We are alive in Christ and that means we are never afraid to proclaim truth and freedom. Let's see what the church fathers taught about Sodom and Gomorrah in Gen. 19 and about Romans 1.
"Get behind me, Satan." And then the apostles told Jesus, "Come on, you are being too harsh." I think being blunt and exposing the error of Fr Cole was absolutely appropriate given the seriousness of the matter.
Another serious issue lies with the Superiors of both Fr Casey and Fr Richard Rohr within the OFM, to allow these men free reign to promote their erroneous opinions as authoritative is a serious breach of their responsibility and vows.
I think the problem is we call these people “nice” because they speak softly and “try” to be helpful. It isn’t nice to lead people to hell, no matter how “pleasant” they speak or appear. Christ is the Logos, anything else is from the evil one.
Thank you for your bold honesty, Fr. Jason. It is a rarity among fellow clergy today, and rightfully receiving strong support as well. The flock is hungry for such shepherds.
great video!! and completely correct!! that young priest is in danger of losing his soul. don't listen to the lukewarm Catholics as they too are in danger of losing their souls. we must speak the truth no matter how harsh. it is our duty to defend it even if it makes many uncomfortable. THE SALVATION OF OUR SOULS DEPEND ON IT. and as an interesting note i find that this young priest will turn "off" the comments on his video that he cannot defend. he chooses to not allow discussion on these specific videos because he cannot defend them as they are not based in truth - sad. i hope his Bishop gets involved in saving this young priest before it's too late. Lord have mercy.
Greeting! Very True! Some of Our Catholic Clergy Have Adopted a Protestant Ethos of "My Interpretation is the More Correct One!" We see that with the Likes of Father James Martin, Father Casey Cole, and others! We are here to preach the faith of the apostles! The Faith of the Fathers! The Faith of the Councils! And Not Our Own Interpretations! You did a Great Job Abunah! Blessed Upcoming Great Lent! Fr. Sergio
6 месяцев назад
@@thejoshuaproject3809 Protestants brought us Humanism.
One of the dumbest things with Fr Casey’s video on homosexuality, is his arguing that scripture don’t address monogamous gay relationships, as if Catholicism is a sola scriptura denomination. Sure, in the last portion of his video, he upholds the teaching of the church on marriage and sexuality, but it comes after a slew of falsehoods, misrepresentations, and half-truths.
Well said. The Church also teaches that a unmarried but monogamous heterosexual couple are commiting sin. So by Fr Casey's logic the Church would be only now understanding this kind of relationship that was uncommon on ancient times.
Children may feel parents are harsh for not letting them do things that hurt themselves and others. But then they grow up and are grateful they had good parents. Thank you Father for showing what Fatherhood means. Praise Jesus Christ!
@@paulperrone4698 True. But like parents, the manner it’s done matters. Look at Fr Altman’s tirades against the Holy Father. He would say he is doing the same thing as John the Baptist, St. Paul, and Jesus, with “millstones” mentioned and everything.
Thank you Fr. Charon for speaking the truth and showing the biblical verses that speaks to these truth. Fr. Casey Cole is young and hopefully malleable to your teachings and can (will) correct his errors in humility and charity. He is young and a product of his seminary training which has been woefully inadequate and poisoned (infiltrated) for decades.
Niceness is not in the Commandments, or the Beatitudes. To truly love (charity = self-sacrificial holy love) is not warm feelings and suchlike, but to will & work the best for another- their conversion and salvation.
Fr Charron Glory to Jesus Christ thank you for preaching the truth some of the Bishop's at the Council of Nicea didn't appreciate St Nicholas' reply to Arius keep being a modern day St Nicholas in charity and lets pray that All preaching or following Heresy come back to the truth.
You were not too harsh, Father Jason. There was nothing wrong with the delivery of your message. Father Casey has skirted the boundaries on authentic Church teaching for too long. He needed to be called-out.
@@herbpalindromepoint out where in my video I misrepresented him. I simply called out his position, which is that the Bible doesn’t speak to modern man on the issue of homosexuality. Such a position is erroneous both scripturally and historically.
@@FrJason I appreciate your reply and your work for the church. To reply to you, I will reply to your summation of Fr. Casey's opinion into two parts and then sum up with my summation of Fr. Casey's video. 1) Fr. Charron at the ~2min mark of the original video: “His point is that these monogamous homosexual relationships were a foreign concept in the Bible’s time. And we live in a modern time in which we are different. And the Bible cannot speak to our current situation, because we have evolved to a point where people have these virtuous monogamous homosexual relationships and the ancient world did not have that.” a. Feedback: I don’t see this anywhere in his video. He certainly never calls any homosexual relationship “virtuous”. 2) Fr. Charron: “The Bible does not say anything on these relationships as such, and therefore, there is just silence on it, he claims. And then he says, with regard to the actions passive or active in the act of homosexuality, that there is all kinds of Biblical criticism and disagreement amongst scholars, and therefore, we Christians in a agnostic, middle foggy haze, where we cannot go left or right, up or down on the issue. We just don’t know.” a. Feedback: He does claim the Bible talks about it. See minute 5 of his video where he says: “Of course this is not to say that the Bible is completely silent or ambiguous on the matter. And Christians for centuries have felt comfortable teaching definitively on the matter.” He then quotes Leviticus 18 and 20. He affirms them. He then says some (not him) may claim Christians are not bound by the law of Moses; therefore, he believes the best evidence is looking at what God institutes. He says look directly at how Jesus defines marriage, which is clearly between a man and a woman. b. Conclusion: What I took away from Fr. Casey's video: 1) with regards to "homosexuals", the problem is the sin not the sinner, 2) with regards to the sin, the Bible clearly condemns adultery, and 3) one should look to Jesus's teaching on marriage and one can see that marriage is between a man and woman, where committing homosexual acts is inherently adultery. The video states that impossible to see homosexual "unions" as being compatible with marriage as defined by Jesus. While I too disagreed with much of Casey's hypothetical arguments, they were hypothetical and not necessarily his argument but a way to advocate for a different approach to the subject matter while holding the same conclusion that homosexual relationships are sinful. Additionally, I take no issue with you critiquing how he handled certain passages; however, that was not the core message of his video.
@FrJason At the 2:10 mark of the original video, you said his point was "that we just don't really know what to say about homosexuality." And at 2:40, you say he speaks of us evolving to a point where we have "virtuous monogamous homosexual relationships", when he never speaks of them as virtuous. At 6:48, Fr Casey speaks of same sex acts (and all acts outside of man-woman marriage where the proper ends are directed toward the union of the couple and procreation) with the phrase "Never have been, nor ever will be, permitted." Trenr Horn rightly points out in his rebuttal that Fr Casey is conceding too many LGBT revisions, but he's not teaching heresy. And at least one example where Fr Casey shows he personally recognizes the Bible's condemnation is his section on Leviticus, where he reads the condemnation. He then says the LGBT interlocutor will argue this is a law of Moses we are no longer bound by. And then Fr Casey says "and even though WE KNOW that moral truths are part of the eternal law and do not change, some may not be convinced." He's clearly stating that he sees this as an eternal condemnation and has good grounds for believing so; but he's also saying that, simply because it's in Leviticus, some will incorrectly deem it as "just Levitical law". I wholeheartedly agree with you, Fr Casey concedes too much as he grants (in some cases, hypothetically grants) many of the LGBT arguments while saying another case can be made that may be more convincing. I agree with Trent Horn on this. But in the weaker case Fr Casey prefers, he still upholds marriage and calls out sex outside of marriage as sinful. And to that end, he should not be lumped in with Catholics who present an LGBT case without condemnation.
We are not called to be nice. We are called to be loving. Thank you for your loving act of admonishing the sinner, Father, and correcting your brother priest. "Let not many of you become teachers...." Anyone with authority to teach who causes confusion and scandal are putting their souls in grave danger, even moreso than the "little ones" they mislead.
Satan mixes truth with lies, because his motive is deception. If someone speaks %99 truth and %1 lie, it's a lie. And the only way we recognize truth and lies is to be an expert at the truth and the only truth is the Bible. The Holy Spirit, when we ask Him , leads us to the understanding of the scriptures. "If you seek Me, you will find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart".
'The Epitome of the Priestly Life' would be advantageous to read. Printed by Benzinger Bros. From the words of our Lord. Has a chapter in it concerning 'priestly attire'. All priests should read this small book of truth.
It's about time that we should be like St.John The Baptist...and speak out when there is clear distortion of the Word of God, of course with Charity..even St.Paul 'corrected' St.Peter...
Has anyone who criticizes this video read the Book of St Jude? Read just this extremely short book of Scripture to discover just how many and what strong “names” are appropriately used to describe those clergy who dangerously lead others astray.
Sincerely, I saw that Trent Horn had already corrected Fr Casey with charity and with clarity & honesty as regards Fr Casey's video. He listened carefully & responded well. It just seems a little too much Fr that so many are publicly bashing Fr Casey to me. It feels or looks more like a bit of overkill with the name calling too. It defeats the purpose imo. God Bless.
A cup of water with a drop of poison makes the water poisonous. Teaching error has the same effect; it’s ok to warn others not to drink the water, especially when it comes from a father.
Father people want to be “neither hot or cold“ wishy-washy Kumbaya “let’s be nice”. The Bible was clear what the result of being neither hot nor cold is going to be. It is an active charity to correct people. And as any parent can tell you, children are resistant to being corrected
I thought you were harsh at first too, but then I thought about it and realized it is pretty scandalous for someone with holy orders, representing the faith on the level of clergy, to set an impression that the Church is ambiguous on homosexuality Hopefully he smartens up
Ezekiel 33 : 1 thru 9 "The word of the LORD came to me: Son of man, speak to your people and tell them: When I bring the sword against a land, if the people of that land select one of their number as a sentinel for them, and the sentinel sees the sword coming against the land, he should blow the trumpet to warn the people. If they hear the trumpet but do not take the warning and a sword attacks and kills them, their blood will be on their own heads. They heard the trumpet blast but ignored the warning; their blood is on them. If they had heeded the warning, they could have escaped with their lives. If, however, the sentinel sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet, so that the sword attacks and takes someone’s life, his life will be taken for his own sin, but I will hold the sentinel responsible for his blood. You, son of man-I have appointed you as a sentinel for the house of Israel; when you hear a word from my mouth, you must warn them for me. When I say to the wicked, “You wicked, you must die,” and you do not speak up to warn the wicked about their ways, they shall die in their sins, but I will hold you responsible for their blood. If, however, you warn the wicked to turn from their ways, but they do not, then they shall die in their sins, but you shall save your life.
As gentle as St Paul, John the Baptist and our Lord when they confront someone who doesn’t want to be restored but persistently leads others astray? The warning of the “millstone” and many examples of various approaches abound in Scripture.
@@paulperrone4698 “And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kindly to every one, an apt teacher, forbearing, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant that they will repent and come to know the truth, and they may escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.” -St Paul
Context again… you are ignoring other texts of Scripture. You forbear with everyone who is learning and trying to overcome sin…but the warnings of the millstone for example, the Book of St Jude, many other Scripture references abounds with examples of treating those leading others astray. Different situations.
@@paulperrone4698 We have a whole lot of commands about how the godly should treat others, even enemies. Where are the commands telling us it’s ok to set aside the fruits of the spirit?
No one is setting aside courage. Brood of Vipers. Whitewashed Sepulchres…etc. These and more such abound in Scripture. These pages are in your Bible too.
I believe there is a significant segment of the Church, hierarchy included, that are attempting to normalize the homosexual lifestyle within the life of the Church. Thank you Father for stepping into the breach.
Fr. Coles "kind" sounding tone makes his message even more insidious. A Liberal Theologian (communist pretending to be Christian) could suggest all other sorts of anti-Christian ideas, for example: denying the existence of miracles, and that'd still warrant a firm admonishment. Responding to him in a kinda tone wouldn't drive home the seriousness of his error.
Very well and clearly explained and useful for other similar situations when people think saying truth is unmerciful...your video is the answer, God bless you😇
There's no "too harsh" when our souls are in danger. I watched your video, and in this world there will always be a "bad" one (someone who is not "nice" as to not hurt the feelings of others), but this time, we are not talking about a mundane thing, we are talking about God, and our soul's salvation. Many times, we need a huge call out to really put things in perspective. God bless everyone
You’re 💯 correct Fr. Charron. There was no harshness in what you had said. You’re either on the side of Truth or the side of deception. There is no in between. Looks like he turned off the comment section on his video. As a 3rd order Franciscan is find it sad that he’s spewing this confusion.
O yes, I see the confusion and where it comes from. When the Lord told the Pharisees they “nullified” the Word of God, their defense was yours. We teach you must honour Father and Mother (Fr Cole). Ahhh but Our Lord responds it is the other things you say that “nullifies” what you claim to teach. I hope this concern of Our Lord helps you. God bless you.
Maybe I’m wrong but I suspect sometimes the dark side plays on pity and compassion to try to excuse and tolerate sin. A real compassionate approach is a truthful one. “This path you are choosing will eventually harm you.”
Father in all fairness he did reaffirm that the homosexual act is a sin. Yes we must be honest and speak out against brazen heresy but I don’t see that here. He said that scripture isn’t very clear in its description of that particular sin which I disagree with but he believes himself and clearly states that homosexual acts are sins which remain forbidden.
Again you should read Pope Pius X on how Modernists nullify the word of God. How? By teaching on one page something that is Catholic and on the next page something that is untrue but more to the point…nullifies what was said on the previous page. Fr Casey tries to do this and set up false contrasts that Trent Horn demonstrated are “easy” to know are false. Suggesting we don’t know something for example from the Bible - even if he is correct which he is not - ignores all the Fathers, etc. Suggesting human nature, or modern relationships are somehow different (and directly implied therefore as virtuous) due to the appearance of “monogamy” - even if he is correct which again he definitely is not, ignores many teachings of the Church. We may agree on Fr Casey’s agenda as all his “mistakes” go only in one direction. He regularly causes confusion and harm to souls by telling people things that are demonstrably false built up alongside something that is not. It is a tricky method of misrepresentation which 1) some can genuinely fall for, or worse 2) others, as you perhaps unwittingly do, use evidence of his serial use of “half-truths” to claim Fr Casey is not saying what he is really repeatedly saying. What is the point of the concessions and “half-truths” Fr Charron rightly condemns? Don’t deal in half-truths and you will see Fr Jason is honest and faithful to and understands the importance of the whole of Church teaching vs Fr Casey who consistently uses dishonorable methods to falsely imply lack of clarity and/or basis for infallible Church teaching. The Fathers condemned the same methods and implications of virtue opposed to Church teaching honestly, just as Fr Charron does.
@@paulperrone4698 Again I believe such harsh words would be justified if he was implicitly saying that homosexual acts are not sinful and that they are acceptable but he does not say that. You must see that the devils methods are to tempt priests and bishops to enter into constant arguments in order to divide the church. Priests must use social media to lead people to greater faith in Jesus Christ and not to create division by using it to constantly criticise one another. While we quarrel the devil plunders. The whole point of all these disputes and arguments you see happening in the church is to take peoples focus away from Jesus Christ himself.
You are one of the few people here getting it right. As much as I don’t like Father Casey and think he’s a modernist, he did agree to the Church’s teaching on the matter.
Expose darkness, yes. Fr. Cole was incorrect in his Biblical exposition, yes. But calling names is not in your purview. "Heresy" has a meaning, and cannot be thrown around willy-nilly. It is a term that means there has been a juridical process before it is used in particular cases. Why not apologize for this over-zealous lack of love? It would give us all a good example to follow in our own battles with darkness.
2 Peter 2;6 if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly;
The main difference between you two fathers is your clarity about the matters that you speak. I walk away from your videos informed. I walk away from Casey’s videos with more questions.
You did great admonishing the modernist Priest, if anything you've been too gentle on him . I can't even watch that guy , that's how deceiving he is. Would a drunk that want to recover benefit from hearing drinking is fine so he's feelings are not hurt or he needs the cold , hard truth ( who's is Christ)?. Gloves off with traitors and by the way the sintagm "nice"is just another definition for hypocrisy.
Never were you in anyway too harsh. Standing up for God and His Truth exposes those who outright reject Truth or are misinformed or lack understanding. How they receive that Truth lets the faithful see what side those who oppose Truth are truly on. Charity by way of Filial correction hurts sometimes, but is absolutely necessary and for our ultimate good. After all, it is our souls on the line. My daughter reacted negatively at first when I applied Alcohol on a scrape she recieved by when doing something I told her not to do. But it was for her ultimate good . Father Casey's error was my daughter's actions that resulted in injury. Your filial correction was the Alcohol applied to the wound. Me telling her not to do what resulted in her injury was God's doctrine that was disregarded. Very poor analogy, I know. This whole Crisis and confusion in the Church today feels like the lesson of the wheat and tares. May God give us the Graces to be Wheat in a world full of tares trying to overgrow the Wheat in the Church.
I don't think you were too harsh, I think you were dishonest. Had you harshly criticized his weak view and understanding of Scripture, I would have applauded your efforts because those would have been honest and necessary corrections. But, you didn't. You accused him of holding the worst views that he discussed. Views he presented as the type of responses that one might hear if they used this or that verse as an argument against homosexuality. And, then, you completely failed to recognize that in the last minute of the video he affirmed Church Teaching on homosexuality in its totality and even said that, despite what the critics might say, Scripture actually does teach against homosexuality. I expect you just didn't watch the video all the way to the end. And now, I wonder what you will do about it.
I’d prefer you call me an imbecile, a dimwit, anything aside from dishonest. You seem to be an engaging person of faith and intellect so I don’t want to dismiss your criticism but neither do I wish to let the accusation of dishonesty pass without rebuttal. If my words are thought to be dishonest then I have nothing to offer and I am a man condemned. Please consider me an imbecile, but not dishonest. I did watch the video, and not only once. My friend, what you fail to perceive is the poison in the water. Yes, as I said in this video Fr. Cole affirms church teaching, but the offense against truth is his proposition that modern heterodox interpretations of Gen. 19 and Romans 1 are comparable and valid, when in point of fact these erroneous interpretations are entirely, categorically opposite to the unified patristic understanding of those passages. This is a direct violation of the 4th session of Trent. The two pillars of our faith are Scripture and Tradition. His undercutting of these two pillars (by claiming sacred tradition and sacred scripture do not treat our modern experience of same sex unions) while formally affirming church teaching is duplicitous sophistry. I’m really at a loss to see how my calling him out on that makes me “dishonest”. The honor of your reply is eagerly awaited.
Your criticism is inaccurate. Trent Horn rebuts the “revisionist” and false statements of Fr Cole which are “easy” to discover. Father Charon knowing this similarly notes the dangerous “half-truths” Fr Cole presents - you should have noticed this - it is the nature of half truths to give half the truth not the whole truth. The correction Fr Charon and Trent Horn is “honest”and necessary” especially since Fr Casey Cole sadly is a serial offender regarding blatant misrepresentation.
Again you should read Pope Pius X on how Modernists nullify the word of God. How? By teaching on one page something that is Catholic and on the next page something that is untrue but more to the point…nullifies what was said on the previous page. Fr Casey tries to do this and set up false contrasts that Trent Horn demonstrated are “easy” to know are false. Suggesting we don’t know something for example from the Bible - even if he is correct which he is not - ignores all the Fathers, etc. Suggesting human nature, or modern relationships are somehow different (and directly implied therefore as virtuous) due to the appearance of “monogamy” - even if he is correct which again he definitely is not, ignores many teachings of the Church. We may agree on Fr Casey’s agenda as all his “mistakes” go only in one direction. He regularly causes confusion and harm to souls by telling people things that are demonstrably false built up alongside something that is not. It is a tricky method of misrepresentation which 1) some can genuinely fall for, or worse 2) others, as you perhaps unwittingly do, use evidence of his serial use of “half-truths” to claim Fr Casey is not saying what he is really repeatedly saying. What is the point of the concessions and “half-truths” Fr Charron rightly condemns? Don’t deal in half-truths and you will see Fr Jason is honest and faithful to and understands the importance of the whole of Church teaching vs Fr Casey who consistently uses dishonorable methods to falsely imply lack of clarity and/or basis for infallible Church teaching. The Fathers condemned the same methods and implications of virtue opposed to Church teaching honestly, just as Fr Charron does.
@FrJason Fr, I have seen too much of your content and interviews to believe you are an imbecile. However, I am happy to take you at your word. If you were not being dishonest, you have simply made an error. The erroneous interpretations that Fr. Casey presents are not endorsed. They are provided as information. He is saying that if you use this verse, your opponent will rebut with this interpretation which has been made by some scholars. So, don't bother. I don't agree with Fr Casey's assessment. I think he gives up too easy. I think it is easy enough to demonstrate that those scholars are wrong (Trent Horn's response does this). But, that is a very different criticism than accusing him of holding those erroneous interpretations himself. At the 7:05 mark, Fr Casey says plainly, "While the Bible may be clear in its condemnation of certain actions [homosexual acts]..." before going on to affirm the dignity of persons who suffer with SSA. It isn't simply that he affirms Church teaching. He presents his own position as being based in a proper interpretation of Scripture. There is no duplicity or sophistry. And, as an aside, your use of these particular words troubled me. I have seen them used ad nauseum recently by those claiming that "couple" and "relationship" (union) are one and the same in their attacks on Fiducia Supplicans. Obviously, this is impossible. Circular definitions are invalid, and the definition of couple is: "Two persons who are in a relationship (marriage/union/etc)". If "couple" is equivalent to "relationship" they must be interchangeable. But, if we define couple as: "Two persons who are in a couple" We have fallen into the postmodern sophistry that gave us the woke definition of woman. To be clear, I am not accusing you of holding this post-modern definition of "couple." It is just what the use of the terms "sophistry" and "duplicitous" bring to mind at this point in time.
Think you were right to rebuke him because he does use his platform to give a fair few modernist/liberal opinions (his vid on masturbation or him siding with secular scholars on the reliability of the NT) but at the same time im p sure in ur video u didnt mention that he does affirm the church teaching on homosexuality which u probably shouldve done
I watched the casey video, and it is entirely cringey. He went out of his way to twist meanings that are purely obvious to even a simple critical thinker.
Yes, your points are understood but I am sorry they don’t apply as you believe. First I didn’t use words such as “sophistry” or “duplicitous “ so you don’t have to put quotations around the them. I am ok with Mueller, Zen, Sarah perhaps using them but I didn’t do so here… I think those comments are on to something though - they are closer to the mark. Secondly, what was talking about was a kind of equivocation- by FS using the same word to “innovate” in a way that 1) creates a different meaning that confuses, and 2) does so in a way forbidden by Church teaching. To be clear the Church never used the word couple this way before…and it does reflect natural reality too - coupling requires difference… but using the word couple in this way about SS should be explained as the “word that formerly meant that you couldn’t use it this way.” So the spirit of the change is not to clarify but effectively to confuse, to remove the helpful distinctions by which we think properly. As a matter of fact, a more obvious example is “irregular” and other euphemisms for grave sins, etc. You may lament that sin is now downplayed but this use of language is how it is done. The confusion now surrounding this document as opposed to R.N. is not because they repurposed words from other contexts but rather because they obscured one that was useful, meaningful and clear in a Church context. It could easily be understood therefore to signal approval by removing the former distinction and prohibition. A very different application than RN. The change went the other way…and since how it is being used is new - the consequences of losing this safeguard of language was predicted. Control the language, control the narrative. Plus there is the context of an agenda to change Church teaching with provides additional meaning. I have enjoyed our discussion. I just think the standards to be used have been unwisely changed by innovation and more than a few novelties…it is not so simple as you suggest. All the best to you. God bless.
Fr. Casey, at the end of the day, agreed with Catholic teaching on homosexuality. You seem to object to how he got to that conclusion, and I agree with you. However, this was no reason to attack him personally and express such deep hostility towards him. It wasn't a reason to call him bad names and damage his reputation. I don't care how right you are. If you have no charity in your heart towards your brother, you are disqualified from any commentary at all, because you walk in darkness. This is the Word of the Lord: *1 John 2: 9 Whoever says, 'I am in the light,' while hating a brother or sister, is still in the darkness. 10 Whoever loves a brother or sister lives in the light, and in such a person there is no cause for stumbling. 11 But whoever hates another believer is in the darkness, walks in the darkness, and does not know the way to go, because the darkness has brought on blindness.* I will not be watching your content until you have publicly apologized to Fr. Casey Cole. You are bound by the Lord's New Commandment to love him as Christ has loved you...and I'm sure you are aware that you are a sinner just like the rest of us. We receive grace from God, so we offer grace to one another...that's the way it works. We are to speak the truth, but always in love (Ephesian 4:15). Give Fr. Casey a call. Go and visit with him in private. Reach out before you speak out.
