The Greatness of Joseph Ratzinger with Dr. Richard DeClue
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 31 янв 2022
- Ratzinger's 1958 Lecture "New Pagans in the Church" www.hprweb.com/2017/01/the-ne...
DeClue's Views: / @decluesviews2740
DeClue's writings: declubac.wixsite.com/sapienti...
Word on Fire Institute: wordonfire.institute/
Beethoven (Community Audio) archive.org/details/Beethoven... 
Развлечения
So glad I found your channel. I love Ratzinger’s work and this video was great - we need to celebrate his greatness more!
Thank you for having Richard Declue on. I appreciate his work and nuanced perspective of the council and history. Love this talk on Ratzinger.
Requesting more Dr DeClue presentations on Benedict XVI please. Im super interested in getting into Ratzinger's works now. 👍👍 🔥🔥🔥
Rest in peace papa!
Best intro music of any channel! ( classical music fanatic here😊)
I, too, am a proud “Ratzingarian.” And I did not miss the last trite slight his replacement saw to: no red shoes for the burial.
Yes, what's up with that? To show that he wasn't Pope already?
I noted that also. Once dead Benedict is not a dead Emeritus, but, in the view of history, a dead Pope. It was totally disrespectful.
I knew I wasn't the only one who noticed this disrespect! @@annikapc
56:12 and forward is very interesting regarding the cheapening of the Sacraments and paganism in the Church.
Bonhoeffer / "Cheap Grace". . . von Balthasar / Razing the Bastions. . . Ratzinger / The New Pagans. . .
I appreciate you having Dr DeClue on! I appreciate his views so much.
Hi this was so enriching to watch. PB 16/Ratzinger has always someone that I have gravitated towards as far as his writings. Where can I find the "lego" game. What is the name of it as it would be really great gifts to give parents and godparents. Thank you!
found it timothy ! thanks for mentioning
Dr. DeClue points out, perhaps inadvertently, a distinction. The Bishop of Santa Barbara can be showy; the Bishop Emeritus of Rome is deeply thoughtful.
Pensé que reconocí esta gentileza de sus reseñas de tinta de pluma. Gracias por tenerlo puesto, prefiero saber sobre la tinta de sangre de dragón. Sus esfuerzos son muy apreciados.
In the Seewald's biography, Prof. Schmaus attempts to derail Joseph Ratzinger's habilitation -- his doctoral dissertation that would lead to teaching among other things. Fr. Ratzinger had moved his parents and sister to Freising and now feared for their economic security and in fact Fr. Ratzinger felt his world was literally falling apart. This did not happen, thanks in part to Reinlander Sohngen. Prof. Sohngen came to his aid but in fact Ratzinger was considered brilliant almost by acclamation. Prof. Sohngen allowed Ratzinger's paper to be returned for corrections but nothing more.
This is partially correct, but there are some inaccuracies here. I did my doctoral dissertation on "Joseph Ratzinger's Theology of Divine Revelation." The most important source was the original, unaccepted version of his Habilitationsschrift, that was not published until 2009 (in German) as part of his collected works. Ratzinger's doctoral dissertation was on "The House and People of God in St. Augustine's Doctrine of the Church." The habilitation thesis is a sort of second dissertation that enables one to hold a chair at a German university. The original version was on St. Bonaventure's Understanding of Revelation and Theology of History. Söhngen did not come in from outside to assist. He was Ratzinger's director for both his dissertation and for the habilitation thesis. So he was involved from the beginning. Söhngen, as the director, read it before Schmaus. Söhngen approved it enthusiastically. Schmaus was the 'reader,' and he rejected it. The theology faculty had to have a meeting to decide what to do. Schmaus had more friends on the faculty and more academic notoreity, but the faculty allowed Ratzinger to revise it. Since Schmaus's criticism was almost exclusively on the part on Revelation, Ratzinger just nixed that part, reworked the Theology of History part, and resubmitted in just a few months. For more, see Ratzinger's book Milestones, ch. 8.
He was a rock star in Germany initially, but Vatican II gave him an international recognition.
This channel has lost all it´s credibility.
It gained a whole bunch of cred from me!
@@crushtheserpent Never mind. After watching more videos, it never had credibility in the first place. Complete dishonesty.
@@fidei829 Can you give an example?
I am grateful Benedict did the right thing and admitted the mass had not been suppressed. However, he was a thoroughgoing modernist himself and by his own admission was devoted to other modernist theologians and philosophers. I don't understand the desire of this channel to call Great these modernists like him and John Paul. We can be grateful they did some good things without resorting to hyperbole. Perhaps we can look forward to episodes on good Pope John and Paul the sixth. They both did some good things.
Define modernism and then check whether it actually agrees with the Papal condemnations, because people throw the word about alot. There is a good deal of Theological and philosophical error and even outright heresy around in the Church, but even if it somewhat parallels the modernists I think for the most part it comes from other sources than historical modernism. So too many who are very orthodox and deeply rooted in Scripture and Tradition and fully loyal to Church authority as for instance De Lubac and Ratzinger himself are calumnied with that name, and it isn't right that such acusations are thrown around without sufficient reasons.
He wasn't a modernist in the slightest. He was devoted mostly to St. Augustine and St. Bonaventure. He argues consistently and sharply for the importance of metaphysics and the ability to know the truth. It is sad when people who don't actually know the theological corpus of a great thinker throw inappropriate labels at him because they heard someone else say it. Ratzinger was always against modernism and fought hard against it.
To call Ratzinger a modernist is so far off base. To anyone that is familiar with his life and his work, this is an absurd statement! Best to read his work for yourself, rather than repeat what the trad echo chambers are saying.
Ratzinger was a liberal Council peritus, but a poor theologian, who was never able to square his theological expectations with the catastrophic results of the Council. To the end, he maintained his "theology of continuity," whereas it was clear to everyone, on both sides of the division, that there had been a serious rupture. He was thus living a self-imposed delusion, one that restrained him from actually saving the Church from its impending catastrophe. And then he resigned in cowardice, leaving his sheep to the wolves, proving himself to be a mere hireling. The whole generation of the Council was and is morally and theologically compromised. You have to be pretty desperate for heroes to take Benedict XVI as one.
Hello brother. I used to think similar to you, but then I studied more of the sources. How much of Ratzinger have you read? For instance, it’s a myth that Ratzinger was a Liberal theologian at the Council. Read his biography with Seewald and his Milestones. Ratzinger is more complicated than what you describe, brother. TSF
I wouldn't second Timothy's reply to you and his advice at the end of the video to 'steelman' the side you oppose to get to the truth of the matter. Timothy's book recommendations are an excellent start. Peter Seewald's bio should be required reading for everyone before giving an opinion on Ratzinger.
Ratzinger? Great? Can you talk about the elephant (modernist) in the room?
He wasn't a modernist. Good grief. He was completely against modernism. He was pro-St. Augustine and St. Bonaventure; that isn't modernism.
@@decluesviews2740 You don't have enough gray in your hair to understand that his fingerprints are all over the problems in the church. Did he he try to reverse course when he became pope? Yes, but it was too little too late and so he walked away and gave us Francis the Destroyer. 😔
@@lovesrlady2 That doesn't make him a modernist. It also tries to blame him for Francis, when he could not possibly have known who would be elected and what said pope would have done. If, let's say, an even more trad pope had been elected, would we still be blaming him, or thanking him? Francis is responsible for Francis. It's easy to cast blame in hindsight.
@@decluesviews2740 If Benedict XVI didn't abandon his children, we wouldn't have Francis at all.
I’m as a Catholic I say Pope Benedict never abandoned us , if you want to see it this way it’s your opinion.
Word on Fire????? Not.
🔥Church on fire🔥
@@Nitro1013 😂 if I don't laugh I'll cry!
at least we have an American bishop that is doing his very best to evangelize, barron steps up and for that I am grateful....
I will be forever grateful for bishop Barron. Althought im aware he is one foot on modernist side, i admit he was the one whos sermons and movies got me to start takeing Faith seriously. I dont follow him as i used to, i realize he lack of courage to say the plain Truth but im still grateful for everything good he has done
@@lawmaker22 And your testimony will mitigate his guilt before Our Lord.
The greatness of Ratzinger???? I thought this was a trad channel?!? Ratzinger was not great. No post Vatican 2 pope was great. Not at all. What in the world?
You don't sound like you've read much of Ratzinger.
@@stevenstuart4194 ridiculous comment
Im agree with you, even in this channel call Jp2 saint! This is a modernist channel period!!!
What a sad little world you live in. Radical traditionalism is an ideology just like modernism. If we can't trust the visible Catholic Church of today then all of this is a farse.
@@grantdomstead1383 keep reading. You haven’t arrived yet.