I grew up Catholic went to church as child, did my first communion then stopped getting taken to church unsure why. I haven't received communion in over 15 years now I'm 25 (couple months ago) I was depressed, lost, angry and had pretty bad intrusive thoughts due to situations in my upbringing until 1 day I stumbled across a Pints with Aquinas video on pornography and starting from there I stopped watching other influencers, took my life seriously and stopped feeling sorry for myself. I've been trying to break free from the sins that I commit daily (still trying) relearning the teachings/traditions of Catholicism (reading the Catholic Bible, praying daily, watching/listening to Catholic content, etc) I have to say coming back to the faith has really been changing me for the better the way I act, talk and live though I still have many flaws just like everyone and need to stray away from the sins I commit but I will be going to confession on Saturday so that I may receive communion this Sunday for first time in many years.
I am hispanic and that is a very common thing that happens. Same happened to me. I came back into the church and started learning about the faith after a life crisis. I hope more people have the humility you had to start looking into it and changing their world view and thus behaviors. May God bless you and use you for good and as an example to more people around you who have taken their faith and traditions for granted. Have fortitude in your faith. 🙂
I've really liked the visit with Brian. I'm not Catholic, but I have enjoyed both of your shows. I do appreciate the faith both of you have. I've learned so much about Catholics in the modern world. Thank you both.
These are my three top reasons people leave the faith. #1- They really don't know their faith in the first place. If they truly did, they would never leave. #2 - There is some rule or requirement of the faith they don't want to obey. Sin. So, choose another faith or sect so you won't have to violate your conscience. #3 - There is someone in the church that has disappointed you by their actions, scandalized you by being such a poor example, or even abused you or others in some way that it has shaken your belief. We must all remember, the church is perfect, not the people in it.
Let me preface this with saying im still Catholic. Yes, "dont leave Jesus because of Judas". It's really difficult to stay Catholic when most Catholics you meet in the aftermath of being abused by a Catholic in a position of power over you act like Judas. I've met people who, in the aftermath of being abused, have had their fellow parishoners demonize them, priests either refuse to believe them or act afraid of them, and the diocese/bishop treat them primarily as a legal liability or opponent rather than as someone they need to protect and minister to. And a lot of these people ARE still in the Church, still trying to be faithful. But some aren't, and I'd be lying if I said I didn't understand why.
@@dottieryan5574Yes and no. We are not Protestants where every Christian is “the invisible church.” The church was also an institution given to us by Christ and is the pillar and foundation of truth. So Uriah’s comment makes sense.
As disturbing as it is to see faithful Catholics leave the church because of personal views on certain moral teachings, the bigger issue far and away is the brokenness of catholic faith formation. It’s better today than it was in the 80s and 90s, but Protestant churches are full of supposed converts from Catholicism. In realty, they are cradle Catholics who weren’t properly formed, but they still yearn for truth, so they grab hold to the first taste of truth they come across. Even if it lacks fullness and completeness.
most of them are people who cannot accept that religion will not bend to their lifestyle or the lifestyle of the people they know. so they hated the religion and go somewhere else who would convince them that they are welcome, that they will not be judge, although in reality these people don't know anything about the faith, like you said they are just cradle Catholics. most of them are just there for convenience.
@@emptylikeboxit seems you don’t have much experience with such people. Generally what I’ve seen is that Christians who leave the Catholic Church for a Protestant denomination are still passionate about Christ and rejecting sin, and aren’t looking for welcome exactly but rather a more genuine faith. They may be confused, and be making a mistake, but you’re attributing things to many that simply aren’t true, or charitable.
2020 revealed many things. The Church should’ve never closed for a single day during the great Covid spell. The fact they closed their doors when people needed them the most and adopted the most ridiculous measures showed me that the current leaders have other priorities and are serving a different agenda. To take the body of Christ through a face mask and the Church doing drive through blessings and collections was something I haven’t let slide.
@@spyroluver0951 It doesn't matter. Since when is the Church governed by local governments? Christianity was forbidden in all of Roman Empire for a few centuries, sometimes punishable by death. Should the early Christians obey the Emperor?
The church had a “Churchill moment” where it could have stood up when the government came to shut it down. It missed its moment, and a Church that once braved lions in the arena and rendered last rites in the midst of the Black Death, cowered and complied with nanny-state secular authorities. The Church accepted that is not an “essential service” (placing it below Walmart that kept its doors open) and shuttered its doors. It was a huge defeat that may take it a generation to recover.
I’m beginning to see the wisdom in describing faith as a ‘gift’ of the spirit as Saint Paul says. So many here in Ireland dropped it without really questioning if authentic faith was was ever there to begin with.
The theme I hear more with people I know is they don't want a churxh telling them what they can and can't do. In other words, they mostly want to do what they see everyone else doing and they think those people are getting away with it and they are not dropping dead so they think it can't be bad and the church is wrong and THEY are right. Pride.
Alternative idea, maybe they just recognize the church has no rational justification for forbidding those things? Perhaps the church is prideful for thinking it can command things without providing anything approaching rationale.
@@WaterCat5 lol! Perhaps they haven't looked deep enough to realized the faith it takes to be an atheist. Shallow views are the leading cause of mistaken conclusions. Philosophical language is hard to understand and so is admitting the flaws of human nature, but it can be learned and patterns throughout history can be found.
I think folks like Pints and Brian don't take into account the subconscious impact seeing the cowardice and knee-bending in the church hierarchy has on people. When we talk about why people leave, it's important to understand how the actions of others in the church, especially at the higher levels, can have a real impact on the average person. When someone says, "It just doesn't make sense to me." or similar, you have to realize that they have lived an entire life where they've seen the church constantly giving ground to the Leftist/Communist/Democrat machine. How could the average congregant understand things when they see their most knowledgeable and experienced people bowing to secularist ideology? How can you say that feminism and blm and whatever else isn't important when they can see their own leaders kneeling at that new altar? There's something inherently off-putting about cowardice. We humans just don't respond well to it for some reason, so what do you think will happen when we can see the leaders of the faith exhibiting great cowardice, fearing the mobs of the Leftist Army so much that they now fly rainbow flags and embrace homosexuality? How can the average person not think that christianity just doesn't make sense when they can see how quickly christians are to fold, to kneel and beg for forgiveness from the most corrupt? A good example of this would be when nancy pelosi's local archbishop declared publicly that she wasn't fit to receive communion. This was big news, and spread across the world through the Leftist controlled media. If the church had remained strong in that stance, the very same thing they've preached a the pulpit for decades, they'd have seen a surge in attendance. Instead, though, the archbishop in DC embraced pelosi and gave her communion even though she was openly and publicly calling for abortions, something that goes against the CORE doctrine of the faith. This was a very big deal. When even the church was split and the corruption was seen by everyone because the Leftist media made sure it was a top story for days, what message do you think that sent to the average people?
Or the whole McKarrick thing. How are we supposed to follow our vows when they can't follow theirs? Not an excuse maybe, but it IS really disheartening.
@@JP2GiannaT Yep. I tell folks that the church has embraced the Spirit of Judas, and that's why we see all this stuff going on. And it's not just the catholics. Everyone talks about how there's a decline in christian church attendance, but they always want to blame someone other than themselves. Who would want to join any club where they can see that the club doesn't enforce their own rules? If the club enforces their rules with an iron fist, nobody on the outside would complain one bit. It garners respect even if you don't like the club and don't want to be a member. This is one of the reasons why I don't support missionary work. Get your own house in order before you start helping strangers. Give back to your own before you start giving to people in another country.
@@Christine-nt4lo Is it? Or is it the one thing that has the biggest and most immediate impact on your life and the lives of your family? You don't have to like it, but you will be ruled over by someone. Either you stand firm and control the politics, or someone else will.
Three Rivers, my friend. Yes, Jesus said Give unto Caesar… , Make sure your news sources are not winding you up. In your own back yard, in your sphere, what are you doing? I know about this, because I share your struggle. Peace.
When I was 21, I ran away from the Catholic Church because I was afraid that God might have been calling me to the religious life. Very sadly, I was away from the Church for 30 years. I now know that my true vocation was marriage - my husband and I have been married for 40 years and ten years ago, our marriage was convalidated. However, my lapsed years coincided with our daughter's childhood and teens, and as result she wasn't raised a Catholic. (Thank God for the confessional.) Now that I'm back, my faith means more to me than ever before and the sacraments and the rosary are major parts of my life. So there is hope. Anyone out there who leaves the faith - God is still waiting for you in His Holy Church. I'll pray for you if you pray for me. 🙏
Why do people leave?? Sometimes our religion was taken away from us. I was born into a Catholic family and went to a Catholic grade school. I was taught everything that was Catholic. Then came Vatican II, and everything changed. That which I was taught was scorned and ridiculed and I was told I was "behind the times" for not conforming to the new ways. I adhered to our traditional ways as much as I could, but eventually the news ways led me to become a Protestant...after all, that's where the new church was headed. After several years, I found the Traditional Latin Mass again and rejoined the Catholic Church. Two years ago, the priest who celebrated the Traditional Mass retired and the bishop apparently thought that was a good time to try and coax us traditionals back into the modernist church by not replacing our priest with someone who would or could celebrate the Traditional Mass. I will not go back to what drove me away and into Protestantism again. I'm in a part of southern Missouri where the Traditional Latin Mass is not available, so I just stay home. I didn't leave the church, it left me.
Yeah, in my opinion, something happened at vatican 2 and with them scrubbing away that mass. And this is coming from someone who wasn't born until the middle of the 90s.
No, I will not attend what drove me into Protestantism. You may say "But it's valid", but I say that a flat Pepsi is still a valid Pepsi, but it's best poured down the drain. @@Anna-oc54sk
In my experience, most people who leave who were enthusiastic about the faith at one point got caught up in some sin they really really like. In the end they rationalize Catholicism away so they can just do that sin without as much guilt.
For me, as I got older, the Bible/church makes less and less sense. Church can not tell me the HumanSacrifice is wrong, yet sacrificing JC was a good thing. Also, why did JC have to be killed?
I personally struggle with Christianity myself. There is something about it that feels not for me. I was watching the Bible study thing that Jordan Peterson was doing and the more I watched it the more distant I felt. It feels like I am appropriating a culture that isn’t mine. I am not jewish or from the middle east, yet Christianity is overwhelmingly culturally jewish. It feels like it’s for the people of that region where they are the chosen people and all others are God’s afterthought. Let’s not forget all the changes that had to be made to attract people in Europe.
Christianity is a struggle, by definition. If anybody has ever told you that it's easy and fun, forget about it and don't listen to them ever again. True Christianity, as taught by the Catholic Church, is hard. It's a sacrifice. The purpose of a Christian life is to make a sacrifice of our own desires, to follow Jesus against our desires, even to death if need be. There's no better testimony of your faith, of your hope for eternal life, your trust in God against all odds, than to surrender to Him your life already here on Earth, every day, till the end. This is a bet, and don't expect anything in return, not even nice feelings. No, even your own body will be against you. And yes, you need to learn a good deal about Jewish culture and history, and old Judaism, if you want to actually understand your faith. For example the notion or sacrifice - it was much easier to understand Jewish sacrifices from the perspective of pagans than from modern atheists and agnostics, who rule the world of today. For modern people even the meaning of sacrifice has changed to mean "give up", "yield" or "resign", totally forgetting about the Sacrum, the sacredness.
I felt as you did once. But by that point I had worked my way through philosophy and religion as a whole, and it was clear to me, intellectually at least, that God is real and Christianity is true. I struggled mightily for several years from that point, praying sometimes and despairing often, attending a church sporadically and hating it. I was apathetic at times, depressed at times. But I continued trying to turn to God and ask him to show me the way. One day, I woke up and found that God had given me faith, and I was finally at peace. I still am uncomfortable with much of the cultural aspect of modern Christianity, but now Christ lives within me and comfort is never far away. “Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.”
It is good for an interested Protestant to hear the good and bad sides of the Catholic church. I am curious as to what would happen if the unthinkable happens, like gay marriages approved. Would Catholics stay or would there be another schism? The reason i ask is that one of the reasons given that we should all be Catholic is that it is the unending Church that Jesus started. But would you conservative Catholics stay and still be Catholic?
This doesn't mean that non-Catholics can't go to heaven. It simply means that in heaven, everyone will be a Catholic. At the moment of death, when we see the truth, we must accept it and repent of our errors. And therein lies the rub: Catholics may have an easier time of it, because they already know the most about the truth. But they will be judged more harshly because of it. Protestants will have to convert then, but won't be judged more harshly if they know less. What is important for all those who want to enter paradise is the search for truth and the effort to love God with all your heart and one's neighbor as oneself.
I'm hanging in there with the Church, and God willing I'll continue too, but having the American Church become more and more the Republican Party at prayer makes it challenging.
Seriously, are we talking Secavandist here, or are we talking lack of pastoral accompaniment for people in difficult situations? Either Taylor Marshall or Pope Francis could say what you've said, so you definitely need to elaborate.
The church has failed to resonate with modern people. Don’t blame the people for the church’s failure to reach them, please. When you just sing for an hour and are shocked why people haven’t found Christ, well I shouldn’t say anymore.
I would say: ask both. But the answer seems rather simple: The World has a lot more to offer today than it ever used to, and the modern Catholic Church has seemingly less than ever. It's no longer easy or profitable to be truly Catholic. Even less to become a monk or priest. It's the time of trial and as one might expect, sadly few people actually resist the temptation to go with the World. Many are still fooling themselves that you can somehow do both, but they usually end up with the World. The new generations of true Catholics will be radical like the Early Church, or nonexistent.
if we will deny, He will also deny us; if we are not faithful, He remains faithful, for to deny Himself He cannot. 2 Timothy 2:13. Stand with Jesus and you will never fail because Jesus as God is the Ultimate REALITY. More real than any other existence and beyond all comprehension. "The heaven and the earth will pass away, but My words shall not pass away"(Matthew 24:35). A man is as good as his word, and the words of Jesus are more real than the universe things seen and unseen.
I've heard a lot about "sin darkening intellect", but it only seems to be in contexts where the accuser could easily be guilty of confirmation bias. If you think im unethical because i can't access some obiective truth, you'll always correlate my disagreement on ethical matters with my faliure to grasp this truth, when it is the existence of this truth that I'm contesting in the first place (so you're question-begging) Are there any empirical studies that show, say, reduced mathematical skills among people who've had multiple sexual partners? Or better yet, a correlated decline in verbal/ non-verbal reasoning as the number of ""sins"" in a controlled population increases? Without that, I'm afraid i just roll my eyes at the triumphalist, literally 'holier-than-thou' excuses.
I'm not sure that linking mathamatical aptitude with social consequences or actions is a fair test for morality. Examples abound of people who are artistic, or mathematical geniuses who fail absolutely spectacularly at life on a societal or personal level. I hear your objection about confirmation bias, but i think a better way to go about it is to study what happens to your decision making capabilities when you engage in certain behaviors, not your mathematical or logical aptitude. Your social decsions and your IQ have been pretty firmly established not to be the same thing at this point. TL;DR: I think we need to define what exactly is meant by "intellect"
You sound really dumb though, because instead of discussing the real prospect that selfish desire could cause us to accept a logical fallacy, you just engage in logical fallacy in lieu of argument. Your argument only makes sense from an alternative religious point of view. If you accept that there is right and wrong, and that doing wrong can make us make bad intellectual choices, then you could argue, “but I don’t agree with you about what is wrong, because I follow an alternate set of rules, and therefore what you say is impinging on my rational thought, isn’t.” All you do is pretend that there is no way that deliberately immoral acts can affect our thinking. Which is stupid.
Darkening the intellect does not mean lowering your IQ or making you less good at math. Perhaps you should take a deeper look at St Thomas Aquinas' argument on the subject rather than dismissing it based on your own confirmation bias. It has much more to do with lessening your ability to reason through consequences to your actions. It is not difficult to understand in the slightest. Someone who tells his first lie is pricked by his conscience. If he doesn't deal with it and lies again his conscience becomes clouded over time and it becomes easier and easier to lie. That is the same with any sin. Corruption doesn't happen over night. It doesn't even take faith to see the truth in that.
you are misrepresenting what is being said, partially because intellect has not been defined. It is most certainly not referring to just pure intellect otherwise no atheist or etc. could be smart. I personally don't understand this myself, but I think it is talking about the ordered sense of reason which allows you to see and interact with God. Sin makes it obscure. This is also not a philosophical concept it is a theological concept. There is 0 point in you providing a philosophical argument in response. It is a cause and effect. If sin exists, and sin affects the soul, then sin most certainly affects the intellect and will since that is what is the primary faculties of the soul? If there is a supernatural order, then it makes sense it affects the natural order. If the supernatural exists, then it makes sense that there is a supernatural explanation. But this assumes the soul even exists, and you will say that's question begging, which is why I am saying it is a theological concept. It is something that is understood in light of faith, and not without it.
The Catholic Church is One, Holy, Apostolic and ETERNAL! The people who run things here on earth are just that - people!. I have to keep having to remind myself that 'they' are not the Catholic Church, I am, we are! Every baptised Catholic IS the Catholic Church. WE leave, or WE stay.
I left because of bible self contradiction. I wasn't catholic I was just a general Christian. I honestly don't know where I'm at, I still want to be a Christian but I don't believe the Bible is inerrant. I've considered remaining a Christian but just denying the doctrine of biblical inerrancy but I don't know, I'd be a heretic by the standard of pretty much every church in the world, the only ones that'd accept me are some protestants that forgo creeds entirely. I'd also be going against certain passages that seem to support inerrancy and how could I determine what doctrines to believe and what church to join if I can't trust the bible? I still believe in God. According to acts 17 I still believe in the same God. I've been interested in shamanism just for the sake of being connected to a tradition, but I don't know if I want to get involved with magic, I'm no longer bound to believe witchcraft is of the devil but I imagine if magic is real serious magic can probably melt your face off if you mess it up.
Listen to the Bible in a Year Podcast with Fr. Mike and see if that helps you put the big story of salvation history in perspective and makes sense to you.
Some are treated like sons of the priests others like sons of the world. In a era where millenia of faith history is available. You are shut down for simply stating basic truth. We suffer once more the wicked baby boomers that facing death whant once more everything tailor made for them. Our elders especially the priests are the wicked generation.
Hi Brian & Matt - i have to say something in me has changed ! i reckon you guys are a bit cozey & cotton wooled & though i disagree w Francis' decision re latin mass, he has a big point to make & you've missed it ! He is RIGHT, that like a franciscan in the sense Chesterton discusses in ch.6 on his book on that saint, if you don't get out for the poor & lost to evangelise and get dirty doing it, then we can say the right things, attend the nicest liturgies but we're not obeying God. And... latin Mass is great & i disagree w his decison. HOWEVER, quit the daydream... latin Mass has not spread at all, except in 2 countries out of 180, meaning not at all, sorry to disappoint you but you ARE in a bubble, whilst you guys are in trouble with God for not doing the following: he's calling you not to latinise Mass, but i agree you can show for that if you prefer it, i'm in favor of keeping that nice diversity... however, God has called you to work, form a movement to improve reverence in the Novus Ordo & make it consistent with what Vatican II really meant... YET even though it has not even attempted to be what it is, thereby not giving it even a chance, you adopt a cozy, cigar smoking, dreamy traditionalism that simply does this: you don't DO it... you don't do what the cry in your heart calls you to (namely, to initiate a call for greater reverence REGARDLESS entirely of which liturgy people use, novus or latin or other - & note the Devil LOVES any division, any is good for him).... see, you truly in the US risk (bc the church there is simply massive in size & has for that reason only, greater voice), dividing the church by putting the superior (bullshit, but keep talkin', it's lovely but not superior, nor should this slightly affected cafeterianism be taken too seriously) latin Mass as the best option... sorry, but most people that adore that Mass are artistic, puntctilious, intellectual types, or most if not all, & tons & tons (VAST majority) prefer a good reverent N.O. in their own language... you are not nearly as in touch with the reality beyond US & France, the ONLY nations where there is a nonetheless also minority movement to the lovely Latin Mass. But i agree it is lovely, but, meantime, DO what the cry in your heart called you to, since it seems you prefer to avoid that harder task & ghetto down w your highly intellectualised catholic pals & feel warm & right in such discussions as sometimes appear very charming on fradd's show etc. & whilst there's always one or two of you who are super active to make you think you're getting out and doing it, therefore, Francis is wrong. But, he's Pope and his job is to make general statements, &.... he's GENERALLY right & you're generally wrong & out of it, based on what i said above. Meantime, i remain an enthusiastic listener to you guys, but after reading Chesterton's chapters in his book on St Francis, your model of rebuilding a totally broken church is more insular than your eyes have managed to see, far far more ... step out a bit more from your comforting highly intellectual circles & you may be forced to tougher questions.... but i see how warm blanketed you are in the charming cultural heritage etc. which down on the ground souls rarely if ever see or get or are able to... reverent novus ordo will likely simply bring more to Christ today... but it's that reverencing of those liturgies that fascinatingly NEVER occurs to you dudes to ever truly act on rather than whiniing about endlessly to zero effect or so it seems... isn't that your call & isn't that obvious !! in an emperor wearing no clothes sort of way... i'm just amazed people like you, none of you, have not started that movemement: that silences the entire (for some) tedious, petty, pedantic debate about how lovely (with a cocked wrist & much sentiment) latin liturgy is versus novus, but that boring divisie speech ought be silenced, by a movement indifferent to liturgical preference & simply creating resources etc. to promote REVERENCE... REGARDLESS of liturgical preference. It reminds of Martin Luther Kings logic, we're dignified despite our various identities in one humanity, not because of them. We're united in REVERNCE for God despite liturgical difference, not because of them - & you've not got it clearly enough. WELL. I say, the emperor is not wearing clothes, you are not serving your call fully yet. Or, show me where i'm wrong, please!!!!!! i welcome it, but doubt you can do it...
Can u please talk about why there is catholic marriage in Catholic Church Before 1917 the church allowed 12-year-old girls and 14-year-old boys to get married to someone no matter how much older. A 12-year-old is only 3 years older than Aisha when she had sex with Muhammad at 53. According to the church, it would been okay if she was 12 with a 53-year-old. Even though Aisha didn't have a period yet she could have had a period at 9. A 9 and 12-year-old are still going through puberty. That is hypocritical to say it's not okay for a 9-year-old but it's okay for a 12-year-old. Even though the church raised the minimum to 14 for girls and 16 for boys they still have no age restriction. Meaning a 14-year-old and a 50-year-old could marry. Even if it doesn't happen often the problem is the church allows it to.
The church yes did have the minimum age requirement. I don’t believe the situation you are talking about would be encouraged by the church though having someone much older with someone say 12 years old. It seems like the rules differed based on the bishops, but i think even though there wasn’t a restriction on that doesn’t mean it’s something the church would encourage
@@princessc660 I think the earlier one needs to be understood that it was common for people to marry earlier those days, there is no good scientific understanding, higher education was not a rlly thing, and life expectancy was shorter, perhaps even status of a woman could be improved or smth. There are probably some other factors. I have read somewhere (don't remember where) that the church states that the age of marriage should be to something higher if the law in that country demands a higher age e.g. say the church marriage is 14, if the legal is 18, you go with the legal age. It is supposed to only prevent marriages strictly under this age. In short, it is not saying this is the minimum age of marriage but rather, anything below this is not valid or smth like that. Finally, i would imagine, there is no specific age restriction because the church forsees some potential reason in why allowing this could be acceptable, I personally haven't thought about it, so I could not provide a good reason. It is a discipline practice not doctrine, the church can most certainly error on this part, especially when it's not explicitly faith or morals. Our Lord never gave an age restriction for marriage, neither now or in the ancient jews, most likely for like I mentioned earlier, there may be a range of circumstances where it is good. I think we have to understand a 14 year old has to choose the 50 year old, hopefully has licit reasons in doing so.
Why? Bcz *"The grass looks greener on the other side"* and *NOT* bcz of our inherent sinful nature. Bcz after having grown up within the Catholic coral, some people at some point want to do more to do more than just observe from within the coral. Especially when they see that outside there's some attractive attractions that are simply NOT available within the coral. This thing happens to all other sorts of corals, not just Catholic. Therefore to blame the "wanderlust" on sin our sinful nature is NOT a proper assessment. That the Church tries to stop this bleed out with draconian measures (sort of like the N.Korea form) obviously has not & is not working. Bcz *"the grass looks greener on the other side"* Catholics become non-Catholics & non-Catholics become Catholic. In sum, why do people wander into & out of Catholicism? For the same reason they do with everything else. No, NOT bcz of our inherent sinful nature but simply bcz no religion or philosophy contains "the whole cheese" Why? Bcz while the church is full of wisdom but it doesn't have a monopoly on it Ultimately the compass that will help navigate us thru the oceans of life, is within
It's in the nature of man to have agenda's & manipulate. We cannot expect the complete truth to have been left in scripture that has passed thru many hands & even a gov't. Do U trust man & gov't today? There's your answer. The Bible is not an exception for not being prone to manipulation by men with agendas. In any case, however, the Bible is principally about faith, not history, science technology & such. For worldly wisdom one needs study worldly things, which have a place. But about heavenly things we need study Godly wisdom bcz that is where we hope to spend eternity and for which knowledge of worldly things will be inadequate
@@Anna-oc54sk It seems you believe in the one size fits all approach to theology. The truth truth is that the Catholic church cannot dictate what is or is not best for every individual without considering other extenuating circumstances. But this is why you accuse me of moral relativism. You prefer the "by the book" approach to interpretation. I don't exactly. And as I said, the Pope is NOT my savior. God is and by who's grace we are saved. The constant teaching of the Catholic Church throughout the ages has been that salvation is bestowed alone by God's grace. Salvation is applied through faith. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says, “Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation” (page 44, paragraph #161).
@Anna-oc54sk moral relativism and Judeo Christian traditions are distinct. Please don't confuse them. It's good to find the original language of the Biblical texts at times. Like repent versus do penance. I heard that the difference started the Reformation
@Anna-oc54sk thanks for the reply. I do appreciate my Catholic Catechism, but the penance and repent are defining issues. The Catechism is comprehensive. Many things I can work with.
I grew up Catholic went to church as child, did my first communion then stopped getting taken to church unsure why. I haven't received communion in over 15 years now I'm 25 (couple months ago) I was depressed, lost, angry and had pretty bad intrusive thoughts due to situations in my upbringing until 1 day I stumbled across a Pints with Aquinas video on pornography and starting from there I stopped watching other influencers, took my life seriously and stopped feeling sorry for myself. I've been trying to break free from the sins that I commit daily (still trying) relearning the teachings/traditions of Catholicism (reading the Catholic Bible, praying daily, watching/listening to Catholic content, etc) I have to say coming back to the faith has really been changing me for the better the way I act, talk and live though I still have many flaws just like everyone and need to stray away from the sins I commit but I will be going to confession on Saturday so that I may receive communion this Sunday for first time in many years.
🙏🏼💛
Excellent ☺️
You're awesome.
I am hispanic and that is a very common thing that happens. Same happened to me. I came back into the church and started learning about the faith after a life crisis. I hope more people have the humility you had to start looking into it and changing their world view and thus behaviors. May God bless you and use you for good and as an example to more people around you who have taken their faith and traditions for granted. Have fortitude in your faith. 🙂
Amazing!
I've really liked the visit with Brian. I'm not Catholic, but I have enjoyed both of your shows. I do appreciate the faith both of you have. I've learned so much about Catholics in the modern world. Thank you both.
These are my three top reasons people leave the faith. #1- They really don't know their faith in the first place. If they truly did, they would never leave. #2 - There is some rule or requirement of the faith they don't want to obey. Sin. So, choose another faith or sect so you won't have to violate your conscience. #3 - There is someone in the church that has disappointed you by their actions, scandalized you by being such a poor example, or even abused you or others in some way that it has shaken your belief. We must all remember, the church is perfect, not the people in it.
Let me preface this with saying im still Catholic.
Yes, "dont leave Jesus because of Judas". It's really difficult to stay Catholic when most Catholics you meet in the aftermath of being abused by a Catholic in a position of power over you act like Judas. I've met people who, in the aftermath of being abused, have had their fellow parishoners demonize them, priests either refuse to believe them or act afraid of them, and the diocese/bishop treat them primarily as a legal liability or opponent rather than as someone they need to protect and minister to.
And a lot of these people ARE still in the Church, still trying to be faithful. But some aren't, and I'd be lying if I said I didn't understand why.
@Uriah. The people ARE the church.
@@dottieryan5574Yes and no. We are not Protestants where every Christian is “the invisible church.” The church was also an institution given to us by Christ and is the pillar and foundation of truth. So Uriah’s comment makes sense.
All those reasons stem out from Vatican 2
@@dottieryan5574 You are describing the Protestant understanding of the Church.
God forbid that I should ever leave the faith!
As disturbing as it is to see faithful Catholics leave the church because of personal views on certain moral teachings, the bigger issue far and away is the brokenness of catholic faith formation. It’s better today than it was in the 80s and 90s, but Protestant churches are full of supposed converts from Catholicism. In realty, they are cradle Catholics who weren’t properly formed, but they still yearn for truth, so they grab hold to the first taste of truth they come across. Even if it lacks fullness and completeness.
most of them are people who cannot accept that religion will not bend to their lifestyle or the lifestyle of the people they know. so they hated the religion and go somewhere else who would convince them that they are welcome, that they will not be judge, although in reality these people don't know anything about the faith, like you said they are just cradle Catholics. most of them are just there for convenience.
@@emptylikeboxit seems you don’t have much experience with such people. Generally what I’ve seen is that Christians who leave the Catholic Church for a Protestant denomination are still passionate about Christ and rejecting sin, and aren’t looking for welcome exactly but rather a more genuine faith. They may be confused, and be making a mistake, but you’re attributing things to many that simply aren’t true, or charitable.
2020 revealed many things. The Church should’ve never closed for a single day during the great Covid spell. The fact they closed their doors when people needed them the most and adopted the most ridiculous measures showed me that the current leaders have other priorities and are serving a different agenda.
To take the body of Christ through a face mask and the Church doing drive through blessings and collections was something I haven’t let slide.
it was gov enforced in my country
@@spyroluver0951 It doesn't matter. Since when is the Church governed by local governments? Christianity was forbidden in all of Roman Empire for a few centuries, sometimes punishable by death. Should the early Christians obey the Emperor?
The church had a “Churchill moment” where it could have stood up when the government came to shut it down. It missed its moment, and a Church that once braved lions in the arena and rendered last rites in the midst of the Black Death, cowered and complied with nanny-state secular authorities. The Church accepted that is not an “essential service” (placing it below Walmart that kept its doors open) and shuttered its doors. It was a huge defeat that may take it a generation to recover.
@@damnedmadmanjust remember it was the local "church" not the Church
@@theregent3397 Even the smallest local church has responsibility first before God, not any government.
"Sin makes you stupid." Interesting 😂
It certainly does
I’m beginning to see the wisdom in describing faith as a ‘gift’ of the spirit as Saint Paul says. So many here in Ireland dropped it without really questioning if authentic faith was was ever there to begin with.
The theme I hear more with people I know is they don't want a churxh telling them what they can and can't do. In other words, they mostly want to do what they see everyone else doing and they think those people are getting away with it and they are not dropping dead so they think it can't be bad and the church is wrong and THEY are right. Pride.
Alternative idea, maybe they just recognize the church has no rational justification for forbidding those things? Perhaps the church is prideful for thinking it can command things without providing anything approaching rationale.
@@WaterCat5 lol! Perhaps they haven't looked deep enough to realized the faith it takes to be an atheist. Shallow views are the leading cause of mistaken conclusions. Philosophical language is hard to understand and so is admitting the flaws of human nature, but it can be learned and patterns throughout history can be found.
@@WaterCat5 The church doesn't forbid anything, Jesus and God do.
Mathew 33:13:-"but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved."
I think folks like Pints and Brian don't take into account the subconscious impact seeing the cowardice and knee-bending in the church hierarchy has on people. When we talk about why people leave, it's important to understand how the actions of others in the church, especially at the higher levels, can have a real impact on the average person. When someone says, "It just doesn't make sense to me." or similar, you have to realize that they have lived an entire life where they've seen the church constantly giving ground to the Leftist/Communist/Democrat machine. How could the average congregant understand things when they see their most knowledgeable and experienced people bowing to secularist ideology? How can you say that feminism and blm and whatever else isn't important when they can see their own leaders kneeling at that new altar?
There's something inherently off-putting about cowardice. We humans just don't respond well to it for some reason, so what do you think will happen when we can see the leaders of the faith exhibiting great cowardice, fearing the mobs of the Leftist Army so much that they now fly rainbow flags and embrace homosexuality? How can the average person not think that christianity just doesn't make sense when they can see how quickly christians are to fold, to kneel and beg for forgiveness from the most corrupt?
A good example of this would be when nancy pelosi's local archbishop declared publicly that she wasn't fit to receive communion. This was big news, and spread across the world through the Leftist controlled media. If the church had remained strong in that stance, the very same thing they've preached a the pulpit for decades, they'd have seen a surge in attendance. Instead, though, the archbishop in DC embraced pelosi and gave her communion even though she was openly and publicly calling for abortions, something that goes against the CORE doctrine of the faith. This was a very big deal. When even the church was split and the corruption was seen by everyone because the Leftist media made sure it was a top story for days, what message do you think that sent to the average people?
Or the whole McKarrick thing. How are we supposed to follow our vows when they can't follow theirs? Not an excuse maybe, but it IS really disheartening.
@@JP2GiannaT Yep. I tell folks that the church has embraced the Spirit of Judas, and that's why we see all this stuff going on. And it's not just the catholics. Everyone talks about how there's a decline in christian church attendance, but they always want to blame someone other than themselves. Who would want to join any club where they can see that the club doesn't enforce their own rules? If the club enforces their rules with an iron fist, nobody on the outside would complain one bit. It garners respect even if you don't like the club and don't want to be a member.
This is one of the reasons why I don't support missionary work. Get your own house in order before you start helping strangers. Give back to your own before you start giving to people in another country.
Politics is the flimsiest of human pursuits.
@@Christine-nt4lo Is it? Or is it the one thing that has the biggest and most immediate impact on your life and the lives of your family? You don't have to like it, but you will be ruled over by someone. Either you stand firm and control the politics, or someone else will.
Three Rivers, my friend. Yes, Jesus said Give unto Caesar… ,
Make sure your news sources are not winding you up.
In your own back yard, in your sphere, what are you doing?
I know about this, because I share your struggle.
Peace.
When I was 21, I ran away from the Catholic Church because I was afraid that God might have been calling me to the religious life. Very sadly, I was away from the Church for 30 years. I now know that my true vocation was marriage - my husband and I have been married for 40 years and ten years ago, our marriage was convalidated. However, my lapsed years coincided with our daughter's childhood and teens, and as result she wasn't raised a Catholic. (Thank God for the confessional.) Now that I'm back, my faith means more to me than ever before and the sacraments and the rosary are major parts of my life. So there is hope. Anyone out there who leaves the faith - God is still waiting for you in His Holy Church. I'll pray for you if you pray for me. 🙏
St. Padre Pio said that the Mass > the sun yet his last advice was love Mary and pray the rosary.
He begged to end the "council" quickly.
True. Thank you. Helpful.
These remarks could easily be stated by any Mainline Protestant about fellow believers, pastors, you name it.
Why do people leave?? Sometimes our religion was taken away from us. I was born into a Catholic family and went to a Catholic grade school. I was taught everything that was Catholic. Then came Vatican II, and everything changed. That which I was taught was scorned and ridiculed and I was told I was "behind the times" for not conforming to the new ways. I adhered to our traditional ways as much as I could, but eventually the news ways led me to become a Protestant...after all, that's where the new church was headed. After several years, I found the Traditional Latin Mass again and rejoined the Catholic Church. Two years ago, the priest who celebrated the Traditional Mass retired and the bishop apparently thought that was a good time to try and coax us traditionals back into the modernist church by not replacing our priest with someone who would or could celebrate the Traditional Mass. I will not go back to what drove me away and into Protestantism again. I'm in a part of southern Missouri where the Traditional Latin Mass is not available, so I just stay home. I didn't leave the church, it left me.
Yeah, in my opinion, something happened at vatican 2 and with them scrubbing away that mass. And this is coming from someone who wasn't born until the middle of the 90s.
No, I will not attend what drove me into Protestantism. You may say "But it's valid", but I say that a flat Pepsi is still a valid Pepsi, but it's best poured down the drain. @@Anna-oc54sk
@@Anna-oc54sk Catholicism is false.
In my experience, most people who leave who were enthusiastic about the faith at one point got caught up in some sin they really really like. In the end they rationalize Catholicism away so they can just do that sin without as much guilt.
For me, as I got older, the Bible/church makes less and less sense.
Church can not tell me the HumanSacrifice is wrong, yet sacrificing JC was a good thing. Also, why did JC have to be killed?
If the tomb was empty, then Christianity is true. And if Christianity is true, then the Church is the foundation of it.
I personally struggle with Christianity myself. There is something about it that feels not for me. I was watching the Bible study thing that Jordan Peterson was doing and the more I watched it the more distant I felt. It feels like I am appropriating a culture that isn’t mine. I am not jewish or from the middle east, yet Christianity is overwhelmingly culturally jewish. It feels like it’s for the people of that region where they are the chosen people and all others are God’s afterthought. Let’s not forget all the changes that had to be made to attract people in Europe.
Christianity is a struggle, by definition. If anybody has ever told you that it's easy and fun, forget about it and don't listen to them ever again. True Christianity, as taught by the Catholic Church, is hard. It's a sacrifice. The purpose of a Christian life is to make a sacrifice of our own desires, to follow Jesus against our desires, even to death if need be. There's no better testimony of your faith, of your hope for eternal life, your trust in God against all odds, than to surrender to Him your life already here on Earth, every day, till the end. This is a bet, and don't expect anything in return, not even nice feelings. No, even your own body will be against you. And yes, you need to learn a good deal about Jewish culture and history, and old Judaism, if you want to actually understand your faith. For example the notion or sacrifice - it was much easier to understand Jewish sacrifices from the perspective of pagans than from modern atheists and agnostics, who rule the world of today. For modern people even the meaning of sacrifice has changed to mean "give up", "yield" or "resign", totally forgetting about the Sacrum, the sacredness.
You can’t follow a religion just because it feels good to you. It all comes down to whether or not the tomb was empty.
I felt as you did once. But by that point I had worked my way through philosophy and religion as a whole, and it was clear to me, intellectually at least, that God is real and Christianity is true. I struggled mightily for several years from that point, praying sometimes and despairing often, attending a church sporadically and hating it. I was apathetic at times, depressed at times. But I continued trying to turn to God and ask him to show me the way. One day, I woke up and found that God had given me faith, and I was finally at peace. I still am uncomfortable with much of the cultural aspect of modern Christianity, but now Christ lives within me and comfort is never far away.
“Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.”
Leave the Sacraments, especially the Eucharist.
Yeah, NO
It is good for an interested Protestant to hear the good and bad sides of the Catholic church. I am curious as to what would happen if the unthinkable happens, like gay marriages approved. Would Catholics stay or would there be another schism? The reason i ask is that one of the reasons given that we should all be Catholic is that it is the unending Church that Jesus started. But would you conservative Catholics stay and still be Catholic?
"There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church". This attitude towards other Christians. I've seen it many times.
This doesn't mean that non-Catholics can't go to heaven. It simply means that in heaven, everyone will be a Catholic. At the moment of death, when we see the truth, we must accept it and repent of our errors. And therein lies the rub: Catholics may have an easier time of it, because they already know the most about the truth. But they will be judged more harshly because of it. Protestants will have to convert then, but won't be judged more harshly if they know less. What is important for all those who want to enter paradise is the search for truth and the effort to love God with all your heart and one's neighbor as oneself.
I'm hanging in there with the Church, and God willing I'll continue too, but having the American Church become more and more the Republican Party at prayer makes it challenging.
Don't ask why people are leaving the Catholic Church. Ask why the Catholic Church is leaving them.
The Catholic church doesn't leave people
Seriously, are we talking Secavandist here, or are we talking lack of pastoral accompaniment for people in difficult situations? Either Taylor Marshall or Pope Francis could say what you've said, so you definitely need to elaborate.
The church has failed to resonate with modern people. Don’t blame the people for the church’s failure to reach them, please. When you just sing for an hour and are shocked why people haven’t found Christ, well I shouldn’t say anymore.
@@HappyG1lm0rewhat do you mean by 'resonate'? Change all the teachings and values, to suit modern secular culture?
I would say: ask both. But the answer seems rather simple: The World has a lot more to offer today than it ever used to, and the modern Catholic Church has seemingly less than ever. It's no longer easy or profitable to be truly Catholic. Even less to become a monk or priest. It's the time of trial and as one might expect, sadly few people actually resist the temptation to go with the World. Many are still fooling themselves that you can somehow do both, but they usually end up with the World. The new generations of true Catholics will be radical like the Early Church, or nonexistent.
if we will deny, He will also deny us;
if we are not faithful, He remains faithful, for to deny Himself He cannot. 2 Timothy 2:13. Stand with Jesus and you will never fail because Jesus as God is the Ultimate REALITY. More real than any other existence and beyond all comprehension. "The heaven and the earth will pass away, but My words shall not pass away"(Matthew 24:35). A man is as good as his word, and the words of Jesus are more real than the universe things seen and unseen.
I've heard a lot about "sin darkening intellect", but it only seems to be in contexts where the accuser could easily be guilty of confirmation bias.
If you think im unethical because i can't access some obiective truth, you'll always correlate my disagreement on ethical matters with my faliure to grasp this truth, when it is the existence of this truth that I'm contesting in the first place (so you're question-begging)
Are there any empirical studies that show, say, reduced mathematical skills among people who've had multiple sexual partners? Or better yet, a correlated decline in verbal/ non-verbal reasoning as the number of ""sins"" in a controlled population increases?
Without that, I'm afraid i just roll my eyes at the triumphalist, literally 'holier-than-thou' excuses.
I'm not sure that linking mathamatical aptitude with social consequences or actions is a fair test for morality. Examples abound of people who are artistic, or mathematical geniuses who fail absolutely spectacularly at life on a societal or personal level.
I hear your objection about confirmation bias, but i think a better way to go about it is to study what happens to your decision making capabilities when you engage in certain behaviors, not your mathematical or logical aptitude. Your social decsions and your IQ have been pretty firmly established not to be the same thing at this point.
TL;DR: I think we need to define what exactly is meant by "intellect"
You sound really dumb though, because instead of discussing the real prospect that selfish desire could cause us to accept a logical fallacy, you just engage in logical fallacy in lieu of argument.
Your argument only makes sense from an alternative religious point of view. If you accept that there is right and wrong, and that doing wrong can make us make bad intellectual choices, then you could argue, “but I don’t agree with you about what is wrong, because I follow an alternate set of rules, and therefore what you say is impinging on my rational thought, isn’t.” All you do is pretend that there is no way that deliberately immoral acts can affect our thinking. Which is stupid.
Darkening the intellect does not mean lowering your IQ or making you less good at math. Perhaps you should take a deeper look at St Thomas Aquinas' argument on the subject rather than dismissing it based on your own confirmation bias.
It has much more to do with lessening your ability to reason through consequences to your actions. It is not difficult to understand in the slightest. Someone who tells his first lie is pricked by his conscience. If he doesn't deal with it and lies again his conscience becomes clouded over time and it becomes easier and easier to lie. That is the same with any sin. Corruption doesn't happen over night. It doesn't even take faith to see the truth in that.
you are misrepresenting what is being said, partially because intellect has not been defined. It is most certainly not referring to just pure intellect otherwise no atheist or etc. could be smart. I personally don't understand this myself, but I think it is talking about the ordered sense of reason which allows you to see and interact with God. Sin makes it obscure. This is also not a philosophical concept it is a theological concept. There is 0 point in you providing a philosophical argument in response. It is a cause and effect. If sin exists, and sin affects the soul, then sin most certainly affects the intellect and will since that is what is the primary faculties of the soul? If there is a supernatural order, then it makes sense it affects the natural order. If the supernatural exists, then it makes sense that there is a supernatural explanation. But this assumes the soul even exists, and you will say that's question begging, which is why I am saying it is a theological concept. It is something that is understood in light of faith, and not without it.
Exactly
The Catholic Church is One, Holy, Apostolic and ETERNAL! The people who run things here on earth are just that - people!. I have to keep having to remind myself that 'they' are not the Catholic Church, I am, we are! Every baptised Catholic IS the Catholic Church. WE leave, or WE stay.
I live as if even if I end up going to hell, it woud be just, daily rosery helps alot.
Christian fundamentalism isn't the only valid practice of Christianity.
They leave the faith because they were illformed by never fully being taught the deposit of faith.
I’m the first to like the video!😅😂#fanboy
Monsignor Nicola Bux wrote about this.
I left because of bible self contradiction. I wasn't catholic I was just a general Christian. I honestly don't know where I'm at, I still want to be a Christian but I don't believe the Bible is inerrant. I've considered remaining a Christian but just denying the doctrine of biblical inerrancy but I don't know, I'd be a heretic by the standard of pretty much every church in the world, the only ones that'd accept me are some protestants that forgo creeds entirely. I'd also be going against certain passages that seem to support inerrancy and how could I determine what doctrines to believe and what church to join if I can't trust the bible?
I still believe in God. According to acts 17 I still believe in the same God. I've been interested in shamanism just for the sake of being connected to a tradition, but I don't know if I want to get involved with magic, I'm no longer bound to believe witchcraft is of the devil but I imagine if magic is real serious magic can probably melt your face off if you mess it up.
Listen to the Bible in a Year Podcast with Fr. Mike and see if that helps you put the big story of salvation history in perspective and makes sense to you.
What is self contradicting about the Bible? Maybe we can walk through this if you'd like. I have a few things in mind of what you may be referring to.
Some are treated like sons of the priests others like sons of the world. In a era where millenia of faith history is available. You are shut down for simply stating basic truth. We suffer once more the wicked baby boomers that facing death whant once more everything tailor made for them. Our elders especially the priests are the wicked generation.
Hi Brian & Matt - i have to say something in me has changed ! i reckon you guys are a bit cozey & cotton wooled & though i disagree w Francis' decision re latin mass, he has a big point to make & you've missed it ! He is RIGHT, that like a franciscan in the sense Chesterton discusses in ch.6 on his book on that saint, if you don't get out for the poor & lost to evangelise and get dirty doing it, then we can say the right things, attend the nicest liturgies but we're not obeying God. And... latin Mass is great & i disagree w his decison. HOWEVER, quit the daydream... latin Mass has not spread at all, except in 2 countries out of 180, meaning not at all, sorry to disappoint you but you ARE in a bubble, whilst you guys are in trouble with God for not doing the following: he's calling you not to latinise Mass, but i agree you can show for that if you prefer it, i'm in favor of keeping that nice diversity... however, God has called you to work, form a movement to improve reverence in the Novus Ordo & make it consistent with what Vatican II really meant... YET even though it has not even attempted to be what it is, thereby not giving it even a chance, you adopt a cozy, cigar smoking, dreamy traditionalism that simply does this: you don't DO it... you don't do what the cry in your heart calls you to (namely, to initiate a call for greater reverence REGARDLESS entirely of which liturgy people use, novus or latin or other - & note the Devil LOVES any division, any is good for him).... see, you truly in the US risk (bc the church there is simply massive in size & has for that reason only, greater voice), dividing the church by putting the superior (bullshit, but keep talkin', it's lovely but not superior, nor should this slightly affected cafeterianism be taken too seriously) latin Mass as the best option... sorry, but most people that adore that Mass are artistic, puntctilious, intellectual types, or most if not all, & tons & tons (VAST majority) prefer a good reverent N.O. in their own language... you are not nearly as in touch with the reality beyond US & France, the ONLY nations where there is a nonetheless also minority movement to the lovely Latin Mass. But i agree it is lovely, but, meantime, DO what the cry in your heart called you to, since it seems you prefer to avoid that harder task & ghetto down w your highly intellectualised catholic pals & feel warm & right in such discussions as sometimes appear very charming on fradd's show etc. & whilst there's always one or two of you who are super active to make you think you're getting out and doing it, therefore, Francis is wrong. But, he's Pope and his job is to make general statements, &.... he's GENERALLY right & you're generally wrong & out of it, based on what i said above. Meantime, i remain an enthusiastic listener to you guys, but after reading Chesterton's chapters in his book on St Francis, your model of rebuilding a totally broken church is more insular than your eyes have managed to see, far far more ... step out a bit more from your comforting highly intellectual circles & you may be forced to tougher questions.... but i see how warm blanketed you are in the charming cultural heritage etc. which down on the ground souls rarely if ever see or get or are able to... reverent novus ordo will likely simply bring more to Christ today... but it's that reverencing of those liturgies that fascinatingly NEVER occurs to you dudes to ever truly act on rather than whiniing about endlessly to zero effect or so it seems... isn't that your call & isn't that obvious !! in an emperor wearing no clothes sort of way... i'm just amazed people like you, none of you, have not started that movemement: that silences the entire (for some) tedious, petty, pedantic debate about how lovely (with a cocked wrist & much sentiment) latin liturgy is versus novus, but that boring divisie speech ought be silenced, by a movement indifferent to liturgical preference & simply creating resources etc. to promote REVERENCE... REGARDLESS of liturgical preference. It reminds of Martin Luther Kings logic, we're dignified despite our various identities in one humanity, not because of them. We're united in REVERNCE for God despite liturgical difference, not because of them - & you've not got it clearly enough. WELL. I say, the emperor is not wearing clothes, you are not serving your call fully yet. Or, show me where i'm wrong, please!!!!!! i welcome it, but doubt you can do it...
Bros got the opposite of male pattern baldness. I bet he doesn’t need a helmet when biking. Forget helmet hair the hair is the helmet. 😂
Can u please talk about why there is catholic marriage in Catholic Church Before 1917 the church allowed 12-year-old girls and 14-year-old boys to get married to someone no matter how much older. A 12-year-old is only 3 years older than Aisha when she had sex with Muhammad at 53. According to the church, it would been okay if she was 12 with a 53-year-old. Even though Aisha didn't have a period yet she could have had a period at 9. A 9 and 12-year-old are still going through puberty. That is hypocritical to say it's not okay for a 9-year-old but it's okay for a 12-year-old. Even though the church raised the minimum to 14 for girls and 16 for boys they still have no age restriction. Meaning a 14-year-old and a 50-year-old could marry. Even if it doesn't happen often the problem is the church allows it to.
The church yes did have the minimum age requirement. I don’t believe the situation you are talking about would be encouraged by the church though having someone much older with someone say 12 years old. It seems like the rules differed based on the bishops, but i think even though there wasn’t a restriction on that doesn’t mean it’s something the church would encourage
Love to hear your sources for that.
I'm also curious where other religions' lines were on this at the same time.
@@JP2GiannaT The church canon tells us the age for marriage what other source would I need
@@princessc660 I think the earlier one needs to be understood that it was common for people to marry earlier those days, there is no good scientific understanding, higher education was not a rlly thing, and life expectancy was shorter, perhaps even status of a woman could be improved or smth. There are probably some other factors.
I have read somewhere (don't remember where) that the church states that the age of marriage should be to something higher if the law in that country demands a higher age e.g. say the church marriage is 14, if the legal is 18, you go with the legal age. It is supposed to only prevent marriages strictly under this age. In short, it is not saying this is the minimum age of marriage but rather, anything below this is not valid or smth like that.
Finally, i would imagine, there is no specific age restriction because the church forsees some potential reason in why allowing this could be acceptable, I personally haven't thought about it, so I could not provide a good reason. It is a discipline practice not doctrine, the church can most certainly error on this part, especially when it's not explicitly faith or morals. Our Lord never gave an age restriction for marriage, neither now or in the ancient jews, most likely for like I mentioned earlier, there may be a range of circumstances where it is good. I think we have to understand a 14 year old has to choose the 50 year old, hopefully has licit reasons in doing so.
@@princessc660Canon law is age 15, I thought. You're saying it was updated to that from 12?
Why? Bcz *"The grass looks greener on the other side"* and *NOT* bcz of our inherent sinful nature. Bcz after having grown up within the Catholic coral, some people at some point want to do more to do more than just observe from within the coral. Especially when they see that outside there's some attractive attractions that are simply NOT available within the coral. This thing happens to all other sorts of corals, not just Catholic. Therefore to blame the "wanderlust" on sin our sinful nature is NOT a proper assessment. That the Church tries to stop this bleed out with draconian measures (sort of like the N.Korea form) obviously has not & is not working. Bcz *"the grass looks greener on the other side"* Catholics become non-Catholics & non-Catholics become Catholic.
In sum, why do people wander into & out of Catholicism? For the same reason they do with everything else. No, NOT bcz of our inherent sinful nature but simply bcz no religion or philosophy contains "the whole cheese"
Why? Bcz while the church is full of wisdom but it doesn't have a monopoly on it
Ultimately the compass that will help navigate us thru the oceans of life, is within
The Bible has the wisdom and some within the Judeo Christian traditions are good at explaining many things.
It's in the nature of man to have agenda's
& manipulate. We cannot expect the complete truth to have been left in scripture that has passed thru many hands & even a gov't.
Do U trust man & gov't today? There's your answer. The Bible is not an exception for not being prone to manipulation by men with agendas.
In any case, however, the Bible is principally about faith, not history, science technology & such. For worldly wisdom one needs study worldly things, which have a place. But about heavenly things we need study Godly wisdom bcz that is where we hope to spend eternity and for which knowledge of worldly things will be inadequate
@@Anna-oc54sk It seems you believe in the one size fits all approach to theology. The truth truth is that the Catholic church cannot dictate what is or is not best for every individual without considering other extenuating circumstances. But this is why you accuse me of moral relativism. You prefer the "by the book" approach to interpretation. I don't exactly.
And as I said, the Pope is NOT my savior. God is and by who's grace we are saved.
The constant teaching of the Catholic Church throughout the ages has been that salvation is bestowed alone by God's grace.
Salvation is applied through faith. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says, “Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation” (page 44, paragraph #161).
@Anna-oc54sk moral relativism and Judeo Christian traditions are distinct. Please don't confuse them. It's good to find the original language of the Biblical texts at times. Like repent versus do penance. I heard that the difference started the Reformation
@Anna-oc54sk thanks for the reply. I do appreciate my Catholic Catechism, but the penance and repent are defining issues. The Catechism is comprehensive. Many things I can work with.