as it is with Pope Francis.
The fact that there is even any debate on the meaning of the Pope’s words tells you all you need to know
Brian, you nailed it brother. Just thoughtful and well considered take on an otherwise hard to navigate issue.
Pope stated that homossexual acts are still sin. Also any other of representations that tries to be equal to marriage, between man and woman, is also wrong, plus the church cannot bless sin.
By his last paragraphy in response of dubia, people are fighthing for ambiguiosity, in short: cases which you bless one or more people as long they dont misunderstang/try equivalency with marriage concept and value, between man and woman, as a sacrament.
First, for one person, a bless can be understandable as a grace for chastity to walk in the road alone, against temptations.
Second, for "or more people" can imply two situations: a group of people amoung all society (that have atraction to same sex) and want to have a grace for chastity OR a pair of people in a mess situation that expose ocasion of sin.
I personally will wait until the end of synod, as the Pope will firm down the resolution of final the document.
We still need to be near the bible, tradition and magisterium, that always specified for centuries/millenias about the intrisec wrong and related to sin acts of sodomy, regardless of any final word of any bishop.
It seems pretty clear to me this is about what he is talking about.
True
Thank you for doing a video about this so quickly - and thank you for linking the info so we may do our own “ due diligence” rather than taking on the thoughts of others without careful consideration of the actual document. I am just praying harder everyday for the wonderful parish priests- arch bishops- basically the Pope’s underlings who are really going to bare the biggest burden from the ambiguous ways he chooses to use. Of course….. I am praying for our Pontiff and All of our political leadership as well 🤦♀️❤️🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻 “Most Precious Blood of Jesus Christ Save Us and the Whole World.”
I agree with you. Many of us are praying for Pope Francis and all of our leaders participating in the synod. What drives me crazy is the fact that most of what this Pope says in public is so often confusing and ambiguous. We, the laity, in these evil times are desperately in need of clarity from our shepherds. Why is it that our Conference of Bishops here in the US are not leading the fight to defend against the erosion of Dogma and Tradition that we have held so dear for ages?
@@joanneperque8649 it helps to avoid media and read the source like Brian suggests and just keep being a good Catholic practitioner, away from all the noise, if possible.
As a parent I always viewed a large part of my job as being consistent and clear in raising my kids…..if we look to the Pope as the father of our church, why can’t we expect the same when delivering his messages? His failure to give clear cut responses seems to fuel confusion and sometimes anger in the faithful. In a world that is in such turmoil, I turn to the church looking for peace and stability and at this point it appears to be missing….
@@joanneperque8649 I used to think Francis was just a well-meaning derelict. But now, after all these years, he is CLEARLY acting from a deliberate, calculated agenda. He is an evil man. I don't see how anyone can see any other interpretation at this stage.
..All the Vatican 2 catholics say it's too confusing, I don't understand, it's confusing ! Or the mass is enough, No, it's not enough. You must have the true Traditional Catholic Faith.
There is nothing Confusing about it !!!
Pope Eugene IV, Council Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441 : therefore the Catholic Church condemns Rejects excommunicates and declares to be outside the body of Christ which is the Catholic Church whoever holds opposing or contrary views.
Pope Pelagius II, Quod ad dilectionem 585:
If anyone however either suggests or believes or presumes to teach contrary to this faith, let him know that he is Condemned and also anathematized, excommunicated, according to the opinion of the same Fathers.
Pope Gregory the 16th 1831 - 1846 : let nothing of the truths that have been defined be lessened, nothing altered, nothing added, but let them be preserved intact in word and meaning !!
Vatican Council of 1870 session 3 chapter 4 part 13 and 14 EX cathedra -- for the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward not as some philosophical Discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence but as a Divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be Faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated hence to that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.
Pope Leo 13 - Satis Cognitum # 13, 1896. You are not to be looked upon as holding the true Catholic faith if you do not teach the faith of Rome is to be held.
Pope Pius10th syllabus condemning the errors of the modernists 1907 article 62 : the proposition the chief articles of the Apostles Creed did not have the same sense for the Christians of the first stages as they have for the Christians of our time is hereby condemned as erroneous.
St John of the Cross 1591 wherefore if there be revealed to us anything new or different we must in no way give consent to it not even though it were spoken by an Angel.
St. Thomas Aquinas doctor of the church 1274 all those who deny one Article of Faith regardless of their reason are by that very fact excommunicated.
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence Session 8, 1439 - Ex Cathedra - Whoever Wills to be saved before all things it is necessary that he holds the Catholic Faith. Unless a person keeps this Faith whole and undefiled without doubt He Shall Perish eternally.
Pope Leo 13th 1896 the practice of the church has always been the same as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the fathers who were want to hold as outside Catholic communion and alien to the church whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of Doctrine proposed by her authoritative magisterium.
Council Florence session 11 February 4th 1442 ex cathedra the Holy Roman Church condemns reproves anathematize has and declares to be outside the body of church which is the Catholic Church whoever holds opposing or contrary views.
Pope Saint Leo the Great, Doctor of the Church, 440- 461 A.D. - the faith shall never vary in any age for one is the faith which justifies the just of all ages it is unlawful to differ even by a single word from Apostolic Doctrine.
Pope Leo 10th, 5th lateran Council session 8th 1513 EX cathedra and since truth cannot contradict the truth we Define that every statement contrary to the enlightened truth of the faith is totally false and we strictly forbid teaching otherwise to be permitted we decree that all those who cling to erroneous statements of this time thus sowing heresies which are wholly condemned should be avoided in every way and punished as detestable and odious Heretics and infidels who are undermining the Catholic faith.
Saint Athanasius,died 373 AD. God's word is one and the same in the doors forever unchanged always the same
Pope Pius 9th, Qui Pluribus I'm faith and religion November 9th 1846 paragraph 20 never cease to instruct all men in it never tolerating and letting pass anyting which could in the slightest degree defiled the purity of this faith. What the same great strength of Mind Foster and all men their Unity with the Catholic church outside of which there is no salvation.
Pope Saints Sixtus 3,432 A.D. nothing new is to be allowed for nothing can be added to the old look for the faith of the elders and do not let our faith be disturbed by a mixture of new doctrines
St Vincent of Lerins 445 A.D., all novelty in faith is a sure Mark of heresy. Saint Paul Cried Out aloud again and again to all men to all times and to all places that if anyone announces a new doctrine let him be anathematized excommunicated.
Ecclesiastics 18:5 - nothing maybe taken away or added.
Pope Pius X, 1903-1914 A.D., Oath against Modernism - and so I retain most firmly the faith of the fathers and shall retain it until the final Breath of Life regarding the certain Gifts of Truth which is was and will always be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles not so that what may seem better and more fitting according to each one's period of culture may be held but so that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed otherwise may never be understood otherwise !!!
Galatians 1:8 - but though we are an angel from heaven preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you let him be anathema excommunicated from the church
Proverbs 30:6, add nothing to his words lest you be reproved and found a liar.
St Thomas Aquinas doctor of the church died 1274 A.D - Our faith is identical with that of the ancients. Deny this and you dissolve the unity of the church !! we must hold this for certain that the faith of the people at the present day is one with the faith of the people of past centuries !!! were this not true then we would be in a different Church then they and literally the church would not be one !!!
Saint Cyril of Alexandria doctor of the church died 444, A.D. - for it is not allowable for anyone to change even one word, nor allow one syllable to be passed over mindful of the saying : past not beyond the ancient bounds which thy fathers have set !!!
Pope Leo XIII,Satis Cognitum (# 9)June 29,1896: Can it be lawful for anyone to reject any one of those truths without by that very fact falling into heresy ?!! without separating himself from the Catholic Church ? Without repudiating in one sweeping act the whole of Christian teaching ? For such is the nature of Faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others !!! b
But he who dessents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all the faith, since he thereby refuses the honor God as the Supreme truth and the formal motive of Faith.
Pope Leo XIII,Satis Cognitum # 9, June 29,1896: the Catholic Church found it on these principles and mindful of her office has done nothing with greater Zeal and Endeavor then she has displayed in guarding the Integrity of the Catholic faith hence she regarded as Rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of Doctrine different from her own.
If there is a change YOU ARE NOT TO SUPPORT IT OR embrace it IN ANY WAY !!!
There is no confusion unless you're a heretic and belong to the vatican 2 fake church, there is no confusion for true Catholics, I'll say that again there is no confusion for the true Catholics the teachings of the church are simple and clear. Nothing is to be changed !!!!! Nothing !! If you disagree with this your excommunicated from the church you no longer are Catholic you no longer have a father in Heaven !!!
This was too charitable. Questions were asked with the intention of creating clarity. They were answered in an intentionally vague way. When the same cardinals sent a follow-up with yes or no questions, the Vatican instead posted the intentionally vague responses. So, they knew they were vague and could be interpreted in various ways according to bias of the reader. It goes against the spirit and purpose of the dubia. Instead we are left with no doubt of the intentions.
How is it possible to be too charitable? We can never be too charitable. Especially to our Holy Father
You're being very charitable. It does not appear to me as if these questions were asked with the intention of creating clarity.
The answers given were perfectly clear. Which begs the question, what do people gain by acting as if they aren't?
I know folks who would advocate for a change in Church teaching about gay unions want to pretend the Pope is on the fence here when he clearly isn't, but why are these cardinals joining those advocates in characterizing a perfectly clear answer as vague?
ABSOLUTELY
@@BullSheeper say yes when you mean yes say no when you mean no, anything else is from the evil one.
@@johnpecoraro1720 we live in a world with nuance. Especially when it comes to us sinners
5:57 This is exactly my problem with Pope Francis' response to this dubia. It is in fact so vague that it even leaves the Cardinals with more questions than they started with, hence them seeking clarification through the means of "YES OR NO" answer for their reformulated questions. Not only his holiness response wasn't anywhere near as easy to understand as it should have been(at least from my perspective of a newcomer to the faith and an ESL individual), his avoidance of the second request for clarification allowed the Media to run away with the interpretation that they went with and I can't blame them. I started my journey for finding God to try to make sense of all the craziness that we see in the modern world and have to deal with on our day to day lives but the more I try to understand the Church's teachings post second Vatican council, it leaves me more and more defeated and discouraged as I can't shake off the feeling that the Catholic church is headed for the same exact transformation that the Anglican church has went through in the past century.
Exactly
Actually the Catholic Church started from scripture almost from its creation
@@glennherron9499But as we can see from this example. This is a new order from the Pope. This is a Change in the Church precedings.
a pope that sends out a opaque and confusing message about a major moral issue of the day is a problem for his followers and a gift for his enemies.
Let’s be honest, the “go DIGGING for the most positive possible interpretation” is SO vulnerable to people taking advantage of you, and if people know you’ll refuse to see the wicked interpretation, they’ll just laugh at how naive you are as they promote their evils. MAYBE Francis is just profoundly-naive-to-a-fault, but that’s hardly better than willful-pawn-of-evil-men
I forget which pope (one of the Pius's or Leo XIII?) said about interpreting modernists/heretics (even those only suspect of heresy)...but we are NOT to interpret in a generous, charitable way. Quite the opposite in fact. This spin of Brian's is why so few Catholics have embraced the truth of Sedevacantism .
Francis naive? That's naive. He's a Jesuit at the top of the Jesuit pecking order. (With apologies to the Blue Jays from New Orleans.)
Very balanced perspective. It helped open my mind a bit to the ongoing debates!
"But the truth is, a variety of interpretations of what he said are possible… and that’s a problem because the whole point of his role, is to bring clarity - to teach us and to uphold those teachings. "
But he [The Pope] has absolutely no intention of doing that. In fact, it looks like the Magisterium has no intention of doing that either.
I understand what Brian is proposing here regarding motives Pope Francis may have for not Being more "dogmatic", But, while excusing the Pope as not being intentionally evil, it does not help to compensate for the millions of souls he is confusing. Since he is the Pope, his responsibility is to be very clear when discussing faith and morals. By failing to do so, he is blaspheming against the Holy Spirit, the only unpardonable sin. Francis is the biblical fig tree bearing no fruit. No attempt should be made to excuse or understand his motives.
Thanks for this video. I must say, as a new Catholic, it is so sad to see so many Catholics thrashing our pope and not reading what he actually said.
I am also a new Catholic. The pope is in the seat of Peter and has the right to his pov, end of story.
@@kiukubless4329 Doesn't mean he is immune to criticism. We've had bad popes in the past. Doesn't mean we won't have any bad ones in the future. On the contrary, it means that we will and we should be aware of it.
Ok so as a new Catholic are you aware of his outrages and insults ? look up his betrayal of our Chinese brethren to the ccp using the excretia mccarrick as his toady. Look up his contempt of the Chilean abuse victims seeking justice ,his wrath toward traditional religious and laity show he is neither holy nor a spiritual father. He is a hireling and a moral imbecile.
@@kiukubless4329 agreed!
@@lll19977 do you personally need to criticize him, or should other laypeople personally be criticizing the pope on the internet? I think not. That is NOT our job. We are to be faithful
Two thoughts -
First, thank you for the use of history to expand your point. I think it is good for us to realize that this will not be the first or last time the church will be placed in the middle of sticky, awkward situations. So pray for our leaders in moments of confusion and chaos, because that when they need the support the most.
Second, as much as I can't fault the average Catholic person on understanding the present Pope and his teachings, I wish we would stop taking our initial thoughts from the wrong parties. Some of the loudest voices that have been talking about what is being said have other intentions, some openly malicious, that must be taken into consideration.
Sometimes we can bend over backwards so far to show how charitable and reasoned we are, that we forget Truth is paramount. We needn’t be coy about it, the bishops in Germany have not been reprimanded for “blessing“ homosexual marriage. Instead, the Vatican goes after Bishop Strickland, and the TLM. “Let your yes be yes, and your no be no.”
In the case of Bp. Strickland, he has signed a formal letter accusing the pope of heresy, and hasn’t retracted it since (to my knowledge). I think that this is a serious issue that ought to be addressed since if the pope is teaching heresy in his magisterium then arguably the gates of hell have prevailed against the church, which leads the faithful away from the church. I do think there ought to be reciprocal consequences for the progressive dissenters as well.
Also not all questions can be answered with a simple yes or no and require a bit more nuance, lest people take a simple yes/no and run with it in the wrong way. For instance “is it okay to eat meat sacrifices to idols,” the answer is technically yes since those pagan gods don’t really exist to defile the food, and yet doing so imprudently could scandalize others into thinking (wrongly) that Christians endorse pagan sacrifices.
These people will not be satisfied with just a blessing anyways. They seek to undermine the church, plain and simple. An uncharitable view, perhaps. But we've witnessed time and again what happens when they're given an inch.
He's definitely opened the door. He seems always to be deliberately ambiguous, giving the "progressives" wiggle room to interpret what he says in a manner favorable to their agenda. He's given pastors the go ahead to formulate blessings for gay sexual relationshops as long as it's clear they're not the same as marriage. That contracts the moral teaching of the Church on this topic. He's in error as the Vatican made clear in 2021 - God cannot bless sin, period, the end.
@@wambaofivanhoe9307 but homosexual behavior is
@@wambaofivanhoe9307 living "gay" is, though...
@@wambaofivanhoe9307 yes it is. Being a gay is a sin. Dwelling in gay thoughts are impure thoughts and sodomy is sin wich cries to Heaven. But liberal Catholics would not know that fact. And if child turns out to be a gay then it does not make in OK (not sin) because it is your child in question.
@@wambaofivanhoe9307 I would love them, but I would not tell them that what they were doing was right, if they engaged in a homosexual relationship. I do happen to have a son who did some things that were not right. I was very clear that I was not happy with what he had done, but I continue to love him. He knows what he did was not good, and he has done his very best to turn away from that behavior and turn to Christ. I have grandchildren. I love them dearly, but they do not always do what is right. I do not stop loving them, but what I want is for them to choose the good. I think that we focus too much on making people feel good about themselves instead of helping them to be good. The basic mistake that is made about same-sex attraction is to make it an ontological identity rather than a matter of emotion, desire, and action.
@@wambaofivanhoe9307 same-sex attraction is not a sin; sexual activity outside of heterosexual marriage is, and that includes adultery and fornication.
You are right to say that Pope Francis is ambiguous. But only when it comes to these issues in particular. He is iron fisted when it suits him, unconcerned by criticism. Leads me to think his ambiguity is malicious.
Just talking about this issue today shows the level of the Church. And it’s totally obvious that this Pope is not a determined person to clarify and fight back and that’s why we are stubbed over and over while he keeps talking about “dialogue”.
Thank you for this!! Finally a traditional catholic who read the documents in full and offered a reasoned and measured criticism! I feel like I’ve been taking crazy pills all week!
Will Ferrell zoolander.."I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!"..I think zoolander
How I wish that we had a Catholic Pope 🤷🏻♂️
@@tommasosantojanni are you seriously claiming the see of Peter has defected from the faith?
@@bryanwalters9574If the have not, they look as if they have.
The pope is allowing confusion. Many people around me believe that Francis has changed dogma. And many are being led to sacrilege.
We are striving to save the pope's face, and I always thought that catholicism was about saving as many souls as possible.
@@bryanwalters9574 Not just that, but apparently most bishops too. There are very little bishops who speak up against modern heresies, so most of them silently support the heresy.
On my way to Mass last Sunday, an announcer on the local Christian radio station mentioned that Church isn't a club, and the goal isn't to increase membership in a social group. I think that's a nugget of gold. It gave me a great deal to pray about during the Mass. It's mainly a Protestant radio station, but I listen to that station because it takes a "Mere Christianity" approach. Catholics are a large minority here, and we don't have a Catholic radio station.
The ironic thing about your statement here is that it resonates with the video where he states "I care about your relationship with the church". As a Christian myself, who is mocked by Catholics, I must say that our church community and pastor always emphasize the importance of having a relationship with Jesus, not the church. On a side note, we don't need a leader making changes to what is and isn't allowed, we only follow God's word and that is enough. I wish everyone well and a blessed week.
@@Fpom79Exactly!
I’m not the “sit and watch what happens” type of guy, especially when the laity has no line of recourse if the Synod creates harm to the greater group of faithful. We’ve already seen the consequences of Vatican 2 with it’s clear failures to the faithful, we don’t need a Vatican 3 that will further destroy what remnant we have left.
He has already comment on this in 2021 by stating the Church cannot bless sin.
As an ex Roman Catholic who became Orthodox, how many more centuries of innovation and contradiction are you willing to endure until you realize that this is now how the first millennium Church was run?
Which orthodox church are you in? Which calendar are you using? Were you recieved by baptism or chrismation? How do you know which way if reception is correct? We believe in one baptism so if a baptism can be valid outside the church, then being rebaptized is rebellion against the Creed. Meanwhile, if all baptisms outside of orthodoxy are invalid then everyone outside of orthodoxy will go to hell, as baptism is necessary for salvation. Also, all the orthodox who were recieved by chrismation are also going to hell if all baptism is invalid outside the church.
How many ecumenical councils are there? 7? 8? 9? How do you define them and how would you know if any future council is ecumenical?
Russia and Greece are in schism (you are coping if you deny this).
Orthodoxy is not one church, simply put
@@cheeseface6328 Your entire comment belies the fact you believe the Church is a political institution, when Our Lord said that His Kingdom is not of this world. Only someone who thinks Christ left His Church or that the Holy Spirit rests on one "infallible" man (or, worse yet, an "infallible" Platonic ideal of a "chair" held by such a man) would let any of those supposed criticisms detract from their faith. You are materialists that worship power just as Protestants are materialists that worship a book.
Just read the whole “blessing lgtv” people thing. In question 2 section (e) states:
“(e) Pastoral prudence must therefore properly discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more people, that do not convey a misconception of marriage. Because, when a blessing is requested, it is a request for help from God, a plea to be able to live better, a trust in a Father who can help us to live better.”
This sounds pretty clear, especially the last two sentences. The others sections still sound pretty vague, so please continue to pray for the church.
Excellent, thanks. Please keep your comments coming when the purposes of this Synod come to light. Here in Canada, what we would expect from our bishops is to help us keep our children safe from the lgbt madness. Rome, on the other hand, seems eager to send them to the wolves.
I'm absolutely done doing _Karine Jean-Pierre - level_ explanatory damage control for that man's secular acquiescence.
🚫 Judgement :: 🚫 Excuse
Very well articulated. Being generous of thought and humble in outlook - Pope Francis doesn’t have the luxury of playing it safe. His church is seeking leadership in a difficult era and time is not on his side.
He really needs to be definitive
Yes yes no no, the Pope shouldn’t communicate in a confusing manner
His responses were politically calculated and non committal.
I'm sorry, but there's no "explaining away" this Pope's behavior anymore. Call a spade a spade. Look at both his actions and his words, and it's abundantly clear he is a liberal man. Pope or not, he's not a good man, and we need to continue to pray for his conversion. May Our Lord and Our Lady protect this Synod from spreading error and confusion!
I just need to say that I gave him benefit of the doubt until he proved his intentions by canceling holy priests and bishops who were telling the truth and teachings of Jesus and then promoting child sex offenders known for years and committing blasphemy against our Lord through ungodly art. Just too many obvious behaviors and decisions to have any doubts about his position and direction he is trying to lead the Holy Church. It’s just indefensible.
It's never charitable to affirm sin. Sin has real negative temporal affects on people. Telling them what they want to hear to their own detriment is just deceitful and of the devil.
Thank you so much for your videos. Your points about excessive generosity are really the crux of many issues the church and even the west as a whole is facing. Keep doing your good work. I joined the catholic church and started attending Latin mass because of people like you.
..All the Vatican 2 catholics say it's too confusing, I don't understand, it's confusing ! Or the mass is enough, No, it's not enough. You must have the true Traditional Catholic Faith.
There is nothing Confusing about it !!!
Pope Eugene IV, Council Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441 : therefore the Catholic Church condemns Rejects excommunicates and declares to be outside the body of Christ which is the Catholic Church whoever holds opposing or contrary views.
Pope Pelagius II, Quod ad dilectionem 585:
If anyone however either suggests or believes or presumes to teach contrary to this faith, let him know that he is Condemned and also anathematized, excommunicated, according to the opinion of the same Fathers.
Pope Gregory the 16th 1831 - 1846 : let nothing of the truths that have been defined be lessened, nothing altered, nothing added, but let them be preserved intact in word and meaning !!
Vatican Council of 1870 session 3 chapter 4 part 13 and 14 EX cathedra -- for the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward not as some philosophical Discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence but as a Divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be Faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated hence to that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.
Pope Leo 13 - Satis Cognitum # 13, 1896. You are not to be looked upon as holding the true Catholic faith if you do not teach the faith of Rome is to be held.
Pope Pius10th syllabus condemning the errors of the modernists 1907 article 62 : the proposition the chief articles of the Apostles Creed did not have the same sense for the Christians of the first stages as they have for the Christians of our time is hereby condemned as erroneous.
St John of the Cross 1591 wherefore if there be revealed to us anything new or different we must in no way give consent to it not even though it were spoken by an Angel.
St. Thomas Aquinas doctor of the church 1274 all those who deny one Article of Faith regardless of their reason are by that very fact excommunicated.
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence Session 8, 1439 - Ex Cathedra - Whoever Wills to be saved before all things it is necessary that he holds the Catholic Faith. Unless a person keeps this Faith whole and undefiled without doubt He Shall Perish eternally.
Pope Leo 13th 1896 the practice of the church has always been the same as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the fathers who were want to hold as outside Catholic communion and alien to the church whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of Doctrine proposed by her authoritative magisterium.
Council Florence session 11 February 4th 1442 ex cathedra the Holy Roman Church condemns reproves anathematize has and declares to be outside the body of church which is the Catholic Church whoever holds opposing or contrary views.
Pope Saint Leo the Great, Doctor of the Church, 440- 461 A.D. - the faith shall never vary in any age for one is the faith which justifies the just of all ages it is unlawful to differ even by a single word from Apostolic Doctrine.
Pope Leo 10th, 5th lateran Council session 8th 1513 EX cathedra and since truth cannot contradict the truth we Define that every statement contrary to the enlightened truth of the faith is totally false and we strictly forbid teaching otherwise to be permitted we decree that all those who cling to erroneous statements of this time thus sowing heresies which are wholly condemned should be avoided in every way and punished as detestable and odious Heretics and infidels who are undermining the Catholic faith.
Saint Athanasius,died 373 AD. God's word is one and the same in the doors forever unchanged always the same
Pope Pius 9th, Qui Pluribus I'm faith and religion November 9th 1846 paragraph 20 never cease to instruct all men in it never tolerating and letting pass anyting which could in the slightest degree defiled the purity of this faith. What the same great strength of Mind Foster and all men their Unity with the Catholic church outside of which there is no salvation.
Pope Saints Sixtus 3,432 A.D. nothing new is to be allowed for nothing can be added to the old look for the faith of the elders and do not let our faith be disturbed by a mixture of new doctrines
St Vincent of Lerins 445 A.D., all novelty in faith is a sure Mark of heresy. Saint Paul Cried Out aloud again and again to all men to all times and to all places that if anyone announces a new doctrine let him be anathematized excommunicated.
Ecclesiastics 18:5 - nothing maybe taken away or added.
Pope Pius X, 1903-1914 A.D., Oath against Modernism - and so I retain most firmly the faith of the fathers and shall retain it until the final Breath of Life regarding the certain Gifts of Truth which is was and will always be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles not so that what may seem better and more fitting according to each one's period of culture may be held but so that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed otherwise may never be understood otherwise !!!
Galatians 1:8 - but though we are an angel from heaven preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you let him be anathema excommunicated from the church
Proverbs 30:6, add nothing to his words lest you be reproved and found a liar.
St Thomas Aquinas doctor of the church died 1274 A.D - Our faith is identical with that of the ancients. Deny this and you dissolve the unity of the church !! we must hold this for certain that the faith of the people at the present day is one with the faith of the people of past centuries !!! were this not true then we would be in a different Church then they and literally the church would not be one !!!
Saint Cyril of Alexandria doctor of the church died 444, A.D. - for it is not allowable for anyone to change even one word, nor allow one syllable to be passed over mindful of the saying : past not beyond the ancient bounds which thy fathers have set !!!
Pope Leo XIII,Satis Cognitum (# 9)June 29,1896: Can it be lawful for anyone to reject any one of those truths without by that very fact falling into heresy ?!! without separating himself from the Catholic Church ? Without repudiating in one sweeping act the whole of Christian teaching ? For such is the nature of Faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others !!! b
But he who dessents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all the faith, since he thereby refuses the honor God as the Supreme truth and the formal motive of Faith.
Pope Leo XIII,Satis Cognitum # 9, June 29,1896: the Catholic Church found it on these principles and mindful of her office has done nothing with greater Zeal and Endeavor then she has displayed in guarding the Integrity of the Catholic faith hence she regarded as Rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of Doctrine different from her own.
If there is a change YOU ARE NOT TO SUPPORT IT OR embrace it IN ANY WAY !!!
There is no confusion unless you're a heretic and belong to the vatican 2 fake church, there is no confusion for true Catholics, I'll say that again there is no confusion for the true Catholics the teachings of the church are simple and clear. Nothing is to be changed !!!!! Nothing !! If you disagree with this your excommunicated from the church you no longer are Catholic you no longer have a father in Heaven !!!
We don’t demonstrate generosity and goodwill to our enemies so that they ‘return the favour.’ We do it because Christ taught it, and we are Christians. It does not matter if we suffer. That is the point of the crucifixion surely?
How I wish that we had a Catholic Pope 🤷🏻♂️
Heaven will provide. Pray always for the Heavenly Father to rescue us from any false shepherds and have mercy on us poor sinners. God Bless.
We do. A bad Catholic pope is still a Catholic pope.
No you don't! Yikes!
Least humble pope in history... and that is saying something.
Rush :Limbaugh said 3 weeks before gay marriage passed that if gay marriage passes the Supreme Court we will see a Pandora’s box opens to which we can not make up at this (past tense) time. Said the prophet that has past.
I miss him too.
This was so tedious. Yet again, another Catholic spokesman grapples with Bergoglio's ambiguity and is critical of this lack of clarity given the role of the Pope. It's unbelievable how naive so many Catholcs are. The ambiguity is deliberate. It is a stratagem Bergoglio has used for many years. It is a stratagem intended to confuse amd divide, and to further erode the function of the papacy itself.
It truly is shocking how wilfully dim and naive too many Catholics are. No wonder the coup that happened to Rome was so easy to achieve.
What gets me is who else would you accept this level of ambiguity from ?, your doctor, lawyer, your parish priest ?. He has a staff that can help craft a clear, direct and catholic response , his years and office alone should be sufficient for this simple task, but like your state's this is deliberate.
Thank God for the new Dubia.
Being nice is not a virtue, it’s a weakness that will eventually be exploited.
This video needs a sequel, given the grenade Francis just threw into the Church today.
Scripture says that you will know them by their fruits. I have seen these fruits from Francis. Confusion. Idolatry, him saying that the death penalty is immoral, its ok for people in mortal sin to receive the blessed host, and that its ok to bless sinful acts etc. All these fruits lead souls to destruction. The "benefit of doubt" is long past. The fruits speak loudly.
Benedict XVI had a lot of experience of dealing with the media as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith before he became Pope. He knew the media's tricks and how to make his statements so there was no way for them to twist them - short of them outright lying about what he had said. Francis does not have the same ability. That is the most charitable explanation I can put on it.
not a fan of the reflexive call to "constructive criticism." that phrase drives me bonkers. what would constructive criticism look like in this context? "maybe next time the pope should be clear, and not open the door to the blessing of sin"? do critical words just need to be wrapped in a sandwich of niceness so no one ever feels bad upon hearing?
It is important to realize that we live in unprecedented times inasmuch as life experience goes. Here's what I mean. All faithful and practicing Catholics alive today have zero experience much less any categories to even comprehend how to live as a Catholic while a bad pope sits on the chair of Peter. Our Lord himself tells us to be wise as serpents and simple as doves. Hence I agree with you Brian that we should not be overly angry about the pope but we should not be naive about it too. The pope may have good intentions, which means he is ignorant at best, and so we must put into practice one of the spiritual works of mercy - to instruct the ignorant. At worst the pope is a wicked man, and so we (or rather his brother Bishops) should admonish him. In the church's eyes, these are all acts of mercy. My primary fear is where many well meaning orthodox Catholics would err on thinking the best of Francis' intentions to eventually discover that too little was done too late, leading to many souls being led astray. Our Lord warned of this when he told us to beware of false prophets, who come in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You know... I am so heartbroken: when Bergoglio came up to the loggia and announced that he took the name Francis, I immediately thought of the image of St Francis taming the wolf at Gubbio and that Bergoglio would do what Benedict XVI has struggled to do. Today I fear that my vision was indeed true, only that I misplaced the wolf because it was adorned in white and wool was over my eyes. I am heartbroken.
clarity is a problem with Francis, and he is known to say one thing and then do another.
He probably realizes we have a catechism that people actually read.
Your voice is so helpful, Brian. You always do such a good job of avoiding jumping to extremes or using exaggerated rhetoric, while also acknowledging the mess we're in as a Church. I read Pope Francis's message in the original Spanish and it's true that much of what he says is being left out of the media narratives. That's obviously happening in the mainstream media, but even also in conservative media. Ben Shapiro did a short video about this that makes it sound like the Pope is essentially allowing homosexual unions. Morning Wire said that he wrote the letter in response to a German LGBT event last week, when in reality the letter was written in July. Lots of sloppy reporting all around.
Pope Francis stated, "... (1 Corinthians 11:3-10; 1 Timothy 2:11-14) and other texts of Scripture and testimonies of Tradition [that] *_cannot be materially repeated today._*
This is peculiar in that it takes away from Scripture.
If he cannot explain the Hermeneutics related to the verses, but rather, extracts the verses to not offend modern cultural sensitivity, then he fails to teach historical, cultural lessons and misleads Ppl in the present.
I'm a confessional Lutheran and a subscriber, so obviously I have a different theology. I read the Dubia, Response, and reDubia. You guys have a problem on your hands.
When there is a consistent repeated pattern of behavior that consistently pushes a global agenda according to WEF values, it's justified to assume those are the intentions in Francis answers
Francis has said so much that at least appears to go against church teaching from the outset. Yes, ignore for a while, but it never ends!
Intention can only be determined by asking the person in question.
If the person replies in an ambiguous manner to a question that has a simple answer then we do not trust that person because that is not consistent with an honest person.
We therefore have a right to distrust that person.
That person cannot fault us for second guessing and distrusting him.
What Francis says as compared to what he does reveals his intentions. He talks of extending love in exceptional situations, which has validity, yet he will not take the necessary actions to stop the German Bishops or people like James Martin. To me he is being devious. Give him an inch and he will take a mile. I don’t trust him
The church already has a blessing for same sex couples. IT'S CALLED CONFESSION!
There in is the problem. Our Pope answers simple questions like all politicians with ambiguity and never a simple yes or no so the Faithful are freed from rampant confusion.
How about this hypothetical. Two pairs of people come to a parish priest.
One is a pair of gay men who are in a romantic and physical relationship and are married in the eyes of the laws of their nation. They want the priest to bless their union, preferably in front of everyone. He says, with charity, no.
The other pair are two men who are each gay. They are close friends. They have both committed to Catholic teaching on homosexuality, and committed to lead chaste lives. They have asked the priest to privately say a blessing over them, or over each of them, to help them stay faithful Catholics, avoid sin, resist temptation, and deepen their friendship *as* a friendship. He says, with charity, yes.
That's completely consistent with what the Pope has written here, and with Catholic teaching, and with what many gay men and women who want to stay in the Catholic Church and be fully welcome there would ask.
Can you think of a more simple way for him to communicate that? It's a nuanced situation, as many are. He's trying to cover a lot of bases in a few paragraphs, I think he's done fairly well.
I love reading papal lawyer cope! I wonder what excuses will be next? @@Ryan-zv6xw
@@Ryan-zv6xwit is not necessary for gay men to present themselves as a pair or a couple for a blessing because as single unmarried men it implies a potential for a relationship. They can receive an individual blessing and still be friends.
I do not understand the need for two gay men looking for an individual blessing to stay chaste etc. Surely they can rely on Mass, the sacraments and prayer for this. Also we all receive a blessing from the priest at the end of Mass. I am divorced and it would never have occurred to me to seek a blessing from a priest to help me remain chaste, I turned to Mass, the sacraments and prayer to seek God's grace . If we all looked for individual blessings the priest would have huge demands in him . I can understand a blessing for a specific event, I received a blessing for a safe delivery on one if my pregnancies.I did not seek it, the priest offered it to me.
@@SydneyCarton2085
They can receive individual blessings.
The question is whether there are not some situations where they might legitimately ask to be blessed together or in a group instead, without that implying a sexual or romantic relationship, and I imagine there are.
It's not normally the place of the Church to create overarching rules against acts that aren't in themselves sinful because they might lead some people to misuse or misrepresent that freedom. For example, the Church does not say that wearing a short skirt, gambling, or drinking alcohol is forbidden (as other religions do). She recommends prudence, avoiding the near occasion of sin, and warns about scandal, of course, but she doesn't ban things based on their potential for misuse. Banning priestly blessings because they could be misused would be a much more grave matter than banning (for example) alcohol use, as a blessing is inherently good and should never be denied without good reason.
“But let your speech be yea, yea: no, no: and that which is over and above these, is of evil.” Mathew 5:37
I'm not so sure I agree that what he said could be interpreted multiple ways, because to do that you have to disregard other parts of his response. And I think you may have overplayed how he seemed to advocate for softening our message, as it seemed more like he was addressing the issue of some people who may even refuse to bless the individuals within a homosexual relationship.
Yes, the answers are not unclear, and they are not in contrast with Church teaching. These cardinals are certainly intelligent enough to understand the answers they have been given, and to understand that this does not contradict teaching -- if any part of it did, they'd certainly be the first to point that out. This isn't really that different from other times in history when bishops wanted to increase their power by challenging the Pope. It's just a power struggle, led largely by American bishops, and the American bishops have had issues for decades. In fact, they were some of the first to start the whole pronoun confusion by for years allowing and even encouraging "inclusive language" in the Bible -- changing "Him" to gender-neutral terms in actual Scripture is much worse than anything some secular transgender advocate is doing today.
His Holiness was correct to call out the schism in the US Church. Cardinal Burke is the epitome of inappropriate and wayward behavior executed for his own ego. Shame on him. He has a sour soul.
Relationship with....”the Church”. Our relationship with our Creator is what’s going to carry us through these times. Not any human.
I wonder if our being charitable to the pope is exactly the same mistake pope Pius made to his enemies. I think we have to face the fact that Francis is deliberately trying to destroy the church. There is no way he is this naive and the way he has dealt with his opponents with the iron fist of a tyrant shows he is not really that charitable.
All churches are going through this.
This strikes a balance between clarity and charity! But seeing Francis’ previous diplomatic strategy, especially his relationship with China, I think it is another disaster coming.
I've never really got the whole motive of being soft on sin. It almost feels like there are some people who want to trick unrepentant sinners into coming into the church, by casting it as something other than what it is.
Brian - I don’t fully understand your nuance. Is it wrong what he has done or not? I made it “this far” but I actually don’t know what your opinion is other than “don’t jump to conclusions” which is great but doesn’t actually go very far in helping me to understand unambiguously what he wrote concerning same sex blessings.
Maybe it isn't Brian's intent for you to "understand unambiguously" what the Pope is saying.
All we really need to know about this document, is that, this pope is allowing the blessing of same sex couples, at the same time. No interpretation necessary. No explanation needed. Please don't tell us that nothing has changed. Obviously it has. The more people try to explain it ---- the more it seems there is something to hide. Just be honest. The damage is done. Major damage, and its going to be a mess.
What I got from Pope Francis’s response was that it may be possible to bless individuals who recognize their sinful nature and want the grace to overcome it, but that there’s no way to bless a sinful union in a way that can be mistaken for an actual marriage. A nuanced criticism refers to the biblical question of eating meat sacrificed to idols, in one sense we can because it’s not like these gods exist to defile the food, but on the other hand we don’t want to scandalize others who will misinterpret whats happening as an endorsement of the pagan sacrifice.
Then why present themselves as a pair and not individually for a blessing? If some John and his escort wanted to repent they are welcome to but why would they present themselves as a pair?
Surely it’s not wrong for a group of platonic friends to present themselves as a group for a blessing rather than one by one. Practically it saves time to bless two people at the same time. However, I do think it’s possible that a SSA couple may present themselves as a pair precisely so they can nefariously distort the blessing later as being a blessing for their disordered union, and that is the question of prudence.
This is such a breath of fresh air on this topic. All I hear nowadays is gossip and blame from Christians talking about other Christians. I respect that you analyze the topic, share considerations for criticism, but also are humble enough to seek understanding. Nowadays people act as they are either in full support or full condemnation, but we as humans are far more complex than that.
No matter what he says or how he says it the media can and will twist its meaning.
I’m reading a book called “The Tremendous Lover” by Fr Eugene Boylan, and its actually helping me to see a little clearer what Pope Francis ‘may’ be thinking and intending by some of his more controversial remarks. I do believe his heart is in the right place, I don’t think he is being purposefully divisive or destructive
More confusing statements and a lack of “NO” is an outright endorsement of blessings. He’s a disgrace to the papacy
For anyone who is confused, stop listening to the news and just read the catechism of the Catholic Church
Thank you for being the voice of reason!
Francis is isolating Catholics by changing the menu and adding division.
This is really embarrassing, Brian. Its not ambiguous. It is clear he is giving the go ahead as long as they dont call it marriage.
It's purposefully ambiguous. The motivation behind it being ambiguous doesn't seem clear to me either. It doesn’t *literally* give authorization but it does leave too much room for interpretation.
No he's answering the direct private Dubia question... i.e. does blessing equate it to marriage...
then it speculates on pastoral approaches to homosexuals given that the cardinals ALREADY KNOW "the Church can't bless sin".
@@nuca5104 The issue is and remains his response saying one or more persons and it is for the bishop to discern. If he had been so wise as to limit it to an individual then we would not have this issue.
@@BouncingZeus Can't bless the union. Can bless the person or (in situations left to the discretion of the bishop or priest who is there and knows the specific situation) persons. Not going to make a general policy because those situations where a blessing is appropriate are going to be the exception, not the rule, so making a general policy doesn't work. Gentle language to not be hurtful to gay men and women that were hoping he would say you can bless the unions or that he would announce a policy that all priests can always bless gay couples. Is that not pretty clearly what it says? Is that not clear enough? Sure, people of ill will can lie about what he "really" means, but they will do that no matter what he writes.
@@BouncingZeus
The trouble is (to get theoretical);
we know for a fact that the Church CAN bless one or more people (in general)...
so it would not be correct for the Pope to say there is NO siutation where more than 1 person can be blessed.
And this is where 'pastoral prudence' fills in the blank => if it's discerned to be a bad situation, don't bless them, if good, bless them.
The Pope alludes to this in the Dubia, how there'a a tug of war between factions who want to take away the power from the priest on the ground JUST to have a culture war by arguing for wide-spread practice & mandates.
Germany has a big GAY PROBLEM, and needs a pastoral approach that DOES NOT involve blessing unions => Pope Francis is trying to achieve the pastoral solution for them that validates dignity of homosexuals and keeps the entire German Church from schism.
I'm Orthodox and I don't hate the LGBT community and I love them. However, I'm confused about what they are receiving blessings for. Are they being blessed as a couple or as individuals within that relationship? Is the hope that the relationship will lead to an end and to obedience to God's commandments? Because if the blessings are intended for them as a couple, I can easily see how people might abuse that
press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2023/12/18/0901/01963.html read 39, 40, 41. It's a blessing on the union, they're saying that blessing the union is not the same as validating it. Straight up heresy.
I was with you until you mentioned the papacy is just naivety. What Francis is doing to the TLM is not naivety it’s downright intentional to limit and prevent any further growth in the TLM.
No Blessing of same sex relationships advocated at all. It is very clear that individual people can receive a blessing to help and give strength in life, but relationships between the same sex persons are not permissible. How is it that people have not understood this? I suspect mischief abounds unfortunately.
I primarily blame secular news stations for the missguided view on what the Holy Father said. I also put the blame on Rad Trads like Taylor Marshall who jumped at the chance to put doubt into people's minds about the Pope and what he "said".
An Australian Catholic Priest and friend told me he spent years in Rome and they could not believe the ambiguity coming from the Pope. He is meant to clarify. Look at his actions too, audiences with abortion supporters etc. The rot was there before him, but he has accellerated it exponentially. God Bless.
Ever the diplomat. Which is good, and we need more diplomats than warriors. However, I’m afraid this might be one of those times, or ultimately this road, lead to warriors. Not now or tomorrow may be three years 10 years? As the saying goes hard times, make strong man, strong man, make easy times, easy times, make weak men, weak men make hard times.
Hey Brian, your video exemplifies a Jesuit concept called 'the presupposition!' It's all about giving people the benefit of the doubt, assuming their positive intentions. The Church could use more of this approach nowadays, but we need to mix in some prudence, as you mentioned. That bit about the evangelical pastor hits the mark too - maybe we've been too harsh on certain sins and too lenient on others. Time and discernment will show whether this path is genuine. Another ex-evangelical, St. John Henry Newman, no doubt has some wisdom to share about that. He spent the first half of his life fighting liberalism in the Church of England and the second half being slandered as a liberal and marginalised in the Catholic Church, before the Pope made him a cardinal! St John Henry Newman pray for us🙏.
You exemplify a true dignified Catholic. It is easy to watch you as many other so called Catholic channels are so quick to create a cycle of hostility and rage and feed off scandal. You spoke about this in a intellectual and constructive way. not aiming to simply yap, tear down, point out the obvious and repeating gossip yet challenging us to view things with an open mind while also taking heed. This left me wanting to pray instead of wanting to click on more gossip. Your channel is a blessing. such great examples regarding excessive generosity at times when i was ready to argue against brian in thought, he brought up another example that made me think nope he's right. giving things away at the expense of your family drove your point home again.
He was wishy washy in his response to the Pope being wishy washy! Hilarious
JP II and Benedict have firmly, clearly stated that no Catholic can support civil union for homosexual couples.
The pope’s actions have shown that the media interpretation as correct.
which exactly? after years about ppl saying "pope does not condemn gays", only this year i found out he still says its a sin, regardless not being a crime in majority of countries, in other words, LIES. By many unfair jugdment i suppose media cannot be trusted at 100% of cases, as sedevacants/protestants are everwere in media and love to hate many popes, being Francis or not.
Have you seen the intervention from the Swiss Bishop (from Chur , I think)? “May your yes be a yes and your no a no. Anything else comes from the ???” This Pope IS a disaster!
Stay in the faith and the Church, there is nothing to fear. God is with all of us.
First time tuning in. That was great! Thank you for the history lesson and example of charity! Let us pray for the Holy Father!