NEVER Critique Pope Francis… Or ELSE
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- Thank you for supporting Scholastic Answers
NEVER Critique Pope Francis
Watch the rest of the stream here: • Video
Click the join button above to get all your livestream questions answered.
NEW AQUINAS ACADEMY
Link: www.christianb...
Discord: aquinas.cc/la/...
Donate: / newaquinasacademy
FURTHER RESOURCES
To get Tutoring: www.christianb...
Annotated Thomist: www.christianb...
Scholastic Courses: www.christianb...
SPONSOR
Use the code “Militant” for 20% off to learn Greek here: fluentgreeknt....
MUSIC
• Song of Kings - Clamav...
• Solemn Mass in Thanksg...
SUPPORT
Subscribe: / @militantthomist
Become a Patron: / militantthomist
Donate: www.paypal.com...
SusbscribeStar: www.subscribes...
FOLLOW
Website: www.christianb...
Facebook: / militantthomist
Facebook Group: / 543689120339579
Twitter: / militantthomist
Instagram: / militantthomist
WATCH
/ @militantthomist
LISTEN
Podcast: www.christianb...
Spotify: open.spotify.c...
Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple...
Anchor: anchor.fm/mili...
SHOP
Book Store: www.christianb...
Merch: www.christianb...
Two things...
One: If not obedience to our religious higher-ups, how else do we learn to conform ourselves to Christ when Christ was obedient to the Father, even when He was instructed to act againts His own human desire to avoid the torture of the crucifixion? Obedience is a virtue that needs to be practiced, usually "agere contra"
Two: If I were a radical leftist pope, I would sincerely hope that when I carefully spoke just barely within the boundaries of orthodoxy that lots of people would say what I meant actually gave the green light to unorthodox beliefs and sinful behaviors. It would foil my plans if everyone took what I said to simply mean carry on with conservative Catholicism. If the Holy Father is really a bad guy (I don't think he is) only masquerading as barely potentially orthodox, then don't do him the favor of taking the bait.
Thank you, Father.
One: obedience doesn't mean not criticizing. Otherwise St Catherine would have been unable to criticize the Pope remaining at Avingon and the theologians of the time would have been unable of criticizing the Pope who denied the beatific vision.
Two: While we shouldn't attribute heresy to the words of Pope Francis the fact is that his words and actions are ambiguous and occasion of scandal for the faithful, like Honorius. We are talking about a Pope who dismisses the use of latin (something praised by the Council itself) and of traditional priestly clothing (cassocks in particular to those who remember). We are talking about a Pope saying to Fernandez about the DDF the following "The dicastery over which you will preside in other times came to use immoral methods. Those were times when *rather than promoting theological knowledge, possible theological errors were pursued.* *What I expect from you is certainly something very different"*
There is a clear intention of making the DDF in particular and the Magisterium as a whole less about censoring harmful theology and more about promoting dialogue.
@@igorlopes7589 on the first part, St. Catherine is a doctor of the Church. Those with a real vocation to theology have some leeway that social media influencers don't have. And even still, theologians need to follow the advice Wagner put in his video. My comment on obedience was more about addressing the spiritual discipline/virtue of obedience.
On the second part, I think what I said still holds, even if I'm wrong about him not being an irredeemable progressive.
@@FrJohnBrownSJ And on literally everyone during the middle ages criticizingPope Jonh XXII?? Also, his policy is clearly one of being against liturgical tradition and theological clarity. For him an insistence on keeping liturgical tradition means a denial of the lay participation demanded by the Council. For him searching errors to condemn is a wrong way of the Magisterium to work, His Holiness was very clear on this and it manifested itself on his lack of clarity on his documents (like amoris and fiducia). These things ought to be criticized, it's not like the Pope is infallible on these matters that aren't even matters of doctrine but rather of praxis. (edit: when criticizing fiducia and amoris I meant not the content but the wording and the lack of clarity)
Should we not criticize Pope Francis when he dismisses latin, going against Jonh XXIII and the Council itself???
@@igorlopes7589they weren’t criticizing John XXII’s magisterium, but his private theological opinion, not the same thing.
I think you’re reading too much into his statements on “not condemning errors”, he’s clearly referring to witch hunts, otherwise his own magisterial documents don’t make sense because he condemns errors in them.
Those documents you mentioned are perfectly clear.
The Holy Father uses Latin and Gregorian chant in his own papal Masses and he prays the LOTH in Latin, so do you think maybe you’re reading something into his comments that he doesn’t actually mean, ironically confirming exactly the type of problematic attitudes he’s talking about? I mean just read Evangelii Gaudium, he has a pretty clear statement about the kinds of “traditionalism” he’s condemning.
1. Ice cream sandwiches
2. Milk
3. Scoop of peanut butter
4. Caramel syrup
Blend (you're welcome)
Edit: my bad I commented this on the wrong vid
Lol
This is a culinary abomination lmao (probably tastes good though)
No, this was the right vid
You can critique a Pope in charity and love. You can't slander, devalue, or insult him, you can't mischaracterize him or his words, and you have to submit to his God bestowed authority (if you are in communion with The Church).
I wouldn’t dispute the fact that one can critique a pope in charity and love. That’s true. But someone who does that with all documents, in all occasions, in all opportunities, he can’t really say to be in real ‘charitas’ even if he has soft tender voice, poses as balanced, and not necessarily as a rabid character. Charity comes for those who really humble themselves to the limits, first understanding what obedience means in the Patristic and Medieval sense, mostly in harsh circumstances. Only then one should start to ponder if it is just - or even necessary, let alone profitable for oneself and the Church - to share public ostensible criticism, since it instills distrust so very easily these days. So it’s not contradictory with the possibility of critiquing the pope, but with the obstinate will to critique (and to take all coming from him with gross suspicion and spirit of rebellion). ‘Amoris Laetitia’, for example, was once too hard for me to swallow but I learned that I should at least give the assent of the intellect and will to non-infallible ordinary teachings of the papal magisterium as a faithful Catholic. It didn’t make it a formidable text, but an understandable document with so many great and thought provoking points. It does wonders when one tries to understand people in the position of authority, specially the Roman pontiff, with more generosity than what we commonly give to our friends or even rivals on the Internet in some cases (not the inverse).
@Christ_is_King-
That’s not how Catholic ecclesiology or the magisterium works. One is bound to submit to the papal magisterium with religious submission of mind and will. Picking and choosing when to follow the pope or ignoring him isn’t Catholic.
@@roundtable3501I don’t think that’s what he’s saying; I think that he’s saying that it is better to not focus so much on Pope Francis’ documents as to not fall into near occasions of sin, if criticizing is a problem. It can be difficult To understand what exactly the Pope is saying at times, and since many aren’t as knowledgeable of the faith, I believe that casually reading/hearing whatever Pope Francis promulgates can be a bad idea for the less catechized.
@@roundtable3501I think the point is that most of these magisterial documents have absolutely no bearing on the lay people. None of us are involved in capital punishment decisions and as laity, we aren’t the principle audience for the blessings (which is optional to all bishops and priests).
So, *unless* dogma is declared, we can rest in that it really doesn’t affect us that much.
@@masterchief8179 The thing is that Pope Francis commits lote of mistakes because his plans for the Church themselves are mistaken. His view at the DDF? He wants it to not condenm but rather to partake in dialogue. His documents? They refuse to explicitly condemn errors widespread in the clergy and be clear on what's allowed and what's not (Fiducia and Amoris Laetitia). On the liturgy? He outright dismisses tradition, look at his comments about latin (praised by the Council and St Jonh XXIII) and traditional clerical vestments like cassocks. And then there is his accusation that people who insist on seeing the TLM as better are "rigid" and "insecure", as if either you see all developments as good or you are bad (oh wait, the liturgical reform itself was based on viewing some development as bad...)
So, you're saying dissenters from the Magisterium are basically gay...
Based
Using the term "based" nowadays indicates a departure from Catholic principles. It's modernist language favored by those with worldly attachments. Do you even have devotion to any of the Angels or Saints? Have you ever delved into the heresies that true Catholics allege Francis and the Vatican II sect commit?
I’m really happy to see this is your position Christian. It’s not popular right now, and it takes bravery to proclaim and defend. God bless you bro.
How do I ask the DDF, Also how do I submit a dubia?
The default take on most sites is always critique pope Francis. We end up pimping for Orthodoxy for fence sitters just because you won’t cross over in stay in a miserable marriage doesn’t mean others won’t leave the marriage. I am talking perception here of Francis not reality he’s not perfect but your miserable because of nitpicky mindset.
this
Its not nitpicky, he has been one of the worst Popes, constantly attacking people who want clarity in theology and tradition in liturgy
Vatican II says EO have fullness of sacraments.
@@Link25 16. Already from the earliest times the Eastern Churches followed their own forms of ecclesiastical law and custom, which were sanctioned by the approval of the Fathers of the Church, of synods, and even of ecumenical councils. Far from being an obstacle to the Church's unity, a certain diversity of customs and observances only adds to her splendor, and is of great help in carrying out her mission, as has already been stated. To remove, then, all shadow of doubt, this holy Council solemnly declares that the Churches of the East, while remembering the necessary unity of the whole Church, have the power to govern themselves according to the disciplines proper to them, since these are better suited to the character of their faithful, and more for the good of their souls. The perfect observance of this traditional principle not always indeed carried out in practice, is one of the essential prerequisites for any restoration of unity.
Quote of vatican II.
@@igorlopes7589
the one’s the pope has “attacked” are ones who slander him publicly on a regular basis. Those aren’t just ones who want more “clarity.” They’re viciously against him.
Criticizing someone differs from critiquing something he says, believes, or both.
Is there infinite human dignity? I think Our Lord has it because he adopted a perfect human nature. But it's hard for me to see how I could have that much human dignity as a merely human sinner.
I suggest that now, after Vatican II, we hear too much about seemingly unqualified human dignity. That reminds me of a distinction from my hero Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. God dignifies us by creating us in his image and likeness. But we can gain or lose what I call "moral dignity." We increase it when we behave virtuously when there's sanctifying grace in our souls. We decrease that dignity by sinning.
That's partly why I wonder whether the Holy Father made a mistake by revising what the Catechism of the Catholic Church said about the death penalty. What happened to the idea that a death row inmate can do penance by humbly accepting that penalty?
I seem to recall a part of "The Gospel of Life," where Pope John Paul II writes something like this. A government may sometimes need to execute a criminal. But it's best protect society differently if possible. That Pope seemed to think mostly about people outside prison when he wrote that encyclical.
But what should a government do to punish condemned criminals who murder guards and other innocent people in prison? If you can restrain a criminal before his execution, why execute him? If there's no way to protect others from him that, maybe it's best kill him sooner rather than later.
God Bless Pope Francis
We owe submission of the will and intellect to the non-infallible Magisterium. But nevethless we can criticize his non-magisterial comments and even his disciplinar decisions (to which we owe merely an external obedience, not religious assent). We can also criticize his way of speaking in his magisterial documents while agreeing with what he teached. One thing is to refuse assent to his magisterial teachings, another is to criticize his lack of clarity when dealing with subjects related to widespread heresies.
Based Pope Francis
What a joke. Might as well as "Based Joe Biden."
Sorry, but nope. He is the one who restricts traditional liturgy and views things like the use of latin (praised by the Council and St Jonh XXIII) as unnecessary. And then there was that time when he said priests wearing tradtional clothing like cassocks were doing it just out of pride and vanity (instead of you know, love for tradition). We should also not forget his letter to Fernandez about his views for the DDF, something that instead of condemning false views engages in dialogue. And then there is his insistent ambiguity, very noticeable in things like Fiducia and Amoris
@@igorlopes7589 Shut up and submit
Francis is an antipope who propagates heresy, placing him outside the Church. One cannot lead a Body of which they are not a part.
Using the term "based" nowadays indicates a departure from Catholic principles. It's modernist language favored by those with worldly attachments. Do you even have devotion to any of the Angels or Saints? Have you ever delved into the heresies that true Catholics allege Francis and the Vatican II sect commit?
Possibly two popes were condemned in the first millennium and Constance (a council) chose a pope? 🤷♂️
I LOVE POPE FRANCIS
I love him as a Pope and as a human being. But I can find no admiration for his work, period
While we shouldn't have public dissent of magisterial teachings, it does not follow from that that we cannot criticize his non-magisterial comments (like his letter to Fernandez), otherwise the people who criticized Jonh XXII would have been wrong and they were not. It also does not follow that we can't openly criticize His Holiness disciplinar decisions (like TC), for to them we owe merely an external obedience, not internal assent. It also does not follow that we cannot criticize his ambiguous and unclear wording in magisterial teachings; one can agree with what he (or the DDF) said while criticizing how he said it. Specially when the ambiguous wording used by the DDF greatly empowers people like Fr Martin.
~5:40 um excuse me, the woman is supposed to make you the nice steak dinner.
Thoughts on Dante critiquing unum sanctum and Boniface? Or did he just not get the memo? Or is that a “real development” from the Middle Ages?
Did you just say Dr Ed Feser didn't do his "homework"? Are you one of those Zoomers that loves the Pope no matter what?
Yes, I am one of those Zoomers who love Pope Francis. Also yes, Feser didn’t follow proper procedure in evaluating the document.
@@MilitantThomist I mean does a scholar need to ask the "DDF" (the Holy Office it should be...) a question every time he doesn't see a correlation with tradition and then recycle that back in order for it to be catholic for you...? This seems to lend credence to the 19th Century protestant meme that catholics are just unthinking automatons at the service of pope in Rome.
and in that same spirit, would it not have been better to ask Dr Feser what he thinks of these magisterial texts before dunking on him in a video? Maybe he has something to back up what he's saying? Not that he's infallible, but Dr Feser is not just some internet crank who just hates Pope Francis.
Further your logic infers that no one can say anything about a magisterial text until a formal question has been asked, and I don't think that's ever been the tradition. Yes, popes can be criticized
@@aloyalcatholic5785"are you one of those -zoomers- *Catholics* who love the Pope no matter what?"
That is the position of a loyal Catholic. He's our Papa. Even if we think he's wrong we should cover our Father's nakedness. At least change your handle if you're gonna go around stockpiling ammo for every enemy of the Church.
you been on that mew?
Hey brother I’m planning to snag Grenier’s complete set from your Lulu page. How good is the quality of the physical book though? Is it sturdy?
Are you a convert?
I love Pope Francis
Based and Christ pilled.
Pope Francis has freed me from my Catholic faith. I owe him so much.
Absolutely Popesplaining
Problem?
@@MilitantThomist just laugh at me reiterating your joke and let me be funny
Pope Francis is one of the better Popes in recent memory.
I am the Pope's Top Guy
He needs me?
Woah....
So true king!
I read Feser’s article on his site and didn’t really take issue with any of what he said. It’s not bad to have a devil’s advocate, Christian. They help give clarity and us to discern.
The cope is unreal
Cannot imagine who follows you!
Lmoa vatican II says EO have the fullness of the sacraments.
That was the catholic position for centuries before VII
@@kurtnotafed4645 So there is no reason for anyone to be catholic over orthodox.
@@nkoppa5332 yes there is: EO are not in communion with the Apostolic See, they have a heretical doctrine of the trinity and many more issues but they have valid sacraments as do the Old Catholics, the Oriental Orthodox and the Assyrians. Now please quote to me a magisterial text of the pre-conciliar church denying the validity of their sacraments.
@@nkoppa5332
Do you understand the distinction between valid and licit?
@@roundtable3501 I understand, valid=valid, like Vatican II says, licit means lawful.
16. Already from the earliest times the Eastern Churches followed their own forms of ecclesiastical law and custom, which were sanctioned by the approval of the Fathers of the Church, of synods, and even of ecumenical councils. Far from being an obstacle to the Church's unity, a certain diversity of customs and observances only adds to her splendor, and is of great help in carrying out her mission, as has already been stated. To remove, then, all shadow of doubt, this holy Council solemnly declares that the Churches of the East, while remembering the necessary unity of the whole Church, have the power to govern themselves according to the disciplines proper to them, since these are better suited to the character of their faithful, and more for the good of their souls. The perfect observance of this traditional principle not always indeed carried out in practice, is one of the essential prerequisites for any restoration of unity.
I did not see "licit" in the entire vatican II document.
This is more catholic double think.
He is the most based pope ever
I love Pope Francis!
I somewhat agree with this critique. If "Pope" Francis was really the Pope, you shouldn't publicly criticize him. However, he has proven to be an obvious, flagrant heretic. To use this guy's father analogy, he is literally NOT our father, so I can critique him all I want. SSPX "Recognize and Resist" position is the dumbest position of all to take.
Cool story heresy does not depose a Pope ipso facto et quad nos
@@kurtnotafed4645 Yes, it does. It also prevents someone from being elected in the first place.
@torchanddog Nice rhetoric, bro. Unfortunately, it doesn't work on me. You are not supposed to follow a heretic. The pope himself commended Nestorius' congregation for not following along with his heresy.
Vatican II says EO have fullness of sacraments.
@@jeandurtal8404 The same Nestorius that was not regarded as deposed ipso facto by his heresy according to the words of St Cyril?
Thank you. This is much overdue. Boomer Catholicism has turned much of the faithful into nonstop whiners.
Pope Francis is so awesome.
You know that there no moral obligation to be pretend the Pope is awesome, right? We owe His Holiness respect and obedience, not sycophancy. His pontificate has had many shortcomings that do deserve criticism, like his anti-traditional rethoric and restriction of the traditional latin right. There is also his lack of clarity, seeing it as more efficient to engage in dialogue with heretics like Fr Martin than repressing their harmful views.
@@igorlopes7589 I unironically think Francis has had an amazing papacy. So, I’m not pretending. It’s my sincere opinion.
Also, I don’t have a problem with his so-called ‘anti-traditionalist’ rhetoric. But, let’s say I did, I wouldn’t be narcissistic enough to think that I am the individual entitled to launch these critiques…
@@lesliecuff2079 How was this an "amazing" pontificate? The likes of Fr Martin have only grown stronger under the insistent laxity and "dialogue" that the Holy Father unfortunately identifies as the best for the Church. Also, His Holiness a lot of times has shown at the very least an attitude of dismissal towards the use of latin at Masses and priests wearing a more traditional clothing. He made very bad remarks about priests wanting to wear cassocks and learn latin, which demonstrates that he dismisses the value of tradition.
But no, everything's perfect! And to notice this pontificate hasn't been the eight wonder of the world is disrespectful *and narcissistic* ... apparentely
@@igorlopes7589 I can’t engage with any of the points that your are making, since I don’t view them as axiomatic. It would take too long to deconstruct what I consider to be your faulty assumptions.
More importantly! I DON’T engage in reproving gossip about his holiness. It’s effeminate, idle chatter.
My starting position is simply this: I believe Francis is the vicar of Christ on earth. 🌍 And I believe he was elected by the Holy Spirit. Do you?
@@lesliecuff2079 You don't view tradition as important? What an interesting perspective! Tradition is useless and people can dismiss it as much as they want and you see no problem. Good to know.
Also, this isn't gossip, you confuse criticism of bad decisions and opinions with gossip. For you pointing bad decisions with harmful effects is gossip, for you to point bad opinions that have bad consequences is mere gossip.
Moreover, the Pope is elected by the Holy Spirit just as much as any other leader in the world. Who truly elects the Pope are the Cardinals who have free will.
You seem to think that (or at least behave as if) any opinion or decision a Pope may have is infallible and beyond criticism. Probably you would be against those who rightfully criticized Honorius and Jonh XXII.