Bishop Barron on St. John Henry Newman: Beyond the Left and the Right
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 жов 2019
- As I read the myriad commentaries on St. John Henry Newman before his canonization, I’m particularly struck by how often he is co-opted by the various political parties active in the Church today-and how this co-opting both distorts Newman and actually makes him less interesting and relevant for our time. I should like to show this by drawing attention to two major themes in Newman’s writing-namely, the development of doctrine and the primacy of conscience.
*"To live is to change, and to be perfect is to have changed often."*
- John Henry Newman
"The Divine Perfection, one and invisible, is, in its infinity, the transcendental analogue of all actual and possible finite perfections."
-Thomas Aquinas
Vatican Council: "The Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman Church believes and professes that there is one *living* and true God, Creator and Lord of heaven and earth, omnipotent, eternal, immense, incomprehensible, infinite in intellect and will and in all perfection Who, being One, singular, absolutely simple and *unchangeable* spiritual substance, is to be regarded as distinct really and in essence from the world most blessed in and from Himself, and unspeakably *elevated above all things that exist, or can be conceived,* except Himself."
Wikipedia: "Modern philosophy presents a remarkable gradation, from Pantheism, which finds *God in everything,* to Agnosticism, which declares that He is *beyond the reach* of knowledge."
Me: The observer changes position in relation to a mirror, and wonders if she is looking at the same thing. Hundreds of years of debate later, and all agree that the most slimming angle is the truth.
@@SpiritualFox
TRUTH oftentimes can be many sided, but a mirrored reflection will never get the attribute, *'Truth'*
@@marypinakat8594 It is not something one takes and puts in one's pocket. It can be a person, although that person is almost immediately crucified. It is disputed when it appears. I would say it destroys, in that all fall before it. What if _i am_ the truth? It is as simple as speaking it, and endeavouring to speak it. We have, however, glorified it, raised it, killed it, raised it again, and watched it leave us. It is some exterior thing, surely. Some man about to get himself killed, or at best, some powerful knight on a white horse come to set everything right (It is current year, and thus, a fairytale). I am in favour of me, my vote is for me, and let us never speak of this unspoken truth, again, and bury it next to religion. We don't speak about faith or politics, because these are ingroups of one. Roll a boulder infront of it, to.
'You're this gender, this race,' almost all shout accusingly, with _that gender,_ and _that race_ being oddly silent at such times. How can white Jesus be white? Or male, or about 30? I'm none of these things!
And up skygod goes, taking his place behind whatever cloud you're not looking behind.
Up goes the truth, taking it's place next to the other incomprehensible ideals. And thank God for that. He was about to march into the WWE and call them all actors. Doesn't he know we're all just doing as we're told, and repeating nonsense?
@@SpiritualFox
God is absolute Truth and He alone is that. Yet He has endowed us with gifts so that we can know Him IN TRUTH, love and serve him, consequently be happy with Him eternally.
@@marypinakat8594 I prefer, 'i know Him,' to 'He's unknowable.' Personal Jesus is entirely the point, isn't it?
I have always thought of the development of doctrine is like the science’s understanding of the universe. The whole reality has already been established, only our understanding of it changes.
Charles Henry Ilagan yes! Agreed, that’s pretty much how Newman explains it while also explaining why certain developments happened at certain times.
Wonderfully and succinctly put
It is the Holy Spirit who leads us to all the Truth in the feeble vessel called Catholic Church!
Who gave the world the Bible in 382AD!
I know he is in Heaven, praying for many a convert and people thinking of converting
Thank you Bishop Barron. I’m happy you get to go for St. John Henry Newman’s canonization. Pray for us back here in the states. St. John Newman intercede for us and for my granddaughters. One will be 1 year old on your day! Blessings forever Bishop!
That's AWESOME.
St. John Henry Newman pray for us and mold us into lovers and upholders of the truth. Amen. All glory and thanks be to God.
Clarifying speeches like these are the antidote to rumor & assumption rampant in news & opinion sites.
Catholics should always listen to Mother th Church and not to the media!!! !" Who listenst to you listens to me and the one who sent me"!!!
Bishop Barron, if you haven't visited the Norbertines in Orange County at St. Michael's Abbey, I think you should! I believe they provide a living example of "beyond left and right" in the post-conciliar world. They offer mass in the Ordinary Form so reverently and beautifully that I believe even the most committed EF-attending "trads" would acknowledge its beauty.
It's a beautiful community that is a living image of what the post-conciliar Church COULD look like.
@Albert Schmalbert Both are valid. Don't let choice of rite become an issue in your life. It's not the rite that takes you to heaven.
@Albert Schmalbert I think if you had attended a mass at the Abbey I referred to, your thoughts on the OF would be different. My attendance of the OF is not virtue-signaling that I "accept Vatican II" (it's an ecumenical council and I am Catholic, so of course I "accept" it).
I think we can agree that one thing that is sad is that so many OF masses are NOT offered reverently and that the preaching at many parishes that only offer OF masses often includes either very little of substance or (sometimes) downright questionable or unorthodox teaching. THAT is sad.
For those reasons I wish the Vatican II documents were laid out with more specificity to prevent the sorts of abuses we see so often, and for that reason I may often find myself at an EF parish because it may be the only parish with orthodox teaching in the area. But I have seen post-conciliar OF mass and religious community done in faithfulness to the tradition of the Church - and they are beautiful.
@Albert Schmalbert I'm not going to argue that the OF is "better" than the EF. I don't think there's a point to that debate, or even a right answer. That said, I do think there are masses that are offered with reverence and masses that aren't. And I think the traditionalist community as a whole has done a far better job at preserving reverence in the liturgy than the Church as a whole. I am sure we agree there.
But there are a few issues I have with what I might call an "EF triumphalist" stance. I'll outline two:
-The idea the the liturgy can't/shouldn't change and the idea that the Tridentine mass is the "best" form of the mass are mutually exclusive. The Tridentine mass was certainly not the mass being said by St. Peter, St. Cyrprian, St. Ambrose, etc. The mass developed over time into something beautiful, but it did develop. As the Tridentine mass was developing, someone might well have said "Well why change the mass from the one St. Peter said?" But that's not what happened. I, for one, love the EF, and I am glad that it *developed* from previous forms.
-The other issue I take with "EF triumphalism" is laying all of the problems of the post-conciliar Church at the feet of the new form of the mass. Based on my own experience (again via St. Michael's Abbey), that is simply wrong. The problems with the post-conciliar Church that you lay out are real - but it doesn't necessarily follow that it is the fault of the form of the mass. St. Michael's Abbey seminary is full to bursting. Students who attend their prep school emerge with orthodox Catholic formation. And they attend the OF every day. I thus argue that the form of the mass is not causally linked to the breakdown of orthodoxy. Rather the breakdown of orthodoxy is the cause of the breakdown of reverence at so many OF parishes.
In this agree with Bishop Barron that above all this is a crisis of teaching and orthodoxy (which in my view, though maybe not his, stemmed from a lack of clarity in parts of the council documents), not an indictment of one mass rite or another.
Albert Schmalbert Vocations are at historic lows because back in the day people were forced to join due to lack of career opportunities or they were forced by their families. Nowadays, religious orders take their time before accepting someone to really test if he has a vocation unlike before. I know of 13 year old girls here in the Philippines who would choose to join and they'd live in the convent as postulants. A lot of them left after a few years. That's not possible today. Before V2 people also left the church but they did it secretly since they would be ostracized. Sexual abuses also existed but they were hushed up due to the culture. Don't think it was all roses back then.
Also, if V2 is so evil, and pre-V2 ways are so good, then WHY did the priests and bishops who were nurtured by pre-V2 give us V2? So, to use your argument against you, what did the oh so holy time of pre-V2 give us? Well, it gave us V2!
@Albert Schmalbert I didn't say the development was the same - I said that the Tridentine mass had changed, so the claim that change to the liturgy is not possible/desirable cannot coexist with the claim that any one rite (except the first mass ever said, if we could even know what that was like) is "best."
I'm not going to speculate on the motives of the council fathers... There were, after all, many of them, and humans being humans, I am sure that some had pure motivations and others did not. But given that it was an ecumenical council, I trust that through their various wills I the Holy Spirit was working.
As to "why change," I would refer you to the Introduction and first few sections of Sacrosanctum Concilium, which addresses impetus for the changes at length.
O Jesus and Mary, teach us: Faith, Hope and Love. Ps 1:2, Lk 11:9
“It is our part to seek,
His to grant what we ask;
ours to make a beginning,
His to bring it to completion;
ours to offer what we can,
His to finish what we cannot.”
😇 St Jerome please pray with us
*St John Henry Newman, pray for us.*
(13th October 2019)
+BRB has been tackling more of these topics with regard to the left and right within the Church. Keep talking about it! We need more honest discussion around topics like these.
☆
*St John Henry Cardinal Newman, pray for us.*
John Henry Newman canonized
on 13th October 2019
Thank you to God for the Saints follow your paths and founding your paths. The great big testimony are their example of life.😇😇😇 For everyone of us.
Praise the Lord Jesus Christ 🙏 Mother Mary Pray For Us 🙏Abba Father Bless us and we Adore You 🙏
I’m reposting a comment of mine from a couple videos ago. I believe it’s relevant:
As far as I can see, the polarization of ultra liberals and ultra conservatives in this country and worldwide is similar to what is happening in the church. Jordan Peterson goes into this in great detail. When things go too far in one direction, the other side starts wanting to take things to the extremes. Things went really far left there for awhile in both the church and society, and in many ways continue to do so. What we are seeing with many radical traditionalists is, however, their foaming at the mouth to take things very far to the right. I very much prefer the path Bishop Barron is talking about. If you haven't listened to Jordan Peterson talk about the left and right extremes, please take the time to do so. I believe his work could actually help with our issues in the Church, to the extent that we could take a step back from the chaos and examine what happens when things are polarized too far in a direction, as well as if things really need to be corrected so far in the opposite direction. Obviously, there is more that needs to be understood and argued (rationally). The fact of the matter is, people are very vulnerable to manipulation and making rash decisions, and going too far in either a left or right direction seems to be a really bad idea politically and spiritually. I understand this post is a high-level view of these ideas and does not discuss the details. My point here is to remain at a high level and allow people to dig into details themselves. Check out Jordan Peterson's videos on extreme leftism and ultra conservatism, it's a missing piece to the puzzle for us as Catholics. God Bless you Bishop Barron. And may God bless the rest of you reading this.
Steve McQueen please elaborate!
This division would not be occurring if we simply accepted that Satan is Christ. Jesus Christ is the son of Satan. The "god" of the old testament is an evil entity that hates children.
Steve McQueen do you know what a false dichotomy is? What I was proposing more or less was that we can take a middle path which can allow for discussion of multiple points of view, whereas you are describing a one size fits all crack down of rules which says it’s either this way or nothing at all. Your view point is literally a false dichotomy, in other words.
Also, can we talk about how you responded with your first comment? Do you make it a habit to laugh at people you believe are brain washed? In the words of an atheist philosophy professor I once had, it’s not really a good thing to delight in the ignorance of others. Your comment seems to indicate that you are. First step of evangelizing would probably be to not do that. That comment wasn’t just something that was like a tree bearing bad fruit, it was a tree that instead of producing an apple, produced cow dung. Very unchristlike if you ask me. If you want to sway people to your side because you believe it truly represents the best way to behave and worship before Christ, you didn’t do a swell job with that.
And I’m aware of some Solzhenitsyn, but saying that he would be calling for a far right movement to counteract a far left movement would be a hard sell I think. Both forms of ruling lead to either gulags or concentration camps, history shows this pretty well. The nice thing about freedom of speech and religion, is free will. Things aren’t hunky dory just because you make a law outlawing those things. They incite war, revolution, and therefore famines and all other terrible things, and oddly enough, the rules were probably made in order to avoid those very things! How ironic.
@Steve McQueen You said more than you think. A couple comments up you will notice your "Yay religious freedom" comment. That, of course, says a lot. It means, if I properly read this as sarcasm, that you do not appreciate religious freedom, which probably means you do not appreciate freedom of speech. Usually, people either believe both of those things, or neither. Besides you saying this, human beings are able to infer certain things during a conversation. You noted Solzhenitsyn had a book that was just printed into English. Pray tell, what book are you referring to? Most people that reference his lesser known work usually use him as a reference for supporting their antisemitic tendencies (E Michael Jones fans usually use this knowledge to criticize Jordan Peterson for not bringing up this part of Solzhenitsyn's work). I still say he would not favor a far-right change of government based on the little knowledge I have of Solzhenitsyn, but I digress. Also, Based on my comment being criticized by you, I can probably infer that you are a fan of some type of extreme government or theocracy. Prove me wrong and tell me a little bit more about your opinions if I am so off base lol. I doubt I am. I think I've summed up enough here to show that you gave more of your opinion away than you realize.
It seems pretty accurate so far. Tell me your opinions if I’m so far off. Say something concrete or this is my last comment lol
Bishop Barron,
I have been getting very intensely into Newman since the canonization, and your videos have helped greatly in my discovery!
Danny Allen Wonderful! Keep exploring.
Bishop Robert Barron thank you, Bishop! Please pray for me, especially my formation (I’m a postulant with the Passionists, oddly enough!).
really well explained, as always context is king, understanding the man within his own framework
Thank you Bishop Barron
conscience as aboriginal vicar of Christ in the soul 🙏
10-9-20
Happy St. John Henry Newman day
I highly suggest reading his Desires for Laity
Lecture 9. Duties of Catholics Towards the Protestant View
Bishop Barron please go on Joe Rogan!!!!
I'd love to. Encourage him to invite me.
His sincere searching for truth led him to the foundation and pillar of Truth!! He found Him there! 1 Timothy 3:15
Thanks much for this video.
I do not think any "Catholic" can agree with the amazons whatever it is. The problem is how we humans distort or wrongly apply the changes.
Catholics agree 100% with the Amazon synod that you do not know anything about!!! And you are here distorting the truth you ignore!!!!
The irony of Blessed John Henry's famous quip on conscience and the Pope is that it only exists in the printed editions of the Letter to the Duke of Norfolk.
It does not appear in the manuscript... The Blessed Cardinal probably included it only as an afterthought, during the editorial process.
Thank you great content! :)
John H Newman Cardinal was Anglican minister before he converted to Catholicism. He was buried in same grave as his 30 year companion who also left protestant Church on same day. His saint hood is mostly because he was very active attack towards King James Bible
The way that I always thought of Doctrine was not to say I always thought of Doctrine as The Doctrine we have embodied in Tradition is explored through how it encounters and responds to the present world. As Tradition/ Doctrine is explored we find new facets or aspects which give insight to what went before.
OneCatholicSpeaks yeah that’s how I see it too. The truth never changes, and once an aspect of the truth is formally defined, that formulation never changes, but our understanding of the truth can expand and deepen.
Hey this Newman Fella seems quite intelligent.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence
@@SuperGreatSphinx What?
He is intelligent and because of that he searched for God!!!!until he found Him in his Church!!!
Regarding the Development of Doctrine, could we draw an analogy from Luke 2:52 (..."And Jesus advanced in wisdom and age and grace with God and men"...) where we compare Jesus with the Church? This seems abundantly reasonable to me. For, it seems that "Sola Scriptura" leads to more of a separation from the world than an engagement with it, along with some lolzy bits like Creation Museums...
Amen!
Until when will this unfolding /development of doctrine continue? Til the end of time? Does it follow that one shouldn't be so sure and content of his beliefs as there will always be changes. That's a dicey business. Tell me I'm wrong. Why don't we give this "tree of constant change" a chance to rest and let the fruit pickers enjoy what it has to offer? I won't be surprised if we start picking different fruits from the same tree of constant change and not get confused. Hoping that the magisterium, the teaching body will do well so as not to sow confusion. Holy Spirit, please guide your Church.
I think this is a misunderstanding of what Newman is saying. It's not that what we have changes fundamentally, it's that it develops beyond what we've always had. Think of the doctrine of the Real Presence or the Sinlessness of Mary. These doctrines were held from the beginning, are still true, and will remain true for all time. But over time, as the Spirit has been at work in the Church, these doctrines have flowered into Transubstantiation and the Immaculate Conception.
It's not that anything old becomes untrue, it's that its truth grows beyond what was once known.
@@jamesinwood381 I'd like to believe you. Constant change is just so scary. But i hope these changes will be for the better. Thanks James.
If a true idea is equivalent to the "sum total of its possible aspects," then the development, in principle, will continue until Christ returns. But this should not be feared! It doesn't for a moment imply that doctrinal statements are settled and definitive. There is, for example, no going back behind Trent or Chalcedon or Nicea. But that doesn't mean that new aspects and dimensions of the idea of the Incarnation will not emerge in the course of time. The growth of new branches on the tree doesn't involve the compromising of the trunk of the tree. Just the contrary, it depends upon the trunk.
@@BishopBarron Touche. Thanks! 😇
@@jamesinwood381the Pope position is to clarify and set once and for all dogma and doctrine! With the Infallibly assistance of the Holy Spirit
please make a review on the joker if u havent watched it watch it it has a powerful message and is the most realistic comic book film
Do you know (UA-cam) Jonathan Pageau, The Symbolic World? He just talked about it.
Seems more like "left and right" are useless terms when trying to talk about theology.
Yes, and always has been, I think. That's why Helmut Thielicke back in the Sixties used 'Theology A' and 'Theology B' in his systematic theology, defining each one. Of course, that means we must ask, 'What terms will we use, then?'
That depends on the categories that we choose to talk about. St Thomas reminds us that we can never encompass all truth in any argument, and that all argument is a journey toward the truth. We must make that journey, but do not expect that we will ever know it all.
So what terms do you think that we should use at this moment?
@@craigsmith1443 Terms that are actually descriptive rather than attempts to theologize cultural conflicts are a good place to start
@@CameoAfro _rather than attempts to theologize cultural conflicts are a good place to start_
You are probably right, though I wonder if one really can do philosophy without doing theology? Since our present cultural conflicts are over attempts to redefine humanity and humanness, wouldn't, oh, say, Aquinas' 'Final Cause' be important here, and thus his conviction that everything is created, and therefore that is an inescapable part of its essence?
“Left” and “right” are useless terms in most conversations unless you’re giving directions.
And yet we continue to use them. We might (should?) ask why. Can we try this:
They categorize, it seems to me, which we need to do, we tool-using creatures, which means that in everything we ignore all that we cannot use ('Am I ever going to use this?' every teacher hears; 'Is this going to be on the test?' or: when you drive, what do you pay attention to? What do you not see? What do you not see all the time?), which means that we separate our world into the useful and the ignorable, the useful being useful for our good (our maps all have ourselves at the center), which means that we are always maximizing our good which also means that we minimize the bad or dangerous (which changes, depending on the kind of 'bad'). So we 'name' (don't we, Adam?) everything in order to understand it to put it in the 'useful/ignorable' box which is similar to the 'good/bad' box. It's very easy to do, and it 'works' well enough, and for most of our lives 'well enough' is good enough. So we do it to label so that we may use or not. Since 'left' or 'right' theology is 'us' or 'them,' we know who our enemies are and can avoid them, for they are 'bad.' These categories thus are a result of our fears.
Thus 'left' and 'right' probably will not go away, for they are too useful to someone, being persistent in politics, which is governed by those who believe in warfare (a result of fear) by other means.
Cain still lives, then, even in our theology.
But even if it won't go away, that doesn't mean that we have to use it. Labeling worked for Adam. We might want to remember that we are not Adam. St Ignatius of Loyola teaches us at the start of the Daily Examen to pray to see as God does, and St Catherine of Siena repeats that everyone is created by God. This means that God doesn't use labels. He uses your name.
I watched Pivotal Players about Newman and may have misunderstood 🤔😔 Bishop Barron that Pope Benedict XVI "canonized" John Henry Newman in 2010.
No. I said "beatified."
I can't figure out what people like Dr Marshall Taylor hold against you unless it's their own limited way of understanding. Anyone makes mistakes, but always on the look for them must be a sign of narrowmindedness. You finish by seeing phantomes, which exclude Newman.
I tried watching that Dude, he seems to be very rigid about his understanding of the world
@AngelBien the wise man, is patient and listens even to the fool
Newman would be horrified by what is going on in the Catholic Church now and I believe he would have converted to Orthodoxy maybe.
@Collins Anosike I was thinking about heresy and things like the Amazon synod and not just the moral failings.
Doubt, you think any true saint would leave their Holy Church even during times of darkness? And remember St. Peter denied Christ three times and he was one of the closest people to Him. So why would you be so quick to give up on the Pope when he’s in error? Christ didn’t give up on Peter. Have more faith.
@@aileenbordelon7884 I'm not Roman Catholic and I don't believe in papal dogmas based on forgeries.
@@Orthoindian
I don't think you understand who are Saints and what is their relationship with us.
Ok Bud, RCC has continued with councils (21) and has every Christian rite undivided, while the schismatic EOC is in it’s own Schism because of no Pope and only has Byzantine Rite. The EOC was once under heresies promoted by Atheistic-Marxist parties, what the RCC is under Godless Captialism is no different. We are the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, not you schismatic frauds
John Henry Newman was first a very Intelligent man!!! The rest followed suit
I admire Mindszenty for standing against communism.
Saul of Tarsus!! Century XIX
Many are voicing in an echo chamber rather than getting facts from the sources, these days. Things basically break down to rumors and everyone firing according to their own agenda. I love the Internet, but it plays a big part in creating this effect as people stay to their own cliques and caricatureing those they percieve to oppose them. It is alot of low-level tribal thinking and when we ought to be using our individual talents and interests as a united front to reintroduce the world to it's Lord and Savior, it is dangerous. By tribal thinking I don't mean primeval human civilization worldview, I mean simplistic 'us good, them different so them bad' kind of thoughtless oppositionalism. That is really hurting us and wasting our time drawing up battle lines over preference and calling it principal.
In this climate, taking a side ensures that one will be drawn into one current or another and that both parties grow towards greater and greater extremes. That is a schism factory, or even worse, it keeps us deadlocked and damages our unity as the Mystical Body of Christ and sows discord among His people. It ought be needless to say that God can not possibly appreciate that. Not when we can do so much better.
What can we do then in these times? As in the world, search for the seeds of the Spirit and follow the Lord. Embrace what you can first out of principal, then out of charity for your brother or sister in Christ ignoring divisional lines within the Church at least. Above all, study the Scriptures, the Saints and Church Fathers and the Teachings of the Church, those things that are firm and pray on matters you must discern.
If you can not handle the factionalism, then simply avoid it and follow the Lord. Ultimately all of this is to get us back there and if any of it does not serve this end, discard it.
I hope this helps some people, note that this is all my personal observations and opinion. Lit by the wisdom of many others, but ultimately, I have no authority or special charism for this. So take it for what it is, my humble opinion.
God bless you who read this.
Much needed words. Couldn't have said better.
yea, many catholics use religion as a means to hate others
@@epicstyle4657
Yeah I can't help wondering what in the world is going on with the Catholics. Chatter and chatter filled with hate.
@@marypinakat8594 I see that mainly from cultural catholics and old people. What few young catholics in my small corner of the world are quite the opposite often they are very smart kind people both Catholics and protestants.
@@ianlilley2577
☆ ☆
5:55 Bob Dylan "Desire"
What about it?
1:41 "freewheelin'"
"You've got to serve somebody"
"Slow train coming"
" Señor, Señor"...
John Hery Newman, the man who hated the Catholic church and set on a journey to demonstrate her as false, ended up becoming a Catholic Saint!!! . By the grace of God
Your servant Brandpn Vogt needs to go to confession ASAP for the hatred he spread on Twitter.
Is servant really the best word to be using? Associate or maybe protege, servant implies a master relationship that I would be super skeptical about the existence of.
😕 huh?
honestly,,, are you guys any better...people are human and can get hurt and triggered by many things...its best to understand that people are human.
@@epicstyle4657 true, we aren'tany better...NEVERTHELESS he needs togo to confession because of the dramahe stirred.
@@LostArchivist The Pope's title is the servant of servants....Don't framethe word servant as a bad word,it isn't...it's a good word. We are all servants....Doyou know who said he would not be a servant? Lucifer did...he said "I will not serve!" and he was cast to hell.....In Opus Dei, the first thing a member does when he wakes up in the morning is say "Serviam!"latin for "I will serve."....so please do not frame the word "servant"as a bad word...it is NOT!
Fidelity to consciousness leads me to conclude that number 301 of Amoris Laetitia is completely wrong, against the teaching of the Scriptures and all the preceding popes. You, Bishop Barron, should say something about this scandal, it is your responsibility before God, who will judge you.
Perhaps you could lead the way?
@@craigsmith1443 I'm not a bishop. In the catholic church we need the hierarchy to lead.
@@pachulin2001 Hans Urs von Balthasar was not a bishop. Adrienne von Speyr was not a bishop, yet they led. You don't need to be a bishop to explain the reasons you say that 'number 301 of Amoris Laetitia is completely wrong.' You will be positive and helpful, however, which the Church needs to be (and is, when we're living and thinking rightly), and not just negative.
OK, so perhaps it's wrong. What is right?
@@craigsmith1443 von Baltahasar led to an heresy which bishop Barron adheres, that we can reasonably hope everyone will be saved. The catholic truth need not to be invented by any laïc. In fact, read consciously number 301 of Amoris Laetitia, and then read number 2072 of the Cathecism. Take your conclusions.
@@pachulin2001
I would think that you need to look for someone other than Bishop Barron cos from what I perceive as your analysis Bishop already has something not so good about him.
Lord, deliver us from “sensible conservatives” in all things.
It's unfortunate that you feel it necessary to criticize 'conservative' catholics in your talk on St. Newman. Your characterizations of catholic conservatives as either "extreme" or "sensible" (those who agree with your progressive views). And yet you do not characterize the Left who have left the Church in confusion and in an ever downward spiral especially under Pope Francis. It's heartbreaking to see what has happened to the Church before Vatican II and what followed from it. I remember and hold dearly the Church of my youth. On the positive side, it was refreshing to hear what you really think.
Come on, Ron...That's a complete distortion of what I said. The bulk of this video is an enthusiastic endorsement of a conservative reading of Newman and a sharp criticism of a liberal interpretation. There are indeed extremist conservatives, who deny the legitimacy of Vatican II, and I criticize them. But to characterize this presentation as "progressive" is just ridiculous.
Bishop Robert Barron Thanks for the reply. Could you point me to any pointed views of yours on liberals (an inappropriate political term)? While I don’t agree with many views of yours, I respect your efforts to promote your perspectives. Please speak more plainly, especially about the nonsense being promoted by
@@BishopBarron Could you do a video on Gnosticism and the history of Esotericism? And a video about Constantine? Not a video about whether your for or against just like what you know about those subjects? Maybe delve a bit into the Sumerians?
Ron Fredericks The Priority of Christ: Toward a Postliberal Catholicism. 500 pages of criticism of liberalism.
@@BishopBarron yeah that's a lot of criticism
8