@@RedWolf5 to God. That's when he would actually be worshipping and loving God as opposed to loving himself, at which point he would cease to be the devil.
true but WE can actually, without imitation, obey the devil. especially when we choose to obey teachings that are contrary to what Christ Himself taught, no matter who the human source of that teaching may be, for we all have free will to say and teach evil, even the pope, if he so chooses (i.e. exercises his free will apart from the Holy Spirit).
@@flowinproductions6416 We don't have faith in the Pope , or any other human. We trust in the promises of Christ. That his Church would remain till the end of the age. That it would be the pillar and bulwark of His truth, and that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it. Bad Popes dont disprove Christ's assurances. They validate them because even the worst of them has not been able to corrupt Christ's truth. Whoever the anti Christ will be, if its even a singular person, will not be the Pope. We have Christ's promise
Yes! As a convert from Protestantism (6 years ago), this is balm to my soul. It breaks my heart when I see Catholics speak like this. I’m not sure if they realize how damaging it truly is.
You CONVERTED to this child rape cult? 330,000 little boys in France were raped by 3,000 catholic pedophile priests, and it barely made the news, because people EXPECT that from catholics. Jesus said child rape was UNFORGIVABLE (Matt 18:6-14), and everyone who supported it will get eternal damnation. That means every single catholic, especially you.
This is a great video. Recently, I made some traditional Catholic content which got some attention and falls under a lot of criticism you’re bringing up. And after reflecting on it for the past month, I really have to agree that rebelling against your own Church is a ridiculous thing to do (especially when the Church you’re rebelling against is the one Jesus established). Yes, the Pope and the Bishops have made imprudent decisions. And lay people don’t have to like every decision the Church makes. But it is a FACT that you have to submit to the Church (barring obvious exceptions). And consistently rebelling against the Church in such a public manner scandalizes others who are thinking of converting.
Right now, unfortunately, it's very trendy in Catholic circles who call Pope Francis "Bergoglio." At that point we're no better than Jack Chick disciples. Then we become Latin-speaking protestants.
It's not inappropriate to call a Pope by his second name. The problem are the tone and the intentions of those people who use the word 'Bergoglio' as an offence.
Catholics are a child raep cult no matter what you say. 330,000 little boys in France were raped by 3,000 catholic pedophile priests, and it barely made the news, because people EXPECT that from catholics. Jesus said child rape was UNFORGIVABLE (Matt 18:6-14), and everyone who supported it will get eternal damnation. That means every single catholic.
I don't even address my former Charismatic pastor by his first name alone. The title shows respect to God because this person acts as a father to an ecclesiasial community.
HILARIOUS. 330,000 little boys in France were raped by 3,000 catholic pedophile priests, and it barely made the news, because people EXPECT that from catholics. Your clergy runs the world's largest child rape cult, and you don't think they shoudl be questioned. Jesus said child rape was UNFORGIVABLE (Matt 18:6-14), and everyone who supported it will get eternal damnation. That means every single catholic. However, you laugh in the face of Jesus.
Unless of course, the personal attacks are attacking the personal and public scandals committed by clergy. As an extreme example: If someday a gay Pope steps out onto the Loggia and starts kissing his lover in full view of the gathered faithful and the whole world via media. Should the faithful just stand there and express their personal disappointment but it's really his business what he does and since he hasn't bound the faithful to an error of faith and morals I guess we should just do whatever he says.
Blessed Mother is telling us "to be alert and do not be deceived by False Magisterium." Magisterium is Pope, Vicar of Christ, and Bishops united with Him. Therefore False Magisterium means false pope and bishops united with him. This is another confirmation that the one in charge now is the false one and we should not follow him, but follow those Bishops who uphold and teach ages-old Catholic Dogmas and Traditions, because after the passing of Benedict XVI, we do not have True Pope with us now. When the Church is purified after Schism (separating from the false ones), we will have the last Pope in St. Malachy's prophecy -- 'Peter, the Roman, who will guide the Church through the persecutions of the Antichrist and his followers.
The problem is that the Pope and bishops undermine their own authority by distancing themselves from the very Tradition that affirms this authority. In the times like today we need the stability of Tradition more than ever.
@@donhaddix3770 The Church is older than the Bible. The scriptures that make up the Bible wouldn't have _any_ binding authority without the Church affirming it.
Well said. Glad I found your channel. My problem with the present hierarchy is not what is said and done, but what is not said and not done. They seem to have lost all interest in correcting blatant heresy and in publicly admonishing notorious public sinners who claim to be members of the Church.
“we don’t have to agree with their opinions beyond faith and morals.” Respectfully, Trent, there are instances where we don’t have to agree with their personal opinions ON faith and morals either. I agree we need to be respectful but there are also bishops spreading false views and teachings related to faith and morality.
I’m an FSSP parishioner. I’ve never heard our pastor or any of our other priests ever speak badly about the Holy Father. The most I’ve ever heard is them literally saying “we need to pray for the pope” because of the potential for the mass to be restricted. That’s it. I think they’ve honestly been more critical of the bishop but only for just reasons, like when our bishop wasn’t allowing any masses or confessions during covid, the pastor spoke out against that, which I think is fine. He didn’t do it in a disrespectful way. I think this comes down to the poison of social media and summed up by my pastor in this way: “Social media is not even neutral. It’s a net negative. You all need to stay off social media because it’s just feeding you fear, anger and anxiety. Stop following these talking heads on the internet who say crazy things. Stop watching the negative news about what’s happening in the church. What you need to do is come to mass, say your rosaries, and stay in unity with Holy Mother Church.”
I think a lot of these people are SSPXers or sympathize with the SSPX and have bought into their talking points. We had people at our parish that left for the SSPX and from what I heard, these were the more radical anti-pope Francis people. Our pastor warned people too about leaving and that it’s schism. But they dipped. We recently had a couple that argued with my buddy about the sspx and another priest had to shut them down. He laid it out why they’re wrong on V2, why they’re wrong on the pope, and why they’re wrong on the SSPX. Told them that they don’t have licit sacraments or orders and have no jurisdiction to do anything. That they are truly a schismatic group. I was so proud of him when he did that. Cause some priests just aren’t courageous or knowledgeable enough to do that. So props to him.
The types he's addressing are more in line with the SSPX or even sedevacantists. Those comments are the same rhetoric I would always see (and disseminate myself, mea culpa) in those circles.
I’m a SSPX parishioner, it was my first parish after my conversion from protestantism 8 months ago. I have your same experience, never heard that rhetoric on my parish and less from our priest. We pray for the pope, and he teaches us about the Church and pope’s authority. I think social media and YT is feeding a uncharitable hatred among catholics and creating this dialectical war with labels like “trads”, “radtrad”, “sspx” etc. It’s sad that the fact that mentioning that someone is from the SSPX can trigger a lot of prejudices in peoples minds about a fellow catholic. It’s sad… but I pray that this would end soon, and the Church settles this issue. Maybe getting off social media and just having a coffee with a catholic brother from the “other side” can make people see that there are more reasons to be one.
@@AbdielGonzalez-in4zv that’s very interesting. We had some parishioners leave for the sspx and since then I’ve only met a couple. You’re the only person I’ve seen online who has said this about their parish! Must be unique. Praying for full unity if the church and reconciliation of the Holy See and the Society. Pray for your bishops cause I know they’re divided on this
Thank you Trent. A much needed clarification and warning to those Catholics who behave in this way. My Mass and the Eucharist are my life and that is what matters to me. I pray for guidance for our Holy Father Pope Francis, our Clergy and laity. “Love one another as I have loved you” 🙏
Thank you Trent! I have been discerning catholicism and this bothers me. I'm a bit hung up on the papacy because of the way people treat the novus ordo, the pope, etc. People like you being honest and restating what Catholics believe have helped me.
As a newer convert, I was nearly lead down a path of despair because of all the disparaging commentary on the pope and the Novus Ordo mass, particularly on TH-cam. I have a wonderful and wise priest (convert) and attend a reverent Novus Ordo mass every Sunday. I thank God in my prayers every night for the amazing priests He has placed in my life to learn from and for our pope, our church and the unity of all Christian's 🙏❤
May God bless and guide your discernment, brother. I hope one day celebrate your coming home to the Church. But, whatever happens, may God's blessings be with you. I would like to testify this from my own experience: I have attended Masses of in both the Ordinary ("Novus Ordo") and Extraordinary ("Tridentine", "Latin", or "TLM") Forms. In that experience, I have seen Masses of great beauty and solemnity in both forms. I have also seen uninspiring Masses, though they were still holy by the presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist, in both forms. It really comes down to the way in which it is celebrated. "Novus Ordo" Masses can have full choirs singing majestic music, the use of incense, and the inclusion of things like saying the Rosary pre-Mass or the St. Michael Prayer after Mass. Nothing prevents such pious practices and others in a "Novus Ordo" Mass. Nor, indeed, are those the only ways that a Mass can be celebrated with solemnity. I hope that you can take heart from this that the Mass being celebrated in most cases is not lacking or to be looked down upon.
@@steelytemplar thank you for sharing your experience. I have kind of come to realize that you can make the novus ordo beautiful and reverent. I think it is harder to make a bad Latin maybe because it has so many guard rails, but I think I now see that the novus ordo just gives people more freedom to express themselves as they see appropriate
Thank you Trent! Excellent video. I appreciate you addressing this topic since anyone who frequently looks up Catholic content on TH-cam is likely to come across those who are too harsh with our clergy. Channels like yours and Michael Lofton's do a good job explaining the nuance of our faith without overindulging in one position or another.
I appreciate this video Trent. As someone who attends the TLM, uncharitable rhetoric isn't uncommon. I try to avoid the finer points of Church politics, but I do sympathize with Catholics that are angry with the hierarchy. The timid leadership and consistent ambiguity are a source of real scandal. It's especially damaging when trying to evangelize conservative Protestants. Even if you effectively convey the beauty and truth of the Catholic faith, many are simply unwilling to step under the authority of a pope who seems more concerned with climate change than biblical morality.
Yep. My protestant family could not understand why I would convert under the current pope. They constantly come to me with questions about why he said this or that. I can only say "maybe he was mistranslated" so many times.
@@Mrs_Homemaker My brother left the Catholic faith to join a conservative Protestant church. He had never really taken ownership of his Catholic faith so I don't think it was mainly about theological issues. He's strong in his faith for Christ and even agrees with Catholic teachings on things like contraception. But every time I bring up the topic of the Catholic faith, he expresses his concerns about Pope Francis. What am I supposed to say? That the Vicar of Christ, capable of infallible teaching, doesn't need to be a strong defender of orthodoxy?
@@BrewMeister27 Pope Francis isn’t actively teaching heresy though (I’m sure if he did I would know about it), and if he were invalid, he would be teaching heresy. Despite what he does personally, he is not contradicting from his place of authority the teachings of the church. That, if anything, should be a testament to the power of the position.
@@fury_blade9303 I'm not accusing him of openly teaching heresy or being invalid. I'm accusing him of committing the sin of scandal. And that's a very serious sin because it turns people away from the faith. People like my brother. Pope Francis has a habit of making vague, off the cuff remarks. The media then interpret and report them in the most left-wing context. But then Pope Francis never comes out to correct the record. When his "who am I to judge?" comment was reported as approval for gay marriage, he allowed that characterization to stand. He never released a response forcefully condemning the LGBT agenda. And repeated incidences like this have allowed the public to believe the Catholic Church is tolerant of heretical beliefs. And that scandalizes the conservative protestants that would otherwise be interested in the Catholic faith.
I think many Catholics are tired of the Pope talking about Climate Change. At times, he seems more like a politician than a Pope. I certainly miss John Paul 2.
Great point about the authority of the Catholic Church! Many are confused by the current situation and throw the baby out with the bath water. We should be faithful children of the Roman Catholic Church and live our faith within the confines of what the Church allows. Obedience can be difficult to discern but is necessary to belong to our hierarchical Church.
Thank you for this talk. We are called to unify the Church not to divide her. This coming Sunday is Pentecost. May we bring ourselves down and allow the Holy Spirit to lead the Church. Lord Jesus, help us follow your footsteps in obedience.
Hi Trent this was so needed. I am expat living in the Middle East and here we don't have so much issues about Pope. But on social media when I joined certain catholic groups just to grow in my faith , I realized that they constantly bashed our Pope which made me leave those groups Sometimes too much exposure to these comments can slow make us be ok with this. And this talk was so needed because you have called this out and spoken so clearly. Thank you once again :)
Before opening your mouth to criticize, open your mouth to offer a prayer. Pray more often than you criticize, then you might actually see some changes in the world.
I just look at this as being above my paygrade. I cant do anything about the clearly horrible things happening in the Church. And at the end of the day, its their millstone, not mine. But it does HURT on a physcial level (not to mention spiritual) to see bishops cower before the world and refuse to speak rightly. It makes us laity feel rather alone standing up for Christ when we have leaders in the Church saying nothing or being unclear. It doesnt take a theology degree to know that much of what is being allowed is wrong.
Pope Francis and some bishops make it very difficult to talk to protestants about the true Catholic faith, at least thats the case down here in alabama. They are aware of the sexual abuse cover-up, pachimama (they really hate idols), the german bishop push to accept homosexual marriage, the Holy Father's pressure on Catholics to get the covid vaccination, the bust of Martin Luther, the allowance of a celebration of an episcopal mass at st. John lateran...they see these things as proof that their protestantism is OK. Pope Francis is a challenge for me personally in many ways, including evangelization. I pray for him and for my own charity toward him.
Terrible comparison, the Church hás declined in every positive metric after VII, while no such thing happened after VI. Trent talks about the Magisterium now, which effectively doesn't exist, not because the hierarchy lacks Authority, but because they refuse to use it. Take Bishop Cordileone's case for example: Even his softer approach saying Nancy Pelosi should stay away from the Eucharist for promoting abortion was countermanded by Pope Francis, despite so-called colegiality being important to the Church. In fact Bishop Cordileone is entirely within his right to excommunicate Nancy Pelosi, but he won't because that'd bê too harsh and authoritarian.
I feel exposed. I didn't know this, I literally said that Pope Francis had moral deficiencies to two people yesterday. Appart from confession, what else can I do to stop being ignorant? How can I stop myself from cringing or blushing as I haphazardly try to defend what the Pope says to my non-Catholic friends without looking stupid? I defend him = stupid fanatic. I criticize him = stupid fanatic. What should I do? Honestly, if I talked badly of my own father to other people, in defiance, I would feel horrible. I now know I am not justified. Is silence the better option? Something I feel very often is that bishops are super abstract. The people I hear on Catholic issues are on books and TH-cam, the priests in my parishes seem cold to me, like they would rather go to lunch than listen to my sins... literally. I feel like sobbing when they repeat in confession, verbatim, what they said in the homily as if I am still a member of a crowd instead of a very particular person, with very partiuclar sins, standing in front of them. Pouring my soul out. Talking like a politician would, instead of like a father to his children, reading from a tele-prompter. I could probably only name 2 bishops in my country. The whole bulk of what they say is unknown to me appart from the 1% that gets news coverage. I feel fatherless spiritually. Are my feelings, as a lay woman, an unimportant subjective thing then?
I'm really hurt by the inaction of the bishops here in Brazil in regard to our heretic and sometimes out right apostate actions of catholics polititions against all kind of moral teaching of the Church, but their minuncious look to orthodox layty through boards that include all kind of marxists and heretic professors. Including bishops condemning political use of the faith meanwhile posing shporting the socialist current government, my heart bleeds. May we pray this week preceding Pentecost that our Church is pacified.
Brazil and the whole of South America is in my prayers. I know millions of faithful exist but the news which comes out of there, almost makes me feel as if that part of the world is not Catholic anymore (at least not as much as I thought it was)
Being Catholic in Brazil makes me wish the Orthodox Church was more present here. Sometimes the catholic leadership can be so liberal and compromising it hurts.
@@ne0nmancer Did you listen to the video? Why would you want a schismatic church to be more present, that’s like wishing to be in the near occasion of sin off another temptation because you think it’s too hard to do stick to the toughness of the moral order. Guard yourself against these temptations brother. 🙏
I’m with you in the majority of the points made. It’s truly disheartening sometimes that the leading bishops are left-wing leaning and some actively participated in public manifestations during elections. Some priests are known to be liberals and to advocate for moral relativism without proper correction. But let’s be honest, the last election was a tragic scenario for Catholicism either Lula or Bolsonaro won it. Bolsonaro was ‘blessed’ on his knees by “Bishop Edir Macedo” in an egregious act of a pure anti-Catholic behavior. All he did was to commit the country to the bizarre trend of Pentecostalism and he NEVER sincerely spoke to the Catholic majority here. Actually he deliberately ostracized us. I think he despised us deep down. Yet Catholicism in Brazil is THE religion of the poor and the pilgrims and those guys whom Bolsonaro fell for were the ones instructing their pastors to blasphemously destroy images of Our Lady Aparecida (“Igreja Universal do Reino de Deus”), don’t you remember? Then Bolsonaro was even “Re-baptized” by Pastor Everaldo in the Jordan River, Israel: well, I’m talking about a politician from the “Bancada da Bíblia” who was arrested for corruption not so long ago. So Bolsonaro even dared to say he is a “Catholic”. Really? One ashamed of his faith in the best scenario or an apostate in the worst, standing to ignore our faith - in the heights of his 4th marriage. He NEVER did one little thing to talk to the Catholic majority but flirted with every obscure Protestant “church” (ecclesial community) in the country. So the real problem with some Brazilian conservative Catholics is that they are politicizing the faith to an intolerable degree just as a response to leftism that they THINK is proportional and necessary - when it clearly is NOT. And yes, so many of us may throw darts at the CNBB (our National conference of bishops) but on January 18th, JUST after Lula got his office (Bolsonaro wasn’t gold but it’s just unbelievable that we even elected that man again, a criminal!), with leftists taking over the presidency, the CNBB made a harsh statement at the Federal Government due to it signaling for the flexibility on abortion rules. Even leftist bishops had the guts to say it out loud. What did those “Internet conservatives” do? Most of them are incapable to help the poor on their own standings and moral lives yet they can think they are able to judge the Church’s hierarchy on Internet tribunals of young “enragé” people. Besides, we have to honestly understand those bishops were ordained priests while we lived the military right-wing dictatorship (1964-1985) and probably that made sense during their theological formation. But they are definitely not perpetual. Younger bishops are much more inclined to reviving tradition and some of the more influential priests in their platforms online are simply too big in the “cultural war” against militant leftism. They are the most ostensive expression, not really the CNBB, of the Catholic Church today in Brazil among the young people. Don’t let yourselves contaminated by the crypto-Protestant mentality. And no, not those with schismatic tendencies. There is room for optimism in the cultural war even though we can feel pessimistic about the growing rates of (the worst versions of) Pentecostalism in the country: some of those leading figures are nothing but satanic on so many levels, for us to miss a general preoccupation here. So I think this tendency of some Brazilian “conservative” Catholics to pose as rebels against the bishops (in a stupid generalization) is almost always ridiculous and mostly ineffective. It doesn’t respond to the cultural war and only instrumentalize the worst versions of Protestantism, even some sects within and without its boundaries. As a conservative myself I can’t help but notice the wrong perception people can have online under the vitriol. But please look just here on TH-cam some of the largest Catholic channels in Brazil: Frei Gilson/ Som do Monte - 3,78 mi subscribed - more than 897 mi views; Padre Reginaldo Manzotti - 3,77 mi subscribed - more than 691 mi views; Luz e Vida - Padre Chrystian Shankar - 1,97 mi subscribed - more than 237 mi views; Padre Paulo Ricardo - 1,61 mi subscribed - more than 281 mi views; TV Canção Nova - 2,55 mi subscribed - more than 344 mi views; TV Aparecida - 3,56 mi subscribed - more than 377 mi views; Fé Católica - 1,63 mi subscribed - more than 198 mi views; Pe Marcelo Rossi - 3,09 mi subscribed - more than 1,05 billion views. ALL those channels have made some ostensive critique to the contamination of our Catholic faith by mundaneness and liberalism. Even TV Aparecida, which seems to be more “left leaning”, have made some serious commitment to preserve the faith against moral relativism. So we need to do our part and just stop being crypto-Protestants online, so as to undermine authority, even if under proclaimed noble purposes. Be intelligent and, more so, be faithful. And ALWAYS pray for the clergy.
I sure hope Trent doesn't go that direction. Seems like that guy dedicates all of his time to antagonizing fringe groups that are just slightly off the mark, that are still at least fighting for the right values in a wicked, secular, hedonistic world.
@@willing_spirit6830 Slightly? Antagonize? Our faith cannot be reduced to a set of values. Schism is schism, with the same fundamental rejection of authority, regardless of the degree. Lofton is doing good work engaging Orthodox and sedevacantist arguments and personalities. Every apologist and channel has its own strengths and focus.
@@tonyl3762 He hardly is focused just on true schismatics, and I don't see strength in gaslighting and hypocrisy. He antagonizes even practicing Catholics like Taylor Marshall and Tim Gordon. He insists on an abundance of charity when interpreting Pope Francis's words, even as we see Pope Francis's actions trying to give more power to people like Bishop Heiner Wilmer and reprimanding those that speak bluntly on the Church's teachings. Then he affords no charity to people like Frank Pavone when he is sorting out his surprising and confusing situation. I just don't understand how Michael Lofton has the nerve to take such a condescending tone as someone that has said he switched churches 3 times Protestant to Catholic to Orthodox back to Catholic.
Trent, thank you so much for making this video. I worry about my other Catholic friends when it comes to speaking about our pope and bishops. Could those who address Pope Francis as “Bergoglio”, or the bishops like the way you described in your video, be considered guilty of the sin of calumny?
Why is it so hard for catholics to pray for popes and catholic leaders 😢? I remember a priest said to not insult or bad speaking abt pope (not just cristicism); it’s just what devils want. In my catcholic local church and my prayer, i pray for pope, too. You know what? One time, i read a comment that makes me angry… it was when the pope was very ill and some people wish he died… the worst was one said that she hoped next pope election, HOLY SPIRIT does her job and not sleeping/being lazy. 😡😡😡 Goodness. Now, people INSULT holy spirit???? They feel wiser and better than Holy Spirit???? Are they forgot, Holy Spirit is GOD? My goodness! When we want or even feel better than God or want His position…remember… we are getting far away from Him. We are more like satan. Period! Just pray for each other. Pope and priests serve mass for us and every sacrament…so, let’s say “thank you” by praying for them. Spiritual war is real!
As a former Protestant, I see clearly the slippery slope of being uncharitable towards the Pope can cause. It leads some people into literal heresy. Sure, this Pope has been problematic and is probably not the best we have had in the past few hundred years. But, he’s also not the worst Pope. I like to stick to the essentials and leave the Pope to God.
@user-ki2vh1uc5k I believe that Bishop Strickland got canned because of not limiting the Latin Mass. But we have seen in the past couple of years, religious stand up and be cancelled by the church hierarchy. The Catholic church has an organization of cancelled priests, that says alot.
@@robertajaycart3491 Unfortunately there have been more than a few canceled Catholic clergymen since Francis has been the Pope. I don't remember so many conservative Priests and Bishops being removed by a Pope. The fact that the ultra liberal German Bishops who do whatever they want and don't get punished, is deeply disturbing.
May the Holy Spirit will continue to guide you and give you wisdom to echo the truth of the Catholic Church teachings and doctrines and shed light the misconception of our fellow Catholics. Amen. Jesus enlighten us.
I do not think the Bishops or Pope are above criticism, however I think that when you seek to criticize a successor to the apostles you should do at least 2 things: 1. Know exactly what you're talking about, know the facts, and make sure you have a proper understanding of the issue. 2. Give the Bishop or Pope the absolutely most charitable viewpoint possible. We should criticize our leaders as if they are good Fathers. If you have a good Father I don't think you would insult him when trying to offer feedback, criticism, or seek clarity. I think if you were going to attempt to criticize a good father you would be gentle and incredibly charitable.
I do agree and i believe this is a trap i've fallen into and am guilty of a few times. However, where is the happy medium? Is there a proper way to go about saying things like "the new mass is overall a bad thing" or is that an opinion that isnt permissable?
I attend TLM and this behaviour is indeed very much present nowadays, at least here in France. It is a form of protestantism and it ought to be condemned. It may even be the reason why TLM got restricted - to avoid a schism (and I'm not defending the restrictions btw).
@@bard5865 Yep, it did make it worse. It was a mistake. But comparing this to the betrayal of our Lord is truly excessive and historically 100% inaccurate.
I noticed that this rebellious attitude exists in America as well. Both countries (France and America) have strong traditions of rebellion (French Revolution and the philosophical ramifications of that, and American War of Independence, Civil War, etc.) I wonder if that is why Catholics from both countries have this streak of Protestantism.
5:51 The issue of charismatic laity is something that gives me pause for the near future. With a few buzzy conversions on the horizon-from Candace Owens to Dr. Peterson and Tucker Carlson- without support for the Church tradition and hierarchy, a celebrity’s following creates as many problems as it solves.
What then handle cases when 100y ago Church said "A" and now say "not A"? How can both be infallible teachings? Another simple example, how I should behave when some bishop (or future pope) say that homosexuality is not sin and is ok? Should I obey it or I can resist it? Would be it schism to reject this bishop?
When I was getting into Catholicism again a few months ago I was watching a lot of Taylor Marshall vids. He makes some good points but also his hyperbole and exaggeration as to how bad are the state of the church and the Pope almost drove me to orthodoxy. But I kinda realized that he’s overstating problems and leaving out mitigating details a lot of times, and now I listen to his videos sometimes but mostly with a grain of salt.
Pope Pius IX condemned the so called Old Catholics because they asserted that all the bishops of the Church have fallen into heresy. We don’t claim That at Vatican II all the bishops have fallen into heresy-maybe the vast majority of them but not all of them.
16:45 To add to that point, we know that nun to most certainly not exist: Lofton checked with the diocese and there are no such monestary as suggested in the apparation.
if we must accept/obey everything the pope of our time says, then that "everything" must include what he says that is contrary to scripture, and what is contrary to other bishops of the time (who continue to teach what was always taught, let's just say hypothetically). *this seems like belief in magisterium above scripture and tradition. i mean sincerely, which bishop am i supposed to listen to nowadays if that is our primary way of knowing the faith? i assume i would have to bypass any local authority and just base my life off what our pope says, in which case i'd have to go against my conscience on things that seem to be grave matter in many, many situations. that's i assume why tradition/scripture needs to be held in the same esteem as magisterium, thus magisterium cannot attempt to trump the others. also, don't forget you prefaced your obedience to bishops segment with how it's correlated to a husband's authority over his family. it sounds like you are then going even further than those "radicals" and saying a family must obey EVERYTHING a husband/father says, even if it's a grave sin (say, a sexually-related sin), but you're at least wholly affirming the husband/father's authority over the wife/children.
Great comment. Magisterium is subordinate to Tradition which is subordinate to Scripture. There is no way out of the dilemma except a return to the sola Scriptura recovered by the true Church during the glorious Reformation. Sola Scrriptura means that nothing can be taught as dogma if it is not affirmed in Scripture. I am almost certain that this so-called "Catholic" youtuber believes in his heart of hearts that Francis is not a true Pope. But were he to admit it publicly, the human-made superstructure of Romanism would collapse on his head. Romanism is far more fractious than the Churches of the Reformation. There are nearly as many "RC Orthodoxies" as there are Roman Catholics. Why? Like the Bible, "the Catechism"/"the Canon Laws" of the RCC must also be interpreted. In their attempt to enforce man-made uniformity, the heedless Romanists replaced a divine book with a human distillate of the same. But unlike the Bible, only very few doctrines in "the Catechism" have ever been infallibly defined (such as the Assumption) so most of its stipulations are mere pius opinions (since they may be wrong). Therefore, literarily every Romanist has his/her private orthodoxy. I know many Romanists who have declared the Pope an anti-Pope or a "Protestant Pope" simply because they disagree with the Pope's NON-DOGMATIC OPINION on some aspect of the "Catechism!" There is far more unity of doctrine between the CLASSICAL forms of the major branches of the Reformed Churches (Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Baptist, etc) than amongst the confusing array of Romanist contortions. Each RC denomination (Mainline, Montinian, Sedevacantist, SSPV, SSPX, Conclavist, Lefebvrist, Catholic Restoration, Sedeprivationist, Ultramontanist, Semi-traditionalist, Concilarist, Neo-ultramontanist, Novus Ordo Catholic, Catholic Liberal, Extraordinary Formist, Opus Dei, Divine Mercy cultists, etc, etc) seems to make up its own "Catholic Truth" on the go. Ironically, it is easier to know what a Reformed denomination believes than to pin down RCs to anything. I do not (yet) know any Baptists who believe that the President of the Baptist Convention is an unsaved heretic. But there is a vibrant army of zealous RCs online screaming that all Popes since Paul VI (some even add John the XXIII for good measure) are damned heretics and false prophets!! What can be more confusing? I repeat - the Churches of the Reformation agreed on major points of doctrine. Anglicans did not believe that Lutherans were heretics whereas many RC denominations believe the Pope himself to be a heretic. The trick of referring to every non-Roman Church as "Protestant" is fallacious. How can a sect formed in Poland in 1998 by a former Romanist be called "Protestant"? This linguistic farce has gotten so bad that there are now millions of Romanists who actually believe that Pope Francis is "Protestant". But if all the Churches formed by former Methodists are linked back to Methodism as "Protestant" then surely all denominations founded by former Romanists should continue to be linked with Romanism. Nothing stops the Orthodox Church from lumping all non-Orthodox Churches (including the RCC) together and giving them one name - say, "the Heterodox" - and then pointing out that "Heterdodox sects" are doctrinally confused. Baptists can play the same disingenuous linguistic game by lumping every non-Baptist (including Romanists) under one name (e.g. "Paedo-baptists") so as to "prove" that only Baptists are coherent! What people find so attractive about Romanism (namely, its consistency) is an illusion.
Christ never promised any church or any bishop infallibly nor protected from teaching errors. In fact 2 Peter 2:1 tells us that there will be false teachers in the church that will deceive many. That certainly has happened to the RCC.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 🎙️ Host's Introduction: The speaker aims to address a concerning trend among faithful Catholics who reject the authority of bishops and the pope. 00:56 👥 Rejecting Authority: Many Catholics criticize bishops and the pope, rejecting their authority and teachings. 02:28 🤔 Thoughtful Criticism vs. Contempt: Thoughtful criticism of bishops can turn into harmful contempt, damaging the Church and unity. 03:23 🌍 Inconsistent Messages: Catholics who criticize bishops to others while promoting Church's importance create confusion for non-Catholics. 04:22 📜 Living Magisterium: The Church has a living magisterium that teaches with authority in the present moment. 06:11 🔀 Historical Examples: Historical examples (Old Catholic Church) show dangers of rejecting bishops' authority, leading to division and heresy. 08:34 🛐 Obedience to Bishops: Catholics should not selectively obey bishops based on personal interpretations or preferences. 10:56 ❗ Authority of Magisterium: Non-infallible teachings by bishops must be obeyed; rejecting their authority can lead to schism. 13:41 💔 Misuse of Terms: Using terms like "spiritual abuse" to disregard bishops' authority can lead to division. 16:48 👑 Validity of Popes: Rejecting a Pope's validity without strong evidence risks schism and disregards historical context. 18:11 🌐 Church Unity: Historical examples and scripture emphasize the importance of unity and submission to Church leaders. 20:06 📚 Historical Revisionism: Comparisons to Protestant Reformation caution against selectively interpreting Church history. 23:15 🙏 Submitting to Leaders: Rather than rejecting bishops, Catholics should respectfully engage with Church leaders for clarity. 24:12 🤝 Balanced Approach: Pray for Church leaders, submit to their teachings, and seek understanding without resorting to slander or contempt.
Unfortunately, there is actually a precious rare amount of Catholic sources that spend more than an hour on Ecclesiology and Church drama. Michael Lofton has basically become the only one who dedicates the majority of his time talking about Pope Francis Derangement Syndrome, schism, Ecclesiology......we need more Catholics to speak up and address what true obedience is from a Catholic understanding, contrary to the "true obedience" of the Marshal's and Kwasniewski's of the world.
I'm not going to lie, Pope Francis isn't my favorite Pope, but he is my Pope, chosen by the Holy Spirit to guide the Church as he sees fit. And when I think I know better, I'm always reminded (I wanna say its by my Guardian Angel), you know if the Holy Spirit wanted you to run the One Holy and Apostolic Faith, and sit in the Chair of Saint Peter, your name could've come up. But it didn't, so pray.
Although I don’t want to throw anyone under the bus, sometimes I think that there are Catholic “influencers” who are more concerned with clicks, likes and shares more than drawing people to Christs church. Negativity sells, and they almost approach the issues with the intention of drawing viewers to their channel, not followers to the church. This is why I stopped focusing on what is being said, there’s enough grifters and half-hearted “traditionalists” who are following trends more than following the core of faith and spiritual direction.
You have it spot on. There are many ‘traditional’ Catholic channels and all they provide is ‘scandal porn’ - their followers end up addicted to hearing the current scandal and become rabid to the point of you don’t practise your faith exactly like them they will say all the same things Protestants say to Catholics IE they condemn you to hell, say you aren’t following Christ and are in the false church/whore of Babylon, will hold your past sins against you ignoring the fact you have repented of them (for example I’m honest with people that I strayed from the faith as an older teen and ended up becoming a single mother outwith wedlock. To his that past sin of mine that I have repented for would mean to hide and deny my son who is an absolute blessing on my life and it was because he was born that I returned to the faith as I promised my parents I would bring him up loving God) or worse many tell you that it’s better to commit the mortal sin of missing Mass if you are unable to attend TLM - image telling faithful Catholics to ignore and neglect Our Lord in the Tabernacle.
I do my best to stay away from Church Politics. I say again and again it reminds me of the spirit fundamentalism! I will not agree with every statement from a pope, bishop, priest, deacon, and lay person; with that being said, I pray for them and stay out of the drama! I do look forward to all the the books coming out. I do not know too much about Matthew Barrett, but I will look him up. I pray that the authors will be gracious towards us Catholics.
And if you think about it, Catholic teachings have not changed and will always be IF Catholics truly believe and trust in the protection of the Holy Spirit on faith and morals. While it's concerning to hear many of the comments by the Pope or Bishops I just listen and move on especially if I have no obligation to believe what they say. Usually their statements are their own opinion, nothing more.
“A man is converted to the Catholic Church from his admiration of its religious system, and his disgust with Protestantism. That admiration remains; but, after a time, he leaves his new faith, perhaps returns to his old. The reason, if we may conjecture, may sometimes be this: he has never believed in the Church’s infallibility; in her doctrinal truth he has believed, but in her infallibility, no. He was asked, before he was received, whether he held all that the Church taught, he replied he did; but he understood the question to mean, whether he held those particular doctrines “which at that time the Church in matter of fact formally taught,” whereas it really meant “whatever the Church then or at any future time should teach.” Thus, he never had the indispensable and elementary faith of a Catholic, and was simply no subject for reception into the fold of the Church. This being the case, when the Immaculate Conception is defined, he feels that it is something more than he bargained for when he became a Catholic, and accordingly he gives up his religious profession. The world will say that he has lost his certitude of the divinity of the Catholic Faith, but he never had it.” - St. John Henry Newman, An Essay in Aid to a Grammar of Assent
Reminds me of the military. When you have a bad captain, you'll hear numerous people say "respect the position, even if the person holding it is irrespectable." But if you really respect the position, would you allow someone unworthy to disgrace it?
@@fruzsimih7214 No. Indeed, a soldier has little say on who leads him, but you ignore the captain when you can, and subvert him when necessary. Poor leaders destroy units. Hopefully he'll learn and improve, but it's just as likely he won't.
I think it has less to do with Malicious thoughts towards the Bishops and more a lack of clear language. It is easier to call someone a heretic than to just straight up call them Cowards. Or easier to say their chair is vacant than to call them Stupid. Because if you call someone a Coward you have to be Brave in the ways they are not but should be or if you call someone Stupid you have to be Intelligent in the way that they are not but should be. Be direct, if you think a Bishop isn't saying/doing what he ought then call him a Coward or Stupid but then you should be ready to own up to the comparison.
You are so right, no matter what I believe God put Pope Francis in the papacy for a reason. Our Lord Jesus can easily discard him if God wants to. I do not understand too how Catholics become disrespectful of our pope, he is still the pope and should be given respect. I will take the position that Father Pio did with his bishop, follow your bishop because maybe God is trying to change something in you that you have not realized or is giving you grace to enter heaven.. God has purpose for everything. We should love our church as Jesus' spouse. When leaders are not faithful, the church is still the spouse of our Lord. I am not the one to make judgment or give the punishment only Jesus can and will. Be patient, the church is not a political conglomerate, only God can make the change and punishment. I only need to be patient and pray for our Catholic hierarchy. Even Mother Mary, she requested everyone to pray more and penance because God will send more blessings to the church when His people pray and live virtuous lives.
There is no way out of the dilemma except a return to the sola Scriptura recovered by the true Church during the glorious Reformation. I am almost certain that this so-called "Catholic" youtuber believes in his heart of hearts that Francis is not a true Pope. But were he to admit it publicly, the human-made superstructure of Romanism would collapse on his head. Romanism is far more fractious than the Churches of the Reformation. There are nearly as many "RC Orthodoxies" as there are Roman Catholics. Why? Like the Bible, "the Catechism"/"the Canon Laws" of the RCC must also be interpreted. In their attempt to enforce man-made uniformity, the heedless Romanists replaced a divine book with a human distillate of the same. But unlike the Bible, only very few doctrines in "the Catechism" have ever been infallibly defined (such as the Assumption) so most of its stipulations are mere pius opinions (since they may be wrong). Therefore, literarily every Romanist has his/her private orthodoxy. I know many Romanists who have declared the Pope an anti-Pope or a "Protestant Pope" simply because they disagree with the Pope's NON-DOGMATIC OPINION on some aspect of the "Catechism!" There is far more unity of doctrine between the CLASSICAL forms of the major branches of the Reformed Churches (Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Baptist, etc) than amongst the confusing array of Romanist contortions. Each RC denomination (Mainline, Montinian, Sedevacantist, SSPV, SSPX, Conclavist, Lefebvrist, Catholic Restoration, Sedeprivationist, Ultramontanist, Semi-traditionalist, Concilarist, Neo-ultramontanist, Novus Ordo Catholic, Catholic Liberal, Extraordinary Formist, Opus Dei, Divine Mercy cultists, etc, etc) seems to make up its own "Catholic Truth" on the go. Ironically, it is easier to know what a Reformed denomination believes than to pin down RCs to anything. I do not (yet) know any Baptists who believe that the President of the Baptist Convention is an unsaved heretic. But there is a vibrant army of zealous RCs online screaming that all Popes since Paul VI (some even add John the XXIII for good measure) are damned heretics and false prophets!! What can be more confusing? I repeat - the Churches of the Reformation agreed on major points of doctrine. Anglicans did not believe that Lutherans were heretics whereas many RC denominations believe the Pope himself to be a heretic. The trick of referring to every non-Roman Church as "Protestant" is fallacious. How can a sect formed in Poland in 1998 by a former Romanist be called "Protestant"? This linguistic farce has gotten so bad that there are now millions of Romanists who actually believe that Pope Francis is "Protestant". But if all the Churches formed by former Methodists are linked back to Methodism as "Protestant" then surely all denominations founded by former Romanists should continue to be linked with Romanism. Nothing stops the Orthodox Church from lumping all non-Orthodox Churches (including the RCC) together and giving them one name - say, "the Heterodox" - and then pointing out that "Heterdodox sects" are doctrinally confused. Baptists can play the same disingenuous linguistic game by lumping every non-Baptist (including Romanists) under one name (e.g. "Paedo-baptists") so as to "prove" that only Baptists are coherent! What people find so attractive about Romanism (namely, its consistency) is an illusion.
Thanks for doing this video. I'm sure you'll get pushback from some. I'm a Lutheran converting to Catholicism and this is what I am trying to escape - constant squabbling and negativity which is a Protestant mindset, IMHO.
Trent, absolutely killed it in this episode. You're doing an amazing job. I used to be very close to sedevecantism and now I'm glad to have turned from that. The Catholics that are uncharitable to the Pope are great soldiers for Protestantism and Orthodoxy
There is no way out of the dilemma except a return to the sola Scriptura recovered by the true Church during the glorious Reformation. I am almost certain that this so-called "Catholic" youtuber believes in his heart of hearts that Francis is not a true Pope. But were he to admit it publicly, the human-made superstructure of Romanism would collapse. Romanism is far more fractious than the Churches of the Reformation. There are nearly as many "RC Orthodoxies" as there are Roman Catholics. Why? Like the Bible, "the Catechism"/"the Canon Laws" of the RCC must also be interpreted. In their attempt to enforce man-made uniformity, the heedless Romanists replaced a divine book with a human distillate of the same. But unlike the Bible, only very few doctrines in "the Catechism" have ever been infallibly defined (such as the Assumption) so most of its stipulations are mere pius opinions (since they may be wrong). Therefore, literarily every Romanist has his/her private orthodoxy. I know many Romanists who have declared the Pope an anti-Pope or a "Protestant Pope" simply because they disagree with the Pope's NON-DOGMATIC OPINION on some aspect of the "Catechism!" There is far more unity of doctrine between the CLASSICAL forms of the major branches of the Reformed Churches (Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Baptist, etc) than amongst the confusing array of Romanist contortions. Each RC denomination (Mainline, Montinian, Sedevacantist, SSPV, SSPX, Conclavist, Lefebvrist, Catholic Restoration, Sedeprivationist, Ultramontanist, Semi-traditionalist, Concilarist, Neo-ultramontanist, Novus Ordo Catholic, Catholic Liberal, Extraordinary Formist, Opus Dei, Divine Mercy cultists, etc, etc) seems to make up its own "Catholic Truth" on the go. Ironically, it is easier to know what a Reformed denomination believes than to pin down RCs to anything. I do not (yet) know any Baptists who believe that the President of the Baptist Convention is an unsaved heretic. But there is a vibrant army of zealous RCs online screaming that all Popes since Paul VI (some even add John the XXIII for good measure) are damned heretics and false prophets!! What can be more confusing? I repeat - the Churches of the Reformation agreed on major points of doctrine. Anglicans did not believe that Lutherans were heretics whereas many RC denominations believe the Pope himself to be a heretic. The trick of referring to every non-Roman Church as "Protestant" is fallacious. How can a sect formed in Poland in 1998 by a former Romanist be called "Protestant"? This linguistic farce has gotten so bad that there are now millions of Romanists who actually believe that Pope Francis is "Protestant". But if all the Churches formed by former Methodists are linked back to Methodism as "Protestant" then surely all denominations founded by former Romanists should continue to be linked with Romanism. Nothing stops the Orthodox Church from lumping all non-Orthodox Churches (including the RCC) together and giving them one name - say, "the Heterodox" - and then pointing out that "Heterdodox sects" are doctrinally confused. Baptists can play the same disingenuous linguistic game by lumping every non-Baptist (including Romanists) under one name (e.g. "Paedo-baptists") so as to "prove" that only Baptists are coherent! What people find so attractive about Romanism (namely, its consistency) is an illusion.
While I was going through my RCIA - the instructor was always saying that the world had change, and for that reason the Church couldn’t be rigid like it was - 😡 I always refuted her saying “the world must conform to the Church, Ma’am not the other way around” thank God I only went to RCIA because it was the only way for me to enter Mother church and not to find information otherwise I would have been very confused! I find that Pope Francis, in many respects, is just like my RCIA instructor
I converted to catholicism as an adult, and I sometime have problems justifying these things to others. I am supposed to submit to the authority of the church but when I hear or see the Pope or bishops say or do things that are so obviously not in line with the tradition or teachings of the church.. for example even entertaining the thought of blessing same sex relationships. Am I not allowed to criticize that? Can I not understand basic rights and wrongs of the Christian faith as a layman? I'm tried of being accused of cognitive dissonance when I say I believe in the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church but have to excuse or defend Pope/Bishops/Priests who are saying things that are clearly not Catholic.
Well said, and this is one of my issues as well. We can understand right and wrong from the teachings of the Church and from the Bible, yet when a Pope or Bishop says something that is contradictory to official teachings, then we aren’t allowed to criticize? I understand that they are not speaking infallibly all the time, but they are supposed to know the teachings of the church and even if they aren’t speaking infallibly they still shouldn’t contradict teaching. Also, at what point does a Pope or Bishop say enough things that are contrary to teachings that we are then allowed to say that they should no longer be a part of the Magisterium? I’m sure that laity in the Catholic Church are not allowed to challenge a Pope over what he says, but if the rest of the Magisterium refuses to do so, then what are the laity supposed to do? Just continue to say “The Pope is incorrect about this according to Church teaching, but he’s not speaking infallibly so its all good”?
It seems our option is to sit down a shut up. Or at least that's how we are made to feel. I can only excuse so many airplane interviews before my protestant family is going to start rolling their eyes.
Why we ask a question often matters more than the answer. When progressives begin a discussion about tradition, they’ve already made up their minds on what they’re gong to do. Yet this principle also applies to us I think. When we argue with a single Church leader-instead of looking deeper at Church history, sometimes our minds are made up. There’s a wealth of reading and doctrine to contradict the misguided actions of progressive bishops. Enough to root us against small storms. So in a way “sit down and shut up” is the right course for us., But instead I’d say: “ *read up* -and steer others to the library”. For instance, Regarding same sex marriage issue, a thorough examination of the issue is Unchanging Witness by Gram and Fortston. They’re not Catholic but their research carefully dismantles the recent arguments by progressive Christians about the ancient world.
In my humble opinion: we ought to respect the Pope and bishops in their authority, and when we want to criticise them we must remember their role and the rule of charity. Criticism is important, but almost always is equally important to dole it in the right and gentle way. It is really sad when they refuse to even call Jorge Bergoglio the Pope.
we can rebuke them if they do wrong, just as Paul rebuked Peter. but you are right, we have to remember their authority and respect it. Bishops do not suddenly lose their authority when we disagree with them.
The ONLY thing that links the cahtolic church to Jesus is if you believe in popes, which was nonsense to start with. If you don't believe in popes, then you're just a child rape cult. If you do believe in popes, you're still a child rape cult that hopes that God loves a series of popes more than God loves children.
It's sad that this needs to be said..but it does! These self righteous channels seem to be multiplying. We all could name a few..but they know who they are. Lead us not into temptation..but deliver us from evil. 🙏
I converted five years ago. I stood in front of the church and agreed to obey the Bishop. I see Catholics acting like protestants when they decide for themselves what church teaching to accept or reject. They set themselves as authorities above the Bishop. This saddens me deeply. As Christians we are not a collection of individuals, but instead a People. Paul told the Roman's to make of themselves (plural) a living sacrifice (singular). In Ephesians 2, we as individuals are part of a household being built together into a dwelling place (singular) of God. If I understand correctly, at Mass, we as Catholics offer up a singular sacrifice and the priest presents it on our (collective) behalf. I suspect we can go too far with our personal, private prayers and devotions. Starting with Abraham, God built the Israel children into His chosen People. He led them out of Slavery as a People. When they misbehaved, He judged them as a People. They went into slavery as a People. They returned and rebuilt Jerusalem as a People. I am afraid we have learned from or Protestant brothers and sisters that we are each free agents who will be saved or damned as "me and Jesus" free agents. As Catholics we must remember that we are a single body.
Thank you for this! I came into the Church a year ago after 4 long years trying to untangle the many Protestant traditions I was raised in. When I see fellow Catholics behave this way I can’t help but think wow you sound like a Protestant. I’ve lived that life and the grass isn’t greener. Whenever I see something troubling I ask where else shall I go? And pray for the Pope or Bishop, because at the end of the day either Catholicism is true and we stick it out faithfully, or it’s not.
@@_ready__ one must be baptized and obey God. A quick look at your previous replies on other videos it seems as though you’re not interested in listening. I’m a faithful catholic. I hold the church teaching. If you’re asking only for the sole purpose of being obnoxious I won’t engage any further.
@@_ready__ God provides the grace and the means, He paid the price and offers us to journey home with Him until death and should we slip or turn from Him, He again offers and if we agree, comes and picks us up again. This rejection is by sin and reconciliation by repentance and indeed sacramental confession because whether in mercy or judgement, every sin must be brought before God`s tribunal for arbitration. Certainly if one perfectly repents out of purely love fot God and sorrow for offending Him, He will forgive, but not coming to Him through the arbitration means He has established, if one can, shows a contempt for His Kingship and that one is not willing to do what one can in love for Him. Or taken by another metaphor, The Divine Physician operates in His way not simply as however we desire. He will triage you if you come, but a full surgery to remove the tumor fully is necessary. The Physician shall either see us with His attendant to heal you, or at the end to declare you spiritually deceased. Apart from God and His grace, we can do nothing, but we must act accordingly and continually consent, God will not force us to stay with Him against our will, God is no kidnapper. Once in His grace, indeed we can do good, but only because of His grace, not because we are suddenly in our own natures increased. If we knowingly refuse God, we can do nothing as we are apart from Him and His Sacrifice. In short, we are in the desert making our Great Exodus, Christ is the New Moses, and the New Aaron, apart from Him and those He chooses, we die in the spiritual desert. However if your question is regarding a certain Commandment, that is a different matter requiring its own response. Remember, if you hate your brother, you commit murder in your heart. God bless you, through Jesus Christ Our Blesser Lord and Savior, Who is the Divine Justice, Divine Wisdom, and Divine Mercy, Who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, our Eternal King and Great High Priest. Amen.
@@_ready__ Hey! Why'd you run away from the other thread and start posting your same old errors again as if you didn't get put on the spot? Ready to explain how the scriptures got here or not? 😉
@@_ready__ Again, you ignore the clarification of terms. Why are you capitalizing "ATTAIN"? Your definition is probably different from the Church true definition. I asked you if an unrepentent sinner could go to Heaven and you ran away from that question. You also never told me who it is that told you the books of the Bible are Divinely Inspired.
Living in San Diego, I needed to hear this today. This topic has been troubling me the last few days and I decided to pray for our bishop this morning in Mass. Your video is a timely confirmation.
I agree with much of what you say, and at most have only pointed out statements the Pope has made in error with reverence, Love and Charity, ... but... I don't think its fair for you to start your presentation by stating you will not criticize the authority figures in the Church but then proceed to criticize the lay people of the Church. Yes, many of the examples you gave, were of lay people who are way over the top and who spoke without charity or respect, but, you never would touch what is proper criticism of errors, you seem to mainly try to instill a fear of not standing against any errors, for fear of schism. I inferred you believe it is very easy to fall into schism and go to hell. I have listened to Jimmy Akin speak about schism, and I believe he differs from your perspective, proposing there are degrees of schism and it is much more difficult to cross the threshold which imperils one's soul. To point out errors, with Love and Charity, I do not believe puts one in schism. I think Jimmy's agrees. If all are too afraid of being labeled as in schism, it is more likely no one will speak out when the Pope or a bishop proposes or makes statements which are in error. We truly would be mindless sheep, not sheep made in the image of the Lord.
thank you trent! as someone who recently has come back to the Church the claims of an antipope and illegitimate Church authority has created a lot of worry in me that i’m on the right path
St. Pius X also stated that the faithful in the early 20th century could not be assured of an imprimatur or nihil obistat being trustworthy. In Pascendi he stated outright that the enemies of the Church extended into the ranks of the priesthood itself.
I know this will alarm some people here, and maybe even make people reply to me in anger, but.... Trent, you should really do more responses to Orthodoxy (there's already plenty of videos you've done against Protestantism)... I am seriously giving them consideration, and I'm starting to feel myself being won over... I don't want to make the wrong decision, and you are easily the most gifted Catholic apologist I know of, so if anyone can refute them and bring me back, it's you.. I just noticed that it's almost always a Catholic vs. Protestant back and forth, but rarely does anyone touch on Orthodoxy..
Ask them why they haven't had an ecumenical council since the Schism. Oh sure, they have gotten together, but it's always "some parts subject to revision by the local patriarchs", unlike the Pre-Schism councils. What changed?
Check with Michael Lofton as well. The Orthodox are not unified at all in theology. While many Catholics can lean to hard on that it’s all great over here when clearly we have disagreements Catholics as a whole do not disagree on essential areas of doctrine while the Orthodox do like in areas baptism should new converts be re baptized, divorce and re marriage some say no, some say can be divorced and re married multiple times, some say contraception is okay some do not, some have disagreements over the Filoque. The Orthodox faith is fracturing again with Russians vs the Greeks right now. So it’s not all peaches and cream over there either. We have our issues sure, and we should reason them out however it’s not an excuse to leave the Church for a counterfeit faith that acts like everything is just them acting as one over there when they aren’t.
In reading about various saints like Padre Pio, they all shared in common their obedience and deference to all superior clergy as is required by the vows they take. We would do well to imitate them.
As someone who has been angry with the bishops and Pope at times, this was important for me to hear. I believe the Holy Spirit sanctioned this message. Thank you Trent.
So if the Pope and the Bishops were to contradict past teachings in the Bible and the magisterium on say, homosexuality, would we be right to follow the current magisterium or the past teachings ?
@@horrorhawk3701 OK, let me word the question differently, if you believed that the current Church was contradicting Biblical and past teaching, should you follow past teaching or present ?
@@horrorhawk3701 Utter nonsense. The magisterium is subordinate to Tradition which is subordinate to Scripture. There is no way out of the dilemma except a return to the sola Scriptura recovered by the true Church during the glorious Reformation. Sola Scrriptura means that nothing can be taught as dogma if it is not affirmed in Scripture. I am almost certain that this so-called "Catholic" youtuber believes in his heart of hearts that Francis is not a true Pope. But were he to admit it publicly, the human-made superstructure of Romanism would collapse on his head. Romanism is far more fractious than the Churches of the Reformation. There are nearly as many "RC Orthodoxies" as there are Roman Catholics. Why? Like the Bible, "the Catechism"/"the Canon Laws" of the RCC must also be interpreted. In their attempt to enforce man-made uniformity, the heedless Romanists replaced a divine book with a human distillate of the same. But unlike the Bible, only very few doctrines in "the Catechism" have ever been infallibly defined (such as the Assumption) so most of its stipulations are mere pius opinions (since they may be wrong). Therefore, literarily every Romanist has his/her private orthodoxy. I know many Romanists who have declared the Pope an anti-Pope or a "Protestant Pope" simply because they disagree with the Pope's NON-DOGMATIC OPINION on some aspect of the "Catechism!" There is far more unity of doctrine between the CLASSICAL forms of the major branches of the Reformed Churches (Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Baptist, etc) than amongst the confusing array of Romanist contortions. Each RC denomination (Mainline, Montinian, Sedevacantist, SSPV, SSPX, Conclavist, Lefebvrist, Catholic Restoration, Sedeprivationist, Ultramontanist, Semi-traditionalist, Concilarist, Neo-ultramontanist, Novus Ordo Catholic, Catholic Liberal, Extraordinary Formist, Opus Dei, Divine Mercy cultists, etc, etc) seems to make up its own "Catholic Truth" on the go. Ironically, it is easier to know what a Reformed denomination believes than to pin down RCs to anything. I do not (yet) know any Baptists who believe that the President of the Baptist Convention is an unsaved heretic. But there is a vibrant army of zealous RCs online screaming that all Popes since Paul VI (some even add John the XXIII for good measure) are damned heretics and false prophets!! What can be more confusing? I repeat - the Churches of the Reformation agreed on major points of doctrine. Anglicans did not believe that Lutherans were heretics whereas many RC denominations believe the Pope himself to be a heretic. The trick of referring to every non-Roman Church as "Protestant" is fallacious. How can a sect formed in Poland in 1998 by a former Romanist be called "Protestant"? This linguistic farce has gotten so bad that there are now millions of Romanists who actually believe that Pope Francis is "Protestant". But if all the Churches formed by former Methodists are linked back to Methodism as "Protestant" then surely all denominations founded by former Romanists should continue to be linked with Romanism. Nothing stops the Orthodox Church from lumping all non-Orthodox Churches (including the RCC) together and giving them one name - say, "the Heterodox" - and then pointing out that "Heterdodox sects" are doctrinally confused. Baptists can play the same disingenuous linguistic game by lumping every non-Baptist (including Romanists) under one name (e.g. "Paedo-baptists") so as to "prove" that only Baptists are coherent! What people find so attractive about Romanism (namely, its consistency) is an illusion.
@@horrorhawk3701 But only Ex Cathedra teachings can be said to be infallible. So if the Pope and the Bishops issued a non ex Cathedra teaching that contradicted past Ex Cathedra teachings we would have a responsibility to follow the past Ex Cathedra teachings rather than the non Ex Cathedra teachings. Also I would say that once a doctrine has been defined in the past Ex Cathedra, then even if a Pope and the Bishops try to redefine it Ex Cathedra then their redefinition is null and void because once something has been defined it cannot be undefined. Because we have more than one Pope through history then present Popes cannot contradict past popes and any attempt to do so must be considered heresy, even if it is a Pope who claims he is speaking Ex Cathedra.
Thank you, Trent, for such a reasonable, well-thought out and well-researched discussion on a crucial issue. I love how you brought in the Vatican Council… with a surprise! Fundamentally, the question is: To Be Obedient or Not To Be Obedient.
Do the bishops regularly address the semantic shift that is one of the main problems today? On the contrary it seems they mostly acquiesce to new definitions: when you see them use words like "love" they mostly seem to use it in the contemporary sense as if Christianity is a hippie religion. So in some ways things are not as bad (Francis is not as liberal as most think, the conservative trend in fertility and young priests, etc), but at the same time we have the seemingly intractable evolution of culture with is very dynamic and chaotic
“The devil can imitate humility, but he cannot imitate obedience” (St Faustina Kowalska).
Obedience to who?
@@RedWolf5 to God. That's when he would actually be worshipping and loving God as opposed to loving himself, at which point he would cease to be the devil.
true but WE can actually, without imitation, obey the devil. especially when we choose to obey teachings that are contrary to what Christ Himself taught, no matter who the human source of that teaching may be, for we all have free will to say and teach evil, even the pope, if he so chooses (i.e. exercises his free will apart from the Holy Spirit).
@@flowinproductions6416 We don't have faith in the Pope , or any other human. We trust in the promises of Christ. That his Church would remain till the end of the age. That it would be the pillar and bulwark of His truth, and that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it. Bad Popes dont disprove Christ's assurances. They validate them because even the worst of them has not been able to corrupt Christ's truth.
Whoever the anti Christ will be, if its even a singular person, will not be the Pope. We have Christ's promise
Yes! As a convert from Protestantism (6 years ago), this is balm to my soul. It breaks my heart when I see Catholics speak like this. I’m not sure if they realize how damaging it truly is.
Fruits of American media culture
You CONVERTED to this child rape cult?
330,000 little boys in France were raped by 3,000 catholic pedophile priests, and it barely made the news, because people EXPECT that from catholics.
Jesus said child rape was UNFORGIVABLE (Matt 18:6-14), and everyone who supported it will get eternal damnation. That means every single catholic, especially you.
You know that Jesus is a fictional character, right?
@@twitherspoon8954 I am convinced. Completely destroyed everything I believe because randos comment.🤡
@@twitherspoon8954 That's laughable! Jesus is God 100% He is The Way the Truth and the Life! Try to prove He is not !!!!!
This is a great video. Recently, I made some traditional Catholic content which got some attention and falls under a lot of criticism you’re bringing up. And after reflecting on it for the past month, I really have to agree that rebelling against your own Church is a ridiculous thing to do (especially when the Church you’re rebelling against is the one Jesus established).
Yes, the Pope and the Bishops have made imprudent decisions. And lay people don’t have to like every decision the Church makes. But it is a FACT that you have to submit to the Church (barring obvious exceptions). And consistently rebelling against the Church in such a public manner scandalizes others who are thinking of converting.
Love your content and your prudence, too many conservative voices have become radicalized.
Dude, I love your Sedevacantism Refuted video!
Right now, unfortunately, it's very trendy in Catholic circles who call Pope Francis "Bergoglio." At that point we're no better than Jack Chick disciples. Then we become Latin-speaking protestants.
It's not inappropriate to call a Pope by his second name. The problem are the tone and the intentions of those people who use the word 'Bergoglio' as an offence.
Catholics are a child raep cult no matter what you say.
330,000 little boys in France were raped by 3,000 catholic pedophile priests, and it barely made the news, because people EXPECT that from catholics.
Jesus said child rape was UNFORGIVABLE (Matt 18:6-14), and everyone who supported it will get eternal damnation. That means every single catholic.
@@djo-dji6018 and as an outsider, it would be ‘Pope Bergoglio’, no?
I don't even address my former Charismatic pastor by his first name alone. The title shows respect to God because this person acts as a father to an ecclesiasial community.
It is apparently not unusual in Europe to do just in ordinary day-to-day parlance
Personal attacks on the Clergy should never be encouraged by anybody.
But the error in the teachings should be refuted no matter who spoke it
Exactly 💯
HILARIOUS.
330,000 little boys in France were raped by 3,000 catholic pedophile priests, and it barely made the news, because people EXPECT that from catholics.
Your clergy runs the world's largest child rape cult, and you don't think they shoudl be questioned.
Jesus said child rape was UNFORGIVABLE (Matt 18:6-14), and everyone who supported it will get eternal damnation. That means every single catholic.
However, you laugh in the face of Jesus.
@@gabismom77 How do you feel about Catholic clergymen who sexually molest children?
Unless of course, the personal attacks are attacking the personal and public scandals committed by clergy. As an extreme example: If someday a gay Pope steps out onto the Loggia and starts kissing his lover in full view of the gathered faithful and the whole world via media. Should the faithful just stand there and express their personal disappointment but it's really his business what he does and since he hasn't bound the faithful to an error of faith and morals I guess we should just do whatever he says.
Blessed Mother is telling us "to be alert and do not be deceived by False Magisterium." Magisterium is Pope, Vicar of Christ, and Bishops united with Him. Therefore False Magisterium means false pope and bishops united with him. This is another confirmation that the one in charge now is the false one and we should not follow him, but follow those Bishops who uphold and teach ages-old Catholic Dogmas and Traditions, because after the passing of Benedict XVI, we do not have True Pope with us now. When the Church is purified after Schism (separating from the false ones), we will have the last Pope in St. Malachy's prophecy -- 'Peter, the Roman, who will guide the Church through the persecutions of the Antichrist and his followers.
The problem is that the Pope and bishops undermine their own authority by distancing themselves from the very Tradition that affirms this authority. In the times like today we need the stability of Tradition more than ever.
bible vs tradition, bible wins
@@donhaddix3770 The Church is older than the Bible. The scriptures that make up the Bible wouldn't have _any_ binding authority without the Church affirming it.
Well said. Glad I found your channel. My problem with the present hierarchy is not what is said and done, but what is not said and not done. They seem to have lost all interest in correcting blatant heresy and in publicly admonishing notorious public sinners who claim to be members of the Church.
“we don’t have to agree with their opinions beyond faith and morals.” Respectfully, Trent, there are instances where we don’t have to agree with their personal opinions ON faith and morals either. I agree we need to be respectful but there are also bishops spreading false views and teachings related to faith and morality.
I’m an FSSP parishioner. I’ve never heard our pastor or any of our other priests ever speak badly about the Holy Father. The most I’ve ever heard is them literally saying “we need to pray for the pope” because of the potential for the mass to be restricted. That’s it. I think they’ve honestly been more critical of the bishop but only for just reasons, like when our bishop wasn’t allowing any masses or confessions during covid, the pastor spoke out against that, which I think is fine. He didn’t do it in a disrespectful way.
I think this comes down to the poison of social media and summed up by my pastor in this way:
“Social media is not even neutral. It’s a net negative. You all need to stay off social media because it’s just feeding you fear, anger and anxiety. Stop following these talking heads on the internet who say crazy things. Stop watching the negative news about what’s happening in the church. What you need to do is come to mass, say your rosaries, and stay in unity with Holy Mother Church.”
I think a lot of these people are SSPXers or sympathize with the SSPX and have bought into their talking points. We had people at our parish that left for the SSPX and from what I heard, these were the more radical anti-pope Francis people. Our pastor warned people too about leaving and that it’s schism. But they dipped. We recently had a couple that argued with my buddy about the sspx and another priest had to shut them down. He laid it out why they’re wrong on V2, why they’re wrong on the pope, and why they’re wrong on the SSPX. Told them that they don’t have licit sacraments or orders and have no jurisdiction to do anything. That they are truly a schismatic group. I was so proud of him when he did that. Cause some priests just aren’t courageous or knowledgeable enough to do that. So props to him.
@@Jerds the SSPX are not in schism, this is an insidious lie.
The types he's addressing are more in line with the SSPX or even sedevacantists. Those comments are the same rhetoric I would always see (and disseminate myself, mea culpa) in those circles.
I’m a SSPX parishioner, it was my first parish after my conversion from protestantism 8 months ago. I have your same experience, never heard that rhetoric on my parish and less from our priest. We pray for the pope, and he teaches us about the Church and pope’s authority.
I think social media and YT is feeding a uncharitable hatred among catholics and creating this dialectical war with labels like “trads”, “radtrad”, “sspx” etc. It’s sad that the fact that mentioning that someone is from the SSPX can trigger a lot of prejudices in peoples minds about a fellow catholic. It’s sad… but I pray that this would end soon, and the Church settles this issue. Maybe getting off social media and just having a coffee with a catholic brother from the “other side” can make people see that there are more reasons to be one.
@@AbdielGonzalez-in4zv that’s very interesting. We had some parishioners leave for the sspx and since then I’ve only met a couple. You’re the only person I’ve seen online who has said this about their parish! Must be unique. Praying for full unity if the church and reconciliation of the Holy See and the Society. Pray for your bishops cause I know they’re divided on this
Thank you Trent. A much needed clarification and warning to those Catholics who behave in this way. My Mass and the Eucharist are my life and that is what matters to me. I pray for guidance for our Holy Father Pope Francis, our Clergy and laity. “Love one another as I have loved you” 🙏
Thank you Trent! I have been discerning catholicism and this bothers me. I'm a bit hung up on the papacy because of the way people treat the novus ordo, the pope, etc. People like you being honest and restating what Catholics believe have helped me.
As a newer convert, I was nearly lead down a path of despair because of all the disparaging commentary on the pope and the Novus Ordo mass, particularly on TH-cam. I have a wonderful and wise priest (convert) and attend a reverent Novus Ordo mass every Sunday. I thank God in my prayers every night for the amazing priests He has placed in my life to learn from and for our pope, our church and the unity of all Christian's 🙏❤
May God bless and guide your discernment, brother. I hope one day celebrate your coming home to the Church. But, whatever happens, may God's blessings be with you.
I would like to testify this from my own experience:
I have attended Masses of in both the Ordinary ("Novus Ordo") and Extraordinary ("Tridentine", "Latin", or "TLM") Forms. In that experience, I have seen Masses of great beauty and solemnity in both forms. I have also seen uninspiring Masses, though they were still holy by the presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist, in both forms. It really comes down to the way in which it is celebrated. "Novus Ordo" Masses can have full choirs singing majestic music, the use of incense, and the inclusion of things like saying the Rosary pre-Mass or the St. Michael Prayer after Mass. Nothing prevents such pious practices and others in a "Novus Ordo" Mass. Nor, indeed, are those the only ways that a Mass can be celebrated with solemnity.
I hope that you can take heart from this that the Mass being celebrated in most cases is not lacking or to be looked down upon.
@@steelytemplar thank you for sharing your experience. I have kind of come to realize that you can make the novus ordo beautiful and reverent. I think it is harder to make a bad Latin maybe because it has so many guard rails, but I think I now see that the novus ordo just gives people more freedom to express themselves as they see appropriate
Thank you Trent! Excellent video. I appreciate you addressing this topic since anyone who frequently looks up Catholic content on TH-cam is likely to come across those who are too harsh with our clergy. Channels like yours and Michael Lofton's do a good job explaining the nuance of our faith without overindulging in one position or another.
I appreciate this video Trent. As someone who attends the TLM, uncharitable rhetoric isn't uncommon. I try to avoid the finer points of Church politics, but I do sympathize with Catholics that are angry with the hierarchy. The timid leadership and consistent ambiguity are a source of real scandal. It's especially damaging when trying to evangelize conservative Protestants. Even if you effectively convey the beauty and truth of the Catholic faith, many are simply unwilling to step under the authority of a pope who seems more concerned with climate change than biblical morality.
Yep. My protestant family could not understand why I would convert under the current pope. They constantly come to me with questions about why he said this or that. I can only say "maybe he was mistranslated" so many times.
@@Mrs_Homemaker My brother left the Catholic faith to join a conservative Protestant church. He had never really taken ownership of his Catholic faith so I don't think it was mainly about theological issues. He's strong in his faith for Christ and even agrees with Catholic teachings on things like contraception. But every time I bring up the topic of the Catholic faith, he expresses his concerns about Pope Francis. What am I supposed to say? That the Vicar of Christ, capable of infallible teaching, doesn't need to be a strong defender of orthodoxy?
@@BrewMeister27 Pope Francis isn’t actively teaching heresy though (I’m sure if he did I would know about it), and if he were invalid, he would be teaching heresy. Despite what he does personally, he is not contradicting from his place of authority the teachings of the church. That, if anything, should be a testament to the power of the position.
@@fury_blade9303 I'm not accusing him of openly teaching heresy or being invalid. I'm accusing him of committing the sin of scandal. And that's a very serious sin because it turns people away from the faith. People like my brother.
Pope Francis has a habit of making vague, off the cuff remarks. The media then interpret and report them in the most left-wing context. But then Pope Francis never comes out to correct the record. When his "who am I to judge?" comment was reported as approval for gay marriage, he allowed that characterization to stand. He never released a response forcefully condemning the LGBT agenda. And repeated incidences like this have allowed the public to believe the Catholic Church is tolerant of heretical beliefs. And that scandalizes the conservative protestants that would otherwise be interested in the Catholic faith.
I think many Catholics are tired of the Pope talking about Climate Change. At times, he seems more like a politician than a Pope. I certainly miss John Paul 2.
❤ this video. Thank you Mr. Horn.
Thank you Trent Horn. This was very informative and very needed. God bless!
Great point about the authority of the Catholic Church! Many are confused by the current situation and throw the baby out with the bath water. We should be faithful children of the Roman Catholic Church and live our faith within the confines of what the Church allows. Obedience can be difficult to discern but is necessary to belong to our hierarchical Church.
Thank you for this talk. We are called to unify the Church not to divide her. This coming Sunday is Pentecost. May we bring ourselves down and allow the Holy Spirit to lead the Church. Lord Jesus, help us follow your footsteps in obedience.
This was an amazing video Trent. Thank you! ✝️♥️
Hi Trent this was so needed. I am expat living in the Middle East and here we don't have so much issues about Pope. But on social media when I joined certain catholic groups just to grow in my faith , I realized that they constantly bashed our Pope which made me leave those groups
Sometimes too much exposure to these comments can slow make us be ok with this. And this talk was so needed because you have called this out and spoken so clearly. Thank you once again :)
Before opening your mouth to criticize, open your mouth to offer a prayer. Pray more often than you criticize, then you might actually see some changes in the world.
I just look at this as being above my paygrade. I cant do anything about the clearly horrible things happening in the Church. And at the end of the day, its their millstone, not mine. But it does HURT on a physcial level (not to mention spiritual) to see bishops cower before the world and refuse to speak rightly. It makes us laity feel rather alone standing up for Christ when we have leaders in the Church saying nothing or being unclear. It doesnt take a theology degree to know that much of what is being allowed is wrong.
Fantastic Response! God Bless you and your family Trent
Pope Francis and some bishops make it very difficult to talk to protestants about the true Catholic faith, at least thats the case down here in alabama. They are aware of the sexual abuse cover-up, pachimama (they really hate idols), the german bishop push to accept homosexual marriage, the Holy Father's pressure on Catholics to get the covid vaccination, the bust of Martin Luther, the allowance of a celebration of an episcopal mass at st. John lateran...they see these things as proof that their protestantism is OK. Pope Francis is a challenge for me personally in many ways, including evangelization. I pray for him and for my own charity toward him.
I actually wonder if Pope Francis even wants me to bother to evangelize.
@@Candis55 clearly he doesn’t wants us to evangelize, at least not how the saints did.
@@Candis55I think you are invincible ignorant.People like you make me very sad
The Vatican gardens ceremony was not idol worship and the Pope did not authorize the Anglican liturgy at St. John Lateran.
@@RedWolf5 That is demonstrably false and contradicted by the holy father’s own words
I loved the parallel of dissenters of the first Vatican council and the second. Truly puts it into perspective
Terrible comparison, the Church hás declined in every positive metric after VII, while no such thing happened after VI.
Trent talks about the Magisterium now, which effectively doesn't exist, not because the hierarchy lacks Authority, but because they refuse to use it.
Take Bishop Cordileone's case for example: Even his softer approach saying Nancy Pelosi should stay away from the Eucharist for promoting abortion was countermanded by Pope Francis, despite so-called colegiality being important to the Church. In fact Bishop Cordileone is entirely within his right to excommunicate Nancy Pelosi, but he won't because that'd bê too harsh and authoritarian.
I feel exposed. I didn't know this, I literally said that Pope Francis had moral deficiencies to two people yesterday. Appart from confession, what else can I do to stop being ignorant? How can I stop myself from cringing or blushing as I haphazardly try to defend what the Pope says to my non-Catholic friends without looking stupid? I defend him = stupid fanatic. I criticize him = stupid fanatic. What should I do? Honestly, if I talked badly of my own father to other people, in defiance, I would feel horrible. I now know I am not justified. Is silence the better option? Something I feel very often is that bishops are super abstract. The people I hear on Catholic issues are on books and TH-cam, the priests in my parishes seem cold to me, like they would rather go to lunch than listen to my sins... literally. I feel like sobbing when they repeat in confession, verbatim, what they said in the homily as if I am still a member of a crowd instead of a very particular person, with very partiuclar sins, standing in front of them. Pouring my soul out. Talking like a politician would, instead of like a father to his children, reading from a tele-prompter. I could probably only name 2 bishops in my country. The whole bulk of what they say is unknown to me appart from the 1% that gets news coverage. I feel fatherless spiritually. Are my feelings, as a lay woman, an unimportant subjective thing then?
By their fruits you will know them…
Thank you
I'm really hurt by the inaction of the bishops here in Brazil in regard to our heretic and sometimes out right apostate actions of catholics polititions against all kind of moral teaching of the Church, but their minuncious look to orthodox layty through boards that include all kind of marxists and heretic professors. Including bishops condemning political use of the faith meanwhile posing shporting the socialist current government, my heart bleeds. May we pray this week preceding Pentecost that our Church is pacified.
Brazil and the whole of South America is in my prayers. I know millions of faithful exist but the news which comes out of there, almost makes me feel as if that part of the world is not Catholic anymore (at least not as much as I thought it was)
Being Catholic in Brazil makes me wish the Orthodox Church was more present here.
Sometimes the catholic leadership can be so liberal and compromising it hurts.
@@ne0nmancer Did you listen to the video? Why would you want a schismatic church to be more present, that’s like wishing to be in the near occasion of sin off another temptation because you think it’s too hard to do stick to the toughness of the moral order.
Guard yourself against these temptations brother. 🙏
@@ne0nmancer That's wishful thinking. The Orthodox has several issues among them because of their lack of unity.
I’m with you in the majority of the points made. It’s truly disheartening sometimes that the leading bishops are left-wing leaning and some actively participated in public manifestations during elections. Some priests are known to be liberals and to advocate for moral relativism without proper correction. But let’s be honest, the last election was a tragic scenario for Catholicism either Lula or Bolsonaro won it. Bolsonaro was ‘blessed’ on his knees by “Bishop Edir Macedo” in an egregious act of a pure anti-Catholic behavior. All he did was to commit the country to the bizarre trend of Pentecostalism and he NEVER sincerely spoke to the Catholic majority here. Actually he deliberately ostracized us. I think he despised us deep down. Yet Catholicism in Brazil is THE religion of the poor and the pilgrims and those guys whom Bolsonaro fell for were the ones instructing their pastors to blasphemously destroy images of Our Lady Aparecida (“Igreja Universal do Reino de Deus”), don’t you remember? Then Bolsonaro was even “Re-baptized” by Pastor Everaldo in the Jordan River, Israel: well, I’m talking about a politician from the “Bancada da Bíblia” who was arrested for corruption not so long ago. So Bolsonaro even dared to say he is a “Catholic”. Really? One ashamed of his faith in the best scenario or an apostate in the worst, standing to ignore our faith - in the heights of his 4th marriage. He NEVER did one little thing to talk to the Catholic majority but flirted with every obscure Protestant “church” (ecclesial community) in the country. So the real problem with some Brazilian conservative Catholics is that they are politicizing the faith to an intolerable degree just as a response to leftism that they THINK is proportional and necessary - when it clearly is NOT.
And yes, so many of us may throw darts at the CNBB (our National conference of bishops) but on January 18th, JUST after Lula got his office (Bolsonaro wasn’t gold but it’s just unbelievable that we even elected that man again, a criminal!), with leftists taking over the presidency, the CNBB made a harsh statement at the Federal Government due to it signaling for the flexibility on abortion rules. Even leftist bishops had the guts to say it out loud. What did those “Internet conservatives” do? Most of them are incapable to help the poor on their own standings and moral lives yet they can think they are able to judge the Church’s hierarchy on Internet tribunals of young “enragé” people.
Besides, we have to honestly understand those bishops were ordained priests while we lived the military right-wing dictatorship (1964-1985) and probably that made sense during their theological formation. But they are definitely not perpetual. Younger bishops are much more inclined to reviving tradition and some of the more influential priests in their platforms online are simply too big in the “cultural war” against militant leftism. They are the most ostensive expression, not really the CNBB, of the Catholic Church today in Brazil among the young people. Don’t let yourselves contaminated by the crypto-Protestant mentality. And no, not those with schismatic tendencies. There is room for optimism in the cultural war even though we can feel pessimistic about the growing rates of (the worst versions of) Pentecostalism in the country: some of those leading figures are nothing but satanic on so many levels, for us to miss a general preoccupation here.
So I think this tendency of some Brazilian “conservative” Catholics to pose as rebels against the bishops (in a stupid generalization) is almost always ridiculous and mostly ineffective. It doesn’t respond to the cultural war and only instrumentalize the worst versions of Protestantism, even some sects within and without its boundaries.
As a conservative myself I can’t help but notice the wrong perception people can have online under the vitriol. But please look just here on TH-cam some of the largest Catholic channels in Brazil:
Frei Gilson/ Som do Monte - 3,78 mi subscribed - more than 897 mi views;
Padre Reginaldo Manzotti - 3,77 mi subscribed - more than 691 mi views;
Luz e Vida - Padre Chrystian Shankar - 1,97 mi subscribed - more than 237 mi views;
Padre Paulo Ricardo - 1,61 mi subscribed - more than 281 mi views;
TV Canção Nova - 2,55 mi subscribed - more than 344 mi views;
TV Aparecida - 3,56 mi subscribed - more than 377 mi views;
Fé Católica - 1,63 mi subscribed - more than 198 mi views;
Pe Marcelo Rossi - 3,09 mi subscribed - more than 1,05 billion views.
ALL those channels have made some ostensive critique to the contamination of our Catholic faith by mundaneness and liberalism. Even TV Aparecida, which seems to be more “left leaning”, have made some serious commitment to preserve the faith against moral relativism. So we need to do our part and just stop being crypto-Protestants online, so as to undermine authority, even if under proclaimed noble purposes. Be intelligent and, more so, be faithful. And ALWAYS pray for the clergy.
I feel like I'm on Michael Lofton's channel Reason & Theology, lol. Good stuff.
I sure hope Trent doesn't go that direction. Seems like that guy dedicates all of his time to antagonizing fringe groups that are just slightly off the mark, that are still at least fighting for the right values in a wicked, secular, hedonistic world.
@@willing_spirit6830 Slightly? Antagonize? Our faith cannot be reduced to a set of values. Schism is schism, with the same fundamental rejection of authority, regardless of the degree. Lofton is doing good work engaging Orthodox and sedevacantist arguments and personalities. Every apologist and channel has its own strengths and focus.
@@tonyl3762 He hardly is focused just on true schismatics, and I don't see strength in gaslighting and hypocrisy. He antagonizes even practicing Catholics like Taylor Marshall and Tim Gordon. He insists on an abundance of charity when interpreting Pope Francis's words, even as we see Pope Francis's actions trying to give more power to people like Bishop Heiner Wilmer and reprimanding those that speak bluntly on the Church's teachings. Then he affords no charity to people like Frank Pavone when he is sorting out his surprising and confusing situation. I just don't understand how Michael Lofton has the nerve to take such a condescending tone as someone that has said he switched churches 3 times Protestant to Catholic to Orthodox back to Catholic.
I totally respect and concur your position.
Trent, thank you so much for making this video. I worry about my other Catholic friends when it comes to speaking about our pope and bishops. Could those who address Pope Francis as “Bergoglio”, or the bishops like the way you described in your video, be considered guilty of the sin of calumny?
Why is it so hard for catholics to pray for popes and catholic leaders 😢?
I remember a priest said to not insult or bad speaking abt pope (not just cristicism); it’s just what devils want.
In my catcholic local church and my prayer, i pray for pope, too.
You know what? One time, i read a comment that makes me angry… it was when the pope was very ill and some people wish he died… the worst was one said that she hoped next pope election, HOLY SPIRIT does her job and not sleeping/being lazy.
😡😡😡
Goodness. Now, people INSULT holy spirit???? They feel wiser and better than Holy Spirit????
Are they forgot, Holy Spirit is GOD? My goodness!
When we want or even feel better than God or want His position…remember… we are getting far away from Him. We are more like satan. Period!
Just pray for each other. Pope and priests serve mass for us and every sacrament…so, let’s say “thank you” by praying for them. Spiritual war is real!
As a former Protestant, I see clearly the slippery slope of being uncharitable towards the Pope can cause. It leads some people into literal heresy. Sure, this Pope has been problematic and is probably not the best we have had in the past few hundred years. But, he’s also not the worst Pope. I like to stick to the essentials and leave the Pope to God.
I completely agree Professor Horn!
Thank you for sharing..very helpful and giving very good advises...
Thanks for this Trent!
So based! Great video
I pray to God for courageous Bishops.
Sadly, some courageous Bishops who dare to speak God's truth get punished by Francis. Bishop Strickland got kicked to the curb.
@user-ki2vh1uc5k
I believe that Bishop Strickland got canned because of not limiting the Latin Mass.
But we have seen in the past couple of years, religious stand up and be cancelled by the church hierarchy.
The Catholic church has an organization of cancelled priests, that says alot.
@@robertajaycart3491 Unfortunately there have been more than a few canceled Catholic clergymen since Francis has been the Pope. I don't remember so many conservative Priests and Bishops being removed by a Pope. The fact that the ultra liberal German Bishops who do whatever they want and don't get punished, is deeply disturbing.
May the Holy Spirit will continue to guide you and give you wisdom to echo the truth of the Catholic Church teachings and doctrines and shed light the misconception of our fellow Catholics. Amen. Jesus enlighten us.
@@_ready__ what are you, a 7th day adventist?
@@_ready__ what are u getting at? Just be forthright and honest.
@@_ready__ Do you know what the RCC actually teaches, or you pulling ur opinions out of one of your body orifices?
@@_ready__ i'm sure as assured by the Holy Spirit. cmon u demon, by the power of Jesus Christ, give it up
@@_ready__ declare ur honest intentions. at my age, no patience for bs.
I do not think the Bishops or Pope are above criticism, however I think that when you seek to criticize a successor to the apostles you should do at least 2 things:
1. Know exactly what you're talking about, know the facts, and make sure you have a proper understanding of the issue.
2. Give the Bishop or Pope the absolutely most charitable viewpoint possible.
We should criticize our leaders as if they are good Fathers. If you have a good Father I don't think you would insult him when trying to offer feedback, criticism, or seek clarity. I think if you were going to attempt to criticize a good father you would be gentle and incredibly charitable.
Thank you, Trent. No doubt this phenomenon is related to the polarization of every aspect of modern life. I appreciate your level head.
I do agree and i believe this is a trap i've fallen into and am guilty of a few times. However, where is the happy medium? Is there a proper way to go about saying things like "the new mass is overall a bad thing" or is that an opinion that isnt permissable?
I attend TLM and this behaviour is indeed very much present nowadays, at least here in France. It is a form of protestantism and it ought to be condemned. It may even be the reason why TLM got restricted - to avoid a schism (and I'm not defending the restrictions btw).
Restricting TLM actually made the situation worse. It might be the second biggest mistake after Judas selling Christ.
@@bard5865 Yep, it did make it worse. It was a mistake. But comparing this to the betrayal of our Lord is truly excessive and historically 100% inaccurate.
@@mathieujvc I am being hyperbolic
@@bard5865 yeah we figured you were being hyperbolic, it's still a terrible use of hyperbole.
I noticed that this rebellious attitude exists in America as well. Both countries (France and America) have strong traditions of rebellion (French Revolution and the philosophical ramifications of that, and American War of Independence, Civil War, etc.) I wonder if that is why Catholics from both countries have this streak of Protestantism.
This was an insightful video. I didn't know much of Reformation polemics relied upon the early church.
Amazing video as usual
Excellent
5:51 The issue of charismatic laity is something that gives me pause for the near future.
With a few buzzy conversions on the horizon-from Candace Owens to Dr. Peterson and Tucker Carlson- without support for the Church tradition and hierarchy, a celebrity’s following creates as many problems as it solves.
What then handle cases when 100y ago Church said "A" and now say "not A"? How can both be infallible teachings?
Another simple example, how I should behave when some bishop (or future pope) say that homosexuality is not sin and is ok?
Should I obey it or I can resist it? Would be it schism to reject this bishop?
This kind of approach might be the way to convince the likes of Dr. Gavin.
Thank you Trent, for this.
When I was getting into Catholicism again a few months ago I was watching a lot of Taylor Marshall vids. He makes some good points but also his hyperbole and exaggeration as to how bad are the state of the church and the Pope almost drove me to orthodoxy. But I kinda realized that he’s overstating problems and leaving out mitigating details a lot of times, and now I listen to his videos sometimes but mostly with a grain of salt.
Pope Pius IX condemned the so called Old Catholics because they asserted that all the bishops of the Church have fallen into heresy.
We don’t claim That at Vatican II all the bishops have fallen into heresy-maybe the vast majority of them but not all of them.
Oh good. Big difference between “everyone’s a heretic!” And “Almost everyone’s a heretic!”
@@bman5257
This difference does matter.
It is proximate to faith that the Episcopal Body is as indefectibel as the Church as a whole.
@@WegdesGlaubens You need to demonstrate a person has committed the sin of heresy before you make that claim or you are engaging in rash judgement.
@@bman5257
To make a long story short:
The Vatican II Church doesn’t have the four marks.
@@WegdesGlaubens Moses wasn’t perfect either, but that doesn’t mean someone can follow Korah and expect to enter the promised land.
16:45 To add to that point, we know that nun to most certainly not exist: Lofton checked with the diocese and there are no such monestary as suggested in the apparation.
I’ve never agreed with a video more.
I hope you make it on to Rules for Retrogrades soon.
if we must accept/obey everything the pope of our time says, then that "everything" must include what he says that is contrary to scripture, and what is contrary to other bishops of the time (who continue to teach what was always taught, let's just say hypothetically). *this seems like belief in magisterium above scripture and tradition. i mean sincerely, which bishop am i supposed to listen to nowadays if that is our primary way of knowing the faith? i assume i would have to bypass any local authority and just base my life off what our pope says, in which case i'd have to go against my conscience on things that seem to be grave matter in many, many situations. that's i assume why tradition/scripture needs to be held in the same esteem as magisterium, thus magisterium cannot attempt to trump the others.
also, don't forget you prefaced your obedience to bishops segment with how it's correlated to a husband's authority over his family. it sounds like you are then going even further than those "radicals" and saying a family must obey EVERYTHING a husband/father says, even if it's a grave sin (say, a sexually-related sin), but you're at least wholly affirming the husband/father's authority over the wife/children.
Great comment. Magisterium is subordinate to Tradition which is subordinate to Scripture. There is no way out of the dilemma except a return to the sola Scriptura recovered by the true Church during the glorious Reformation. Sola Scrriptura means that nothing can be taught as dogma if it is not affirmed in Scripture. I am almost certain that this so-called "Catholic" youtuber believes in his heart of hearts that Francis is not a true Pope. But were he to admit it publicly, the human-made superstructure of Romanism would collapse on his head.
Romanism is far more fractious than the Churches of the Reformation. There are nearly as many "RC Orthodoxies" as there are Roman Catholics. Why? Like the Bible, "the Catechism"/"the Canon Laws" of the RCC must also be interpreted. In their attempt to enforce man-made uniformity, the heedless Romanists replaced a divine book with a human distillate of the same. But unlike the Bible, only very few doctrines in "the Catechism" have ever been infallibly defined (such as the Assumption) so most of its stipulations are mere pius opinions (since they may be wrong).
Therefore, literarily every Romanist has his/her private orthodoxy. I know many Romanists who have declared the Pope an anti-Pope or a "Protestant Pope" simply because they disagree with the Pope's NON-DOGMATIC OPINION on some aspect of the "Catechism!"
There is far more unity of doctrine between the CLASSICAL forms of the major branches of the Reformed Churches (Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Baptist, etc) than amongst the confusing array of Romanist contortions. Each RC denomination (Mainline, Montinian, Sedevacantist, SSPV, SSPX, Conclavist, Lefebvrist, Catholic Restoration, Sedeprivationist, Ultramontanist, Semi-traditionalist, Concilarist, Neo-ultramontanist, Novus Ordo Catholic, Catholic Liberal, Extraordinary Formist, Opus Dei, Divine Mercy cultists, etc, etc) seems to make up its own "Catholic Truth" on the go.
Ironically, it is easier to know what a Reformed denomination believes than to pin down RCs to anything. I do not (yet) know any Baptists who believe that the President of the Baptist Convention is an unsaved heretic. But there is a vibrant army of zealous RCs online screaming that all Popes since Paul VI (some even add John the XXIII for good measure) are damned heretics and false prophets!! What can be more confusing?
I repeat - the Churches of the Reformation agreed on major points of doctrine. Anglicans did not believe that Lutherans were heretics whereas many RC denominations believe the Pope himself to be a heretic. The trick of referring to every non-Roman Church as "Protestant" is fallacious. How can a sect formed in Poland in 1998 by a former Romanist be called "Protestant"? This linguistic farce has gotten so bad that there are now millions of Romanists who actually believe that Pope Francis is "Protestant". But if all the Churches formed by former Methodists are linked back to Methodism as "Protestant" then surely all denominations founded by former Romanists should continue to be linked with Romanism. Nothing stops the Orthodox Church from lumping all non-Orthodox Churches (including the RCC) together and giving them one name - say, "the Heterodox" - and then pointing out that "Heterdodox sects" are doctrinally confused. Baptists can play the same disingenuous linguistic game by lumping every non-Baptist (including Romanists) under one name (e.g. "Paedo-baptists") so as to "prove" that only Baptists are coherent! What people find so attractive about Romanism (namely, its consistency) is an illusion.
Christ never promised any church or any bishop infallibly nor protected from teaching errors. In fact 2 Peter 2:1 tells us that there will be false teachers in the church that will deceive many. That certainly has happened to the RCC.
He did.
Thank you! I think the vitriol of Catholics against bishops and priests show a lack of trust in the Holy Spirit.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:00 🎙️ Host's Introduction: The speaker aims to address a concerning trend among faithful Catholics who reject the authority of bishops and the pope.
00:56 👥 Rejecting Authority: Many Catholics criticize bishops and the pope, rejecting their authority and teachings.
02:28 🤔 Thoughtful Criticism vs. Contempt: Thoughtful criticism of bishops can turn into harmful contempt, damaging the Church and unity.
03:23 🌍 Inconsistent Messages: Catholics who criticize bishops to others while promoting Church's importance create confusion for non-Catholics.
04:22 📜 Living Magisterium: The Church has a living magisterium that teaches with authority in the present moment.
06:11 🔀 Historical Examples: Historical examples (Old Catholic Church) show dangers of rejecting bishops' authority, leading to division and heresy.
08:34 🛐 Obedience to Bishops: Catholics should not selectively obey bishops based on personal interpretations or preferences.
10:56 ❗ Authority of Magisterium: Non-infallible teachings by bishops must be obeyed; rejecting their authority can lead to schism.
13:41 💔 Misuse of Terms: Using terms like "spiritual abuse" to disregard bishops' authority can lead to division.
16:48 👑 Validity of Popes: Rejecting a Pope's validity without strong evidence risks schism and disregards historical context.
18:11 🌐 Church Unity: Historical examples and scripture emphasize the importance of unity and submission to Church leaders.
20:06 📚 Historical Revisionism: Comparisons to Protestant Reformation caution against selectively interpreting Church history.
23:15 🙏 Submitting to Leaders: Rather than rejecting bishops, Catholics should respectfully engage with Church leaders for clarity.
24:12 🤝 Balanced Approach: Pray for Church leaders, submit to their teachings, and seek understanding without resorting to slander or contempt.
Unfortunately, there is actually a precious rare amount of Catholic sources that spend more than an hour on Ecclesiology and Church drama. Michael Lofton has basically become the only one who dedicates the majority of his time talking about Pope Francis Derangement Syndrome, schism, Ecclesiology......we need more Catholics to speak up and address what true obedience is from a Catholic understanding, contrary to the "true obedience" of the Marshal's and Kwasniewski's of the world.
I'm not going to lie, Pope Francis isn't my favorite Pope, but he is my Pope, chosen by the Holy Spirit to guide the Church as he sees fit. And when I think I know better, I'm always reminded (I wanna say its by my Guardian Angel), you know if the Holy Spirit wanted you to run the One Holy and Apostolic Faith, and sit in the Chair of Saint Peter, your name could've come up. But it didn't, so pray.
This is precisely why I'm not Catholic
are you protestant or orthodox? how are those any better? Mankind is like this no matter where you are. Doesn’t change the authority that God gave.
@@erravi I'm as protestant with a lot of orthodox sympathies, they are better because the popes are clearly corrupt and illegitimate
The bible also teaches to respect the authorities we can disagree but with respect
Although I don’t want to throw anyone under the bus, sometimes I think that there are Catholic “influencers” who are more concerned with clicks, likes and shares more than drawing people to Christs church. Negativity sells, and they almost approach the issues with the intention of drawing viewers to their channel, not followers to the church.
This is why I stopped focusing on what is being said, there’s enough grifters and half-hearted “traditionalists” who are following trends more than following the core of faith and spiritual direction.
You have it spot on.
There are many ‘traditional’ Catholic channels and all they provide is ‘scandal porn’ - their followers end up addicted to hearing the current scandal and become rabid to the point of you don’t practise your faith exactly like them they will say all the same things Protestants say to Catholics IE they condemn you to hell, say you aren’t following Christ and are in the false church/whore of Babylon, will hold your past sins against you ignoring the fact you have repented of them (for example I’m honest with people that I strayed from the faith as an older teen and ended up becoming a single mother outwith wedlock. To his that past sin of mine that I have repented for would mean to hide and deny my son who is an absolute blessing on my life and it was because he was born that I returned to the faith as I promised my parents I would bring him up loving God) or worse many tell you that it’s better to commit the mortal sin of missing Mass if you are unable to attend TLM - image telling faithful Catholics to ignore and neglect Our Lord in the Tabernacle.
I do my best to stay away from Church Politics. I say again and again it reminds me of the spirit fundamentalism! I will not agree with every statement from a pope, bishop, priest, deacon, and lay person; with that being said, I pray for them and stay out of the drama! I do look forward to all the the books coming out. I do not know too much about Matthew Barrett, but I will look him up. I pray that the authors will be gracious towards us Catholics.
And if you think about it, Catholic teachings have not changed and will always be IF Catholics truly believe and trust in the protection of the Holy Spirit on faith and morals. While it's concerning to hear many of the comments by the Pope or Bishops I just listen and move on especially if I have no obligation to believe what they say. Usually their statements are their own opinion, nothing more.
“A man is converted to the Catholic Church from his admiration of its religious system, and his disgust with Protestantism. That admiration remains; but, after a time, he leaves his new faith, perhaps returns to his old. The reason, if we may conjecture, may sometimes be this: he has never believed in the Church’s infallibility; in her doctrinal truth he has believed, but in her infallibility, no. He was asked, before he was received, whether he held all that the Church taught, he replied he did; but he understood the question to mean, whether he held those particular doctrines “which at that time the Church in matter of fact formally taught,” whereas it really meant “whatever the Church then or at any future time should teach.” Thus, he never had the indispensable and elementary faith of a Catholic, and was simply no subject for reception into the fold of the Church. This being the case, when the Immaculate Conception is defined, he feels that it is something more than he bargained for when he became a Catholic, and accordingly he gives up his religious profession. The world will say that he has lost his certitude of the divinity of the Catholic Faith, but he never had it.”
- St. John Henry Newman, An Essay in Aid to a Grammar of Assent
Reminds me of the military. When you have a bad captain, you'll hear numerous people say "respect the position, even if the person holding it is irrespectable." But if you really respect the position, would you allow someone unworthy to disgrace it?
As you have no authority to depose the captain: yes. The military is not a democracy, and neither is the Church.
@@fruzsimih7214 No. Indeed, a soldier has little say on who leads him, but you ignore the captain when you can, and subvert him when necessary. Poor leaders destroy units. Hopefully he'll learn and improve, but it's just as likely he won't.
I think it has less to do with Malicious thoughts towards the Bishops and more a lack of clear language. It is easier to call someone a heretic than to just straight up call them Cowards. Or easier to say their chair is vacant than to call them Stupid. Because if you call someone a Coward you have to be Brave in the ways they are not but should be or if you call someone Stupid you have to be Intelligent in the way that they are not but should be. Be direct, if you think a Bishop isn't saying/doing what he ought then call him a Coward or Stupid but then you should be ready to own up to the comparison.
Are you saying that Ad Hominem attacks are more effective than putting forward reasoned arguments?
I am smart enough to know I am dumb. If I disagree with 2000+ years I know I am wrong as they are right.
You are so right, no matter what I believe God put Pope Francis in the papacy for a reason. Our Lord Jesus can easily discard him if God wants to. I do not understand too how Catholics become disrespectful of our pope, he is still the pope and should be given respect. I will take the position that Father Pio did with his bishop, follow your bishop because maybe God is trying to change something in you that you have not realized or is giving you grace to enter heaven.. God has purpose for everything. We should love our church as Jesus' spouse. When leaders are not faithful, the church is still the spouse of our Lord. I am not the one to make judgment or give the punishment only Jesus can and will. Be patient, the church is not a political conglomerate, only God can make the change and punishment. I only need to be patient and pray for our Catholic hierarchy. Even Mother Mary, she requested everyone to pray more and penance because God will send more blessings to the church when His people pray and live virtuous lives.
There is no way out of the dilemma except a return to the sola Scriptura recovered by the true Church during the glorious Reformation. I am almost certain that this so-called "Catholic" youtuber believes in his heart of hearts that Francis is not a true Pope. But were he to admit it publicly, the human-made superstructure of Romanism would collapse on his head.
Romanism is far more fractious than the Churches of the Reformation. There are nearly as many "RC Orthodoxies" as there are Roman Catholics. Why? Like the Bible, "the Catechism"/"the Canon Laws" of the RCC must also be interpreted. In their attempt to enforce man-made uniformity, the heedless Romanists replaced a divine book with a human distillate of the same. But unlike the Bible, only very few doctrines in "the Catechism" have ever been infallibly defined (such as the Assumption) so most of its stipulations are mere pius opinions (since they may be wrong).
Therefore, literarily every Romanist has his/her private orthodoxy. I know many Romanists who have declared the Pope an anti-Pope or a "Protestant Pope" simply because they disagree with the Pope's NON-DOGMATIC OPINION on some aspect of the "Catechism!"
There is far more unity of doctrine between the CLASSICAL forms of the major branches of the Reformed Churches (Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Baptist, etc) than amongst the confusing array of Romanist contortions. Each RC denomination (Mainline, Montinian, Sedevacantist, SSPV, SSPX, Conclavist, Lefebvrist, Catholic Restoration, Sedeprivationist, Ultramontanist, Semi-traditionalist, Concilarist, Neo-ultramontanist, Novus Ordo Catholic, Catholic Liberal, Extraordinary Formist, Opus Dei, Divine Mercy cultists, etc, etc) seems to make up its own "Catholic Truth" on the go.
Ironically, it is easier to know what a Reformed denomination believes than to pin down RCs to anything. I do not (yet) know any Baptists who believe that the President of the Baptist Convention is an unsaved heretic. But there is a vibrant army of zealous RCs online screaming that all Popes since Paul VI (some even add John the XXIII for good measure) are damned heretics and false prophets!! What can be more confusing?
I repeat - the Churches of the Reformation agreed on major points of doctrine. Anglicans did not believe that Lutherans were heretics whereas many RC denominations believe the Pope himself to be a heretic. The trick of referring to every non-Roman Church as "Protestant" is fallacious. How can a sect formed in Poland in 1998 by a former Romanist be called "Protestant"? This linguistic farce has gotten so bad that there are now millions of Romanists who actually believe that Pope Francis is "Protestant". But if all the Churches formed by former Methodists are linked back to Methodism as "Protestant" then surely all denominations founded by former Romanists should continue to be linked with Romanism. Nothing stops the Orthodox Church from lumping all non-Orthodox Churches (including the RCC) together and giving them one name - say, "the Heterodox" - and then pointing out that "Heterdodox sects" are doctrinally confused. Baptists can play the same disingenuous linguistic game by lumping every non-Baptist (including Romanists) under one name (e.g. "Paedo-baptists") so as to "prove" that only Baptists are coherent! What people find so attractive about Romanism (namely, its consistency) is an illusion.
We do NEED desperately good and faithfully bishops!
Finished it, solid episode. The less rooted you are in history, the more likely you are to be demoralized by current times.
Thank you Trent for doing this. It hurts my soul when I read comments like this. May God heal the divisions within true church.
As someone who would identify as a “Traditionalist” I could not agree more with this video. Thank you Trent!
Thanks for doing this video. I'm sure you'll get pushback from some. I'm a Lutheran converting to Catholicism and this is what I am trying to escape - constant squabbling and negativity which is a Protestant mindset, IMHO.
Trent, absolutely killed it in this episode. You're doing an amazing job. I used to be very close to sedevecantism and now I'm glad to have turned from that. The Catholics that are uncharitable to the Pope are great soldiers for Protestantism and Orthodoxy
There is no way out of the dilemma except a return to the sola Scriptura recovered by the true Church during the glorious Reformation. I am almost certain that this so-called "Catholic" youtuber believes in his heart of hearts that Francis is not a true Pope. But were he to admit it publicly, the human-made superstructure of Romanism would collapse.
Romanism is far more fractious than the Churches of the Reformation. There are nearly as many "RC Orthodoxies" as there are Roman Catholics. Why? Like the Bible, "the Catechism"/"the Canon Laws" of the RCC must also be interpreted. In their attempt to enforce man-made uniformity, the heedless Romanists replaced a divine book with a human distillate of the same. But unlike the Bible, only very few doctrines in "the Catechism" have ever been infallibly defined (such as the Assumption) so most of its stipulations are mere pius opinions (since they may be wrong).
Therefore, literarily every Romanist has his/her private orthodoxy. I know many Romanists who have declared the Pope an anti-Pope or a "Protestant Pope" simply because they disagree with the Pope's NON-DOGMATIC OPINION on some aspect of the "Catechism!"
There is far more unity of doctrine between the CLASSICAL forms of the major branches of the Reformed Churches (Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Baptist, etc) than amongst the confusing array of Romanist contortions. Each RC denomination (Mainline, Montinian, Sedevacantist, SSPV, SSPX, Conclavist, Lefebvrist, Catholic Restoration, Sedeprivationist, Ultramontanist, Semi-traditionalist, Concilarist, Neo-ultramontanist, Novus Ordo Catholic, Catholic Liberal, Extraordinary Formist, Opus Dei, Divine Mercy cultists, etc, etc) seems to make up its own "Catholic Truth" on the go.
Ironically, it is easier to know what a Reformed denomination believes than to pin down RCs to anything. I do not (yet) know any Baptists who believe that the President of the Baptist Convention is an unsaved heretic. But there is a vibrant army of zealous RCs online screaming that all Popes since Paul VI (some even add John the XXIII for good measure) are damned heretics and false prophets!! What can be more confusing?
I repeat - the Churches of the Reformation agreed on major points of doctrine. Anglicans did not believe that Lutherans were heretics whereas many RC denominations believe the Pope himself to be a heretic. The trick of referring to every non-Roman Church as "Protestant" is fallacious. How can a sect formed in Poland in 1998 by a former Romanist be called "Protestant"? This linguistic farce has gotten so bad that there are now millions of Romanists who actually believe that Pope Francis is "Protestant". But if all the Churches formed by former Methodists are linked back to Methodism as "Protestant" then surely all denominations founded by former Romanists should continue to be linked with Romanism. Nothing stops the Orthodox Church from lumping all non-Orthodox Churches (including the RCC) together and giving them one name - say, "the Heterodox" - and then pointing out that "Heterdodox sects" are doctrinally confused. Baptists can play the same disingenuous linguistic game by lumping every non-Baptist (including Romanists) under one name (e.g. "Paedo-baptists") so as to "prove" that only Baptists are coherent! What people find so attractive about Romanism (namely, its consistency) is an illusion.
Love your insta vids!
While I was going through my RCIA - the instructor was always saying that the world had change, and for that reason the Church couldn’t be rigid like it was - 😡 I always refuted her saying “the world must conform to the Church, Ma’am not the other way around” thank God I only went to RCIA because it was the only way for me to enter Mother church and not to find information otherwise I would have been very confused! I find that Pope Francis, in many respects, is just like my RCIA instructor
If it’s not in line with tradition, you don’t have to believe it. The church doesn’t change it’s a Vatican 1 anathema.
For the Church to change for the world literally goes against Scripture.
I converted to catholicism as an adult, and I sometime have problems justifying these things to others. I am supposed to submit to the authority of the church but when I hear or see the Pope or bishops say or do things that are so obviously not in line with the tradition or teachings of the church.. for example even entertaining the thought of blessing same sex relationships. Am I not allowed to criticize that? Can I not understand basic rights and wrongs of the Christian faith as a layman? I'm tried of being accused of cognitive dissonance when I say I believe in the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church but have to excuse or defend Pope/Bishops/Priests who are saying things that are clearly not Catholic.
Well said, and this is one of my issues as well. We can understand right and wrong from the teachings of the Church and from the Bible, yet when a Pope or Bishop says something that is contradictory to official teachings, then we aren’t allowed to criticize? I understand that they are not speaking infallibly all the time, but they are supposed to know the teachings of the church and even if they aren’t speaking infallibly they still shouldn’t contradict teaching. Also, at what point does a Pope or Bishop say enough things that are contrary to teachings that we are then allowed to say that they should no longer be a part of the Magisterium? I’m sure that laity in the Catholic Church are not allowed to challenge a Pope over what he says, but if the rest of the Magisterium refuses to do so, then what are the laity supposed to do? Just continue to say “The Pope is incorrect about this according to Church teaching, but he’s not speaking infallibly so its all good”?
It seems our option is to sit down a shut up. Or at least that's how we are made to feel. I can only excuse so many airplane interviews before my protestant family is going to start rolling their eyes.
Why we ask a question often matters more than the answer. When progressives begin a discussion about tradition, they’ve already made up their minds on what they’re gong to do.
Yet this principle also applies to us I think.
When we argue with a single Church leader-instead of looking deeper at Church history, sometimes our minds are made up.
There’s a wealth of reading and doctrine to contradict the misguided actions of progressive bishops. Enough to root us against small storms.
So in a way “sit down and shut up” is the right course for us.,
But instead I’d say: “ *read up* -and steer others to the library”.
For instance, Regarding same sex marriage issue, a thorough examination of the issue is Unchanging Witness by Gram and Fortston. They’re not Catholic but their research carefully dismantles the recent arguments by progressive Christians about the ancient world.
In my humble opinion: we ought to respect the Pope and bishops in their authority, and when we want to criticise them we must remember their role and the rule of charity. Criticism is important, but almost always is equally important to dole it in the right and gentle way.
It is really sad when they refuse to even call Jorge Bergoglio the Pope.
He is the Pope, but an objectively bad one. He is a globalist and says apostates like Joe Biden are “in good standing”.
we can rebuke them if they do wrong, just as Paul rebuked Peter. but you are right, we have to remember their authority and respect it. Bishops do not suddenly lose their authority when we disagree with them.
@@MegaVega2007 yes, I wholly agree :)
The ONLY thing that links the cahtolic church to Jesus is if you believe in popes, which was nonsense to start with.
If you don't believe in popes, then you're just a child rape cult.
If you do believe in popes, you're still a child rape cult that hopes that God loves a series of popes more than God loves children.
@Ribguy101 wholly agree, 2:24 2:29 too
It's sad that this needs to be said..but it does!
These self righteous channels seem to be multiplying.
We all could name a few..but they know who they are.
Lead us not into temptation..but deliver us from evil. 🙏
I converted five years ago. I stood in front of the church and agreed to obey the Bishop. I see Catholics acting like protestants when they decide for themselves what church teaching to accept or reject. They set themselves as authorities above the Bishop. This saddens me deeply.
As Christians we are not a collection of individuals, but instead a People. Paul told the Roman's to make of themselves (plural) a living sacrifice (singular). In Ephesians 2, we as individuals are part of a household being built together into a dwelling place (singular) of God. If I understand correctly, at Mass, we as Catholics offer up a singular sacrifice and the priest presents it on our (collective) behalf.
I suspect we can go too far with our personal, private prayers and devotions.
Starting with Abraham, God built the Israel children into His chosen People. He led them out of Slavery as a People. When they misbehaved, He judged them as a People. They went into slavery as a People. They returned and rebuilt Jerusalem as a People.
I am afraid we have learned from or Protestant brothers and sisters that we are each free agents who will be saved or damned as "me and Jesus" free agents. As Catholics we must remember that we are a single body.
@@_ready__ staring your trolling already, what is the matter with you. Protestantism is a mental illness
👏👏👏👏👏 This is a great!
Thank you for this! I came into the Church a year ago after 4 long years trying to untangle the many Protestant traditions I was raised in. When I see fellow Catholics behave this way I can’t help but think wow you sound like a Protestant. I’ve lived that life and the grass isn’t greener. Whenever I see something troubling I ask where else shall I go? And pray for the Pope or Bishop, because at the end of the day either Catholicism is true and we stick it out faithfully, or it’s not.
@@_ready__ one must be baptized and obey God.
A quick look at your previous replies on other videos it seems as though you’re not interested in listening. I’m a faithful catholic. I hold the church teaching. If you’re asking only for the sole purpose of being obnoxious I won’t engage any further.
@@_ready__ Key question is, what do you mean by attain?
@@_ready__ God provides the grace and the means, He paid the price and offers us to journey home with Him until death and should we slip or turn from Him, He again offers and if we agree, comes and picks us up again. This rejection is by sin and reconciliation by repentance and indeed sacramental confession because whether in mercy or judgement, every sin must be brought before God`s tribunal for arbitration. Certainly if one perfectly repents out of purely love fot God and sorrow for offending Him, He will forgive, but not coming to Him through the arbitration means He has established, if one can, shows a contempt for His Kingship and that one is not willing to do what one can in love for Him.
Or taken by another metaphor, The Divine Physician operates in His way not simply as however we desire. He will triage you if you come, but a full surgery to remove the tumor fully is necessary. The Physician shall either see us with His attendant to heal you, or at the end to declare you spiritually deceased.
Apart from God and His grace, we can do nothing, but we must act accordingly and continually consent, God will not force us to stay with Him against our will, God is no kidnapper.
Once in His grace, indeed we can do good, but only because of His grace, not because we are suddenly in our own natures increased. If we knowingly refuse God, we can do nothing as we are apart from Him and His Sacrifice.
In short, we are in the desert making our Great Exodus, Christ is the New Moses, and the New Aaron, apart from Him and those He chooses, we die in the spiritual desert.
However if your question is regarding a certain Commandment, that is a different matter requiring its own response.
Remember, if you hate your brother, you commit murder in your heart.
God bless you, through Jesus Christ Our Blesser Lord and Savior, Who is the Divine Justice, Divine Wisdom, and Divine Mercy, Who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, our Eternal King and Great High Priest. Amen.
@@_ready__ Hey! Why'd you run away from the other thread and start posting your same old errors again as if you didn't get put on the spot? Ready to explain how the scriptures got here or not? 😉
@@_ready__ Again, you ignore the clarification of terms. Why are you capitalizing "ATTAIN"? Your definition is probably different from the Church true definition. I asked you if an unrepentent sinner could go to Heaven and you ran away from that question. You also never told me who it is that told you the books of the Bible are Divinely Inspired.
New videos from Trent AND Laura in ONE DAY?? WOW!
As a Catholic, I’ve been waiting for this one. Should probably do a “when Catholics argue like atheists,” too
Living in San Diego, I needed to hear this today. This topic has been troubling me the last few days and I decided to pray for our bishop this morning in Mass. Your video is a timely confirmation.
I agree with much of what you say, and at most have only pointed out statements the Pope has made in error with reverence, Love and Charity, ... but... I don't think its fair for you to start your presentation by stating you will not criticize the authority figures in the Church but then proceed to criticize the lay people of the Church. Yes, many of the examples you gave, were of lay people who are way over the top and who spoke without charity or respect, but, you never would touch what is proper criticism of errors, you seem to mainly try to instill a fear of not standing against any errors, for fear of schism. I inferred you believe it is very easy to fall into schism and go to hell. I have listened to Jimmy Akin speak about schism, and I believe he differs from your perspective, proposing there are degrees of schism and it is much more difficult to cross the threshold which imperils one's soul. To point out errors, with Love and Charity, I do not believe puts one in schism. I think Jimmy's agrees. If all are too afraid of being labeled as in schism, it is more likely no one will speak out when the Pope or a bishop proposes or makes statements which are in error. We truly would be mindless sheep, not sheep made in the image of the Lord.
Thank you, Trent! We all could use a bit of introspection and charity.
Thank you, Trent. Really great video.
Man, Calvin was a really shameless virtue signaler
Yeap
Laudetur Jesus Christ! Well said, Trent. Thank you for addressing this issue. Keep up your incredible work. May God bless you and your family.
thank you trent! as someone who recently has come back to the Church the claims of an antipope and illegitimate Church authority has created a lot of worry in me that i’m on the right path
St. Pius X also stated that the faithful in the early 20th century could not be assured of an imprimatur or nihil obistat being trustworthy. In Pascendi he stated outright that the enemies of the Church extended into the ranks of the priesthood itself.
I know this will alarm some people here, and maybe even make people reply to me in anger, but....
Trent, you should really do more responses to Orthodoxy (there's already plenty of videos you've done against Protestantism)... I am seriously giving them consideration, and I'm starting to feel myself being won over...
I don't want to make the wrong decision, and you are easily the most gifted Catholic apologist I know of, so if anyone can refute them and bring me back, it's you..
I just noticed that it's almost always a Catholic vs. Protestant back and forth, but rarely does anyone touch on Orthodoxy..
What in particular in Orthodoxy do you find concerning that would require a response?
@@TheCounselofTrent maybe I can share some videos you can respond to..?
Michael Lofton from Reason and theology is a great resource for a response to Orthodoxy.
Ask them why they haven't had an ecumenical council since the Schism. Oh sure, they have gotten together, but it's always "some parts subject to revision by the local patriarchs", unlike the Pre-Schism councils. What changed?
Check with Michael Lofton as well. The Orthodox are not unified at all in theology. While many Catholics can lean to hard on that it’s all great over here when clearly we have disagreements Catholics as a whole do not disagree on essential areas of doctrine while the Orthodox do like in areas baptism should new converts be re baptized, divorce and re marriage some say no, some say can be divorced and re married multiple times, some say contraception is okay some do not, some have disagreements over the Filoque. The Orthodox faith is fracturing again with Russians vs the Greeks right now. So it’s not all peaches and cream over there either.
We have our issues sure, and we should reason them out however it’s not an excuse to leave the Church for a counterfeit faith that acts like everything is just them acting as one over there when they aren’t.
In reading about various saints like Padre Pio, they all shared in common their obedience and deference to all superior clergy as is required by the vows they take. We would do well to imitate them.
As someone who has been angry with the bishops and Pope at times, this was important for me to hear. I believe the Holy Spirit sanctioned this message.
Thank you Trent.
So how would YOU stand up against a gnostic takeover?
So if the Pope and the Bishops were to contradict past teachings in the Bible and the magisterium on say, homosexuality, would we be right to follow the current magisterium or the past teachings ?
@@horrorhawk3701 OK, let me word the question differently, if you believed that the current Church was contradicting Biblical and past teaching, should you follow past teaching or present ?
@@horrorhawk3701 Utter nonsense. The magisterium is subordinate to Tradition which is subordinate to Scripture. There is no way out of the dilemma except a return to the sola Scriptura recovered by the true Church during the glorious Reformation. Sola Scrriptura means that nothing can be taught as dogma if it is not affirmed in Scripture. I am almost certain that this so-called "Catholic" youtuber believes in his heart of hearts that Francis is not a true Pope. But were he to admit it publicly, the human-made superstructure of Romanism would collapse on his head.
Romanism is far more fractious than the Churches of the Reformation. There are nearly as many "RC Orthodoxies" as there are Roman Catholics. Why? Like the Bible, "the Catechism"/"the Canon Laws" of the RCC must also be interpreted. In their attempt to enforce man-made uniformity, the heedless Romanists replaced a divine book with a human distillate of the same. But unlike the Bible, only very few doctrines in "the Catechism" have ever been infallibly defined (such as the Assumption) so most of its stipulations are mere pius opinions (since they may be wrong).
Therefore, literarily every Romanist has his/her private orthodoxy. I know many Romanists who have declared the Pope an anti-Pope or a "Protestant Pope" simply because they disagree with the Pope's NON-DOGMATIC OPINION on some aspect of the "Catechism!"
There is far more unity of doctrine between the CLASSICAL forms of the major branches of the Reformed Churches (Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Baptist, etc) than amongst the confusing array of Romanist contortions. Each RC denomination (Mainline, Montinian, Sedevacantist, SSPV, SSPX, Conclavist, Lefebvrist, Catholic Restoration, Sedeprivationist, Ultramontanist, Semi-traditionalist, Concilarist, Neo-ultramontanist, Novus Ordo Catholic, Catholic Liberal, Extraordinary Formist, Opus Dei, Divine Mercy cultists, etc, etc) seems to make up its own "Catholic Truth" on the go.
Ironically, it is easier to know what a Reformed denomination believes than to pin down RCs to anything. I do not (yet) know any Baptists who believe that the President of the Baptist Convention is an unsaved heretic. But there is a vibrant army of zealous RCs online screaming that all Popes since Paul VI (some even add John the XXIII for good measure) are damned heretics and false prophets!! What can be more confusing?
I repeat - the Churches of the Reformation agreed on major points of doctrine. Anglicans did not believe that Lutherans were heretics whereas many RC denominations believe the Pope himself to be a heretic. The trick of referring to every non-Roman Church as "Protestant" is fallacious. How can a sect formed in Poland in 1998 by a former Romanist be called "Protestant"? This linguistic farce has gotten so bad that there are now millions of Romanists who actually believe that Pope Francis is "Protestant". But if all the Churches formed by former Methodists are linked back to Methodism as "Protestant" then surely all denominations founded by former Romanists should continue to be linked with Romanism. Nothing stops the Orthodox Church from lumping all non-Orthodox Churches (including the RCC) together and giving them one name - say, "the Heterodox" - and then pointing out that "Heterdodox sects" are doctrinally confused. Baptists can play the same disingenuous linguistic game by lumping every non-Baptist (including Romanists) under one name (e.g. "Paedo-baptists") so as to "prove" that only Baptists are coherent! What people find so attractive about Romanism (namely, its consistency) is an illusion.
@@horrorhawk3701 But only Ex Cathedra teachings can be said to be infallible. So if the Pope and the Bishops issued a non ex Cathedra teaching that contradicted past Ex Cathedra teachings we would have a responsibility to follow the past Ex Cathedra teachings rather than the non Ex Cathedra teachings. Also I would say that once a doctrine has been defined in the past Ex Cathedra, then even if a Pope and the Bishops try to redefine it Ex Cathedra then their redefinition is null and void because once something has been defined it cannot be undefined.
Because we have more than one Pope through history then present Popes cannot contradict past popes and any attempt to do so must be considered heresy, even if it is a Pope who claims he is speaking Ex Cathedra.
Thank you, Trent, for such a reasonable, well-thought out and well-researched discussion on a crucial issue. I love how you brought in the Vatican Council… with a surprise! Fundamentally, the question is: To Be Obedient or Not To Be Obedient.
Do the bishops regularly address the semantic shift that is one of the main problems today? On the contrary it seems they mostly acquiesce to new definitions: when you see them use words like "love" they mostly seem to use it in the contemporary sense as if Christianity is a hippie religion. So in some ways things are not as bad (Francis is not as liberal as most think, the conservative trend in fertility and young priests, etc), but at the same time we have the seemingly intractable evolution of culture with is very dynamic and chaotic
Thank you so much. It's one of the main reasons I dropped social media and mostly stoped reading YT comments.