#448 

Thank God for good priest like this who _dare_ do their job properly :)

If only more shepherds were this firm about the Eucharist!!

You’re priest is a hero of the faith

When I was a director of religious education at a Catholic parish I learned one of my catechists was in what is politely referred to as an "irregular marriage" - i. e. wasn't married in the Church so I had to ask for her resignation. This motivated her to seek a declaration of annulment for her first marriage and then get truly married in the Church so there was a happy ending for all. Lovingly "confronting" people can help them right their relationships with God and His Church.

Great priests are out there. ❤️

Agreed, Anglicanism would be glad to have him

Unfortunately his eyes are on the long game. He is on a mission : To turn the Catholic Church into HIS kind of church. A church in His image and likeness. So he won't stop and he won't quit until he achieves that goal. He has been slowly but surely toiling, banging away at the teachings of the Church and "re-educating" the flock his whole "priestly" career. He has already accomplished much of what he set out to do but he still has a lot to do. His prospects are better than they have ever been so why would he quit when he can achieve the mission he has dedicated his whole life to?

@@AL_YZ he hasn’t done anything. He’s a fly who’s going to be squat hard. More and more people are coming back to the Church (myself included) because the world has gone mad and we need wisdom to stay sane.

I wish y'all would stop sending your trash priests our way. And the Episcopalians (of which I formerly belonged to) would grow a backbone. Tragically, the good Bishops, priests and layman are cast aside or sued.

There’s more power, prestige, and influence within Catholicism, which is ultimately what worms like him want

Are you saying that being an orthodox Catholic is as difficult as parallel parking?

@@BrentKalar lol

In a qualified sense, yes

Perfectly put.

​@@ReasonandTheology Do you still stick by this comment in light of your recent video on the letter Pope Francis wrote endorsing the Catholic LGBTQ outreach convention lead by Fr. Martin? ru-vid.comWvFyq7V6h6U?feature=share

@Saints and Scholars my view is that, if Lucifer rebelled in Heaven and Luther and scores of other Church-confirmed heretics have infected the Church, we shouldn't be surprised when such servants of Satan continue to arise.

Get your kids out of that school

That’s so frustrating.

@@christenh359 yeah, like pass the buck of irresponsibility - from teachers to trustees to bishops and back again. Meanwhile, as the innocent and vulnerable children who are led unwittingly into grave evil and possibly irretrievably out of their Catholic faith, those responsible keep avoiding responsibility. Where is the love of caring for our own? Where is the care of the shepherds for their flocks? I am beside myself and only can implore God for help.

@Eli Sheets thank you for your reply! What do you mean by judging? Would you know when he judged them?

typical Vatical II pastor, like PF

@@marcokite 'Pastor'

@@marcokite Vatican II has nothing to do with this, nice attack though.

@@husq48 Vatican 2 and priest like this Father are a symptom of modernist infiltration of the church

I can proudly say he has blocked me twice now for simply quoting canon law.

Thank you Excellent point

Well, I agree that correction must be equal to both sides. Those priests you mention are not without criticism either.

Fr. Corapi was manipulating and sleeping with a woman, in addition to living in a mansion and breaking his vow of poverty. It had nothing to do with what he was preaching. What he was preaching was the truth, but there's more to a man than what he says. What he does matters as well.

@@JP2GiannaT I'm not saying these guys are saints. I never said they shouldn't be admonished or even censured. But supposing that all of them (Altman, Pavone, Corapi, and Martin) are guilty of misguiding the flock, don't you think it's quite political how some are picked out, while others are not? Are you not also disgusted by magisterial inconsistency that may indirectly approve of a particular kind of scandalous behavior?

start a new church.. they just took old manuscript's from Alexandria. St. Peter was a married man. he over saw the Christian church in Rome. JESUS CHRIST is the Rock; not Peter; sorry for your indoctrination. Catholicism is pagan and not of Jesus; our Lord and Saviour. I trust Him completely. He is my all in all; not Mary(Sophia) WAKE UP!!! ☠

That’s not exactly a heresy

@@djspenceital Only according to those that reject or subvert Church teachings. St. Nicholas would have literally ko'd Fr. Martin if he would have spewed his heresies and half truths in the 3rd century

For reals? Do you have a link or something? Although still not technically heresy, as the holy spirit doesn't really have a gender, doing so implies an extremely weird relationship in the triune God. That's just... really really awkward.

@@sgzartan there’s no ecclesial definition that declares it a heresy. And Spirit or “Ruach” in Hebrew is a feminine word. So if we’re punching ppl in the face who refer to the Spirit in the feminine, then we’re gonna be punching some of the Biblical authors. Doesn’t sound too orthodox to me.

@@bearistotle2820 I’m not sure why it would imply a weird relationship in the Trinity. I don’t personally refer to the Sprit in the feminine. I prefer to refer to It as “It” because pneuma in Greek is a neuter word. I do that without denying the personal nature of the Holy Sprit (though it does sound weird in English tbh). But Ruach/Spirit in Hebrew is a feminine word. So it’s Scripture itself that makes use of the feminine to refer to the Spirit.

The Catholic Church is the system of Antichrist.

@@anonymousapostle5657 let me guess, sedevacant?

@@christvault4038 pardon?

@@anonymousapostle5657 are you a sedevacant?

@@christvault4038 no

God bless you Francesco. Ask your guardian angel to communicate with Brandon’s guardian angel. Please watch the warning or illumination of conscience by Christine Watkins. When this amazing event happens it will bring to an end satans century. God bless. Praise Jesus and Mary always!!!

Does a Jesuit follow a particular bishop, or would the higher up in the Jesuit order be his higher ups? I genially don’t know

@@ultimateoriginalgod he has to respect whatever diocese he enters. He is under a Jesuit Order superior as you hinted at. There are some other nuances that I am not familiar with but those are the main points.

As a member of a religious order (Jesuits) he owes obedience to his religious superior in the order but he also owes obedience to the bishop in whose diocese he exercises his "ministry." There is no such thing as a Jesuit bishop in the sense you mean it - it is instead his Jesuit superior.

Clearly the need to silence Fr. Martin is evidence that "some bishops" fear that the message they preach can't compete with the Good News brought by Fr. Martin. It's pretty clear which side the Holy Spirit is empowering.

@@mcmemmo the Catholic Church allowing outsiders to debate them is more akin to what you’re saying, and they do just that. Allowing these outsiders to teach others under the guise as one of them doesn’t make sense whatsoever.

Yea I agree. I applaud Trents charity towards him but at a certain point he is actively misleading followers of Christ and this must stopped

He hasn't even come close to grounds for excommunication. He would need to explicitly contradict church teaching, which he has never done. He should be counseled by his bishop, and go through those proper channels, but excommunication is a specific act that has a specific use, and this use does not apply here.

Haven’t there been clerics that had their faculties taken away for misleading the laity? I thought there was an official term for being “silenced” that way, but I can’t think of it.

@@bearistotle2820 He's publicly referred to the Holy Spirit as "she" more than once.

@@bearistotle2820 I agree that the first step is to attempt a more private disciplining from a higher-up, before doing the highest level of discipline that is excommunication. However, he still must be disciplined!!! And he hasn’t been! This demonstrates to non-Catholics like me that the Church is as weak as ever, and turns us off from ever joining it. A Church that cannot control and discipline the men it gives power over congregations, in the name of tolerance and charity, is a church that actively provides soap boxes for antichrists. It’s why I disavow the Lutheran Church now, and why I disavow the Catholic Church. Too much tolerance within their ranks. Ever wonder how the Borgias were able to do what they did? Well, you’re seeing it.

@Prasanth Thomas His bishop can surely excommunicate him if they so chose to under Canon law but that is not the only thing a bishop can do to keep a priest from harming the faithful. He can be relieved of his duties as editor of America Magazine. They could also ban him from speaking engagements and from using Twitter.

Same with St Joseph’s in Philly. A joke.

Glad to see you back home.🌷

Trent is awesome.

Definitely.

I will pray. Concentrate on what you can control (for example prayer) but don't worry for what you can't control.

@@vituzui9070 im quite worried of the fact that more Catholics would get confuse and lose faith....

From the Bible: "Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous Judgment", John 7:24 (NASB)

What kind of situational ethics?

@@djspenceital Ethics or morals that are contingent upon the situation - aka, moral relativism, no moral absolutes. In Father James Hardon's "The Catechism of the Catholic Church", he explains that the Church is completely opposed to situational ethics. It was reassuring to have referenced this reliable Catholic resource even if and though my contrarian professor posited otherwise. I was a fish out of water, but at least I was not alone. I had to pray for him a lot.

@@MM22272 Well it depends on how far the professor pushed it. There is situational ethics in the Tradition, which is compatible with moral absolutes. Augustine says in Book 3 of the Confessions that, although God’s justice never changes, how it manifests in different times and places does change. Aquinas also makes a distinction between first order and second order precepts of the natural law, the first being absolute and universally available by synderesis, but the second are not universally known. Hence, Aquinas thinks that the ancient Germanic tribes who thought that stealing was acceptable, were not liable for that action, as it’s not forbidden by one of the first precepts. Later theologians, such as Suarez, become more deontological in their approach, and multiply the number of moral absolutes.

@@djspenceital He was slightly nuanced, but regularly advanced non-traditional moral views which he supported with like-minded theologians. For example, he openly and flatly contradicted the Church teaching on contraception. It may be worth noting that I do not mean the proper operation of the pertinent gifts of the Holy Spirit or the employment of the four cardinal virtues when one is confronted with a moral dilemma. A church friend of mine had unwittingly and inadvertently conflated situational ethics with the practical application of moral absolutes and, as a result, confidently, but mistakenly drew a wrong conclusion. It was, nonetheless, beneficial for me to observe this fault and learn how it transpired so as to avoid such a fall. That aside, your comments are curiously intriguing, given the apparent paradox, namely regarding the explications of Sts. Augustine and Aquinas, both of whom I have scarcely read. So, I readily admit that you would have more knowledge that I do. Nonetheless, I find your comments intelligible and cogent. To that end, my impression, quite subject to correction, is that the above-mentioned saints (Suarez aside) are presenting quite a different matter than what my professor had advocated. In closing, I thank you kindly for leaving me with this information that itself inspires me to do some more reading by such authors. May God light your path and direct your steps.

@G Am I was just introduced to Fr. Hardon at the shrine in La Crosse, WI yesterday and I’m actually considering becoming a Marian Catechist through the program he founded. Small world!

Malayali aano?

Similar to german bishops thinking.

Frightening and very sad!

You are championing one who kept you "in that confused state longer than necessary." Trent Horn doesn't discuss LGBTQ issues; he uses Father Martin as a convenient scapegoat. Trent earns money that way. I've read Martin's books, and I have never seen him "use ambiguity to lessen the gravity of any potential sin." Trent's video begins with some nice words about welcoming LGBTQ people to the Church, and then he spends an hour using ambiguity to cast doubt on one of (if not the) highest profile priests who minister to a downtrodden minority. Jesus met people where they are and He accompanied them on their life journey. I have never read or heard Father Martin advocate for anything else. If you want to replace your sexual orientation issues with a fixation on Catholicism, then fine; I don't judge. If you are going to champion a manifestly dishonest person like Trent, well...that's not Catholic or Christ-like. And PS, in case you're wondering: I'm a very old, heterosexual, lifelong Catholic man.

@@gpwyt First off, it seems incongruent to bash someone for making money selling books while then promoting someone who makes money selling books. You clearly know nothing about Trent Horn. I have heard a lot of Fr. Martin's statements ever before seeing Trent's explanation video, and I have always felt that he is perniciously ambiguous. It is extremely difficult to tell if he is saying that sin is okay or not. And with some of the things you said in your comment, you seem to be both saying that it is a sin and that it is not a sin without actually saying either. I prefer clarity. If someone is going to say they disagree with the Catholic Church then that is his choice, but it should be made clear. The Catholic group which is actually helping those with same-sex-attraction who are clear about Church teaching is "Courage". Father Martin is not helping but rather adding to the confusion of our times. He does not minister to the downtrodden minority if he is not helping them to live a chaste Catholic life. Instead that is called enabling. My "fixation on Catholicism" is my love for Christ. It is not meant to replace any struggles, but is meant to keep me on the right path within that struggle. Those who say they don't judge are usually the most judgmental. Considering that you spent an entire comment judging Trent Horn and myself, I highly doubt that you don't judge. Trent is not dishonest. You are accusing someone of wrongdoing without any evidence. That is scandalizing someone's good name and bearing false witness. Saying bad things about your brother, Trent, is actually what Christ spoke against and is certainly not Christ-like. I will accept what the Church says Catholicism is rather than you. If you wish to help those who you call downtrodden, then love them. Love, in the Catholic sense, means to wish for their good. And staying close to Christ by following His commandments is the ultimate good. Accusing those who wish to do so as being obsessed with Catholicism is unloving and even demeaning. As a lifelong Catholic man I hope that those years of experience in the faith will kick in one day so that you stop trying to lead others astray. Godspeed.

@@CatholicK5357 "First off," one is a priest and one is a media talking head, earning a handsome income. I know Trent Horn's writings and I know Father Martin's writings. You clearly know nothing at all about Father Martin and you're unfortunately all too willing to help Trent make money. I would suggest that you NAME what you claim is "perniciously ambiguous," (Christ save us)... When you get over that "you seem to be both saying" garbage, then read what I wrote again and think in terms of clarity. Christ meets people where they and accompanies them on their life journey. That's clarity. Trent Horn twists logic and uses words like "slippery" to characterize the writings of a priest with a very difficult public ministry. And you champion Trent. And I know Courage as well. So? YOU and Trent are "not helping but rather adding to the confusion of our times," because you're lying. You have zero evidence for that idiotic idea that he's "enabling." In reality, he challenges LGBTQ people to give the Church another chance, and he challenges you and Trent to welcome the sinners. Try that out. Trent's dishonesty - and yours - starts with "slippery." I have and could dissect every bit of Trent's hour-long func-raising appeal - I've done it before and he wet his pants in reply - but I'm not going to waste my time unless you decide to exercise the faith you and Trent dishonor. Your "fixation" is on a one-sided, likely-politically-motivated view of Catholicism. It shows in your slavish devotion to Trent Horn, your reflexively dishonest characterization of a priest with (like it or not, for Christ's sake) a very difficult public ministry, and with that f**king pathetic bit about accepting "what the Church says over [me]." Struggle, Keith. Work on it. Remember, however, that those who characterize other public Catholics' work using words like "slippery" do not care about you or the faith. Trent's earning a handsome living, nothing more. As a lifelong Catholic man, I hope that you will one day realize that no decent human being, let alone one claiming Christianity, writes filth like "I hope that those years of experience in the faith will kick in one day so that you stop trying to lead others astray." Godspeed yourself, Keith.

@@gpwyt As you can imagine, as someone who has decided to live a chaste life with the struggles that I have, I tend to get a lot of heat from both sides. I always have other people telling me that I am wrong or should do something different. What you said in your first comment and in this last comment made me feel judged and defensive. I hope that is not what you intended. If my response to that was reactionary and only added fuel to the flames of this discussion then I apologize. Thank you for your opinion. I suppose we will find out if I am a bad Christian on judgement day. I would however advise both of us to be more careful with how we word things, as we will be judged for every idle word, spoken or written. I love Trent Horn. His work at Catholic Answers is one of several apologetics content which led me towards the Catholic faith, and away from despairing against faith and my sins. He fulfilled a great need and has helped a lot of Catholics strengthen their faith and has led others to the fold. So yes, I certainly support him and am proud of the work that he does. When I saw that he did a video on a topic I care deeply about I watched the whole thing. You can think what you want of him, but that is what I think of him. And I will stand by it. I have no problem with him making a living since that is a requirement for all. I don't think he is very wealthy but that is none of my business. I also love Father Martin. And it is because of my love for him that concerns me, both for him and those who he is trying to help. If you think he is not ambiguous than you are free to have that thought. However, Fr. Martin's statements were part of many factors that almost led me into a life of sin. I find no clarity in his statements. And as Trent Horn pointed out in his podcast, he even said that there was no problem with a self-identified gay couple kissing in Church. That statement is not ambiguous to me, but concerning. Priests are held to a higher account than lay people because they have more responsibility over souls. Christ meets us where we are at and both asks us and helps us to change. We all have crosses to bear. We can bear it with Christ and try and avoid sin, or else we can turn away from Him. That is the same with any sin. The reason I mentioned Courage, was to show what an authentic ministry who helps people that struggle with same sex attraction looks like. I'm sorry if I gave an impression of political mindedness in my faith. You are welcome to show me where I did so. But I certainly don't see caring about avoiding sin and being concerned about bad examples in priests has to do with politics. I actually hate politics. You can think what you wish about me being a bad Catholic. I will let God be the judge of me. But I would advise you to refrain from swearing and using God's name in vain, which is a very filthy form of speech. I can't say that no true Catholic would say it, because unfortunately they do all the time. It is extremely offensive to God and to our faith. It scandalizes other people and can cause weaker brothers to falter. Whether a Catholic for life or for a week, we all need to treat Christ with respect by keeping His name sacred.

@@CatholicK5357 And then, as you should be able to understand, as someone who sees the reality of what Father Martin is doing - challenging LGBTQ people to give the Church another chance and for us to behave as Catholics and welcome the sinner (NOT "enable," or "celebrate," or or or) Your apology is not necessary; I do not judge people. I challenge political Catholics, on both sides. And given your comments about Trent and Father Martin, your apology is without credibility. There is a very small number of Catholics who deal with LGBTQ issues and who "love" Trent Horn. I know a large number of LGBTQ people due to several factors in my life, and I have never met one who had a positive view of the Church. And I've lived all over the States. There is a reason for that reality. There is a particularly sad arrogance and hypocrisy about comments that include things like "...it is because of my love for him that concerns me..." You are not clear about what Father Martin said that "almost lost you;" however, I suspect that it was a combination of factors including a misreading of his comments, that put you in that frame of mind. Of course you find no clarity in his statements. You're looking for a black and white answer where there is none, and that makes you particularly susceptible to Trent Horn's hypocrisy. I would suggest that you go back to that bit about "gay couples kissing in the Church," and consider how and why you feel that it's a sin for two men to kiss as a sign of the peace. People like Trent teach you to think that it's ambiguous. He's playing on your anxiety about your sexual orientation. You should not let him do that. Christ meets us where we are and accompanies us on our journey through life. We all have crosses to bear, and one of them is the idea that who you are is a sin. I don't know you and I don't know why you have an issue with sexual orientation, but I don't believe that you are a sin. I have a serious problem, though, with public Catholics who preach dishonestly, and Trent Horn preaches dishonestly. You buy into that "slippery" filth from Trent, and that's the start of your political slant, Keith. True Catholicism is directly in the middle and does not include making up idiot questions about a priest with an impossible public vocation. It does not include claims about the "LGBTQ agenda," and it does NOT include the kinds of filth that Trent Horn writes about pro-choice people. I would strongly advise you in the name of Christ Almighty to get the hell over that freaking nonsense about "swearing," and while you're at it, realize that you do not know the mind of God. You don't have to like my language, but you should realize that for a great number of people (and as far as I'm concerned, likely for God), there is nothing as filthy as the rhetoric coming from people like those at Catholic Answers. You clearly have the right-wing-nut Catholicism down and you've taken it to heart. Now get with the Jesuits and own the reality, which is that Catholicism has as much to do with Father Martin and his approach as it has to do with Trent Horn and his fucking dishonesty.

Agreed!

I remember reading about that. Horrible situation on the part of the government, especially in a country that is still mostly nominally Catholic…

Good question

He’s a Jesuit.

@William Newell 😂

keep them in your daily rosary

Maybe it's time to start looking for a new parish

I would have a go at him about that.

You need to confront your priest, dude. Do it from love, not hate, but confront him.

Find another parish! STAT

@@HAHA-rm3ii no, running from it is selfish and doesn’t do anything to help the church. He must confront the priest. I surely hope you do not also run away like a coward when faced with adversity.

I could not have put it better myself. Also, I hope you're doing well my friend.

He's not a diocesan priest, there's not much the Bishops can do about him. It would be up to his Order (Society of Jesus) to correct him.

He’s a Jesuit so he doesn’t answer to a bishop

@@folofus4815 thanks.

Well, to start with, there is probably at least a one and three chance is bishop is gay and sexually active, according to researchers into such things.

@@folofus4815 He still needs the permission of the bishop of the territory out of which he operates. Religious orders serve in an area at the pleasure of the bishop, who could kick them out at any time.

@@BrentKalar Father James Martin is obviously gay himself.

Amen

martin never talks about repentance and Jesus ministry was and is calling us to repent..

He's not silly. He's giving scandal to the faithful. A serious sin.

Because the Enemy has been controlling certain elements within the Church, especially the Society to which Fr. Martin belongs.

Unless you don't hold a certain axiom on morality and therefore narrative, all analogies breakdown. You need to have conviction, i suspect father martin is aware of this and does have conviction but is it to the catholic church? I am not convinced

Yeah, it skipped my mind. I would say that divorce and remarriage still constitute a somewhat private sin because for all we know the previous marriage was annulled and the divorce was confessed.

@@TheCounselofTrent I appreciate you replying to my comment. Most people don't. Unfortunately, your opponent will argue that the benefit of the doubt will be applied unfairly against gay couples, if at all. Let's say your son was in Catholic school and you saw his male teacher holding hands with his openly gay "roommate" at a school function. With your logic, it would be unfair to assume that their relationship was more than just a close friendship. If they did fall into temptation, we would simply give the teacher the benefit of the doubt and say they must confess any personal falling into sin to a priest. Guys live together all the time, right? But a straight man that marries a woman half his age a couple weeks after divorcing his wife? Oh, she was pregnant at the time? Oh, he forgot to invite me to his second wedding? Oh, weird. Must have slipped his mind. He probably got the first one annulled. Nothing to see to see here. Steelman it. First, scandals usually come from merely the appearance of impropriety, not from the truth. That's why it would be wrong for a priest to have dinner alone with another man's wife. It might be totally innocent, but it'll cause problems for the faithful. That's largely what 1 Cor 8:7-13 is about. St. Paul teaches that it's totally legal to eat meat sacrificed to idols because food is good and there is only one God, but it CAN be a sin if someone with less knowledge or a weaker conscience is mistakenly led into sin by the example. Second, marriages in the church are by design events in front of witnesses. The public vows mean something, particularly to the community involved. That's why, if people cared, it could be MORE scandalous than a gay man that's just in the closet. Because the faithful was involved in the celebration, and there are often children involved. Maybe they're in the classroom where the scandal comes to light. Again, good video. :) Fr. Martin is, at best, being disingenuous. But I think his argument is stronger than you're claiming it is. Thanks again for addressing it. You're a smart dude and have helped me in my own Catholic formation. Keep up the good work.

Father Mike is a better choice in any topic.