Why Protestant Criticism of Pope Francis Backfires 

Very nice! Nice job debating him!

Did not expect to see the Shamounian in this comments section, what a pleasant surprise

Many Protestant's appear to have a vendetta against the Catholic Church.

I look forward to your video investigating the Biblical defense of Pergatory. I hope it's soon

@Christ_saves938 Thanks... it seems so silly looking back on it but they were the first group I fell in with once I became a believer. I remember doing research and the NIV translators admit to removing the word jehovah from their Bible because they knew it wouldn't sell. To paraphrase one of the men in charge: "if it says jehovah is my shepherd I shall not want it won't sell a copy" that was when I decided to take them serious. James White focused on the changes the JWs made to scrilture to fit their theology and I saw the hypocrisy. It wasn't easy to leave them, they were tracking me down, emailing, calling, all after I told them please no more correspondence. I brought up several issues I had learned about and they were unwilling to address any of them. They said there's a level of wisdom one must attain before they can understand why these changes were made. Anyway I still talk to them today and still use the same 3 passages that stumped them before. Calvinism was tougher because they have a pretty decent systematic theology... they're very good at highlighting and extrapolating from single Bible verses. Even better at hiding contradictory Bible verses, mental gymnastics, and much much stronger biblical foundation. Still it has its holes and much of the last decade I spent trying to understand it. Studied the reformers, followed James white and Doug Wilson.

@@_ready__ How does it cloak truth

@_ready__ Well 10 years of confusion from the calvinists and 100% clarity with Catholics. I'm reading and learning from scripture like never before. For example... I'd read unless you are born of water and spirit you cannot enter the kingdom. Obviously baptism but my calvinist theology wouldn't let me see it. I would say I don't know what that means but it can't be baptism. I would read baptism now saves you and think no it doesn't. Only faith in christ.... I would read we are saved by works and not by faith alone and think that can't be right. It got to a point where I started to passively ignore Bible passages like that. Protestant apologetics is almost like a training program for interpretation and omission of scripture rather than subject to it. When scripture is plainly saying something and you're disagreeing with it because of your theology then you aren't really following sola scriptura. In fact I would go as far to say protestantism is the art of bending scripture to their theology.

@_ready__ Funny how protestants cant deal with the arguments so they try and attack your character. Sad how you use the Bible to try to do that... Catholics attack the man made prot doctrines not the protestants themselves. I've never accused a protestant of not having a relationship with christ, never told one they're going to hell, never accused them of lying on purpose. The theologies are simply scripture filters, highlighting some scripture and hiding others. Catholics do not operate on sola scriptura and neither do protestants... its whatever man made tradition you follow. The reformation happened 500 years ago... doctrines like sola fide, sola scriptura, editing out the deuterocanon, premillenial dispensationalism, Mormons, jws, 7DAs, messianic jews, oneness pentacostals, and a flurry of anything goes versions of Christianity happened in a blast of a couple hundred years. Martin Luther wanted every man to be his own pope and to this day there's millions of people who say their theology is fine to ignore scripture and dismiss it, contradict it, twist it, and use it to make people think they ALL know what the NT says better than the church that produced it. Let me ask you a question, which man made tradition/denomination do you hold to?

The Grace of God has a sense of humour! You surely proved that as well! Isn’t it amazing how the Holy Spirit tempers the Waters of Salvation!

As a Protestant, James White embodies every criticism I have of Protestantism

What could he do in order to make you more likely to become Catholic?

James White basically lit the canon that shot me into Catholicism 😂😂😂 i hung on to his apologetics for soo long trying to convince myself he was right but ultimately realized he fabricates history & is so malignant in his approach he pushes a lot of people away. It’s really sad. I couldn’t hang on to Jame’s false version of Christianity any longer.

@@sophiabergner7191 No joke. I'm still protestant atm but his sola scriptura debate with Patrick Madrid completely uprooted my worldview on scripture and has since left me in religious limbo

@@sivad1025 i highly recommend just taking time off of his channel and pray for God to increase a hunger in your heart for wherever his church truly is. For me it was the Eucharist mostly. I jumped from baptist, to Anglican, to Lutheran churches and always felt like I was spiritually deprived of something deeper. I couldn’t deal with the spiritual musical chairs of Protestant denominations any more. I needed a set of doctrine that was uniform and unchanging. The only church that has this is the Catholic Church. & now when i have angst or questions, I know with complete certainty where I’ll find the answers. And the 20 Catholic Churches in my town would say those same answers. Christ prayed for unity in his church. The fruit of 10,000 denominations of Protestantism is the opposite of this. For me, the “bad pope” argument was the least convincing. There are plenty of atrocious Protestant scandals as well yet we don’t hear about it because it’s not in such a large view like the pope is. We don’t see magazines and blogs posting headlines about James White’s lack of charity. Satan attacks the RCC more than any other denomination in the world. I wonder why? - because it’s the church Christ founded & he knows it. Grace and peace to you friend.

Hey! yay! You are back!

White is always criticizing the Catholic Church like if he always says perfect things. As much as he researches the Catholic Church it’s unreal how he hasn’t converted. Probably doesn’t convert because of pride. He knows the TRUTH but he will never admit he’s wrong.

Bae? You realize that is still the same amount of syllables as "Babe", right? It doesn't sound better. Just in case you thought it did. You're welcome.

@@chivalrousjackIs this a satirical comment?

@@RomingAroundTown Use your intelligence. Ask yourself.

*had and have

@@frumaatholoid that’s what I meant.

I haven't been a Catholic for very long, but in my studies of my confirmation Saint Ignatius of Loyola, my intuition of him is that he would say that if we do indeed have dirtbag clergy then the reason is because we are dirtbag Christians. They shoulder a ton of spiritual responsibility, and it's our job to assist in any way possible

@@wayned803 you may be right. I wouldn’t say they are dirtbags but it seems that they have forgotten to follow the catechism. But you are right. No one is perfect…

@@RGTomoenage11 one utterly amazing thing I've noticed about the Catholic Church --and I can't stress this enough, and it's actually one of the causes of my conversion --is even when She's "wrong" She's still somehow even more right. Ie, If clergy ever speak in some kind of error, this causes a reaction from laity or other clergy to correct the problem all while maintaining unity (notice that within Protestantism, whenever a single controversial statement is made, five new denominations spring up as a result)

Well said. If more us began to work for positive change within our sphere of influence instead of trying to worry what the Pope is doing. The Church would be in a much better state.

That's a very good point. I really don't think about the pope very much until I see something he has said or done that is turned into a negative news cycle for the church.

It's also perfectly possible for people of a higher station and understanding to mislead and bear the culpability for those in their flock. James White, and most low church protestants, seemingly just doesn't believe in those verses straight out of the Bible at all even though he misled people on something that made it dubious whether he was even Christian for years in his tritheism

You are required to give submission of mind and will, though not faith, to everything the pope teaches. This includes fallible teachings of his ordinary magisterium.

I agree. Trent's last comments about the risk of apostasy if we identify manifest scandalous or erroneous pronouncements from Francis is too ultramontane for my tastes. It's simple: unless speaking definitively on a matter of Divine Faith or morals, everything uttered by the Pope (or bishop or priest) must simply be weighed against the Magisterium. The Pope is a mere vessel to hand the riches of the Magisterium from his predecessor to his successor, not to be deviating from established doctrine (e.g., capital punishment). Overall Trent is right, a fawning missive to a group of likely dissenters is imprudent, probably evil, but does not affect the legitimate status of the teaching authority of the Vicar of Christ.

It could be you!

Do you know which video that is? I’d like to listen to it if I can

@@thenazarenecatholic I can’t properly cite it. It was from a few years ago. Sorry.

@@user-uc1yb7hy2n that's alright!

Rekindling the Reformation (youtube)

White’s snarky comments and snide attitude are the absolute opposite of the winsome and gracious words and attitudes of the Catholics (and Orthodox) I spoke to during my movement away from Reformed Calvinism. I was stunned when both Catholic and Orthodox priests I consulted with all said, “Slow down, take it easy. We’re the Catholic (Orthodox) Church. We’ve been around for 2000 years. We’re not going anywhere.” That attitude just made me want to be part of those traditions even more. I have now been Catholic for just under three months.

@@wjtruax James White is the type of person who even if I agreed with him on everything I wouldn't be able to stand being in a room with him. Pretty much all of the personality traits I find abrasive and undesirable.

@@watariovids1645 my father loves to say, “No one is worthless. At the very least, everyone can be a bad example.” But I feel very sorry for James White, because if the Lord is gracious and White’s ignorance does not prove invincible, the abject humiliation he would have to subject himself to in order to be reconciled to the Catholic Church would be almost unfathomable.

James White is a perfect example of the idea that Protestantism is for folks who wish to treat Scripture as a legal textbook and the cross as a loophole for a pardon. Catholicism, however, is for those who look to the cross as a source of grace to legitimately heal their fallen nature

@@wjtruax Very cool. I have never understood why Calvinists even bother when they are supposedly determinists. It is questionable the degree to which they internalize their nominal beliefs, but it is a more logical way out of certain problems of authority/interpretation, and it explains their behavior since it's an anti-intellectual easy out when you can disregard reason and just say your opponent is just a reprobate and you have the true interpretation. They also disregard causality because while other protestant denominations could get away with the efficient means of their coming to certain knowledge being tradition, even if they don't like using that word, Calvinists seem to act like that doesn't actually matter at all as if the efficient means of the faith being communicated through their family, congregation, theologians down the line, etc, is just an illusion of them being called and having perspicuity in sola scriptura.

Not at all. The second clause is actually fallacious. Because an atheist would never recognize the divine origins of the Bible. So that is not a part of the argument. And... who says the papacy isn't divine in origin? You? Protestants? In that case, who's to say the Church itself is divine in its origin? You really applied some messed up logic right there.

If you're interested in joining a community to ask more questions about Catholicism, I recommend checking out crossthetiber.org

@@ProtestantKing7James white is one of the stupidest Protestants out there and that’s saying something

@@bersules8 Encyclical Redemptoris Missio, salvation is accessible in mysterious ways, inasmuch as divine grace is granted to them by virtue of Christ's redeeming sacrifice, without external membership in the Church, but nonetheless always in relation to her (cf. RM 10). It is a mysterious relationship. It is mysterious for those who receive the grace, because they do not know the Church and sometimes even outwardly reject her. It is also mysterious in itself, because it is linked to the saving mystery of grace, which includes an essential reference to the Church the Savior founded. In order to take effect, saving grace requires acceptance, cooperation, a yes to the divine gift. This acceptance is, at least implicitly, oriented to Christ and the Church. Thus it can also be said that sine ecclesia nulla salus - - "without the Church there is no salvation." Belonging to the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, however implicitly and indeed mysteriously, is an essential condition for salvation.

@@ProtestantKing7 Encyclical Redemptoris Missio, salvation is accessible in mysterious ways, inasmuch as divine grace is granted to them by virtue of Christ's redeeming sacrifice, without external membership in the Church, but nonetheless always in relation to her (cf. RM 10). It is a mysterious relationship. It is mysterious for those who receive the grace, because they do not know the Church and sometimes even outwardly reject her. It is also mysterious in itself, because it is linked to the saving mystery of grace, which includes an essential reference to the Church the Savior founded. In order to take effect, saving grace requires acceptance, cooperation, a yes to the divine gift. This acceptance is, at least implicitly, oriented to Christ and the Church. Thus it can also be said that sine ecclesia nulla salus - - "without the Church there is no salvation." Belonging to the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, however implicitly and indeed mysteriously, is an essential condition for salvation.

Study Catholicism and you'll find proper reasons to join the Catholic Church. James White's arguments and antics shouldn't be the cause of your convertion.

Stick to crime fighting: LOL 😆

@@davidjanbaz7728 Heresy is a crime against God. And protestantism is heretical. So...

@@batmaninc2793Pope JhonPaul 2 Encyclical Redemptoris Missio, salvation is accessible in mysterious ways, inasmuch as divine grace is granted to them by virtue of Christ's redeeming sacrifice, without external membership in the Church, but nonetheless always in relation to her (cf. RM 10). It is a mysterious relationship. It is mysterious for those who receive the grace, because they do not know the Church and sometimes even outwardly reject her. It is also mysterious in itself, because it is linked to the saving mystery of grace, which includes an essential reference to the Church the Savior founded. In order to take effect, saving grace requires acceptance, cooperation, a yes to the divine gift. This acceptance is, at least implicitly, oriented to Christ and the Church. Thus it can also be said that sine ecclesia nulla salus - - "without the Church there is no salvation." Belonging to the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, however implicitly and indeed mysteriously, is an essential condition for salvation.

Blind hatred and ridicule is always the best sign that you are right.

@@EmberBright2077 That is how protestantism started. Like a bunch of SJW commies mad about Orange Man. After all, protestant Christianity *is* just liberal Christianity. You wouldn't know blind hatred and ridicule if you produced, "Sound of Freedom". Christ built His Church upon St Peter (St. Matthew 16:18), no one and nothing else.

He's insufferable and a "miracle" in and of itself that anyone can sit through any of his talks

Was thinking the same thing

Jamal Muhammad White is insufferable. But like you said, at least God can use his false doctrine to bring ppl to the fullness of the truth and the One True Church of Christ to his own shame and humiliation.

@@chad_hominem Do you think James White is a follower of Christ?

Ecumenism has been proceeding as planned, unfolding in real time.

Needs prayers for sure. Can't respect anyone who is inept at there job.

​@@ProtestantKing7Francis stated PUBLICLY: "I am NOT the Vicar of Christ." So that means that I (a Catholic) am NOT obliged to follow him. Jesus is my Lord --- I Trust in Him ONLY. ❤

@@danielasaro8762 that's the most moronic thing to say Pope Francis is our Pope.....to not respect him is to not respect the Roman Catholic Church You seriously need to read your catechism so you don't say ignorant moronic things.

@@danielasaro8762it’s your opinion that he is inept, though. He leads a global church. It’s a lot more likely that he is tackling problems the scope of which we can’t see from our limited perspectives. It’s best to be humble in times like these, and trust God is doing exactly what he intends to do with our Pope and our church. If He wanted you to be Pope instead, you would be.

No earthly representative of Christ who pits Pachamama, a pagan idol in the Vatican to worship deserves any respect. WAKE UP

Well I'm sorry to hear that. I pray that you and your loved ones are abundantly blessed this year and that God will lead you away from Rome and into all truth.

I am a confessional Lutheran who finds Cooper to be arrogant and condescending. I have no idea why we have raised him up to be our spokesman online. Well, maybe I do. Sadly, most of the confessional Lutheran pastors and theologians who have a public platform and following are exactly the same way. That's probably why I watch Trent, Matt Fradd, etc.

@@deannajunkin3696I’ve always loved cooper even as someone who isn’t a Lutheran, and though he can seem arrogant at times I’ve always found him to be very nice to listen to on certain things

This analogy is awesome!

What an amazing analogy! You should find a publisher for this!

@@jeandoten1510 thank you, both of you. I was kinda surprised to see this comment liked by many people, because I wasn't sure if civilians would get how "fussy" the Marines are about dress uniforms, what a "sacred privilege" it is to wear them, and the general military wisdom that "if a serviceman has a pristine & immaculately maintained uniform, chances are he's great at his job"

I'm stealing your citation for a response to another comment. -Kyle

He seems like a nice guy but what if the next pope is a fire and brimstone reactionary, infallible of course . Where's the consistency.

Sex Scandal EXPOSURE that started 25 years ago ? You’d think the church would have adequately addressed sexuality and reformed by now. NOPE.

There is no institution in the world that is sinless. All humans are sinners, and to deny this is simply a lie. Jesus chose Judas as one of the 12. Also, read the OT & notice the leaders that are corrupt. I take it you didn't listen to this podcast.

Servant leadership isn't easy. What I see is a servant of Christ who is making every attempt to unify and include everyone. I happen to have worked closely with members of the Ark Community. What impresses me is that many protestants see the value of being unified to the Catholic Church, however, I see many Catholics on RU-vid objecting to this unified approach. It is really sad that we don't care for the great commission instituted by Jesus, rather ,we focus on what Pope Francis is misquoted on. Why?

Your attitude will not be dangerous only if you always try to interpret Pope Francis' words and actions honestly. I've noticed there is a great number of people who cry heresy any time the Pope speaks, even when he says something perfectly coherent with Catholic orthodoxy.

Why can’t some of those dogmatic Anathemas from Council of Trent by applied to Pope Francis ? Legitimate Question

There are 151 Anathemas, so ~

Assuming your argument is correct and that you're a Protestant, does the Protestant alternative offer a better alternative? After all, some centuries ago, the Calvinists, Lutherans, and Anglicans were issuing anathemas to the Anabaptists and today, those anathemas have disappeared because of "biblical" arguments. In other words, even Protestants can't decide what is "biblical" or even that it is reliable. How sure are Protestants that maybe William Whitaker, Martin Luther, or John Calvin's condemnations of the Anabaptists and Baptists today were perhaps correct? Another point is on the sin of schism. Most of the early Church Christians taught that schism was a sin. That changed after the Protestant Reformation. All of a sudden, the sin of schism disappeared. Keep in mind that many Churches that claim apostolic succession believe that schism is wrong and sinful. What is the Protestant response? Well, James White says that the early Christians were "wrong" on this topic and Gavin Ortlund tries to interpret the early Christians as meaning something different. If Protestants can blunder like this, what exactly is "Biblical"? Well, in your own words, being Biblical is "arbitrary, ad hoc, useless stupidity."

Generally I think Lutherans use this as defense against Catholics saying we've fallen into liberalism.

The problem is not always the Pope, though. Many Catholics have joined the tribal mindset of our times, and call the Pope a heretic even in those (non frequent) occasions when he defends Catholic teachings properly.

Don't worry, elementary school teachers are busy spreading their beliefs to your children.

Rely on God and not men. Evil is becoming so transparent these days that I am confounded why some bishops can't see it. The Bible is pretty clear on most of it, and many modern problems are just rehashing old problems that we have sound teaching on. We can pray to God directly for guidance in our daily lives where it isn't clear and trust Him.

@@Marontyne Right, but God has always used fallible men to carry out his mission. Look at all the Old Testament leaders, they were flawed... some to great extent. We can rely on God and also rely on the people God has given us.

You have a Bible, read it. There are many resources online & in history books. Take notes as you read; they may answer a previous question or pose a new one. Be diligent, & able to back up your findings. Read The Apostles and Church Fathers to give a fuller view… I, personally, do not listen too hard to spiteful, mean-spirited “pastors or teachers.” God’s assistants on Earth should reflect His character to the very best of their abilities. That Mr White, raining down hellfire and brimstone are harmful to all. I did a term paper on “The Golden Rule;” how it is worded and applicable in various churches, religions and philosophies. I earned an A+ on it…

Hopefully in your local bishops, but even if that isn't the case, we still have the saints and our Lord Jesus Christ's words in Sacred Scripture.

As a Protestant, I appreciate you.

As a Lutheran I pray the same. God Bless

@ThoskaBrah he isn't saying “I James White don't believe the Mass is a sacrifice”, that would not be either relevant or worth saying, his point appears to be more subtle, that because the participants in this conference are allegedly heretics, there is no way Catholics can believe they can offer a valid Mass, but James White had yo know this is wrong and that we believe in ex opera operato

In both North & South America both Catholicism + Protestantism is in decline. IN THE USA it’s now 47% Protestants, 21% Catholics. Ratio 1:6. For each new/renewed Catholic, 6 Catholics exit.

But is it genuine confidence if it's inevitably accompanied with sarcasm and loathing?

Lol

He is a very smarmy speaker. Difficult to listen to.

How can you be a Catholic and say, "Oh yeah, the Magisterium gets it?"

@@brutus896 the current members, or for the whole 2,000 years?

@danvankouwenberg7234 Both. Although it doesn't date back 2000 years

Mediocre? The guy is a scoundrel. A wolf in sheep's clothing. It is not about communication. He knows how to communicate heresy and apostasy in an ambiguous way so, when people complain, he plays the innocent guy. He is excellent at gaslighting. He takes advantage of the fact that we Catholics don't like to criticize the Pope.

@@derechoplanoHow ridiculous. You’re clearly not even trying to give our Holy Father the judgement of Charity. Sounds like something Luther himself would say. “We Catholics” treat our Pope with more respect than that. Shameful.

​​@@DudeNamedDuncan So one guy on RU-vid writes that Catholics don't like to criticise the Pope, and you accept that claim as absolute truth? Catholics have always been critical of their popes, we know very well that errors must be stigmatised, even when coming from the Bishop of Rome. Of course there are also people who always excuse the Pope, but that's against the teachings of the Catholic Church.

@@DudeNamedDuncan Nonsense? So you know for sure he is what is prophesied, and your with all these words are not showing pride? We cannot have great popes without having bad popes. Pope Francis is a horrible communicator and horrible leader. That doesn’t make him an ape. Early on I got the impression that he is ignorant of what is going on in the US. That ignorance carries on to things like praising Father Martin. The difference is, Pope Francis doesn’t speak like Father Martin. Pope Francis specifically calls our homosexual acts and transgender actions as sinful and quotes the catechism whereas Father Martin will say, “well, what about an adulterer?” Facts lead to the theory being proven. The theory someone wants to be true doesn’t lead to facts. Pope Francis has condemned these sins. He has equated abortion with climate change. His same words are easily used by all sides that hate Catholicism against us. Early on the left and right were twisting his words to their own ends and ignoring other words he has said. Who out there knows he linked abortion with climate change? Be careful how you judge the holy father. Like it or not, he is who the holy spirit gave the keys to the kingdom when our previous pope resigned. There are advantages to having a bad pope. We then talk about these things. That is good. He isn’t speaking ex cathedra. He himself can error. Don’t make Pope Francis something he isn’t. That is for history and the church to decide, not us. Jesus is our king and unfortunately He made Pope Francis his steward. Regardless, we must hold a basic respect for him and trust God that it will all work out. The Bible says it, nothing is new under the sun.

​​@@paulmualdeave5063ou're right, Francis is not an ape. That would be an insult to apes....he's a Jesuit!

@@Christ_saves938 Bingo. A preacher of scripture has to speak with gentleness and respect, yet without fear or feelings of intimidation (1 Peter 3:13-17). White looks like he'd hit someone.

Not trying to be hostile, but "the other guy yelled a lot" is not an argument.

@@Wilkins325 I’m not arguing for anything I’m just sharing a personal conviction based on the spirit of the discussion.

I've said, mostly to myself, j.w is in the wrong religion. Note his beard sans stache. Submission to God. Islam.

So is Gavin Ortlund a proof of Trent's falsehood? Surely the tone of a single pastor doesn't prove diddly about what an ecumenical council says.

Granted that Pope Francis hasn't been a good pope, isn't today a fantastic time to be Catholics? Faith is tested and thrives the most in times of hardship.

@@djo-dji6018 good point!

It's the bishop's responsibility to uphold orthodoxy in their diocese, you're looking at things in the wrong light. Has this pope prevented or in some other way made harder the job of the US bishops to do their work properly? No. He's the bishop of Rome, and as a roman I see the papal office to be very very careful in evaluating what goes on here. Yes, he alse has to offer guidance to the church as a whole, and he IS doing that by the tremendous and extraordinary efforts in providing for the flock in poor and war torn areas of the World, and in deescalating the Ukrain war.

That's fair and I say in the video he can be criticized for allowing himself to be in such a situation

You're free to believe Francis is a bad pope. We've had terrible popes in the past, we will have more in the future. But just because one agrees that the pope is the head of the Church it doesn't mean he or she justifies bad leadership.

We've had bad leadership in the Church since the beginning and by the grace of the Holy Spirit the Church has survived while under serious trials. It will continue to do so. This is the Pope that God wants us to have right now, it's in God's providence. Perhaps it would be good to investigate the stuff he is doing like his works on Mercy and relationship building with the Orthodox instead of focusing on his perceived failures. We either trust the promises of God or not.

@@TheCounselofTrentyes and it’s not the only stumbling block to conversion. The biggest I think in the end is conviction of sin.

So you're going to stop helping the blind because of Fr Martin? Yeah....... that's so christian like of you.

And you're taking that scripture out of context...... Just because the people are blind and you think Fr Martin is blind.........that scripture doesn't mean the blind leads actually blind people That scripture means that a leader who doesn't believe is leading others who do not believe. Nobody is actually blind. You need bible study classes

@@user-fb2jb3gz1dThank you for your comment. I intended the verse in the following sense: 1. I consider Fr. James Martin's writings to be casuistry, i.e., carefully worded to mislead his readers about Catholic teaching and permeated by a fixation on lifestyles contrary to Catholic teaching. 2. One is known by the company they keep and Fr. Martin's recent appearance at Fordham this month with groups that want to change Catholic moral teaching like Dignity USA reveals his true colors. Or is Fr. Martin spiritually blind about Dignity USA's intentions? I think not. 2. For the Xavier Society For The Blind to translate Fr. James Martin's works into braille, I consider that to be an abuse of those with an unfortunate disability who the society is supposed to serve. 3. In this respect, I consider the society has betrayed their purpose, therefore the quoting of this verse is even more of a denunciation than what Jesus meant. 4. My comment was (A) specifically intended to underline the gravity of abusing those innocently less fortunate and (B) to provide one more example of how this Pride movement (that Fr. Martin wants to have formally celebrated in Catholic churches), based entirely on the demonic exaltation of sexual activity devoid of natural procreative content within marriage, has insidiously permeated our entire culture. 5. One thousand years ago the Catholic Church was in the throes of a similar cultural phenomenon. St. Peter Damian composed his Liber Gomorrhianus, c. 1051 AD to address these vices during the reforms of Pope Gregory VII. Damian was a Benedictine monk who became a bishop, and then a cardinal of the church. In 1823 he was declared a Doctor of the Catholic Church by Pope Leo XII. I recommend his Liber Gomorrhianus to anyone as an antidote to what is presently happening. Why, I even recommend that the Xavier Society For The Blind translate into braille St. Peter Damian's Liber Gomorrhianus! 6. As long as I am able, I plan to always be studying the Bible, as well receiving its wisdom in the Liturgy, God willing. 7. The peace of Christ be with you.

@@user-fb2jb3gz1d Please see my reply to your other comment.

“There are Forces, right now, in The Vatican that DON’T Want The Gospel. They want to change it. They want to ignore it.” Bishop Joseph Strickland

@@getrit3007 "For ALL THE LAW is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." (Galatian 5:14) As christians, we are obligated to fulfill Christ's law. The Catholic Church DOES NOT teach, that we are bound to follow the Law of Moses. You are making a strawman argument. Yes, the law held us accountable for our sins, and the law could not justify us: "If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema." (Council of Trent, session 6, canon 1) This is precise Catholic teaching! You have been gravely deceived and now you are continuing to spread lies about the Holy Faith. But grace doesn't in any way exclude the necessity of repenting of sin: "That the RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE LAW MIGHT BE FULFILLED IN US, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live." (Romans 8: 4-8; 12-13) Protestants say we are justified by faith alone. What does the Bible say? "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." (James 2:24) Protestantism is heresy and is indeed unbiblical.

​@@getrit3007They don't. Your first question is false. The rest can be discarded.

​@@getrit3007 The 10 Commandments are the moral law, not the Jewish Ceremonial Law. Christ abolished the Ceremonial Law and in fact strengthened the moral law. You are gravely misreading Paul.

We WERE warned --- read your Bible 👍

@@beebee9803 I knew that, sarcasm doesn't translate well on the internet

I’ve heard that about James White, but Jordan Cooper?

@@samueljennings4809 well, it’s more towards Leighton Flowers regarding Cooper. But yeah, as for White I just said “Calvinists tend to use semi-Pelagian for non Calvinists a lot” and next thing I know I’m being called a clown shoes by one of his fans. I didn’t even respond to them.

​@fighterxaos1 to be fair to us Dr. Cooper fans, Flowers has been lying about Lutherans and what we believe for a long time.

​@@samueljennings4809well it's simply not true. Dr. Cooper is a confessional Lutheran and unlike White a real Theologian, Studied Theology and went to Seminary. I'm a regular viewer on Dr. Cooper's youtube channel and it is usually very civilized there. There is no mindless bashing. Putting those two in the same category is plain wrong. Even as a non-Lutheran there are many insights on Cooper's channel e.g. defending infant baptism, liturgical service, opposing charismatic heresies etc.

@@Dilley_G45 Yeah, any Catholic lumping a confessional/historical Protestant (Lutheran) like Dr. Cooper in with your run-of-the-mill, low church, contemporary American Evangelical is being disingenuous at best, ignorant at worst.

Yes, he did have issues, but the difference is that King David REPENTED!

@@brutus896 Every sinner has a future and every saint had a past. Repentance doesn't have an expiry date except bodily death itself, and last time I checked the Pope still breathes on Earth. Cheers.

@alonso19989 Yes, the pope is still breathing because Jesus is long-suffering that we come to repentance. But he Pope's future is not that bright. Repentance for him means to renounce catholicism, and he won't do that. He has received his reward.

@@brutus896 Why would leaving the One True Church save you? If anything that would damn him. God bless.

@@alonsoACR Because the "one true church" is not the true church. It is full of false doctrines and blasphemy against Jesus.

👆 I think lots of Protestants are just tired including (or perhaps especially) Evangelicalists. There’s really nothing more to say. It IS true that Pope Francis has some popularity with some specific groups.

Actually, that is NOT the main reason why the Catholic Church opposes Sola scriptura The main reason is the fact that the Bible itself never said that Christians should adhere to ONLY what is explicitly written in the Bible.

@@jerome2642 sola Scriptura does not need to be in the Bible in order for it to be true. If there is a good reason to believe the Bible is infallible and something other than the Bible contradicts the Bible, you know that the other thing cannot be infallible. But sola Scriptura is biblical. Ephesians 2:19-20 claims that the Church is built upon apostles and prophets, with Christ Himself as the cornerstone. Therefore, the fundament of the Protestant Church is indeed the apostles and prophets, with Jesus Christ as cornerstone. Only if they would add another fundament themselves, we should add that fundament as well. And Scripture also directly says Scripture is able to make us wise for salvation (through faith in Jesus Christ); Scripture should be used for rebuking and correcting; with Scripture we are equipped by God, completely equipped for every good work; and the Word of God is clear. With that we have every doctrine necessary for sola Scriptura. The Protestant faith is based only on that which is revealed by God. The Roman and eastern Church claim that the Church itself is the fundament who gave authority to the preaching of the apostles. That directly contradicts the Bible.

@@janbasdegroot2186 Well, admitting that Sola scriptura is NOT in the Bible is essentially the same thing as admitting that Sola scriptura is UNBIBLICAL (Protestants often use the word "unbiblical" to describe any teaching or practice that is NOT written in the Bible) Secondly, Ephesians 2:20 doesn't support Sola scriptura, neither does it say that the church should stick to ONLY what is written in scripture. Yes, it says that the church is built on CHRIST; but it doesn't say that the church is built on SCRIPTURE. It appears you are interpreting the phrase "built upon Christ" to mean the same thing as "adhering to the teachings of Christ". Well, even if it that was the correct interpretation, it still doesn't justify the principle of following ONLY what is written in the Bible because the Bible doesn't contain everything that Jesus taught. (John 21:25) Thirdly, 2 Timothy 3:15 did say that the study of the scriptures is able to give us wisdom; but that is NOT the same thing as saying that the scriptures are the ONLY source of wisdom. Wisdom is a gift that comes FROM GOD (James 1:5), and the scriptures are ONE of the ways by which God gives wisdom but it is not the ONLY way. We know this because great men of faith like Abraham and Noah all had the gift of wisdom even though they NEVER read the scriptures (because the scriptures had NOT YET been written during their lifetime.) Indeed, there is no doubt that the man of God is INCOMPLETE without the scriptures (which is why Paul says that the man of God needs the scriptures in order to be COMPLETE for the performance of every good work - 2 Timothy 3:17). But to say that I need to have something in order to be COMPLETE is not the same thing as saying that it is the ONLY thing that I need to have. This is obvious even from common sense. For instance, a car needs an engine in order to be COMPLETE (because a car without an engine is incomplete, even if it has all the other parts of a car); but obviously this doesn't mean that a car needs ONLY an engine to function properly, because it also needs other important parts eg tyres, petrol, brake pads, etc

@@jerome2642 Protestantism doesn’t deny that truth can be found outside of the Bible. That means that we can derive knowledge, like sola Scriptura, outside of the Bible. We don’t deny general revelation. Protestantism tells us that every truth that is necessary for salvation and a holy life is found in the Bible, just like 2 Timothy 3:15-17 tells us. Protestantism tells us that the Bible is the only infallible authority. We know the Bible is an infallible authority, because it is the Word of God and God is infallible and authoritative. Unless God declares anything else is infallible and authoritative, we can only assume this to be true for the Bible. Every other statement should be tested, unless we can know it is the Word of God. It is pretty simple: we don’t assume anything to be infallible unless God tells us so. We know God is infallible by His nature and we don’t know that from anyone or anything else. We can know for sure that the pope, the councils and the Church are indeed fallible, since they have made statements that contradict the Word of God. Ephesians 2:20 says that the Church should be built upon the teachings of Christ through His prophets and apostles. So unless something is taught by the prophets and the apostles (who wrote their teachings down in Scripture), it is not fundamental for the Church. Something like the resurrection of Mary or the perpetual virginity of Mary can therefore not be a fundamental doctrine of the Church. The Roman-Catholic gospel is contrary to the teachings of Christ, so that undermines the fundament upon which the Church should be built. I believe Mary was a virgin for her whole life, but just because it is historically probable, not because we can possibly know whether or not the apostles taught it. The Bible is the only thing from which we can know for certain that the apostles and prophets taught it, since it was written by the apostles and prophets themselves. We cannot possibly verify whether or not the apostles taught all the extra doctrines of the Roman-Catholic Church, since they didn’t write them down. The best thing we have is that Ben said that Bob said that Jesus said it, but we don’t know if we can trust Ben and Bob. In most cases, there isn’t even a clear chain of witnesses going back to the apostles for papist doctrines. Therefore we should first have a reason to believe the pope is infallible just like God, before we can trust that what he says must necessarily be true. We know the Bible doesn’t contain every single thing Jesus ever did, but the only infallible summary we have is the Bible. If we can know for certain some extrabiblical action or teaching of Jesus, the apostles or the prophets, it is of course just as authoritative as the Bible. Protestantism doesn’t state that the Scriptures are the only source of wisdom. It states that it is the only infallible source of wisdom that is useful for the Church today. If God would speak to us directly like He did to the prophets, of course it would be just as authoritative as the Scriptures. Even if the prophets and apostles would speak to us directly it would be just as authoritative. But the only way in which the prophets and apostles together with God directly speak to us, is in the Scriptures. That is because there are no apostles and prophets today anymore. Paul doesn’t only say we NEED the Scriptures to be complete for good works, but that we MAY be complete for good works by the Scriptures. Paul doesn’t only say that we NEED the Scriptures to make us wise unto salvation, but that the Scriptures are ABLE to make us wise unto salvation. He doesn’t qualify those statement by adding extra sources we need. The Scriptures are able to make us wise unto salvation, something the Roman-Catholic Church denies by rejecting sola Scriptura and by adding extrabiblical doctrines as necessary beliefs. If I would say that your car may be thoroughly equipped for driving by installing an engine, wouldn’t you feel scammed if you found out the car is still not thoroughly equipped for driving after you paid me to instal the engine? Am I not a scammer if I would say you actually also need to add some other missing parts? Same thing if I would say that by adding a new engine to your car, your car would be able to drive, without qualifying you actually need other new components as well.

@@janbasdegroot2186 once again, you are not being accurate in your scriptural references. 2 Timothy 3:15 did NOT say that EVERY truth necessary for salvation is found IN scripture. It says that WISDOM that leads to salvation can be found IN scripture. What is this "Wisdom" ? What is that scripture tells us to do in order to be saved ? Does scripture tell us that we can be saved by focusing on ONLY the teachings IN scripture and ignoring every other teaching that is NOT found in scripture ? There is nothing about 2 Timothy 3:15 - 17 that suggests Sola scriptura. For instance, Paul said that "ALL scripture is inspired by God" and not "ONLY scripture is inspired by God". Furthermore, he said that scripture is PROFITABLE (or USEFUL) for teaching and correcting error; he didn't say that scripture is SUFFICIENT for teaching and correcting error. The word "sufficient" means "the only thing that is needed". This means that the work of teaching and correcting error can actually take place WITHOUT the Bible. This is because Jesus passed on His teachings to His Apostles WITHOUT writing any of them in a book (He simply SPOKE to them and they LISTENED) . Likewise, in the early days of the church, the Apostles were able to TEACH others the teachings of Christ WITHOUT making use of any "New testament books" as a source of reference (for instance, Acts 2:42 says that shortly after Pentecost day the early Christians devoted themselves to the TEACHINGS of the Apostles, even though we know that NONE of the books of the New testament had been written at that time). Eventually, over time, the Apostles WROTE down their teachings in the books/epistles of the New testament but they did NOT write down EVERYTHING that they taught; they continued to make use of WORD OF MOUTH or ORAL tradition as a means of passing on some of their teachings (see 2 John verse 12 and 3 John verse 12 and 2 Thessalonians 2:15). Why did they do this ? Because they were the leaders of the early Church and they knew that the hierarchy/leadership of the CHURCH of Christ has the primary responsibility of TEACHING the word of God to all members of the church; they didn't agree with the point of view that the primary responsibility of the church was to simply WRITE down ALL its teachings in a book (Bible) and give it to christians to read it for themselves and stop listening to what the hierarchy of the church has to say. Hence, they didn't write down ALL their teachings in the books of the Bible. Besides, Jesus said to them: "TEACH them everything I have commanded you" (Matthew 28:20); He didn't say to them: "WRITE DOWN everything I have commanded you" And so the Apostles themselves realized that the work of TEACHING and PASSING ON the word of God from one generation of christians to the next is the primary responsibility of the CHURCH (i.e its leadership/ hierarchy), not the BIBLE. The Bible is simply ONE of the means by which the church fulfills this responsibility. Unfortunately, over time, Protestants began to say: "We have the Bible in our hands to read for ourselves; we believe that it contains EVERYTHING that was taught by Jesus and the Apostles, and so we DO NOT care about listening to anything that is being taught by any leader of the church" Once again, you have referenced Ephesians 2:20 wrongly because it DID NOT say that the church is built upon the TEACHINGS of Christ and the Apostles; Paul's exact words were "built on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone" (Ephesians 2:20). It is obvious that Paul is describing the STRUCTURE of the church, he is NOT telling us about a book (i.e Bible) that would be the ONLY source of teachings for Christians. Like I said, even if you believe that Ephesians 2:20 is telling us to adhere to ONLY the teachings of Jesus Christ and the Apostles, it still doesn't mean the same thing as adhering to ONLY what is written in the Bible because the Bible isn't the ONLY place where the teachings of Christ and Apostles can be found.

Yet it is booming in other countries. Do the research.

@@sheilazanella1294 so it’s dying in the west ? Thats research

@@sheilazanella1294 you mean Aferica . Middle East and parts of Asia yes Jesus is working without Catholic Church

Wrong. Wishful thinking on your part.

@@sheilazanella1294 I will pray for you to be humble like Jesus.

I'm in your camp. We have no problem saying Popes were bad in the past. I'm calling a spade a spade. Pope Francis is the Pope, but he's doing a terrible job and is definitely responsible for damaging the faith of many. I pray for him that he finds guidance and clarity from whatever ails him.

Archbishop Viganò has been speaking/writing/reporting for years. Maybe he worthy of trust and shouldn’t be discounted.

Writing is on the wall, so to speak. Willful Blindness is dangerous.

Social media can be used for good, but so often gets misused! -Vanessa

Maybe some traditional Catholics. But I would say there are far more Catholics like James White who are trying to change Church teaching. Everything Trent says can be applied to both groups but my sympathy is for the Traditional Catholics who are trying to preserve Gods word, not change it or twist it to their own destruction.

@@joelpenley9791 I’m sure you meant James Martin. The problem with radical traditionalists is their erroneous, even (dare I say) modernist, ecclesiology, where they seem to believe they can accuse the pope of heresy and baldly state that the Holy See has defected from the faith. They always rejected Vatican II, but now they’re being more open about rejecting Vatican I, even if they don’t (yet) put it quite like that. So, I don’t accept that trads are trying to preserve anything except their own private judgement. Sorry, but that’s how I increasingly see it.