Cosmetic Catholics and the Crisis of Authority. Taylor Marshall exposes Calvin Robinson.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ย. 2024
- If you liked this video, please visit www.catholicun... to pick up a silver or gold membership and receive daily news commentary from Dr. Gavin Ashenden straight to your inbox.
Links:
www.anglicanco...
www.papalencyc...
• Fr. Calvin Robinson an...
Summary:
Here Dr Gavin Ashenden, former Anglican Bishop and Chaplain to the late Queen Elizabeth II, explores the ambiguity around Calvin Robinsons Catholicity following a recent interview that Calvin did with Taylor Marshall.
Gavin explains how the 39 articles are a rejection of the Church which Christ himself instituted and that those who fail to make the sacrifices necessary to become Catholic have no business calling themselves so.
Gavin refers to JRR Tolkien, Pope Leo XIII and Luther in his forensic analysis of the Anglican rejection of Rome.
We KNEW this was inside of you! Jolly Good to see you express Christs Charity and Mercy as Truth! The Gospel is often times a tough pill to swallow. Thank you for caring for Calvins soul as apparently no one else has had the courage and love to do so! God Bless you 🙏 ❤
As a new catholic convert, thank you for such a concise explanation of the interview. When I watched it, and was confused by Calvin's answers, I thought my lack of knowledge was the issue not him.
I too was confused and switched off early from the attitude as well as cigar clouds.
I have SO MUCH respect for Calvin's courage and speaking, and much of what he says (as a former "Anglo-Catholic" myself) resonates and I find myself sympathizing with. BUT I have come to the Catholic Church (Confirmed in April) to experience the fullness of Christianity and a relationship with Christ, and looking back now after a conversion process that was lengthy (many years), painful (cost me dear friendships and still risks some of my family relationships), and messy, I can see so plainly that sincerely striving for the historic, living Christian faith could have led nowhere other than to the Catholic Church. Based in Rome. Under the Pope in communion with the worldwide bishops. I hope that Calvin finds his way home too.
Your Pope venerated the thanks. demon goddess. No thanks.
Your barking up the wrong tree, come and join us at the only true Church of Christ, The Holy Orthodox Church.
Ill include you in my prayers 🙏☦️
@@BillSikes. But which one? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Moscow%E2%80%93Constantinople_schism
@@TheUltimateUSCFan
The Assyrian! We're the original Church!
@@BillSikes. Would all the other Orthodox Christians agree with that?
Dr. Ashenden my repect for you grows with every listen. Thank you.
Praise God
Thank you so much, Doctor Ashenden. This conversation was a brilliant and charitable examination of Calvin Robinson and the paucity of Anglican Protestantism. Calvin Robinson needs to enter the faith and some Bishop needs to reach out to him. God bless and sustain you.
Maybe he knows too much, although he accepts discussion, will he grow in faith?
I've listened to this commentary twice now and want to thank Gavin for insight and analysis. Even though I am Catholic I hadn't understood the 39 articles and am actually rather shocked at the venom contained within them.
They were devised by me men who hated everything about the Catholic Church.
A stretch of Tim 3:16 which if read by any common sense person patently does not declare that is all one needs.
I'll never forget hearing about Gareth Bennett's demise.
Keep praying for Calvin, I'm sure he'll get home in the end ! Mr. Ashenden did !
I was so hoping that you would address this interview because you are uniquely qualified to do so. Thank you for bringing the historical, as well as the theological and ecclesial perspectives which are anything but ‘cosmetic’!
Check for accuracy, especially in the history department, compatibility with Vatican II on Anglicanism, and compare what Gavin said on Apostolicae Curae with the easy to read publication INRALLIBLE FALLACIES (London: S.P.C.K., 1953).
This is excellent! Thank you very much. May God bless you.
Thank you so much, Dr. Ashenden, for this insightful presentation. Calvin Robinson has been a puzzle to many of us in recent times. While I appreciate his clearly fervent Christianity, and his public defense of the faith during the crises of this modern era, I have been concerned that his - how can I call it - liturgical laxity - will in the end cause harm where it didn't need to and weaken his position. We are all evolving as Christians. My prayer is that CR will heed the wisdom you have presented here, make the sacrifice, and embrace the one holy Catholic faith completely.
What an excellent explanation of so many key issues. As an American, I learned a great deal and came away deeply impressed by the combination of clarity and charity on Gavin’s part.
As always, you speak the truth with love, as scripture says. You have such a gracious spirit in your conversation. Thank you, especially for the exhortation to "pay the price, it's worth it." And also the reminder to defend the Church in these trying times. God bless you and please continue to teach us and encourage us in our faith. To God be the glory. 🙏🏻
Thank you, Sir! Occasionally listening to Calvin, I recognized an interesting evangelist but a flighty bird. So grateful for your gentle but clear insight into his mission.
Henry's distribution of the assets of the monastic houses to his friends probably sealed England's fate because it gave the most powerful people of England a vested interest in supporting Protestantism. The restoration of Catholicism would have put them and the government under enormous pressure to see that those assets were returned.
Yes - King Henry VIII was a master politician. His father, King Henry VII was extremely unpopular, because he was a greedy man who spent most of his reign confiscating property and taxing his subjects up to the limit. His son was, in the early years of his reign, extremely popular, because he reversed this process. Queen Katherine was also extremely popular - while Henry was fighting in France, she led an English army against Scotland, displaying the military prowess inherited from her parents, Ferdinand and Isabella. It could all have ended so much better. All that Henry needed to do was to do what King Henry I had done - persuade the Nobles to agree that his daughter should inherit the Throne on his death. While it did not work for King Henry I (the Nobles repudiated their agreement to accept the Empress Mathilda as their Sovereign) it might well have worked for King Henry VIII.
I'm not condoning Henry's use of Monastic funds for war mongering but we have to remember why the Monasteries were so rich in the first place. Playing on peoples' fears about the after life and garnering monies from indulgences, pilgrimages and relics (most of them dubious) brought in huge wealth. Quite simply, God had had enough. The corruption of Rome was at an unprecedented level and the Reformation was inevitable.
@@clivejames5058 Whereas Henry and those who received the assets of the monasteries were motivated by high ideals? What high ideals? Was it to reform the monasteries? If so, how does closing something down "reform" it? It doesn't. The monasteries were where Henry VIII's most effective opposition came from. He needed to destroy them and he used the pretext of their supposedly uniquely high levels of corruption to do so. He gave Protestant-friendly nobility the assets in order to buy their complicity or at least acquiescence in his designs. Once having been bought-off they needed to support Protestantism and the propaganda he invented to "justify" the asset seizure.
@@clivejames5058the winners write the history but then there is nowadays Eamon Duffy to set the record straight!
Alas, yes.
Thanks for a wonderful video. While I have much admiration for Mr Robinson's courage in defending traditional values without counting the cost, I do respectfully agree with your conclusions concerning the possible disingenuity of his position as to his relationship and standing with the One True Faith. He is clearly NOT a Catholic but if he continues to falsely argue otherwise, then he will have only succeeded in re-Protestantise himself and create the 450,000th Protestant denomination!
You appear to be expecting a lot of your audience intellectually in your current crop of lectures, they seemed to be pitched higher than former ones, and you seem to be happier for giving yourself a free reign to express your personal ideas and to range across many fields of knowledge and cite multiple sources.
This is exhilarating to listen to, very challenging in a positive way. Please carry on being emboldened to share your unique point of view with full vigour.
Thank you Veronica 🙏
Agreed.
Agreed too. We don't want dumbed down
Yes, I agree with the rigor.
Nothing wrong with going for a long walk and having to exercise your legs. Nothing wrong with listening to a reasoned argument, and having to stretch your mind.
Very astute diagnosis of a reprobate construction such as Anglicanism.
I came back into the fold after skipping for 12 years in the angry desert of protest and becoming weary to despair unless I returned to receive Holy Communion this Easter Vigil where i find myself in Common Humanity again and so cheerful again praise Be to the name of the Lord.
We are in a real Culture battle and for sure do we need St Peter's posterity to embolden us against the Holy Ship's dodgy pilots and leaking hull.
May The Holy Spirit enable us to defend against the inner as well as the outer Wolves.
Pax Vobiscum Amen + .
As a person who has seen this issue and have gone through the stages from being so called Anglo-Catholic to now going on this long and painful journey to Rome through the Ordinariate, I was so blessed to hear this analysis. God bless you.
Good point about the 39 articles and the TLM.
This is one of your best Gavin. You speak the truth!
Wow, wow, wow. Have never heard these articles before. This explains so much. Thank you!
the best podcaster in youtube. finally a precise speaker
Thank you, this is wonderful! I listened to Taylor's interview with Calvin, he sounded very intellectual and very protestant. He knows better then Jesus. I'm in SC and on my street alone there are 2 house churches, and 2 small churches, one in a trailer.
Wow, such a gem your channel is!
I have subscribed!
Thank you 🙏
What a very good article. Carry on doing articles and so forth.
Just one minor clarification on a point of doctrine. Now, when I was at school, at about the age of seven, I can remember learning from the Catechism [Question] “Is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass a re enactment of the Sacrifice of Calvary?” [Answer] “No, the Sacrifice of the Mass is not a re enactment of the Sacrifice of Calvary. It is the same sacrifice as that of the Cross.” This was part of the Catechism so that Catholics could refute the accusation made by Protestants that Catholics believe that Jesus dies again on the Altar at a Catholic Mass. Jesus does not die on the Altar during the Mass. He died once and for all, as the one perfect sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins, on the Cross. The Mass makes this sacrifice real and present, but it is the same sacrifice as that of the Cross, not a re enactment of the death of Jesus at Calvary. Gavin does not quite make this clear. Sometimes converts are eager to stress, possibly, sometimes, to over stress, the fullness of Catholic truth, but that truth does not extend to an assertion that Jesus dies on the Altar at each and every Mass. It is a fine distinction, I know, however, the Catechism from which I was taught (abolished, of course, as has been so much that was good in the Church) did go to great lengths to ensure that Catholics were aware exactly what the Church did, and did not, teach, as far as the nature of the sacrifice of the Mass is concerned.
I had the same Catechism.
Back when we memorized most of it!
I am not Catholic but always thought it was a "re-presentation" of the original sacrifice of the cross, not Christ dying again each time. That's how the distinction was explained to me anyway.
@@littleboots9800 The Catechism used to state “it is the same sacrifice as that of the Cross” (made real again) but not a re enactment of the sacrifice of Calvary, which was a once and for all sacrifice which is not repeated again at Mass. I suppose that “re presentation” does convey the same meaning as “the same sacrifice as that of the Cross”.
@@Mark3ABE yeah, it's a little unclear, which is not what is desirable in regards to a theological issue of such importance and dispute I suppose.
The priest did impress upon me that it was the same sacrifice that is being presented each time, not a new sacrifice or the same sacrifice being 'repeated' each time.
The catechism always struck me as a very good idea, that could be taught from, memorised, referred to throughout ones life when needed.
@@littleboots9800We need to absolutely bring it back. Catholics are poorly catechized these days.
Sending prayers and love, brother. 🙏
Thank you for your excellent research and superb talk. Much more interesting and informative than the Robinson/Marshall interview.
The Roman Catholic parish in our university city joined with all the Protestant groups last year by hanging the Pride flag from the church organ. Only the Anglo Catholic group refused to participate. Guess whose building was defaced.
Thank you Dr Gavin for this video🙏 I had already seen the Calvin Marshall video and wondered by Dr Taylor hadn't asked two questions:
- Do you believe in the Real Presence of the Blessed Sacrament? and if so,
- Why aren't you Roman Catholic?
@@royquick-s5n Deliberately describing oneself in a manner that may cause confusion is immoral.
Claiming holy orders in the Catholic church without authority is reprehensible.
I thought that you would have to ask those two questions too.
Thank you for this critique and historical explanation!
God bless you.
A good insight, thanks for explaining. Laudate Dominum.
I was ordained a Catholic priest in the Finnish Malobar Free Presbyterian Nordic Swahili Church of Northern Vermont. We are too Catholics! And you better not say any different! And don't listen to those Southern Vermonters!
So you're in union with the Vatican per the Vatican?
I was ordained into the Priesthood of the East Cheam Old Catholic Church, based at 23 Railway Cuttings, East Cheam by the late Anthony Hancock. Hattie Jacques laid on a first rate tea after the ceremony.
Oriental and Eastern Orthodox churches don’t recognise the authority of the RC pope, so according to Gavin’s logic Orthodox Christians are schismatics and heretics too, yet the RC church allows Orthodox Christian’s to commune and RC mass! Like most in the RC church he’s muddleheaded on this matter. Id like to pin him down in this matter because he seems to be avoiding addressing this matter.
@@user-re2ss3jn8wI think that he’s in union with the Pope of Sarcasm.
I do often wonder how the Episcopal vegans (wandering bishops) in the Thuc and other lines……how do they advertise their services and their ‘stipend’ required for ordination. So as not to commit the sin of simony.
Thank you for the great information. God Bless 🙌 it's sad because evil is all around us.
Brilliant talk, full of truth, and I'm grateful for you posting it. Thank you. God bless and keep you.
Excellent!
Mary Tudor gets a bad rap, and rightly so, one does not go around burning people with whom one has theological disagreements. However for context Mary had approximately 300 executed, Elizabeth I 600, and their father Henry VIII 37,000 of his fellow countrymen from a population of around 3 million.
If she hadn't died the figure would have been higher.
Religion and politics did mix the Armada was sent to get rid of Elizabeth and return England to the Roman Catholic religion
@@margaretdefrias698 Both Mary and Elizabeth were victims of circumstance beyond their control in many ways, neither having a free hand in affairs of state. The same cannot be said for their father. Tudor propaganda has been mixed with monarchy, law and religious observance ever since.
@margaretdefrias698 Philip of Spain opposed Mary's burnings. And the Armada was sent in large part out of anger at the activities of Sir Francis Drake, who liked to present his Queen with lovely plunder.
@@alicepavey974looks like I need to read more about it any suggestions?
@@margaretdefrias698E Duffy has a good book on Mary Tudor's time. Protestants were very worried by the success of her religious policy.
Such an information dense and enlightening talk, so much food for thought here. This English convert to the Roman Catholic Church thanks you so much 🙏🏻 It has been my greatest hope, these past few years, that England will find her way back to true Christianity (which is only Catholic), claim the inheritance that heretics violently stripped from her hundreds of years ago and do her part to restore Christendom whereby His will be done on earth as it is in Heaven. 🤍
"For myself, I found my own most pregnant evidence in the work of the divines of the Anglican Church; their prayer-books and their *articles* ; and in the visible influence which they had ever had upon the high places of the Establishment, in favour of the truths, which I saw to be true. These were the means by which Providence had led me on, from the beginning to the end, to find a present refuge from absolute religious scepticism, and a bulwark against error."
St John Henry Newman, Apologia.
Thank you Dr Gavin! Absolutely outstanding and needed explanation. I heard the entire interview and found myself perplexed many times. Ultimately, I believe you have hit the nail on the head. Fr. Calvin simply does not feel comfortable enough at the time to cross the Tiber (though PF is probably not helping him)...regardless he will need to see Christ and his authority behind the lone One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church He established regardless of the failure of any of its present-day ministers.
Stop calling him father.
@@anthonythomas1504 it seems he has been ordained validly yet illicitly very similar to an ordained Orthidox priest hence you can still call him Father.
Gavin, thank you so much for this fabulous talk. Extremely insightful and informative. I’ve enjoyed it very much. God bless 🙏
🙏Bless you Gavin I love Calvin and find him confused vulnerable autistic soul looking for a right support and direction- church laws and structure is indeed complex and very complicated I pray for him as his work absolutely essential now💖💖💖✝ hope he’s coming back to GB and continue his conversations here at homeland🙏✨
This Lutheran pastor at age 90 is very appreciative of your commentaries over the several years I have listened to you!
I often think on the Catholic Churchs' relationship to those Lutherans who have remained faithful to their principles and remained 'orthodox and faithful' to their Christian tenets. Its wonderfully ironic how close we are now considering we had called for each others blood in that great separation.
🎉There is no such thing as the ," Old Catholic" Church. THEY are wannabe Catholics, unwilling to pay the price. ITS disgusting and no true Catholic should give them the time of day. We need to find out WHO in the Vatican decided it was a good idea to recognize some of their so called Orders and so called Sacraments. ITS a disgrace. IT NEEDS TO BE OVERTURNED.
@@jamesshaw6455yet, Lutherans are not in the Church, and close doesn’t matter except in horseshoes and hand-grenades.
90 and comfortably active on social media..! 👏🏼 God bless you sir. Come home to the RCC. 🙏🏻
Thank you for that, I was struck by the historical background and the depth of explanation. I went to bed last night with thoughts of the great example of intellectual integrity based in truth. I can take some lesson from this in my own efforts.
Calvin is. now displaying what I felt was true of him, but did not want to be true: I think Calvin is a self promoting person, who uses the name of Christ for his own selfish and egotistical ends. Gives me no joy as a Catholic to say this. Let's pray for Calvin.
As opposed to Marshall?
@@stephenjohnson7915 Apologies, what do you mean?
@@thecrazyenglishman1066 Have you watched or read his stuff from the past few years?
I think he started well but is now being buffeted by all sorts of forces. He needs prayers 🙏
someone asked in the comments "When did the Catholic Church become a Roman franchise?". To me the response is in 68 AD, when Peter was crucified in Rome.
Dr Ashenden, Calvin reminds me a bit of myself when younger and discerning whether to go into ministry (initially as a Methodist but then thinking about Anglo-Catholic orders). I paid the price and gave it up to the Lord when I entered into the Ordinariate here in Australia and am happy as a layman in my vocation as a husband and ordinary run of the mill Christian. I have some sympathy for Calvin but I too have the same view as you in the end.
@@royquick-s5n not quite sure what you mean by this. In any case, I am quite content being a layman and living out my vocation as a father, husband and follower of Christ.
@@royquick-s5n I was never confirmed as a Methodist or after I became Anglo-Catholic. Was never a candidate for orders (so I was a layman). So I never tucked away anything of this sort that you are talking about. My baptism was considered valid and I was received and confirmed in the Ordinariate. The only thing I tucked away was my theological positions which up until that point had varied quite a bit (from conservative Evangelical [of both Arminian and Calvinist stripes] to latitudinarian and then conservative Anglo-Catholic).
@@royquick-s5n You may be surprised that that is not the case with the clergy that I associate with in both regular Latin Rite and the Ordinariate. They only “respect” those views in the sense that they are proper to those who aren’t Catholic.
Please can you post these talks on apple podcast, it would be incredible useful. Many thanks
Yes. Have just set up and posted the Jonathan Pageau conversation. Others, including this, coming shortly . Thank you
I once met Calvin Robinson (in his Afro days), and he was distinctly underwhelming, although very tall!. Maybe he means well. But these days The Church needs more theologists, spirituality, and less do-goodery. The Catholic Church should be a bastion and fortress, and it's priests truly of The Apostolic Succession. People need this, and they WILL come to a fully authentic Catholic Church and not some waterered down ecumenical mish-mash, or Chrislam, or whatever else Francis proposes (may the Holy Spirit help him please). Anglo Catholics seem to have (whatever their personal discernment or sense of vocation) a rather lower level of spiritual development. Maybe it's the secular culture we live in. Although there exists a hunger for traditional practice and that itself may draw those whose understanding is superficial. Many converts not raised in the culture, seem lacking in deep spiritual DNA. And some just love the cosplay!!
SO very interesting. What a profound lesson about the inability to escape the consequences of past actions. And I am very grateful to now understand exactly why there is no such thing as an Anglican priest.
What a superb history lesson, Dr Ashenden. Many many thanks. My grandmother, a convert, used to quote the blasphemous fables bit, and call our lovely medieval cathedrals stolen property. Good for her !
Newman in Tract 90 tried to reconcile the Articles with the Decrees of the Council of Trent.
Hear, hear!
Excellent summary of Dr. Marshall's interview. The Synodal Modernist Church mirrors the errors and rise of the Anglican church in my opinion. In the same way the Mass of the Ages is being suppressed, although a lot less bloddy.
This has been a most stimulating start to my morning here in the Southern Antipodes. God Bless, Dr Gavin.
How far South? Invercargill? Dunedin?
I was being inaccurate . It is really that big lump of an Island, AKA Australia.
Brilliant! I had a lot of time for Calvin until he went searching for priesthood as a personal goal. He should, like you, Gavin, embrace the true Church as a layman and let the Church discern his vocation. He should, like you have, pay the price.
"letting the Church discern your vocation" sounds great in theory, but the Church has ordained thousands of abusive pedophiles and heretics, and passed over many very devout holy men who would have been a tremendous blessing to the Church.
It takes humility, and we all have to work on that.
45:59 It's a perfectly valid and Catholic position, that an office holder, even if he be Pope, would lose office immediatly on starting to preach heresy.
This was not defined in the Vatican Council, but it stands in the minutiae of the council proceedings.
Dr Scott Hahn, a Catholic theologian and a Christian apologist, who was Protestant Minister who has taken on a Catholic teaching role after becoming a Catholic.
Thank you for reading the document of Pope Leo XIII (forgive me if I got the number incorrect here). I greatly appreciate hearing the reasoning verbatim. I had heard of it, but only the outline, as follows:
Anglican, and therefore American Episcopalian ordination was invalid because the wording of the Ordination Rite was altered to be made ineffective, and by the time the wording was changed again to try to bring it back into line with the Apostolic ordination, all the successors to the Apostles were dead, and so the line went extinct in the Anglican Church.
Gavin.....Book The stripping of the Alters by Eamon Duffy Absolutely brilliant a thousand yrs of Marian England to the destruction of a religion that the English people loved.
Every baptised Catholic has an essential dignity, as a member of “a holy nation, a royal priesthood, a people set apart”. This concept of a “universal priesthood” is, of course, entirely different from the concept as understood by Protestants. While only those validly ordained to the Presbyterate have the fullness of the Priesthood, nevertheless, every baptised Catholic does share in the Priesthood of Christ. For example, in cases of necessity, any baptised Catholic who is in a state of grace may administer the sacrament of Baptism - possibly the most important of the sacraments, since it makes the recipient a new creation and admits him to the Catholic Church and to salvation. To go even further, administered at the point of death, with the recipient having the right intention, it means the difference between eternal damnation in Hell and eternal joy in Heaven. Today, we have a number of Catholic lay people who exercise a very valuable teaching ministry within the Church. I won’t name those I particularly admire, because a list of some might exclude others equally valuable to the Church. They lecture (or have lectured) at Catholic universities and have a wide public platform. Of course, Gavin is amongst their number. He does not refer to himself as a Priest, since he has not been ordained into the Presbyterate of the Catholic Church and it would be misleading for him to use this title, even though he did have this title, as well as that of Bishop, in the Church of England. Is Gavin’s ministry any less effective just because he serves the Church as part of the universal priesthood of all baptised Catholics (as properly understood in the Catholic Church)? In my view, no. If he were ordained into the Presbyterate he would immediately become subject to a Diocesan Bishop, who would be free to impose whatever restrictions he wished on Gavin, even to the point of insisting that he remain completely silent on the current issues affecting the Catholic Church. One of the accepted charisms within the Church, as listed by St. Paul, is that of “Teacher”. That is the charism which Gavin is currently exercising in the Catholic Church.
True.
Anyone can baptise in a situation of necessity and it be valid, even a non Catholic or even an atheist/agnostic.
Even some of the close friends of the King managed to find themselves the victims of the so called reformation.
In those days there victims on both sides of the Reformation and what some books call the Counter Reformation.
If Calvin joins a jurisdiction that upholds the 39 Articles he can't use the Latin Mass without violating the 24th Article, "It is a thing plainly repugnant to the word of God and the custom of the primitive Church, to have public prayer in the Church, or to minister the sacraments in a tongue not understanded of the people."
Thank you Gavin...We are being chastised but God calls forth Saints and great Theologians to guide us.
I must say I don't quite understand the problem: there are two clubs, the Church and the Anglican church. Everybody is free to choose, but choose they must.
Dr. Ashenden, Dr. Marshall Marshall confused me when he called Rev. Robinson "Father." Then Rev. Robinson said he celebrated sacramentally valid liturgies. But Pope Leo XIII taught that Anglican clergy weren't sacramental priests. What about Anglo-Catholic clergy?
Though I'd hate offend anyone, I can't say Anglican clergymen are priests when Pope Leo assures us they aren't. I can't even call general Christianity "the faith" when I believe Christ founded only Catholicism and the Catholic Church. Sanctifying grace, baptism of blood, baptism of desire, and some others things can connect a non-Catholic to the Catholic Church. But I think Catholics are its only members.
Non-Catholics can say the believe in one, holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church by making that phrase denote all Christians. Rev. Robinson told Dr. Marshall that he, Robinson, may believe the Protestant branch theory. If I understand that theory, its fans think the one, holy, Catholic Church includes Cattholics, Anglicans, and the Eastern Orthodox faithful.
I agree with you.
They recite our Creed, claiming belief in the Communion of Saints, but these 'Anglo Catholics' don't even believe in Purgatory, and they have no idea what the Communion of Saints is!
@@alhilford2345 A TH-cam commenter told me the Catholic Church hasn't taught that Purgatory is painful. That makes me wonder why Fr. Shouppe describes a holy soul who appeared to a friend to beg him for a Mass because the soul was in agony. He, the soul, thought he suffered there for months or years. The soul's friend assured him that he would celebrate the Mass and said the departed man's corpse was still warm.
Now you know partly why I believe today's religiously indifferent ecumenism is immoral. It may at least make people spend years in Purgatory or even lead them to Hell. For me, that ecumenism is the most pernicious novelty from Vatican II.
Fr. Calvin was actually ordained a priest in one of the member churches of the Union of Scranton (the conservative way of the Old Catholics), whose Sacraments and Orders are considered valid but not licit.
This means that he is in fact validly ordained. He really is Father Calvin.
However, as much as I truly do appreciate Father Calvin and his ministry, I think it is a very legitimate criticism to point out that he essentially shopped around for a Church that would ordain him that would have valid Orders, not only so that he could say he had them, but one that would apparently allow him to carry on public ministry as he pleased with very little apparent oversight, at least that's how it appears.
When I was in clerical formation for the diaconate, it was repeatedly emphasized to us that there is no such thing as a "lone ranger" among the Catholic clergy, and if someone did happen to attain a status like that, it would not last for very long.
The appearance that father Calvin is giving is that he wants to call himself Catholic and say he has a valid orders without submitting himself to the Pope's authority, or to direct Episcopal authority.
But being a cleric is partly about obedience, obedience to God, but also obedience to one's superiors.
@@DavidOatney I agree with you, but I don't think the Old Catholics are Catholic. Although the Eastern Orthodox sects have ministerial priests and valid sacraments, they're non-Catholic. But their names still include the the word "Catholic" when they're schismatic and heretical. In my option, to be Catholic people must belong the the worldwide Church the Pope governs. For me, it is Christ's Mystical Body. Protestant sects are manmade and the Eastern Orthodox left the Church in about 1054.
I don't agree with Unitatis Redintegratio 's idea that the Holy Ghost uses denominations to get people to heaven. Why don't I agree? Because Pope Pius XII contradicts it in Satis Cognitum. Yes, I mean to say "contradicts."
Here's what UR tells me.
"The brethren divided from us also use many liturgical actions of the Christian religion. These most certainly can truly engender a life of grace in ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or Community. These liturgical actions must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community of salvation.
It follows that the separated Churches(23) and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church."
www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html
Now please read a passage from Satis cognitum.
"The Church of Christ, therefore, is one and the same for ever; those who leave it depart from the will and command of Christ, the Lord - leaving the path of salvation they enter on that of perdition. "Whosoever is separated from the Church is united to an adulteress. He has cut himself off from the promises of the Church, and he who leaves the Church of Christ cannot arrive at the rewards of Christ....He who observes not this unity observes not the law of God, holds not the faith of the Father and the Son, clings not to life and salvation" (S. Cyprianus, De Cath. Eccl. Unitate, n. 6)."
www.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_29061896_satis-cognitum.html
We can talk about the hermeneutic od continuity, bur if I understand these passages, there's obvious discontinuity.
@@DavidOatney being one’s own authority is a Protestant perk that many struggle to relinquish.
😂 I was very confused for the first 30 minutes until I realized he wasn’t referring to Calvin as in Calvinism.
Talk about begging the question. Anglicans attacked Catholics because they thought the Roman tradition had brought in novelties and errors. Their attack in no way proves that they were intending to abandon Catholicism, but rather shows that they thought Rome had abandoned it. You pointed out that the Mass is found in the Fathers. True. But when the Fathers talk about the sacrifice of the Mass, they don’t say they are offering the Mass in propitiation for sins, much less, do they mention anything remotely like the medieval practice of endless Masses, all at once, over and over. You mention the Papacy is found in the Fathers. Yes. And yet men, saints and patriarchs in the east, who knew the apostles, felt absolutely no compulsion to heed the Pope when he wanted to excommunicate them over the date of easter.
You attempt to assault Calvin's character, as if he was overly ambitious/not submissive; and strangely say that when Calvin was working as a deacon in a more low church environment and began to have higher views of the sacraments, that what Calvin should have done is just keep this to himself and preach/teach what the low church people wanted to hear. Strange, because your entire video is predicated on the idea that Calvin needs to be willing to sacrifice everything for the truth, to preach the truth, to become Catholic regardless of what he may lose. Yet you critique Calvin for preaching the truth to low church people, and say he should have just taught what the people wanted to hear instead.
You accuse Calvin of being dishonest about his reason for not believing that the Pope has jurisdiction. This claim is both uncharitable and malicious, and you bear the guilt which incurs upon those who “judge, and will be judged” - for not giving the benefit of the doubt, but accusing others without any basis. The claim is also naive, as if the history is so clear about papal universal jurisdiction such that no honest and educated inquirer could come to a different conclusion. As I pointed out earlier, in the second century we had a whole swath of eastern bishops, including a saint who knew the apostles, who clearly did not recognize papal jurisdiction. The council of Nicaea seems to relegate papal jurisdiction to its own metropolitan area. An honest inquirer can look at such things and come away not convinced of the Roman claims, and accusing Calvin of anything less only makes you look bad, and your apology offered before you began assaulting his character does not make up for it. Calvin’s comment that those who take Apostolicae curae ‘seriously’ was indeed rude, juvenile, self-serving, and not true. Unfortunately, your accusations are also rude, juvenile, self-serving, and not true. Everything indicates that Calvin is sincere and transparent in his beliefs, and there is no reason for thinking otherwise, except your own ad hoc apologetic desire to slander those who disagree with you.
With about ten minutes left in your video, you said you were going to stop, because to go further would be graceless. You were graceless from the moment you started, and you became even more graceless after you said you were going to stop, accusing Calvin of dishonesty several more times, accusing him of only not wanting to become Catholic because he is about to get an Anglican parish, etc.
I hope you will take this feedback to heart and apologize to Calvin, repent for these sins, and change your tact in the future.
It surprises me when people who are otherwise educated in the Catholic religion, still use the Protestant-coined name for the Church - "Roman Catholic". There is an excellent and pleasingly brief explanation of "How the Catholic Church got her name" on the Links page of Christian Order, for those who care to search for that. The Church's name is simply "Catholic" - as the earliest documents reveal.
One would think joining the Catholic Ordinariate would be Calvin's answer. But Calvin's experience of the Ordinariate in England convinced him that he would be persona non grata, unable to preach about, for example, the sanctity of marriage etc. He experienced a weak hierarchy who threw him under the bus at the unfounded and ridiculous complaint from a practicing homosexual choir member. Would you, if you were he and found yourself speaking up for the faith alone (no Catholic bishop or priest was willing to side him) like he did at his famous Oxford Union speech, would you vow obedience to soft confused lefties who will cancel you?
Not sure if we are thinking of the same Steve Ray but the American Steve Ray I know of was a baptist but has long ago become a Roman Catholic.
Gavin, do you think this denial of Spirit and material in the Holy Eucharist is similar to the fable of separation of Church and State in many American minds? The original intention of this had to do with the State not instituting an official denomination of Christianity. But the intent is to act if the State can act on it own authority with being under God’s dominion. A separation of Spirit and Material. This to me very much so represents the mind of the Harlot in Rev17/18.
The One World Religion will be irrational. Words will be used merely to justify and rationalize, not to discover the truth.
It is sometimes interesting to speculate. Let us suppose that I was born in about 600 and lived in Constantinople. As far as I would be concerned, the Emperor would be responsible for the overall temporal good of the Church and the Patriarch would be responsible for pastoral care. If a dispute about a point of doctrine were to arise, I should expect the Emperor to call an Ecumenical Council and for him to summon all of the Bishops from all over the world to attend the Council. The Bishop of Rome would attend, either in person, or by a representative. At the end of the Council, it would report to the Emperor who would accept its report. Then, in the exercise of his Petrine Ministry of “confirming the brethren in the Faith” the Bishop of Rome would give his formal approval to the dogmatic definitions of the Council. So, at that time, I would, of course, be a genuine catholic, orthodox Christian, but the Bishop of Rome would not be involved in any way in the oversight and management of the Church to which I belonged. We have those who say that “outside the Church there is no salvation” and insist that this means being a member of a Church under the direct, day to day, administrative supervision of the Bishop of Rome. However, as a Christian living in Constantinople in 600 AD, this option would not have been available to me. I would have understood the Church as consisting of the Bishops, the Emperor and, in terms of day to day administrative responsibility, the Patriarch. So, the question arises “was I saved?”. Was I part of the Church, outside of which there is no salvation?
Is the 1979 BCP ordinal valid if used by an Old Catholic Bishop?
Fantastic video
He's not really Catholic at all is he? I gather he has joined some splinter group where he can do and say what he likes.
I do not intend to enter into a discussion here, but merely wish, gently and respectfully, to say that some of Gavin's statements about the Free Church of England are inaccurate and misleading.
I have only ever met one Vicar who was in the Free Church of England and he was very, very, anti-Catholic.
John - please by all means use this platform to give the audience a far better and more representative account of the FCE than I could in brief passing remarks. If my memory was correct I had in mind in my remarks its origins as an anti-tractation Protestant movement. I’m sure people would benefit from knowing how far you have helped move it in a less Protestant direction especially with your links to the Orthodox in India. However, I hope you’ll forgive me for my assertion that it does not have a Roman Catholic doctrine of either priesthood or the Church.
Hi Gavin, your commentary is always thoughtful, though at times it might benefit from a stronger dose of charity. Since this video publicly rebukes expressed views, I wonder how it avoids the sin of detraction and upholds the virtues of charity and justice, concerning Calvin, our Holy Father and even St John Henry Newman. If this critique leads Calvin to turn away from the one true fold of the Redeemer, how might that affect you?
Who is better? Calvin or your local gay Catholic priest? Father James Martin? Calvin could of gone very, very far in the CofE if he had just played the game. But he chose God. That is a lot braver than many, many 'faithful' people who call themselves Catholic but then try to bring in affirming theology into the Catholic Church.
All of this seems an awful long way from Jesus’ child-like faith. People suck, always using the wrong tools for the job at hand.
@@MillieBealIf it wasn't for the Church under the leadership of the Pope you would have no knowledge about the precepts of loving God and your neighbour. And there are plenty of Baptist pastors who act like popes in their own limited jurisdiction.
Superbly presented, Dr. Ashenden. Dovetailing in with your view, I wrote the following comment to the talk between Marshall and Robinson a few days ago:
Taylor did a pretty good job pointing out some of the flaws in CR's rationalization for staying out of the one true Church, but I would have liked to see him make it clear to CR that to the extent he (CR) can show that some papal authority is an abuse of development or over the top, etc., he can fight for a reduction of same within the Roman Church. Staying outside of Christ's one true Church and settling on an incomplete connection to Rome because of some papal personal deficits and other things not liked by CR is just stubborn arrogance. It must also be emphasized over and over again that Jesus Himself purposely singled out Peter for a special role that CR does not want to accept because it took some time for it to unfold, but it was always there. Alas, CR repeats the bogus claim that Peter is merely the first among equals, but that makes Christ's actions and the manner in which He gave him alone the keys to Heaven and nobody else basically ceremonial with no substance.
Bottom line: CR is a very good man, but he still wants to dictate to Jesus how he will serve him instead of humbly accepting the reality that one is not a full member of Jesus' Church unless he or she is united to Rome.
Rome isn't a church, it is a sect, having abandoned Christianity for idolatry.
Blah, blah, blah…
The rift between Anglicanism and Roman Catholicism is a very sad, tragic thing. Healing that wound is gonna take some time. I don't think the "Extra ecclesia" condemnation applies to Anglicans, because there's at least an effort (on both sides) to fix things. Unfortunately, the solution probably can't be as simple and direct as Anglican priests converting en masse
@@navarrenavarre ?
@@WayneDrake-uk1gg Rome has left the Christian Church, that is where the rift has taken place. The CoE is barely still a Christian church, having largely rejected the authority of Scripture.
Just as Christ warned He would do to churches in Revelation 2 & 3, Rome has lost its lampstand.
The Thirty-nine Articles are a little ambiguous - a typical example of English compromise! For example, Article 28 states: “the Bread which we break is a partaking of the body of Christ; and likewise the Cup of Blessing is a partaking in the Blood of Christ.” Earlier, the non-conformist doctrines are specifically denied “The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another, but rather, is a Sacrament of our Redemption by Christ’s death…” So, it is not correct to say that the Thirty-nine Articles specifically deny the doctrine of the “real presence”. They do not accept the formulation of “transubstantiation” but not because this doctrine is considered and refuted, but, simply, that this formulation is not found in the Sacred Scriptures. The Eastern Orthodox Churches also decline to adopt the formulation of “transubstantiation” - for the same reason. It is not to be found in the Sacred Scriptures, nor in the definitions of any of the first Seven Ecumenical Councils (the only ones which the Eastern Churches accept as valid). So, while most Protestants do believe that Holy Communion is no more than a “love feast” (which it is, and the Catholic Church also teaches this) or a “remembrance of the Last Supper” (which it is, and the Catholic Church also teaches this) the Church of England does, in fact, also teach a version of the doctrine of the “real presence” the words “is a partaking of the Body of Christ” are clear enough to make this clear. Most Protestants would state that we partake of bread, which is only a “symbol” or “emblem” of the Body of Christ. The Church of England does not say this - it says that it is, rather a “partaking of the Body of Christ” with no attempt to “soften” this very clear teaching of the Catholic Church on the point.
The Roman Catholic Church and the Church of England have been holding meetings on the Eucharist and now have a common understanding of Eucharist. It is false to assert, like Gavin does, that the CofE denies real presence, because the Catholic church clearly thinks it does. But Gavin has a grift to work.
In the Catechisms of the 1928 and 1979 Books of Common Prayer in the U.S., "The outward and visible sign in the Eucharist is bread and wine, given and received according to Christ's command," and, "The inward and spiritual grace in Holy Communion is the Body and Blood of Christ given to his people, and received by faith." I think it is the same in separate catechism of Anglican Church of North America. The official word on the point. The 39 Articles have not been considered a formulary of the Christian faith in the Church of England but statements toward doctrinal disputes which were convulsing Europe at the time.
Amen!
The first APE OF THE CHIRCH was Anglicanism
Always be wary of those believing they are being 'lead by the spirit'. Removal of the checks & balances provided by the Church to blaze your own path os why we are here. Rinse & repeat. Satan always repeats the same lies but wraps them in the appeal of self.
14:37 Speaking of the two Cecils, what do you think of the Inkling Lord Cecil?
Was he a bad influence on C. S. Lewis keeping him back from Rome?
Was he a restraining influence on J. R. R. Tolkien, helping to keep him out of Apologetics?
Thank you for confirming that the Roman Catholic church is not the church for me.
I felt the same way at Alcoholics Annoymous!
The apostles weren't perfect either. Jesus chose them and Judas still betrayed. Jesus still the Chief Shepherd. Gates of hell won't prevail.
Seems like Calvin Robinson needs to start his own pseudo-christian denomination, as all protestants do who just cannot give up all and follow Christ into his Church, and feed on him there.
Priests Offer Sscrifice!
You CANNOT Ordain Priests to NOT Offer Sactifice.
Hence, there cannot be ANY Protestsnt Priests.
The Pope, actually the Popes going back a long way would disagree with you. The Vatican recognises Anglican priests, and works alongside Anglican priests. Please study the facts before making statments that go against the teachings of the Catholic church, God bless
@@helenbond8893Unless you completely misunderstood the discussion here of Aposolicae Curae the Catholic Church never recognized the validity of Anglican Orders ,both because of a defect in the sacramental form, and the negative intent of the Edwardian Ordinal of 1549 which embraced the protestant heresy of ministry. Hence, Pope Leo XIII declared that Anglican Orders have always been and continue to be “ absolutely null and void.” Anglican/ Episcopalian clergy are not priests, but protestant ministers who cannot validly confect the Eucharistic sacrifice or any sacrament which require the power of Orders.
@@giovanniserafino1731 Actually, Anglican Priests can becme Catholic priests if they convert to Catholicism. During Vatican ii the Pope invited Anglican Bishops to be a part of the discussions. And since Vatican ii the Vatican have worked alongside Anglican priests. Pope Leos decleration has been very much moved past and built upon since his time
@@helenbond8893 Yes, you are correct, anglican clergymen can become Catholic priests. However, it should be noted, that they are not accepted into the Catholic Church as already validly ordained priests as would be in the case of Orthodox priests who convert to catholicism. They must be ordained in fact, ( as if for the first time) and not “sub condtione” which would imply that they may have already been validly ordained priests as anglicans. In submitting to this requirement of the Holy See, anglican clergymen are implicitly accepting they were never validly ordained as priests.
This is very much in keeping with Apostolicae Curae which is still the official Catholic position concerning Anglican Orders which has never been rescinded or changed. Lastly while some theologians and other progressives want very much to” move past ” AC, Pope Benedict XVI when head of the former Holy Office clearly stated that AC is part of the ordinary magisterium of the Church, and is therefore unchangeable ,and must be accepted by all Catholics. Far from “moving past” AC, Pope Benedict used this magisterial teaching when setting up the provisions whereby former Anglican ministers can be ordained Catholic priests.
@@helenbond8893 All Anglican "Priests" wishing to become Catholic Priests are Ordained anew, (wrong word).
The Mass as has been proved by Biblical argument at the reformation and still olds true . “Jesus dies ONCE and fir all “ The last supper was “ In remembrance …” past event .
Thee Roman church commits blasphemy every time they have a mass .
Her heretical heresies proved again at the reformation by biblical argument she not only still holds them but has since added t0 them.
Beggarly substitutes in place of spiritual reality .
The viciousness of the counter reformation speaks for itself .
“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day." Same goes naturally for the Bride, Calvin would not at this stage do any good to the Bride of Christ; obscurity and pollution just suffocate everyone no matter the intention and even that is in Calvin's case obscure.
I find Gavin's "schtick" most unconvincing. This gentleman has ascribed to more opposing ideologies in two decades than most folks would in a journey of two lifetimes. Once a pro-gay libber, pro-women priests and now super Trad Catholic. And God only knows what he was in between. I suspect that he is a "hot potato" for the Vatican and will go nowhere in that Communion.
Chaplin to Queen Henrietta Maria, Christopher Davenport, tried to link the Church of England to Catholicism. His brother, Rev. Davenport, went the other way and founded New Haven.
Actually, Gavin, Eastern Catholics (Uniates) DO call deacons "Father" - so it's not THAT unheard of.
That is true, however it is not commonly used. Most Eastern Rite Catholic deacons whom I know referred to themselves as “Deacon John” or whatever their Christian name may be. In the Western Church the title “Father” is more associated with the priesthood.
They are Deacon so and so or Brothers.
What are your views about the Philippines Independent Church in the Philippines ?
That's a good pitch Gavin but should a Catholic attend a Novus Ordo Catholic Church ?
Careful if you are Roman Catholic. You accuse the Protestants of such crimes which yes the protestant church has become problematic for the faith in general, But not in all areas. You can accuse other churches of such things but the Catholic church tries to share the claim of being the first. The Orthodox church wants to ask you about the Filoque.
The Pride and Hubris in the Catholic church believing it is the ONE TRUE CHURCH, is disgusting as the claim cannot be proven and such arguements go against the body of christ, which is us Christians.
“Orthodox” church hasn't changed anything in terms of dogma or tradition since the 12th century when the schism took place.
On the other hand, the “Catholic" church has made changes on some aspects like:
Added the infallible of the pope (dogma-wise)
Changed the Nicene Creed (center dogma of belief statement) concerning the Holy Spirit back and forth, a couple of times, by three distinct infallible Popes
Got more focused on the birth of Christ rather than the resurrection
Changed the community only for bread/body and not wine/blood for laics
Prohibited the marriage of the priests
And that's just for starters.
Theoretically speaking, the “Orthodox” church now is like the “Orthodox” church on the 11th century which was like the “Catholic Church” on the 11th century which has many differences with the “Catholic” after the Schism.
The question is not “Which one is older?” but “Which one is unchanged, dogma and tradition wise.”
Catholics are Schismatic enough without pointing the finger at Good Men.
To prove the claims of the Catholic church we would need proof of the line of apostolic succession, Good luck with that.
Interesting. I know many of those who are searching for the “true Church” who have found their home in the Orthodox Church. However, for most, there is a practical problem. The Orthodox Churches are national churches, so, to find one, you need to find a large city with a large Greek, Serbian, Bulgarian etc community, which has its own local national Orthodox Church to serve that community. However, to join that Church an English Christian would need to make a serious effort to try to “fit in” with people of a very different national and ethnic background. Then, in the smaller towns and cities, there is, quite simply, no question of “joining the Orthodox Church” because there isn’t one to join! In an ideal Church there would be a genuinely “English Orthodox Church” with its own English Patriarch in communion with the other Orthodox Patriarchs. King Henry VIII did envisage something along these lines - a national English Church governed by its own Bishops, in loose communion with other national Churches. However, he severed all communion with Rome. The Eastern Orthodox Churches would probably accept that the Bishop of Rome is also Patriarch of Rome - in fact, the Pope has recently chosen to adopt the title of “Western Patriarch” and to repudiate the title “Vicar of Christ” in an effort to please the Eastern Orthodox Churches. Gavin will find himself in a similar position in the English Catholic Church. There are very few “Old English Catholics” (descendants of the old recusant families). Most Catholics in this country are Catholics because they are not of English ancestry - Irish, Polish, Italian, Spanish, etc. and these days often immigrants from the various parts of the world having large Catholic populations. The local Catholic Church, in most small towns and cities, sits in contrast to the local Church of England, which now occupies prize of place, having confiscated what was once the local Catholic Church. The modern Catholic Church is, generally, a 1960s building on the outskirts of the town or city. Will we ever have an “English Orthodox” Church. I rather doubt it.
I’m Roman Catholic and would have preferred if you just responded to the specific points he made about how the papacy has expanded from Appellate jurisdiction since the great schism to total original jurisdiction and management authority rather than going on a holistic polemic against Old Catholics.
Punching way up, fair enough
Does Gavin consider Oriental and Orthodox Christian’s to be heretics/ schismatics too? 🤔
I would say that Anglican orders are null but not void. Or perhaps void but not null.
They have no place in the Catholic Church. How can they ascribed to the 39 articles and think the can just slot in. They have to be ordained again or sit in the pews like the rest of us.