The Dangers of Liberal Catholicism (Guest: Trent Horn)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 เม.ย. 2024
- For decades "liberal" or "progressive" Catholicism has been dominant in the Catholic Church in America, deeply influencing parishes and parishioners. What are the dangers of this brand of Catholicism, and what can we do to combat it?
Guest:
After his conversion to the Catholic faith, Trent Horn earned three master’s degrees in the fields of theology, philosophy, and bioethics. He serves as a staff apologist for Catholic Answers, and is the host of The Counsel of Trent podcast. He has authored or co-authored over a dozen books, including The Case for Catholicism, Persuasive Pro-life, and Why We’re Catholic: Our Reasons for Faith, Hope, and Love. His latest book is "Confusion in the Kingdom: How 'Progressive' Catholicism is Bringing Harm and Scandal to the Church."
Links:
• "Confusion in the Kingdom" (book): shop.catholic.com/confusion-i...
• Trent Horn website: www.trenthorn.com - บันเทิง
![[#SHORTS CLIP] ครูอึ้ง กรรมการอึ้ง ฮ่าๆ l ซานิเบาได้เบา l One Playground](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/qeBTuMJs4t0/mqdefault.jpg)
"Liberal Catholicism" is a polite phrase for "Modernism".
Look at the horrid agnostic notes in the NAB and NAB/RE. Look at the confraternity OT and NT which it shoved aside. Not a cause, but a SYMPTOM of the malaise in the Church.
@@HAL9000-su1mz You are correct. What we have here is the exact same approach to the Scriptures that entered the mainline denominations a century ago. One just has to look at them today to know what the Church is in for if it continues to travel down that road.
The Vatican II sect is polite towards the devil, what do you expect?
@@TheRomanCatholicChurch This is actually a stupid comment.
@@HAL9000-su1mz Jorge Bergoglio, "My Story Through History: Francis's Inspiring Biography Through History" (p. 220): “I believe it is essential today that we abandon the rigidity of the past, and distance ourselves from a Church that points the finger in condemnation.”
Pope Pelagius II, epistle (1) Quod ad dilectionem, 585 AD: “If anyone, however, either suggests or believes or presumes to teach contrary to this faith, let him know that he is condemned and also anathematized according to the opinion of the same Fathers.”
There's no such thing as "liberal" Catholicism! There is only practicing or non-practicing
Exactly!
The conciliar church range goes from FSSP and the like on one end to the notorious German bishops on the other end.
There's that saying that conservatives are liberals who drive the speed limit.
I think that applies here. We're being treated like the frog slowly boiling so that it doesn't realize to jump out of the pot. The trick that is played on us is calling the church conservative because its ideas are a hundred years old. But an organization that's had the words of Christ in its possession for over 2,000 years should have 2,000 year old ideas, not slightly old fashioned ideas by 21st century standards.
What you have now in the world of Christianity are the Leninist communists versus the Stalinist communists, but it's all communism. I do not think any person living today has ever seen what authentic Christian practice looks like.
It’s an oxymoron
Great talk. I have covered both my issues with trads & progs here, & I will say for all their faults at least the trads make an attempt at orthodoxy. Prog Catholicism is just a veneer for secular humanism.
I wish that normal Catholics would have passion for their faith that you see quite often in trads circles.
The devil loves confusion and chaos.
Hell is grey.
Got the Catholic podcast dream team here 💪
What about when a part of parishioners drive the priest out because he’s too pre-Vatican 2 and the entire community is torn apart?
Or like when they drive him out because he's too post-Vatican II?
My parish used to drive priests out, because they were deemed as 'too catholic'.
We have a weird dual system in switzerland, and the secular part of that dual system got a bit too power grabby and thought they could be in charge how Church shouldbe held and what parts of tradition could be followed and which not.
We lost 3 good priests with such awful quibbling!
Much prayer later, we now have a great team fightng to bring liturgy and orthodoxy back on track. They are fought at every step, but they gained a lot of ground, and it seems like they're winning, though the battle is still raging on. If they lose, our parish is done. No priest will be touching us with a ten foot pole, and we have the crypt of a 4th saint in our Church!
But we see small miracles happening around us, espescially with the young people and children! I'm hopeful God will fight for us!
What I want to say: parish infighting is rough and awful. And never heals without much hurting and pruning from Gods side. Pray, help whre you can and trust God. He knows what He is doing!
That is a big problem, and the bishop is likely not to support his own priest.
@@MrsYasha1984 trusteeism. Lay people gang up on the priest.
Glad to hear Trent is taking on Fr. Richard Rohr’s teaching(s) in this book.
Eric is the best host ever! Never interrupts- should be used in training podcasters ❤ and Trent is the kindest debater I’ve ever heard🙏🏽❤️
You better tell me what is NOT dangerous in liberal Catholicism? Or what is Catholic in it, because I cannot found anything more than in normal atheist.
I agree. Small snipe at Taylor Marshall, too.
The people who call themselves "liberal" have made my life miserable since 1966. They made my Mom cry. The 70s are over. The experiment failed.
I had to leave a parish for this exact reason. The priest could not recall the words of the reconciliation liturgy, I and spouse left that month.
How about the Fiducia supplicans document ????? Blessing homosexual couples??? The church blesses all individuals but the blessing of a homosexual/cohabitant couple is simply wrong and very confusing to the already confused Catholics!
I agree that it’s confusing to people but it’s also orthodox. Anyone, committing any sin, can receive a blessing from a priest. You could murder someone and go up to a priest and ask for a blessing.
Personally, from the other point of view (of the sinner), practically speaking it doesn’t make sense to me. If I was guilty of homosexual sin, why would I bring my “near occasion of sin” up with me to the priest if I’m serious about receiving a blessing and turning away from my sin. That said, God will meet us where ever we are. So maybe in that case, my desire to bring my “lover” up for a blessing with me, is just another thing that God needs to work through me to correct. (And that would all start with the Grace received after receiving a blessing)
@@christusenciaga anyone YEs - blessing homosexual COUPLES ??? NO
@@Floridiansince94 disordered couples already get blessed during almost every mass. It’s completely orthodox
@@christusenciagaall sinners (including me) can get a personal Blessing in the confessional!
@@upstatelynchmob agree 100%. Confession has been such a blessing in my life! 10/10 highly recommend
You'll never hear a mathematician called a fundamentalist mathematician, only those you disagree with.
I think a more proper term is rad trad
@@dRagonmajin No, that's a term attempting to "other" catholics.
Or a "Trad" mathematician. And woe befalls us who dare to tread the middle path. (shrug)
How about a book on milquetoast Catholicism?
Doesn’t the guest represent that already??
There is a prayer group in my parish that feels like I’ve gone back to Protestantism. I don’t go, there was a mistake on my part on understanding the schedule, so I ended up attending their reunion that happened on Pentecost vigil, rather, a couple hours before the mass of the vigil.
It made me uncomfortable, so I left. If I wanted Protestantism, I wouldn’t have gone through the hard trouble of converting. They were speaking in “tongs” and all, the speaker spoke like a pastor… I can’t.
This is weird to me. We say Protestants don’t have a hard set of beliefs, but the Catholic Church isn’t doing so great in that regard, seems to me.
This is very ambiguous: Leviticus 18:22 has been translated in common English versions as: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination.
And when you’re an abomination you try to obscure that bit of scripture. What would St Catherine of Siena say?
Great episode with Trent Horn 🙏✝️🇻🇦👍
Thanks much for this video.
After reading the comments, I had to chime in. I am a "trad", if you will. I even attend an SSPX church. However, Trent Horn is the only Catholic apologist I can stomach, and his is the only Patreon I've ever supported in my life. I don't agree with him on everything (I'm a Young Earther, ok? 😅), but I 100% support his calm, charitable approach, and would love to find a voice like his among the virtual trads. There is a festering wound of fear & hatred in much of the online trad community, and it will lead to its own demise. The fact that Trent is maligned for not calling the pope a heretic is very telling. I fear that some online trads do more harm than good, and honestly I'd love if X could just implode one day and leave everyone scrambling to find the safety of another echo chamber. Anyway, I enjoyed this interview and hope that Trent continues doing his good work of outreach toward Protestants and atheists alike. Deo gratias!
The USA, indeed the world is coming to a head. It will NOT be pretty. We know this. Therefore, we watch and pray.
I was banned from Reporter for dissenting the dissent.
I'm a recent convert and my perception of liberal Catholicism is that it is a type of syncretism trying to mesh together Catholicism and progressive politics and philosophy, and more often than not Catholic teaching is bent and twisted to fit the progressive orthodoxies.
In some sense, my conversion process was letting go of all my opinions and preconceived notions and recognizing God and His church as the ultimate authority on what is true, and that if I'm an authentic truth seeker then ofcourse I should submit myself to the wisdom of the church.
I think this mindset is at the root of all errors. And I hope to be guarded from it and to be enlightened of the ways in which I fall for this
We did find that there were faithful parishes by visiting those in my county except the one in my neighborhood. This was an experience that we really learned from.
It seems that Trent Horn is some sort of humanist or Vatican II "conservative" and has strayed too far from Catholic tradition, which is unfortunate. I think that's why he only talks about human issues or sexual sins and not the glory of God.
Nailed it!
Because he doesn’t advocate Throne and Altar? 😂
Trent that was a very good description of what is progressive Catholic’s worldview.
I agree 100%
8:51 Saying that one Fr. James Martin is a priest in good standing is like saying that man with six lovers is validly married to one woman.
Thank you for this work, as a FUNDAMENTALIST/TRADITIONALIST I will pass on your future videos disparaging Traditionalism
This is a parody, right? Traditionalists aren't really as obtuse and pigheaded as your post suggests, right?
OK Kieth.
Yep. Avoiding this channel like Babylon.
Very milquetoast sensibilities here (the topic). I avoid the guest…I still give the host some hope thou’…
@@mraemartinez I will hold charity for all. I may come back to this show for the right topic or guest, but this one was very off-putting.
Neat
I recommend readinh John Finnis article on social doctrine. I think it would clear up many people's views.
My spouse and I went to ever parish in our area before making a decision about a new parish.
How protestant of you
Christ is king 🤴🕊🦅✝️😇
0:15 nothing but endless words. Actions speak louder. Faith without the holy spirit is dead.
Trent proposes we use the negatively coded “fundamentalist” rather than the more positively coded “traditionalist.” Hints of subversion. It makes me wonder if that’s his real fleece.
Perhaps you should wait for the book to come out to see what he is criticizing, and perhaps he uses the "negatively coded" term fundamentalist precisely because he does not want to disparage actual traditionalists, only those who cloak their fundamentalism under the term traditionalism.
Good tip. I’ll do that. My profession makes me hyper sensitive to rhetorical tactics.
Trent is a wolf in sheep's clothing.
@@CrisisMag No, that's not what he's doing.
Trent Horn is the perfect person to write this book because he *is* a liberal Catholic.
Does a police department employing gay and lesbian officers create confusion?
14:34 - Unfortunate state in the Church when using Catholic principles and a Catholic ecclesiology to order your perspective and final take on an issue will get you attacked and ostracized.
What the priest did was remove the Sacrement of reconciliation from his parish. He had been a priest for more than fifty years. He wasn’t always but over time he became unfaithful where he came to believe in the absence of mortal sin. He is retired now. And that parish has a real priest now.
Mario Jorge Bergoglio is in many ways the greatest victim of circumstance. In his innocence, he was groomed to become a prelate in the image and likeness of man rather than to be one in the image and likeness of God, and thus in his heart of heart's knows he cannot assume the position as Vicar of Christ. He thinks as man thinks and not as God thinks; potentially telling us where we are in salvation history and in the passion of the Mystical Body of Christ. In his recent confession, he admits to being used.
In no offense, from my part, the "perfect idiot" for the infiltrator's sake. I use the term "idiot" in it's most old fashioned form, "lacking in the politics of the day;" his formative days. His childish contempt for the Tridentine Mass, keeps him from overcoming his passions and keeps him base and unlike Christ. His faith is in worldly means and not in the Word, through no fault of his own. Nurtured in the nature of a deified Vatican II, can we truly say that Pope Francis isn't exactly the appointed Pope due for our time in age?
The solution: Pope Francis should celebrate the Tridentine Mass, and let Christ speak for Himself then through His Vicar.
Furthermore, strictly speaking to the letter of the law. As I recall, all popes post Pope John XXIII are dubious. I, still recognize them to this effect:
The King of the United Kingdom is the King of the United Kingdom, Charles III. However, there is a more legitimate living heir and thus the Rightful King of the United Kingdom (and he is of Catholic descent). Being this the case does not nullify the kingship of Charles III, for the throne carries him through as king. This I believe to be the case for the papacy and modern popes.
Also, Hitler used "das übermensch" in the most opposite form of Friedrich Nietzsche's intent. We can't control what others do with our output. We just pray God's will be done.
Communion in the hand is sacrilege.
Communion in the hand is apostolic
@@josephmiller3672 What do you mean by that?
@@josephmiller3672 Council of Trent: The fact that only the priest gives Holy Communion with his consecrated hands is an Apostolic Tradition.
It cannot be substantiated that communion in the hand was the widespread norm in the early Church.
Pope St. Sixtus I (115-124) declared that, “The Sacred Vessels are not to be handled by others than those consecrated to the Lord
If laymen cannot touch sacred vessels, how much less handling Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament.
The Council of Saragossa (380) excommunicated those who received Holy Communion by hand.
So…in my main Church…I have seen the host dropped 4Xs in 1 year 3 months. Another Church I go to (slowly dying, but it tries to be reverent..) just after Mass today said Holy Eucharist found in pews 2 times very recently…Priest said most likely from funerals. This is really happening & could NEVER happen if given on tongue…like TLM.
@@mraemartinez Indeed, communion in the hand invites what you describe. Among many other things, communion in the hand is discussed in the book Work of Human Hands: A Theological Critique of the Mass of Paul VI.
I would say progressive Catholicism in the worship of Infinite Human Dignity
I'd agree, but I'd state it as "Infinite" "Human" "Dignity" 😅
You got it!
That is a terrific definition!
The largest scale violations of human dignity occurred in the 20th century and happen into the 21st century. I see this affront on human dignity as a symptom of modernity that the "progressive" Catholic is responding to. Just a thought.
I think the clergy should stay away from public policy and debatable social issues, and exclusively focus on inherently or intrinsically evil acts or doctrines. It's asphyxiating and overbearing to have them pronounce themselves on everything (a very progressive thing, IMO). This seemed to have been Benedict's position, if I understood him correctly. The risk of spiritual tyranny is too great, otherwise. The realm of politics is the primary responsibility of lay people after all.
Traditional & Fundamentalist are the same thing. True Catholicism. The fact that even in Christian religion that there is constant fighting is like a very bad joke. It’s hard to find peace on this horrible earth. 😩
Eric why don’t call Robert Sungenis to rebuttal of all those claims that Jimmy Atkin claim about holy faith ( I can’t stand lies in our faith )
Thank you
Eric…c’mon man!
There is nothing wrong with flying the Confederate Flag.
You've redefined "liberal Catholicism" since you're not taking about about, say, George Tyrrel and Felicite de Lamanais taught.
“Jesus said to His disciples: ‘I am the true vine & My Father is the vine grower. He takes away every branch in Me that does not bear fruit…& every one that does He prunes so it bears more fruit.’” John 15 1-2. It’s not any easy way to salvation…many of their own understanding believe it is. Those branches are thrown in fire. 🔥 Cuidado.
I do know Preists who do hold liberal ideas, but it ends there, and doesn’t go to their faith. Some do it take further, to where it overcomes their faith. Sometimes it takes time for this process to get to the same place. This is sin in action.
"Infiltration" trademarked--hilarious.
God made the blind and the lame ? Being blind and lame is not a sin while being gay is a sin.
Nailed it
@@ericjohn6143Nope
Technically, there is no such thing as "being" gay as it is not an ontological state or rise from personhood. It is something that one experiences, which in itself is not sinful. The sin is in what one does with that.
Being gay is not a sin! Performing gay acts IS. No different than heteros committing “marital acts” outside of wedlock.
Same sex attraction is not sinful.The acts are sinful.
what if I like both flags? What if I pin a pride flag on my cønfeder@te battle flag?
Jesus was killed for heresy. The heretic they tied to the wood of the stake signifies jesus tied to the wood of the cross.
The extreme pain the heretic suffered signifies the extreme pain Jesus suffered.
The mortification of the flesh of jesus signifies the morification of the flesh of the heretic.
The Pharisees signify the priests. The kings and rulers who oversee the execution signify pontius pilate and the local leaders.
The trial and procession the heretic went through signify the trial and procession Jesus went through.
Jesus said: "If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it."
The religion of Christianity is devoted to being a heretic and then being brutally killed for it, thus imitating or mimicking Jesus. That is why it is obsessed with the concept of heresy and is devoted to bashing each other as heretics.
All this is hidden in cryptic demonic ways
Like voting for Trump, is that what you mean?
Modernism
There are plenty of the usual suspects to criticize. Ben Shapiro is one of the good guys.
I want to see a diocese go off grid, to separate itself from having to pay electric and gas bills.
Mass in the winter would be almost impossible. I'm sure churches of old had a heat source at least. You can only use candles so much.
@@femaleKCRoyalsFan Yes, they usually had the standard Roman version that goes back to the time before Christ- wood heated water channeled through holes in the foundation that would heat from the floor. No need for grid energy at all, same technology was used to heat Roman Baths for centuries.
A modern version is available that uses flexible plastic pipe between the floorboards and a sturdy floor covering, to circulate the hot water. Though usually solar powered heat exchangers are MUCH more efficient- and surprisingly are low power enough to even work on cloudy days.
Note I said off grid- not off carbon though- no solution for climate control is atmospheric carbon friendly- just some use less fossil carbon than others.
Having said that, during a recent power outage my use of heated candle lanterns saved our lives during the 24 hours our house was without power or heat. 18 lit candles under metal plates behind glass, kept my living room nice and toasty. Beeswax. I really must get the new replacement box blessed.
I pray that Fr. James Martin and Dr.Taylor Marshall both read Trents book. Both could benifit tremendously and could bring so many souls to Jesus Christ if they only "rebalanced' themselves!
May God bless both of them! 🙏
Wait isn't Liberal Catholicism = Trent Horn? Trent Horn, 'Pope Francis and Vatican II Splainer-in-Chief', right? What am I missing, guys?
Trent is to Catholicism what Bill Maher is to leftism. "I'm not one of those extremists (but I'll continue to vote for/support them)"
Right on. Sometimes you just gotta scratch your head with the guests Eric finds
You can do better than this, Eric. Your guest reminds me of the book of Revelation: be hot or cold, the lukewarm will be spit out of my mouth.
Please don’t have him on hustling his next book, trashing traditional Catholics and the TLM.
@@illyb514Taylor Marshall at least is on fire for the true faith & knows how to lead people…prolly bcuz he used to be a Prot Priest. I am still with Taylor Marshall & still can’t see why people like to hate him. All I see is prideful jealousy…
@illyb514 It was a joke, and I'm sure Taylor would take it as such. He does great work.
Eric and Trent, you’ve touched on the fact that this “liberalism” you speak of, the subject of your video, is particularly evident in the area of sexuality. Well, I guess I’m a liberal Catholic then! Consider this old and aging former “conservative Catholic” in the ranks of Fr. James Martin. Because I would suggest that our faith might have gotten something wrong for the past 2,000 years, and since science has now exposed this error, it might be time for a rethink on this teaching.
The issue of gays and their rights to enjoy love in the way heterosexuals do has been at the forefront of late. I am not referring to one-night hookups which are forbidden in the same way they are for heterosexuals but rather, couples living in loving monogamous same-sex relationships that reflect the love God has for all His subjects.
While I agree that gay marriage as defined presently by the Catholic Church is not possible, there remains a growing effort for the Church to recognize the love, partners in monogamous gay unions, have for each other. While this type of marriage sacramentally is not possible, allow me to explain what might be.
There is a social/sexual revolution coming in the Church. In one aspect of this coming revolution, the Church wants to expound on Pope John Paul’s central idea in “Theology of the Body” and how it centers on the fact that God wants a deep intimate loving relationship with each of us in the same way a committed monogamous heterosexual couple enjoys. It is not meant to reflect this in the physical sense but is mirrored in that way, to reflect the deep love God has for each of us, and the Church attempts to bring to light, to celebrate the joy and exultation that comes from such a love.
The Catholic Church’s stance on homosexuality has long been that it is not inherently sinful, as a person does not choose to be either homosexual or heterosexual. However, the Church has always taught that homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered” and “contrary to natural law”. According to the Catholic theology on sexuality, all sexual acts must be open to procreation by nature and express the symbolism of male-female complementarity.
The Catholic Church’s stance on homosexuality has been founded on the belief in a natural order created by God, as it has been based on the idea that sexual acts should be by the natural law of procreation and male-female complementarity. This theology has been used to form the Church’s view on the sacrament of Marriage and the notion that marriage is only permitted for a union between a man and a woman. “Male and female he created them.” (Gen. 1:27)
Recent scientific developments, however, may influence how the Church addresses this issue in the future. Some feel God may be working in His Church to rectify a wrong that has survived for centuries. Could the coming changes in the Church and yes, changes are coming, possibly be the work of the Holy Spirit, as Jesus promised? Could Pope Francis be His messenger in all of this?
The principle of doctrinal development in Catholicism allows for the Church's understanding of its teachings to evolve and develop over time while still preserving the core truths of the faith. Some examples of this are Original Sin, the Trinity and the doctrine of Purgatory, the Eucharist, the Canon of Scripture, religious liberty, social justice, and the role of women in the Church and society, but to name a few. Should the beliefs of the Church in the area of homosexuality and same-sex unions not evolve when presented with modern scientific evidence that proves otherwise or, should She remain with Her head in the sand in the interest of maintaining the status quo and “preserving the gospel”? The Catechism says, the Church and Her theology, cannot be at odds with science (CCC 159). The Church teaches that faith and reason must always be in agreement or, one or both, are in error (CCC 36, 286).
Medical experts have stated they can find no studies to show that homosexuality is an abnormality in the human person. Experts now widely agree (American Psychological Association (APA), World Health Organization (WHO), American Medical Association (AMA), World Medical Association (WMA), National Academy of Sciences (NAS), National Library of Medicine, and many other numerous research studies) that homosexuality is a natural variation of human sexuality rather than a conscious choice made by individuals or an unnatural disorder the homosexual was born with.
Scientific studies NOW conclude that homosexuality will make up 3% of the population, no matter what, and that homosexuality IS part of the natural order. So, it seems our knowledge of this matter has changed. Should not our theology develop and evolve in light of these new findings? After all, aren’t homosexuals made in the image and likeness of God, as we all are?
If we are not to dispute the scientific and medical consensus, the question then becomes, are homosexuals not allowed to carry out God’s plan of love and commitment in the best way possible, in loving monogamous same-sex unions? Are they not allowed to participate in true love and commitment that mirrors Christ’s love for us on the cross in the same way heterosexual couples who have impediments to marriage, are given dispensations by the Church, even though they cannot fulfil all marriage requirements? It is through no fault of their own, that gays are who they are. God made them as surely as he made you and me, and we all know, God doesn’t make junk.
That's a terrible argument. Just because a certain % of people are inclined to commit a certain sin, that means we should just allow it? A certain % are also inclined to be alcoholics, thieves, murderers etc., but that doesn't mean we just begin to say it's ok. That was an unnecessarily long comment for such a basic and poor argument. It's also clear that your faith first and foremost is in so called "science", and then God and his Church come second (if you even have faith in God). So you try to bend your religious beliefs based on what scientists say. I doubt you consider the influence of Satan in modern science.
@@ReapingTheHarvest You’re missing the point of the “natural order” of things. Gays are not “inclined to commit a certain sin”. It is their nature without being genetically pre-disposed like alcoholics or being conditioned by their social and economic surroundings, like thieves and murderers. The Church laid heavy weight on the natural order of things to formulate its present theology on marriage. But She has also said that science and faith cannot be at odds. But according to you, they apparently can. I guess the Catechism is wrong then. Maybe Satan has taken over science, as you say. Or, maybe that is the one saving grace of science, that there are different answers to any given question. NOT!
@@crazyedswonderfulworldofso9370 I'm not missing the point. Yes it could be in their nature due to our fallen nature that they are inclined to commit certain sins. If you are born with SSA, then you are more inclined to act on the sins that come with that.
No, science and faith can't be at odds. If they appear to be at odds, then the "science" is wrong, and the Church is right. Scientists aren't infallible and have a much lower authority than the Church. It is clear you position "science" as a higher authority.
@@crazyedswonderfulworldofso9370 I'm not missing the point. Yes it could be in their nature due to our fallen nature that they are inclined to commit certain sins. If you are born with SSA, then you are more inclined to act on the sins that come with that.
No, science and faith can't be at odds. If they appear to be at odds, then the "science" is wrong, and the Church is right. Scientists aren't infallible and have a much lower authority than the Church.
@@crazyedswonderfulworldofso9370 I had to type that comment 6 different times and keep changing the words to get TH-cam to accept it and not censor it. It will be impossible to continue the discussion because I can't be as clear as I want to be, and you are already twisting everything I say as it is, and accusing me of missing the point when in fact it is you missing the point. For example I never said science and the church are at odds, and I never said satan has taken over science. I can't tolerate sneaky rhetoric.