I support your suggestion. I would certainly listen to Bishop Sanborn's Catholic viewpoint as do many I know in NZ. It is a current conflict which is so in our faces on msn television every day. As a Catholic, I would value His Lordship's perspective.
With the exception of one member the Bolshevik party was primarily Jewish Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, Leon Trotsky, Grigory Zinoviev, Lev Kamenev, Josef Stalin, Grigory Sokolnikov, Andrey Bubnov (the seven members of the first Political Bureau), Alexandre Kollontai, Nikolai Bukharin, Yakov Sverdlov, V P Nogin, Alexei Rykov, Artem Sergeyev, Y. Miliutin, Felix Dzerzhinsky, Leonid Petrovich Serebryakov 21 in all.
I appreciate Bp Sanborn's honest admissions of a lack of sufficient knowledge of the history of Ukraine or Russia. Bp Sanborn did formulate correctly the crucial question: Is Ukraine a legitimate country? But, all too easily, He assumed and implied the answer. He invoked rules of prescription and of just war to undermine President Putin's decisions. He also made a flippant generalization that the question of borders in Europe is just one silly thing people argue about; expressed the hunch that the Nazi influence in Ukraine was minimal; repeatedly called the stupidity of Ukraine as the reason for trouble; and the stupidity of the US (is being subjugated and instrumentalized by a foreign power primarily a stupidity?). And many other inaccurate statements. How are we going ever to set the record straight? With all due respect.
With all due respect, President Putin is subject to God’s law as well, and there’s no way a Catholic can justify his invasion of Ukraine outside of the Donbass regions as within the bounds of just war theory.
You cannot find the country with the name Ukraine in any older dictionaries or older atlases of the world. The territory of land that called today as "Ukraine" was always Kiev's Russia. Otherwise, for some period of time, that territory of Russia was under the Great Lithuania or Poland. The Ukraine never exist.
Another thing not spoken of was the continuous bombing of the Donbas region by Kiev, the capital of Ukraine, killing over 14,000 people ,all civilians, were killed in cities in the Donbas and how many thousands were injured, all by US weapons. That is really why Russia went into the Donbas. As far as Crimea, the people of Crimea VOTED to return to Russia by 90% , pretty telling
Donbas region was bomd mostly by Russians themselves there are difference between colatarel damage and purpusely bombing civilians crimean so called referendum happened after green men and also people only had to choose bettween crimea as independant state and and crimea as part of russia there wasn't third option about crimea remaining part of Ukraine not so legitimate referendum
I have few follow-up questions: Does the doctrine of "just war" allows for self-defense in the case when the attack is carried clandestinely and in contradiction to verbal assurances/treaties? Is the object of attack obliged to accept blatant lies and ignore obviously hostile/threatening actions? Is there a limit for a benefit of a doubt or good faith one is obliged to extend, before one concludes one is being taken for a ride?
@@StephenHeiner No need to be defensive; but I am glad you answered at all:). Common sense dictates that the answer is yes to all the above questions (unless you disagree). I have great respect for the Bishop, and also for yourself; I am not engaging in biting, but want to point out that Bishops knowledge of the region is indeed insufficient to pronounce any opinion about the conflict, and that his hunches are actually rather incorrect.
Question: Are all so called MILITARY SPECIAL OPERATIONS ( regardless of what country is initiating it) involving killing people especially civilians without announcing the war considered to be a CRIME?
Were the present day citizens of Ukraine ever asked if they consider themselves Russians and would rather be a part of Russia again ? The original Russians ( properly called Muscovites ) are a very small minority within the territory of the present Russian Empire in reconstruction . There is not a single ethnicity or a nation or a tribe which ever before in history or now have asked or petitioned Moscow’s white or red tsardom for incorporation into the Russian State . Mind you, Russia , white or red , never ever attacks a foreign territory , she only crosses your borders to liberate you from „…………. „ ( you have a multiple choice of : kings, nobility , burgeoise , capitalists, imperialists, western degenerates , social injustice, religion , and on and on , but ultimately she wants to liberate you from yourself ) . The baptism of Jaroslav was a Catholic baptism of the Kiev Rus , what now-days is the territory of Ukraine ( Kiev ) not the Muscovy which at that ancient time was just a little fishing village , not a country now called Russia . The name “ Russia “ is derived from Rus , which had nothing to do with the Muscovy , both ethnically and politically . The Kiev’ian Rus was a democracy , the Muscovy was not , and is not . And she will never be.
Worship of democracy is nonsense. A particular system of government does not make your nation better than another. That aside, your carefully worded take on history ignores current day realities. While Russia is not perfect, it's main opponents are the same people who are pushing godlessness and degeneracy on the entire world. They also murdered people in Odessa for protesting against a cia backed coup. Take your us state department propaganda elsewhere.
Fundamentalnym nieporozumieniem w tej rozmowie i ocenie dzisiejszej sytuacji w Europie, jak i jej historii, jest oświeceniowa (bezreligijna) interpretacja dziejów świata. Od średniowiecza, europejskie wojny, konflikty, rewolucje czy tumulty w ogromnej większości miały podłoże religijnie i tylko współczesna, oświeceniowa i świecka historiografia, odrzuciwszy aspekt religijny, widzi w nich walki państw, narodów, dyktatorów czy grup społecznych. Czym dla USSR było mauzoleum Lenina, tym dla USA jest Statua Wolności. Są to symbole upaństwowionych rewolucji przeciw Staremu Porządkowi. Liberalizm (patrz Leon XIII „Libertas”) to wolność od Kościoła (wolność religijna itd.) i od monarchii (demokracja). Tę „wolność” USA niosą całemu światu. Pius XI pisał, że ojcem socjalizmu był liberalizm, a spadkobiercą będzie bolszewizm, czyli… USSR „wnukiem” USA (patrz Leon XIII „Rerum novarum” oraz Pius XI „Quadragessimo anno”). Ta antykatolicka współpraca - anglosaskich liberałów (indywidualizm bez dekalogu) i radzieckich bolszewików (kolektywizm bez dekalogu) - zaowocowała „papieżem” Janem XXIII i wstrzyknięciem w organizm Kościoła trucizny rewolucyjnych „wolności”. To konsekwencje nieposłuszeństwa Niepokalanej, by poświęcić Rosję jej Niepokalanemu Sercu. USSR upadło, a Rosja, widząc owoce liberalizmu (np. gender), póki co próbuje ubrać się w tradycję i chrześcijaństwo… Lepszy rydz, niż nic :)
What he says around 12:00 about how Ukraine supposedly 'had' Donbas for a hundred years is flat out false. Up until 1991 all of those territories including Kiev and Donetsk Sevastopol were all a part of the USSR. Then all of the sudden they all woke up one cold winter morning and found out they were no longer part of the same country. None of that is to promote or defend Vladimir Putin's view of history which is as full of holes as swiss cheese but let's get our facts straight please. And I would counsel against making the 'shifting borders' argument because if borders can shift one way who is to stop someone from trying to shift them another way?
5:14 _"...Poles got as far as Moscow and there was some big battle and Russians pushed them back..."_ Bla, bla, bla! Poles not only got as far as Moscow, but also captured the Kremlin and ruled it for 2 years.
@@StephenHeiner It wasn’t the only shortcut used by bishop. Some elements were even lies. For example, bishop says that Nazi ideology was a marginal phenomenon in Ukraine. In fact Ukraine and Ukrainian diaspora was always driven (and still is) by this criminal ideology. For example, remember recent standing ovation for SS veteran in Canadian parliament? Bishop just adding to the chaos already spread over the Internet.
@@jaremaw2368 the bishop isn’t part of the “general chaos” he is primarily speaking about Catholic principles and you cannot invade another country unless certain just war principles are respected. It is not a sufficient cause to invade Ukraine, even if 99% of the population is Nazi.
@@StephenHeinerDefine _"certain just war principles"_ History of the Catholic Church is full of unjust wars (eg wars on Old Prussians, wars on Yotvingians, Hussite wars etc). _"...It is not a sufficient cause to invade Ukraine, even if 99% of the population is Nazi."_ Right! But then again, is it just to invade Afghanistan or Iraq, even if 99% of the population is terrorists? Anyway, as a Catholic I think that we've got much bigger problem (potential schism), than rusko-ókrainian war.
@@jaremaw2368you can look up just war principles yourself on the Internet. Who said Iraq and Afghanistan were just wars? They certainly were not, for they didn’t abide by the principles set forth in just war theory: ultimatum, proportionality, confinement to military targets, clearly enunciated intentions, etc.
There are very few people in the world who have a deep knowledge of every part of history, much less in one region. The bishop did not pretend to have a comprehensive regional knowledge and said so numerous times in the interview.
Russian people were prosecuted in Donbas , lots of their rights have been slowly taken away by local rulers , this is one of the reasons Putin went there
Its not true that Russia had any serious intentions of joining NATO, otherwise they would have gone through with the application process. NATO is not some organization with the US as the gate keeper. You need approval from every member to join and Putin said: "we aren't going to stand in line with countries that don't matter." The way Putin imagines NATO membership is Russia and the US dividing up countries that "don't matter" into spheres of influence and promising not to attack eachother. That isn't how NATO works. And this sort of mindset is precisely why Russia wouldn't be allowed in NATO if they tried. They're not interested in cooperation with their neighbors just licking their wounds after 1991 and entertaining fantasies of lost empire.
Nonsense. Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq, Syria and many more disagree with your fantastical "story". 800+ military bases around the world, surrounding Iran, China, Central and South America. I could go on and on. Why would Russia apply to something Clinton told Putin they would not succeed in joining? Put down the pipe. BTW, who did the vatican support during WW2? There's a little place called Jasenovac you've never been told of where catholic priests blessed nazis killing Slav's, jooz, roma. I'm sick and tired of this pedophilic cult called the vatican re-writing history. Open the vatican vaults.
But the US is de facto a gatekeeper in NATO. Each country that joined NATO essentially agreed with the US foreign policy and a NATO representative from any of the member countries is usually a US vassal or fanatically pro-US man. I can see it in Slovakia, a NATO member: even governments that are critical of the US always send a US vassal to NATO.
Thank you for this, as a Catholic living in Russia, thanks again and God Bless
Thank you Bishop Sanborn, excellent video. God bless!🙏🏻
Thank you very much for this segment discussing the Putin interview.
Thank you Bishop Sanborn. Very enlightening video 🙏🏻
@questionsfortherector would His Excellency be willing to do a similar analysis of the Catholic view concerning the conflict in Palestine?
I support your suggestion. I would certainly listen to Bishop Sanborn's Catholic viewpoint as do many I know in NZ. It is a current conflict which is so in our faces on msn television every day. As a Catholic, I would value His Lordship's perspective.
With the exception of one member the Bolshevik party was primarily Jewish Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, Leon Trotsky, Grigory Zinoviev, Lev Kamenev, Josef Stalin, Grigory Sokolnikov, Andrey Bubnov (the seven members of the first Political Bureau), Alexandre Kollontai, Nikolai Bukharin, Yakov Sverdlov, V P Nogin, Alexei Rykov, Artem Sergeyev, Y. Miliutin, Felix Dzerzhinsky, Leonid Petrovich Serebryakov 21 in all.
Stalin was not Jewish. He was Orthodox.
Actually Stalin was in the seminary for a time training for Priesthood.
Very well done.
Thank you!
I couldn't agree more.
Thank you. I learned a lot!
I appreciate Bp Sanborn's honest admissions of a lack of sufficient knowledge of the history of Ukraine or Russia.
Bp Sanborn did formulate correctly the crucial question: Is Ukraine a legitimate country? But, all too easily, He assumed and implied the answer. He invoked rules of prescription and of just war to undermine President Putin's decisions. He also made a flippant generalization that the question of borders in Europe is just one silly thing people argue about; expressed the hunch that the Nazi influence in Ukraine was minimal; repeatedly called the stupidity of Ukraine as the reason for trouble; and the stupidity of the US (is being subjugated and instrumentalized by a foreign power primarily a stupidity?). And many other inaccurate statements. How are we going ever to set the record straight? With all due respect.
With all due respect, President Putin is subject to God’s law as well, and there’s no way a Catholic can justify his invasion of Ukraine outside of the Donbass regions as within the bounds of just war theory.
Thanks!
Thanks for your support
You cannot find the country with the name Ukraine in any older dictionaries or older atlases of the world. The territory of land that called today as "Ukraine" was always Kiev's Russia. Otherwise, for some period of time, that territory of Russia was under the Great Lithuania or Poland. The Ukraine never exist.
Such clear and fact-based analysis! Much appreciated.
Does the principal of prescription apply to popes -- ie if there's a conclave and people accept that there's a pope long enough, then you have a pope?
Another thing not spoken of was the continuous bombing of the Donbas region by Kiev, the capital of Ukraine, killing over 14,000 people ,all civilians, were killed in cities in the Donbas and how many thousands were injured, all by US weapons. That is really why Russia went into the Donbas. As far as Crimea, the people of Crimea VOTED to return to Russia by 90% , pretty telling
Donbas region was bomd mostly by Russians themselves there are difference between colatarel damage and purpusely bombing civilians crimean so called referendum happened after green men and also people only had to choose bettween crimea as independant state and and crimea as part of russia there wasn't third option about crimea remaining part of Ukraine not so legitimate referendum
I have few follow-up questions: Does the doctrine of "just war" allows for self-defense in the case when the attack is carried clandestinely and in contradiction to verbal assurances/treaties? Is the object of attack obliged to accept blatant lies and ignore obviously hostile/threatening actions? Is there a limit for a benefit of a doubt or good faith one is obliged to extend, before one concludes one is being taken for a ride?
You can research Catholic just war principles on the Internet and answer that for yourself.
@@StephenHeiner No need to be defensive; but I am glad you answered at all:). Common sense dictates that the answer is yes to all the above questions (unless you disagree). I have great respect for the Bishop, and also for yourself; I am not engaging in biting, but want to point out that Bishops knowledge of the region is indeed insufficient to pronounce any opinion about the conflict, and that his hunches are actually rather incorrect.
Question: Are all so called MILITARY SPECIAL OPERATIONS ( regardless of what country is initiating it) involving killing people especially civilians without announcing the war considered to be a CRIME?
Were the present day
citizens of Ukraine ever asked if they consider themselves Russians and would rather be a part of Russia again ?
The original Russians ( properly called Muscovites ) are a very small minority within the territory of the present Russian Empire in reconstruction .
There is not a single ethnicity or a nation or a tribe which ever before in history or now have asked or petitioned Moscow’s white or red tsardom for incorporation into the Russian State .
Mind you, Russia , white or red , never ever attacks a foreign territory , she only crosses your borders to liberate you from „…………. „ ( you have a multiple choice of : kings, nobility , burgeoise , capitalists, imperialists, western degenerates , social injustice, religion , and on and on , but ultimately she wants to liberate you from yourself ) .
The baptism of Jaroslav was a Catholic baptism of the Kiev Rus , what now-days is the territory of Ukraine ( Kiev ) not the Muscovy which at that ancient time was just a little fishing village , not a country now called Russia .
The name “ Russia “ is derived from Rus , which had nothing to do with the Muscovy , both ethnically and politically .
The Kiev’ian Rus was a democracy , the Muscovy was not , and is not .
And she will never be.
Worship of democracy is nonsense. A particular system of government does not make your nation better than another. That aside, your carefully worded take on history ignores current day realities. While Russia is not perfect, it's main opponents are the same people who are pushing godlessness and degeneracy on the entire world. They also murdered people in Odessa for protesting against a cia backed coup. Take your us state department propaganda elsewhere.
And the crimes of the ussr are the crimes of jews. Much like the current us government and the head midget in kiev.
Super helpful. Great job! Thank you.
Are sensitive topics, especially World War II deliberately omitted here?
@@kazek334this is not a history channel. This topic was discussed because it is relevant world news.
What his exelency can tell us about Israeli Hamass war?
Fundamentalnym nieporozumieniem w tej rozmowie i ocenie dzisiejszej sytuacji w Europie, jak i jej historii, jest oświeceniowa (bezreligijna) interpretacja dziejów świata. Od średniowiecza, europejskie wojny, konflikty, rewolucje czy tumulty w ogromnej większości miały podłoże religijnie i tylko współczesna, oświeceniowa i świecka historiografia, odrzuciwszy aspekt religijny, widzi w nich walki państw, narodów, dyktatorów czy grup społecznych.
Czym dla USSR było mauzoleum Lenina, tym dla USA jest Statua Wolności. Są to symbole upaństwowionych rewolucji przeciw Staremu Porządkowi. Liberalizm (patrz Leon XIII „Libertas”) to wolność od Kościoła (wolność religijna itd.) i od monarchii (demokracja). Tę „wolność” USA niosą całemu światu. Pius XI pisał, że ojcem socjalizmu był liberalizm, a spadkobiercą będzie bolszewizm, czyli… USSR „wnukiem” USA (patrz Leon XIII „Rerum novarum” oraz Pius XI „Quadragessimo anno”). Ta antykatolicka współpraca - anglosaskich liberałów (indywidualizm bez dekalogu) i radzieckich bolszewików (kolektywizm bez dekalogu) - zaowocowała „papieżem” Janem XXIII i wstrzyknięciem w organizm Kościoła trucizny rewolucyjnych „wolności”. To konsekwencje nieposłuszeństwa Niepokalanej, by poświęcić Rosję jej Niepokalanemu Sercu. USSR upadło, a Rosja, widząc owoce liberalizmu (np. gender), póki co próbuje ubrać się w tradycję i chrześcijaństwo… Lepszy rydz, niż nic :)
where do i send my question to bishop?
You can use social media or the seminary contact us form on the website
@@StephenHeiner got it, thanks
What about the fact that the people of Crimea and the Dombas region voted to be Russian?
It was rigged like all Russian elections.
What he says around 12:00 about how Ukraine supposedly 'had' Donbas for a hundred years is flat out false. Up until 1991 all of those territories including Kiev and Donetsk Sevastopol were all a part of the USSR. Then all of the sudden they all woke up one cold winter morning and found out they were no longer part of the same country. None of that is to promote or defend Vladimir Putin's view of history which is as full of holes as swiss cheese but let's get our facts straight please. And I would counsel against making the 'shifting borders' argument because if borders can shift one way who is to stop someone from trying to shift them another way?
5:14 _"...Poles got as far as Moscow and there was some big battle and Russians pushed them back..."_ Bla, bla, bla! Poles not only got as far as Moscow, but also captured the Kremlin and ruled it for 2 years.
Thanks for the clarification. The bishop’s statement did not exclude this possibility.
@@StephenHeiner It wasn’t the only shortcut used by bishop.
Some elements were even lies. For example, bishop says that Nazi ideology was a marginal phenomenon in Ukraine. In fact Ukraine and Ukrainian diaspora was always driven (and still is) by this criminal ideology. For example, remember recent standing ovation for SS veteran in Canadian parliament?
Bishop just adding to the chaos already spread over the Internet.
@@jaremaw2368 the bishop isn’t part of the “general chaos” he is primarily speaking about Catholic principles and you cannot invade another country unless certain just war principles are respected. It is not a sufficient cause to invade Ukraine, even if 99% of the population is Nazi.
@@StephenHeinerDefine _"certain just war principles"_ History of the Catholic Church is full of unjust wars (eg wars on Old Prussians, wars on Yotvingians, Hussite wars etc).
_"...It is not a sufficient cause to invade Ukraine, even if 99% of the population is Nazi."_ Right! But then again, is it just to invade Afghanistan or Iraq, even if 99% of the population is terrorists?
Anyway, as a Catholic I think that we've got much bigger problem (potential schism), than rusko-ókrainian war.
@@jaremaw2368you can look up just war principles yourself on the Internet. Who said Iraq and Afghanistan were just wars? They certainly were not, for they didn’t abide by the principles set forth in just war theory: ultimatum, proportionality, confinement to military targets, clearly enunciated intentions, etc.
You all have to brush up on your history, very poor understanding I think....!!
There are very few people in the world who have a deep knowledge of every part of history, much less in one region. The bishop did not pretend to have a comprehensive regional knowledge and said so numerous times in the interview.
Exactly. Thank you.@@Trisha-s3j
Russian people were prosecuted in Donbas , lots of their rights have been slowly taken away by local rulers , this is one of the reasons Putin went there
So why those people in Donbas don't move to Russia?
They have been there for ages , this is their home@@vytautasmikuciauskas222
Filthy Russian propaganda
45:37 i thought it was great to hear the bishops thought and i agree with everything the bishop said
Its not true that Russia had any serious intentions of joining NATO, otherwise they would have gone through with the application process. NATO is not some organization with the US as the gate keeper. You need approval from every member to join and Putin said: "we aren't going to stand in line with countries that don't matter." The way Putin imagines NATO membership is Russia and the US dividing up countries that "don't matter" into spheres of influence and promising not to attack eachother. That isn't how NATO works. And this sort of mindset is precisely why Russia wouldn't be allowed in NATO if they tried. They're not interested in cooperation with their neighbors just licking their wounds after 1991 and entertaining fantasies of lost empire.
Nonsense. Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq, Syria and many more disagree with your fantastical "story". 800+ military bases around the world, surrounding Iran, China, Central and South America. I could go on and on. Why would Russia apply to something Clinton told Putin they would not succeed in joining? Put down the pipe. BTW, who did the vatican support during WW2? There's a little place called Jasenovac you've never been told of where catholic priests blessed nazis killing Slav's, jooz, roma. I'm sick and tired of this pedophilic cult called the vatican re-writing history. Open the vatican vaults.
Russia was told that they could not go through the application process to join NATO.
Isn't that pretty clear?
Absolutely. (Tongue in chief) @@floridaman318
This is just standard CNN/DOD talking points. Russia has to be bad because NATO has to have a purpose.
But the US is de facto a gatekeeper in NATO. Each country that joined NATO essentially agreed with the US foreign policy and a NATO representative from any of the member countries is usually a US vassal or fanatically pro-US man. I can see it in Slovakia, a NATO member: even governments that are critical of the US always send a US vassal to NATO.