I am an Evangelical who likes to read about Church History. That made me more and more interested in Catholic Doctrine. It really connects us to the Apostles and the Church Fathers...
I was a cradle Catholic who rejected the Catholic Church and organized religion as a teen and at 34 was drawn into studying the Bible by a Jehovah Witness. Fortunately my Baptist friend gifted me with an NIV translation to protect me. My Lutheran grandmother begged me to return to the Catholic Church rather than be baptized as a Witness and out of my love and respect for her I started looking for a church to place me on the path to heaven. It was the 90s and the priest scandal kept me away from her advice but By Gods Grace I became a PCA evangelical teaching children for 20 years, memorizing and reading scripture and falling in love with Jesus.
To continue I hit the wrong button. It was the Readings of the early church fathers that reopened my eyes to the Eucharist and the Real Presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament that cemented my return to the Catholic Church. Read John chapter 6 carefully. Listen to Scott Hahn a former Evangelical minister and study his scripture proofs. As an evangelical I knew my Bible and it convinced me Jesus sits in the tabernacle humbled and expectant waiting for His children to acknowledge and follow Him. Read John 6 Jesus is explicit and many followers turned away in disgust not wanting to be cannibals. He did not run after them to explain it as a ‘figure of speech’. He let them go.
Praise God! The more one seeks truth and studies Church History, the more one will be led back to the one holy Apostolic Church that Our Lord Jesus Christ founded.
I really enjoy all your pod casts and in a "I Guess" funny way every time I listen to them it's like the first time because I'm 81+ years old and don't remember from one day to the next what has been discussed.
I'm currently reading Measure for Measure and it struck me, listening to this talk, that Shakespeare is perhaps exploring these three concepts within this play. Especially in Act 2 Sc 2. Thank you Bishop Barron for another excellent talk.
I most appreciated your answer to a viewer's question. A hymn I came across recently dating from the 1860s has found a special place in my heart recently. One of the verses: "And none, O Lord, have perfect rest, for none are fully free from sin; and they who seek to love Thee best are conscious most of wrong within." Our rest, ultimately, must be found in Christ, not in our inadequate efforts to please Him.
I dont know R. Barron's academic background but he is exceptionally well read on these ethical debates that extend beyond the remits of Christian teaching. I was lucky enough to go to an excellent university and read philosophy but this man has such a finer understanding of ethics than I have managed to.
Such an interesting, insightful and uplifting talk. Thank you both. From Romano Guardini: "...It is as great a mistake to think that only that virtue is genuine which springs naturally from one’s disposition as it is to say that only that is ethical which is acquired with pain and toil. Both are virtue, morally formed humanity, but only realized in different ways. (...)They must discipline themselves, begin again after each failure and do battle for orderliness. In this way, the character of the virtue in them is something conscious and toilsome, eventually reaching a certain degree of naturalness, but always endangered. Guardini, Romano. Learning the Virtues: That Lead You to God (p. 6). Sophia Institute Press. Kindle Edition.
After all there *IS* something called *Catholic Morality☆* The better we will all be for welcoming it with a *B-I-G HEART.* And no one like Bishop Barron to let us get started! (Pre-Premier Comment)
Reminded of the novel “crime and punishment.” The central conflict of the book hinges on whether we can justify an evil act based on what comes of it or who you are.
When I was going to confess something clarified my mind: For there to be a sin there has to be 3 conditions. If the 3 conditions are not present there was not a mortal sin. That is what people doesn't understand when judging others. Normal people doesn't have the discernment to know this about others. I am seing this video searching for the concept of in Spanish: Conflicto de deberes etc. I heard it here too. May God give me the life to listen, study and apply all the concepts of this video.
Thank you +Baron for a succinct summary. It would be useful to explore further the issue of morality in war. This is not theoretical for me and countless others who seek to live their lives in extreme situations of violence. In the 80s I lived and worked in a country at war with itself. Violence, famine, poverty and disease were an everyday reality. Making decisions in such a context was difficult. My moral framework became, ‘it’s never right to do wrong but sometimes it is necessary’. Upon my return home (New Zealand), I came to see the same existential dilemmas applied here in less extreme circumstances only we kid ourselves it doesn’t. I get it that this decision framework can create difficulties though I think this is true for the all the frameworks you outline. No one is good but God alone. This is why I rest in the Grace of God.
BTW my view of the law is that it gives us the content of Grace. Consequently, a life lived in gratitude before God is transformative. “Love God and do what you want”.
“Everything can happen, everything is possible and probable. Time and place do not exist; on an insignificant basis of reality the imagination spins, weaving new patterns; a mixture of memories, experiences, free fancies, incongruities and improvisations.” ― August Strindberg, A Dream Play.
Really helpful overview of framework for Catholic ethics and how it has the strengths of other systems, avoids their limitations, and goes far beyond them too. So well articulated. Thx Bishop
The problem is, that right now our culture is the one teaching our kids the basics of how to live, and it is making an awful job. Companies are defining our cultural values, driven by a never ending thirst of profits. Parents cannot compete with the bombardment of content in the media manipulating and molding the moral landscape of children. You can tell your children a hundred times not to lie, but they see many thousand times in the media that it is ok to lie, that it is normal, and that everybody is doing it with no consequences.
Excellent discussion. A good book to compliment the discussion on virtue ethics from a different angle might be "Peak" by Anders Ericsson on how top achievers work, which echos many of the things discussed here.
Preach the gospel at all times and ... sometimes use words😀. I agree - paper has soul, lol😂. Also for the question, get people to empower their own journey in Christ. Once they are brought in , let them begin to pray and listen and let God draw them near in their walk with Him. Pray, listen, learn, go forward. 😃
Excellent video! I was very pleased to hear you mention Pinckaers. He is my favorite contemporary moral theologian to read. He greatly shaped my own moral thought and teaching! Similarly, I agree that Veritatis Splendor is one of Pope St. John Paul II's best encyclicals, which is saying something, since there were so many great ones.
Brandon frantically tries to fill out the amazon kindle returns form as he realises buying his Christmas presents early this year was NOT a good idea after all.
Wow! This is how to avoid Kantianism or Pharisee-ism (or Canon Lawyerism?) - don't begin with the law. That insight about not beginning with law is magnificent, Bishop Barron! Begin with the basic goods that lead us to happiness and even supernatural joy. Then move to habits and virtues, which orient us to those goods that makes us happy. Then move to law which gives form to habits/virtues which allow us to attain the goods that make us happy. Truly human - finally, but not first, the law supports joy.
... “... don’t begin with the law.” Really? Because Paul’s clear teaching in the New Testament is that the law is the starting point. It is the schoolmaster which leads us to Christ. Paul says that he wouldn’t have known sin except by the law. It is impossible for any person to love other people, as Jesus commanded, without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit which is given as a down payment and a promise that God will redeem that person in the future. The Holy Spirit is the power by which we do good works. Furthermore, the Catholic Church teaches that grace is dispensed piece meal through the Eucharist and other such adherences, including good works. Paul taught we are saved by grace through faith, and also that we were created (new creatures) in Christ Jesus to perform good works. The Catholic Church teaches that good works are necessary to be saved. The protestant teaches that they are the result of being born again ie saved.
@@memowilliam9889 Paul doesn't say the law is the starting point, but rather that the law makes sin apparent. "I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law". The law has its purpose, but it can't be defined without initial reference to "the good". So, Bishop Barron is correct, approaching through a Thomistic, rather than a Pauline lens, though both Paul and Thomas would agree.
The Image of Divine Mercy Jesus is more than a painting, it is meant to draw us toward Jesus and His merciful heart. It's also a reminder of the demands of our Lord's mercy, "Even the strongest faith is of no avail without works". (Diary 742
Hi, Bishop Barron. I don't know if this relates to the topic but do you mind explaining how and why a particular thought, as trivial as it may seem, can constitute sin. For example, engaging the will to relish sexual thoughts without any intent of performing any sexual act. I'm trying to explain it to a non Christian colleague. Thanks.
I noticed a change of mental register in your presentation, bishop. When you say: « I’ve been following the 10 commandements since my childhood....good, now you are ready for the high octane stuff. » I get the leap you are proposing, but one may have been habituated to following the 10 fundamentals as processed by a consequentialist deontological software. Hence, he, I assure you, cannot move to the high octane stuff as the habituation was shaped by a software incapable of processing from a different architecture. Here, I speak from experience. Since I was a child, the Church has gradually hardwired a consequentialist software to a point where I held beatitudo as what God owed me as a consequence of having held my side of the bargain. I suffered through a severe and deep depression (no kidding) to painfully come to trust God in installing His software. Please, monseigneur, do not discount the pain so many of us may go through in letting God undo the consequentialist software my generation had had installed by clerical authorities committed to our beatitudo. I regularly listen to you and thank you for the sensical and sensitive way to transformation you have been gifted to gifting others. Love, Lévis
Dear Levis, I am not part of the WOF other than as a subscriber. I know too well the consequentialist mindset. The clerical authorities and a few family religious failed to convey to this boomer the deep abiding infinite Love Our Lord has for every human. After a period away from the church, I decided to seek the Truth independently and far from such corrupt minds. This was no small effort, to undue the painful habits of mind that were destroying the gifts I received in Baptism, alone. With a restive hunger and determination to know the truth eventually I was led to the Spiritual Exercises of St Ignatius Loyola and an awareness of the Lord"s Love for (us) me , in this case. I experienced the supernatural Joy of His Love and Light. And I now live a life filled with the Holy Spirit. Every day is not perfect though on balance more good than bad. Forgiveness is a powerful Virtue. Seek and You will find! Knock and the door with be opened. I will keep you in my Prayers.
@@tomgreene2282 I had to look that up because Jansenism is close in spelling to Jainism (an Indian religion) and I always mix up the two. Remember, that North America had Puritan and Jansenism movements historically. So seeing that being embedded in the culture of many churches here (Canada to a lesser extent than the States though) is common. Some of them left Europe because they felt it was "impure" so that could account for the rigidity. Of if they're from the Reformist Calvinist sect which basically teach there is no free will, and place an emphasis on original sin causing Judgment as well.
@@tomgreene2282 It's likely an influence in the culture. It's not just limited to our Protestant sects either. My aunt said that my Catholic grandfather came from a school of thought that if one didn't have all the Sacraments that you were destined for Hellfire no matter what you did. (This was in relation to the fact that I wasn't Christened, he told me this himself) Some of those views must have gotten into Catholic doctrine as well because I can't find a consensus on that viewpoint from official RCC sources here. My aunt thinks it could have been the time period he was raised in as well. Most Catholic Churches in Canada aren't at that level so I'm not certain which was more influential.
I criticized Taylor Marshall (and other reactionaries) for attacking Bishop Barron, but while I thought he was being unfair, I see BB has taken many public actions against the insanity in our society today, and given much clear and assertive moral teaching. it may not be enough for his critics (for some it is never enough), but they can't claim he's done nothing!
One important point missed in this talk: grace/the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Aquinas’ moral theology would not be understood well without first of all including grace. Even in the introduction of I-II he explains that morality is the movement of the rational being in God ( de motu rationalis creaturae in Deum). Without grace, we would not be able to be perfect and holy (Mat 5:48).
I guess I'm a consequentialist then for the most part. To me what matters is the help or harm that actions cause, not necessarily the actions themselves. Lying to someone to hurt them vs lying to protect Anne Frank in your attic sort of thing. Killing someone out of jealousy vs killing to defend yourself. Ultimately morality will always be relative in this way to thinking people.
I'm a little hesitant to include Finnis in the natural law tradition, as I am skeptical that the "New Natural Law" thinkers (Finnish among them), are really faithful to the natural law tradition which flows from St. Thomas.
As someone that majored in the visual arts in college I find the sentiment about destroying, “beautiful things” as inherently evil to be quite an interesting idea. This is just my bias showing, but I have felt that once art became entangled with post-modernism a lot of people seemed to turn against beauty as a worthwhile pursuit. I’m not saying that beauty has to look a certain way. But it seems to me that the intent behind the creation of what we deem to be art changed around the time of the Dadaists and especially after Michel Duchamp. To an extent, I do think it is healthy for the arts to kinda push the boundaries, otherwise we’d just make kinda hackneyed beidermeiered art. Yet, it seems that the pursuit of the visually beautiful, whatever that means, is no longer a goal for many artists and I think that’s kinda too bad.
I am inclined to think that Free Will is an attribute of God Himself who is perfectly, morally exercised. When He created human, man was endowed with free will, but falling short of perfection. God offered Adam and Eve all His love for the sharing, but God demands by testing Adam and Eve to love Him back on their own free will from their mind. But, disobedience happened to a simple sanction of not to eat the forbidden fruit, so the story went as we all understand...
I would almost sign up to Christianity to be a member of that wonderful cuddly naive sheep pack.. But I'm not that naive and I think it's rubbish.. But I definitely admire the moral values you proclaim to have...
On Bishop Barron's point about not being able to attack a basic good, and citing ending the world war by fire bombing Germany, stating that it was wrong to do that and in violation of a basic good, and that it doesn't matter if that ended the war or not, there was no justification for ending the hundreds of thousands of lives that course of action claimed. What would you have had us do, back then, if you were in that pair of shoes, witnessing this and having to deal with it first hand yourself? Would you have just let Germany, who was intent on violating a whole collection of basic goods, trample over everyone and everything and get away with such an act of evil? Or would you have stood and fought against that to protect who and what you love from someone clearly on destroying and violating what you love? Or without love in the equation, even without that, my argument still holds, would you have stood against that and done what you had to do to stop them from violating several basic goods? How would you have defended against that and put a stop to that while adhering to the Word of God and the teachings of Jesus?
I am not just poking the bear on this topic just to poke the bear and be obnoxious. I genuinely want to know what Bishop Barron would say to my argument and question about this as a practicing Catholic looking for learning. This happens to touch on something that is very important to my own life.
Can someone enlighten me on the name Bishop keeps mentioning - "Finnis". Is that the right spelling or can someone please tell me. Is he referring to John Finnis? Thanks Ray (Singapore)
All we need are the ten commandments and the teachings of Christ. I don't see the reason to figure out what morality is when it has already been mapped out. Maybe I'm missing something?
Anyone know of any seminary that's put it's philosophy/theology lectures up on UA-cam? I think it'd be a great evangelical tool. I say this, knowing the saying "see a need, fill a need" so i could go ask professor to record, but if theyre already out their I'd like to know.
You oppose , then, the dropping of the atomic bomb as to the argument that it saved one million American lives as to an invasion of Japan would cost ???
I'm having some trouble understanding this doctrne and how it's not in violation to the truth of God. It's blasphemous for me to visualize a "walk with God" that isn't mediated and authorized by Christ Himself. You see, the problem with Catholicism is that it doesn't line up to the gospel preached by Christ and His disciples. The veneration of man has plauged this doctrine it's entire time in exstence. It's wrong to veiw anyone as your mediator to God The Father, because Christ is that for us. That's the entire meaning of the gospel of truth.
Why is Bishop Barron just encouraged Catholics reading the lives of th saints? He always shows off his being knowledgeable but I don't find any evangelization on all of his talks. He doesn't even remind or encouraged his audience to pray the Holy Rosary. You don't even start your talk with sincere prayers!!!
I don't know much about Joe Rogan really - is it true that he is highly critical of the Catholic Church as an institute of oppression (as per the sometimes reliable Wikipedia description)? If so, what are his main issues (i.e. confusions)?
@@angelicdoctor8016 he'll probably play dumb, bring in DMT like topics off the bat and lead his viewers to more confusion. Joe Rogan could have a conversation with the Bishop with a neutral person to steer the conversation but going to Joe's field and playing by his rules won't be prudential. (Personal opinion)
did he mention ten commandments. oh yes thats just kids stuff., jesus evolution to two comandments . theology of seven sins seven virtes. confession and forgivness of sin. much more understandable than this highbrow philisophical mud. instead of hypothetical train example discuss drone strikes, breaking not kill command. In the film the mission de niro goes for kill, jeremy irons went for marterdom. by this example i was tickeled by Chestertons thread of catholic religion. only saints manage the ten we and our society break them all the time.
Those catholics who defend Catholicism above all are not helping Christianity where are they in faith and belief, they are catholics without understanding think of god father of all,bot a god with favorites, and when some consider the favorite then we have conflicts, and that's where we are , so how could we ever understand unity in diversity.
My (limited) understanding of the Catholic position on trolly problem. You pull the switch which results in the 1 guy dying bc pulling a switch isn't intrinsically evil, and you're not intending the death of the 1 man, rather saving the 4. But you couldn't say push a fat man in front of the train to stop it because deliberitly pushing a man in front of a train is intrinsically evil, it's murder. I would have the intent of killing the guy.
I guess one could argue that the central intent is still to stop the train and not to kill the man, in a similar manner as to how a teacher taking a bullet to protect a student would not exactly be the same as attempted suicide. *However,* the fact that the hypothetical fat man is being pushed onto the tracks against his will, rather than it being his own free choice, is probably what would make this act evil, especially if the person was innocent. Pulling the lever is an attempt to save five people, with one death as a side-effect, whereas the fat man scenario arguably involves a person’s free will being robbed too, forcefully turning him into the instrument to save someone at the certain expense of his own life.
I think that's almost it, Mark. Feel free to rebut. I have one correction (at least I think it's a correction). For the fat man example, you actually might not have the intent to kill the guy (e.g., you might think he'll survive). However, by object (not intention) - think object, circumstance, intention regarding determination of the goodness of a moral act - it's as you say, an intrinsic evil. Being evil by object is sufficient to make the entire act evil, since if any of object, circumstance, or intention is evil, the entire act is evil (i.e. privated of something that ought to be present in the act - in this case, a privation of protecting the fat man/valuing his life).
@@angelicdoctor8016 I do not think we are in any real disagreement here, so I likely cannot "rebut" anything. When I stated that the fat man scenario would involve "a person’s free will being robbed too, forcefully turning him into the instrument to save someone at the certain expense of his own life", that phrase appears to allude to how you mentioned "a privation of protecting the fat man/valuing his life". I guess if I were to word anything differently, I would probably say "a privation of valuing that innocent fat man's freedom, over whether he wills to give his life or not in this situation". So I concluded that taking the proposed action in the fat man scenario, or pushing an innocent bystander against his will into an oncoming bullet's path to save someone else (if we wanted a more realistic version of that moral thought experiment), would be intrinsically evil on that front.
So aborting a child when you discover that either you, the mother, and or, the child could die if your foetus is not aborted. Is this ok morally to abort? To save yourself?
Hi I am a Roman catholic living in Canada. I am on my way toward salvation through continuing faith development and a resolve to love our Lord.
Shalom be with Youz Bishop Barron and Brandon. Amen and amen.
I am an Evangelical who likes to read about Church History. That made me more and more interested in Catholic Doctrine. It really connects us to the Apostles and the Church Fathers...
I was a cradle Catholic who rejected the Catholic Church and organized religion as a teen and at 34 was drawn into studying the Bible by a Jehovah Witness. Fortunately my Baptist friend gifted me with an NIV translation to protect me. My Lutheran grandmother begged me to return to the Catholic Church rather than be baptized as a Witness and out of my love and respect for her I started looking for a church to place me on the path to heaven. It was the 90s and the priest scandal kept me away from her advice but By Gods Grace I became a PCA evangelical teaching children for 20 years, memorizing and reading scripture and falling in love with Jesus.
To continue I hit the wrong button. It was the Readings of the early church fathers that reopened my eyes to the Eucharist and the Real Presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament that cemented my return to the Catholic Church. Read John chapter 6 carefully. Listen to Scott Hahn a former Evangelical minister and study his scripture proofs. As an evangelical I knew my Bible and it convinced me Jesus sits in the tabernacle humbled and expectant waiting for His children to acknowledge and follow Him. Read John 6 Jesus is explicit and many followers turned away in disgust not wanting to be cannibals. He did not run after them to explain it as a ‘figure of speech’. He let them go.
Which Church claims to be the one, holy and apostolic Church founded by Christ?
@@anthonyburke3000
That which has story, very surely history of Father(s).?
Praise God! The more one seeks truth and studies Church History, the more one will be led back to the one holy Apostolic Church that Our Lord Jesus Christ founded.
I love these longer formatted videos. Please give us more of these mini upper-level classes from Bishop Barron.
Happy Feast of the Assumptuon Everyone
Yes, all beauty must be first from God in God to God and with God!😇😇😇👼
Thank you Bishop Barron for your spiritual inspiration during these difficult times, ( a parent & grandparent)
I really enjoy all your pod casts and in a "I Guess" funny way every time I listen to them it's like the first time because I'm 81+ years old and don't remember from one day to the next what has been discussed.
A beautiful commentary by a beautiful man. Brings tears to my eyes.
I'm currently reading Measure for Measure and it struck me, listening to this talk, that Shakespeare is perhaps exploring these three concepts within this play. Especially in Act 2 Sc 2. Thank you Bishop Barron for another excellent talk.
I most appreciated your answer to a viewer's question. A hymn I came across recently dating from the 1860s has found a special place in my heart recently. One of the verses: "And none, O Lord, have perfect rest, for none are fully free from sin; and they who seek to love Thee best are conscious most of wrong within." Our rest, ultimately, must be found in Christ, not in our inadequate efforts to please Him.
💗
I agree Bishop Barron about the kindle, need to turn the pages of a book😊
@Just thoughts really And cassettes!
*"Proclaime to the world Christ is our Joy"*
- St. Pope Paul VI
💗
@@Ver-oni-ca
☆Stay blessed☆
@@marypinakat8594 Thank you - continue to release your joy Mary, please
@@Ver-oni-ca
☆
I dont know R. Barron's academic background but he is exceptionally well read on these ethical debates that extend beyond the remits of Christian teaching.
I was lucky enough to go to an excellent university and read philosophy but this man has such a finer understanding of ethics than I have managed to.
Such an interesting, insightful and uplifting talk. Thank you both.
From Romano Guardini: "...It is as great a mistake to think that only that virtue is genuine which springs naturally from one’s disposition as it is to say that only that is ethical which is acquired with pain and toil. Both are virtue, morally formed humanity, but only realized in different ways. (...)They must discipline themselves, begin again after each failure and do battle for orderliness. In this way, the character of the virtue in them is something conscious and toilsome, eventually reaching a certain degree of naturalness, but always endangered.
Guardini, Romano. Learning the Virtues: That Lead You to God (p. 6). Sophia Institute Press. Kindle Edition.
After all there *IS* something called *Catholic Morality☆*
The better we will all be for welcoming it with a *B-I-G HEART.* And no one like Bishop Barron to let us get started!
(Pre-Premier Comment)
"Find the centre, know you are a sinner, realise that *your life is not about you."* Deep catechesis!☆
Reminded of the novel “crime and punishment.” The central conflict of the book hinges on whether we can justify an evil act based on what comes of it or who you are.
Yeah. And it isnagreat book. Recomend it to everyone. The first 50 pages are setup, and a but slow but man is the rest amazing.
I think you have been praying the rosary for me because my life is changing slowly for the better
Εὐλογεῖτε!
Praise the Lord Jesus Christ 🙏 Mother Mary Pray For Us 🙏Abba Father Bless us and we Adore You 🙏
I totally agree with Bishop Barron on his Kindle thesis.
When I was going to confess something clarified my mind: For there to be a sin there has to be 3 conditions. If the 3 conditions are not present there was not a mortal sin. That is what people doesn't understand when judging others. Normal people doesn't have the discernment to know this about others. I am seing this video searching for the concept of in Spanish: Conflicto de deberes etc. I heard it here too. May God give me the life to listen, study and apply all the concepts of this video.
Thank you +Baron for a succinct summary. It would be useful to explore further the issue of morality in war. This is not theoretical for me and countless others who seek to live their lives in extreme situations of violence. In the 80s I lived and worked in a country at war with itself. Violence, famine, poverty and disease were an everyday reality. Making decisions in such a context was difficult. My moral framework became, ‘it’s never right to do wrong but sometimes it is necessary’. Upon my return home (New Zealand), I came to see the same existential dilemmas applied here in less extreme circumstances only we kid ourselves it doesn’t. I get it that this decision framework can create difficulties though I think this is true for the all the frameworks you outline. No one is good but God alone. This is why I rest in the Grace of God.
BTW my view of the law is that it gives us the content of Grace. Consequently, a life lived in gratitude before God is transformative. “Love God and do what you want”.
From a couple of years of following kantian ethics, I am starting to appreciate more and more virtue ethics.
Anyone else need to watch this for school?
fr
Consequentialism pushes back the question of the good judging between two things. The most good begs the question of what good is the basis to judge.
“Everything can happen, everything is possible and probable. Time and place do not exist; on an insignificant basis of reality the imagination spins, weaving new patterns; a mixture of memories, experiences, free fancies, incongruities and improvisations.”
― August Strindberg, A Dream Play.
God Bless You Bishop Baron!
I always look forward to watching Bishop Barron’s videos but this one was especially interesting!
Excited for another video from our favorite bishop. God bless
Really helpful overview of framework for Catholic ethics and how it has the strengths of other systems, avoids their limitations, and goes far beyond them too. So well articulated. Thx Bishop
The problem is, that right now our culture is the one teaching our kids the basics of how to live, and it is making an awful job. Companies are defining our cultural values, driven by a never ending thirst of profits. Parents cannot compete with the bombardment of content in the media manipulating and molding the moral landscape of children. You can tell your children a hundred times not to lie, but they see many thousand times in the media that it is ok to lie, that it is normal, and that everybody is doing it with no consequences.
Thanks much for this video.
Thank you Bishop for all your video and thoughts on so many topics
Go on Bishop Barron, you’re Jesus Voice
I agree about the Kindle going back to a page already read is a pain.
Excellent discussion. A good book to compliment the discussion on virtue ethics from a different angle might be "Peak" by Anders Ericsson on how top achievers work, which echos many of the things discussed here.
Preach the gospel at all times and ... sometimes use words😀. I agree - paper has soul, lol😂. Also for the question, get people to empower their own journey in Christ. Once they are brought in , let them begin to pray and listen and let God draw them near in their walk with Him. Pray, listen, learn, go forward. 😃
Thank you for wading through this, Your Excellency! This addresses many questions in our current identity crisis. God bless you for your great work.
Excellent video! I was very pleased to hear you mention Pinckaers. He is my favorite contemporary moral theologian to read. He greatly shaped my own moral thought and teaching! Similarly, I agree that Veritatis Splendor is one of Pope St. John Paul II's best encyclicals, which is saying something, since there were so many great ones.
Brandon frantically tries to fill out the amazon kindle returns form as he realises buying his Christmas presents early this year was NOT a good idea after all.
Wow! This is how to avoid Kantianism or Pharisee-ism (or Canon Lawyerism?) - don't begin with the law. That insight about not beginning with law is magnificent, Bishop Barron! Begin with the basic goods that lead us to happiness and even supernatural joy. Then move to habits and virtues, which orient us to those goods that makes us happy. Then move to law which gives form to habits/virtues which allow us to attain the goods that make us happy. Truly human - finally, but not first, the law supports joy.
...
“... don’t begin with the law.”
Really? Because Paul’s clear teaching in the New Testament is that the law is the starting point. It is the schoolmaster which leads us to Christ. Paul says that he wouldn’t have known sin except by the law.
It is impossible for any person to love other people, as Jesus commanded, without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit which is given as a down payment and a promise that God will redeem that person in the future.
The Holy Spirit is the power by which we do good works.
Furthermore, the Catholic Church teaches that grace is dispensed piece meal through the Eucharist and other such adherences, including good works.
Paul taught we are saved by grace through faith, and also that we were created (new creatures) in Christ Jesus to perform good works.
The Catholic Church teaches that good works are necessary to be saved.
The protestant teaches that they are the result of being born again ie saved.
@@memowilliam9889 Paul doesn't say the law is the starting point, but rather that the law makes sin apparent. "I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law". The law has its purpose, but it can't be defined without initial reference to "the good". So, Bishop Barron is correct, approaching through a Thomistic, rather than a Pauline lens, though both Paul and Thomas would agree.
Veritatus Splendor, JP2. Indeed
There is an UNcrossable line.
The Image of Divine Mercy Jesus is more than a painting, it is meant to draw us toward Jesus and His merciful heart. It's also a reminder of the demands of our Lord's mercy, "Even the strongest faith is of no avail without works". (Diary 742
Gosh! Love this so much!
That kind of moral junction that is explained in 9:00, in my experience, comes when you have been playing power games, playing God. So power you get.
People may believe that I am crazy. But I am saying the truth about my experiences.
Thanks for the great content and reading recommendations!
Your videos are such a gift! Thank you.
The road of good intentions is often paved with sinful acts
Bishop Barron! I like books, too!
Hi, Bishop Barron. I don't know if this relates to the topic but do you mind explaining how and why a particular thought, as trivial as it may seem, can constitute sin. For example, engaging the will to relish sexual thoughts without any intent of performing any sexual act. I'm trying to explain it to a non Christian colleague. Thanks.
I noticed a change of mental register in your presentation, bishop. When you say: « I’ve been following the 10 commandements since my childhood....good, now you are ready for the high octane stuff. » I get the leap you are proposing, but one may have been habituated to following the 10 fundamentals as processed by a consequentialist deontological software. Hence, he, I assure you, cannot move to the high octane stuff as the habituation was shaped by a software incapable of processing from a different architecture. Here, I speak from experience. Since I was a child, the Church has gradually hardwired a consequentialist software to a point where I held beatitudo as what God owed me as a consequence of having held my side of the bargain. I suffered through a severe and deep depression (no kidding) to painfully come to trust God in installing His software. Please, monseigneur, do not discount the pain so many of us may go through in letting God undo the consequentialist software my generation had had installed by clerical authorities committed to our beatitudo. I regularly listen to you and thank you for the sensical and sensitive way to transformation you have been gifted to gifting others.
Love, Lévis
Dear Levis, I am not part of the WOF other than as a subscriber. I know too well the consequentialist mindset. The clerical authorities and a few family religious failed to convey to this boomer the deep abiding infinite Love Our Lord has for every human. After a period away from the church, I decided to seek the Truth independently and far from such corrupt minds. This was no small effort, to undue the painful habits of mind that were destroying the gifts I received in Baptism, alone. With a restive hunger and determination to know the truth eventually I was led to the Spiritual Exercises of St Ignatius Loyola and an awareness of the Lord"s Love for (us) me , in this case. I experienced the supernatural Joy of His Love and Light. And I now live a life filled with the Holy Spirit. Every day is not perfect though on balance more good than bad. Forgiveness is a powerful Virtue. Seek and You will find! Knock and the door with be opened.
I will keep you in my Prayers.
@@tomgreene2282 I think the Prohibition list idea was likely carried over by the Puritan Sects.
@@tomgreene2282 I had to look that up because Jansenism is close in spelling to Jainism (an Indian religion) and I always mix up the two. Remember, that North America had Puritan and Jansenism movements historically. So seeing that being embedded in the culture of many churches here (Canada to a lesser extent than the States though) is common. Some of them left Europe because they felt it was "impure" so that could account for the rigidity. Of if they're from the Reformist Calvinist sect which basically teach there is no free will, and place an emphasis on original sin causing Judgment as well.
@@tomgreene2282 It's likely an influence in the culture. It's not just limited to our Protestant sects either. My aunt said that my Catholic grandfather came from a school of thought that if one didn't have all the Sacraments that you were destined for Hellfire no matter what you did. (This was in relation to the fact that I wasn't Christened, he told me this himself) Some of those views must have gotten into Catholic doctrine as well because I can't find a consensus on that viewpoint from official RCC sources here. My aunt thinks it could have been the time period he was raised in as well. Most Catholic Churches in Canada aren't at that level so I'm not certain which was more influential.
I criticized Taylor Marshall (and other reactionaries) for attacking Bishop Barron, but while I thought he was being unfair, I see BB has taken many public actions against the insanity in our society today, and given much clear and assertive moral teaching. it may not be enough for his critics (for some it is never enough), but they can't claim he's done nothing!
Yep
One important point missed in this talk: grace/the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Aquinas’ moral theology would not be understood well without first of all including grace. Even in the introduction of I-II he explains that morality is the movement of the rational being in God ( de motu rationalis creaturae in Deum). Without grace, we would not be able to be perfect and holy (Mat 5:48).
Bishop Barron!
I must keep silence and don't say anything. I feel that I am in a test. I won't talk anymore.
The ancient practice of Infant Communion inculcates this from their beginnings.
Do not do evil so that good might prevail
What about the destroying of idols in the Old Testament? Surely you would view that as a good.
He got that VIRTUE in him 🗣🗣🗣
I guess I'm a consequentialist then for the most part. To me what matters is the help or harm that actions cause, not necessarily the actions themselves. Lying to someone to hurt them vs lying to protect Anne Frank in your attic sort of thing. Killing someone out of jealousy vs killing to defend yourself. Ultimately morality will always be relative in this way to thinking people.
A bit more references to Christ's teachings on morality from the Bible would be appreciated.
Where's those good ol' fashioned values on which we used to rely?
I'm a little hesitant to include Finnis in the natural law tradition, as I am skeptical that the "New Natural Law" thinkers (Finnish among them), are really faithful to the natural law tradition which flows from St. Thomas.
As someone that majored in the visual arts in college I find the sentiment about destroying, “beautiful things” as inherently evil to be quite an interesting idea. This is just my bias showing, but I have felt that once art became entangled with post-modernism a lot of people seemed to turn against beauty as a worthwhile pursuit. I’m not saying that beauty has to look a certain way. But it seems to me that the intent behind the creation of what we deem to be art changed around the time of the Dadaists and especially after Michel Duchamp. To an extent, I do think it is healthy for the arts to kinda push the boundaries, otherwise we’d just make kinda hackneyed beidermeiered art. Yet, it seems that the pursuit of the visually beautiful, whatever that means, is no longer a goal for many artists and I think that’s kinda too bad.
What does anyone think about the relationship between consequentialism and Matthew 7:16?
The moving light behind you guys is distracting 😔. Hope it can be fixed
I am inclined to think that Free Will is an attribute of God Himself who is perfectly, morally exercised. When He created human, man was endowed with free will, but falling short of perfection. God offered Adam and Eve all His love for the sharing, but God demands by testing Adam and Eve to love Him back on their own free will from their mind. But, disobedience happened to a simple sanction of not to eat the forbidden fruit, so the story went as we all understand...
Absolutly God is the justice not the man.
I would almost sign up to Christianity to be a member of that wonderful cuddly naive sheep pack.. But I'm not that naive and I think it's rubbish.. But I definitely admire the moral values you proclaim to have...
The moving “spotlight” is distracting.
On Bishop Barron's point about not being able to attack a basic good, and citing ending the world war by fire bombing Germany, stating that it was wrong to do that and in violation of a basic good, and that it doesn't matter if that ended the war or not, there was no justification for ending the hundreds of thousands of lives that course of action claimed. What would you have had us do, back then, if you were in that pair of shoes, witnessing this and having to deal with it first hand yourself? Would you have just let Germany, who was intent on violating a whole collection of basic goods, trample over everyone and everything and get away with such an act of evil? Or would you have stood and fought against that to protect who and what you love from someone clearly on destroying and violating what you love? Or without love in the equation, even without that, my argument still holds, would you have stood against that and done what you had to do to stop them from violating several basic goods? How would you have defended against that and put a stop to that while adhering to the Word of God and the teachings of Jesus?
I am not just poking the bear on this topic just to poke the bear and be obnoxious. I genuinely want to know what Bishop Barron would say to my argument and question about this as a practicing Catholic looking for learning. This happens to touch on something that is very important to my own life.
Can someone enlighten me on the name Bishop keeps mentioning - "Finnis". Is that the right spelling or can someone please tell me. Is he referring to John Finnis? Thanks
Ray (Singapore)
Yes, John Finnis, author of Natural Law and Natural Rights.
@@stephenespinola5264 Thanks Stephen. Appreciate yr assist. God bless
19:50 Watching this in 2023... "A FEW YEARS AGO, WHEN THE TALIBAN WAS IN CHARGE OF AFGHANISTAN..." 😭
Would ATTEMPTED murder be TOTALLY corrupting or would one be , necessarily, evil to contemplate such an attempt??
All we need are the ten commandments and the teachings of Christ. I don't see the reason to figure out what morality is when it has already been mapped out. Maybe I'm missing something?
real physical books are the best
Anyone know of any seminary that's put it's philosophy/theology lectures up on UA-cam? I think it'd be a great evangelical tool. I say this, knowing the saying "see a need, fill a need" so i could go ask professor to record, but if theyre already out their I'd like to know.
This lecture series is very thorough on Philosophy. Protestant lecturer but rather unbiased. ua-cam.com/video/Yat0ZKduW18/v-deo.html
@@outofoblivionproductions4015 These ARE great! Thanks for sharing. Took me awhile but I worked through them a few years ago.
Thomistic Institute!
The " detracking" argument ?
I. Kant... even...
(Someone had to say it)
Lol!!
Cool
Is this like a pop quiz for Bishop Barron, or does he get time to study?
Maybe you could spare some time checking out on this Channel itself.
🙌🙏
You oppose , then, the dropping of the atomic bomb as to the argument that it saved one million American lives as to an invasion of Japan would cost ???
Anyone have a nutshell explanation?
I'm having some trouble understanding this doctrne and how it's not in violation to the truth of God. It's blasphemous for me to visualize a "walk with God" that isn't mediated and authorized by Christ Himself.
You see, the problem with Catholicism is that it doesn't line up to the gospel preached by Christ and His disciples. The veneration of man has plauged this doctrine it's entire time in exstence. It's wrong to veiw anyone as your mediator to God The Father, because Christ is that for us. That's the entire meaning of the gospel of truth.
Why is Bishop Barron just encouraged Catholics reading the lives of th saints? He always shows off his being knowledgeable but I don't find any evangelization on all of his talks. He doesn't even remind or encouraged his audience to pray the Holy Rosary. You don't even start your talk with sincere prayers!!!
I was indoctrinated by the prosperity consciousness of the New Age. Excusable not only Spanish atenuante.
Comment
JOE ROGAN JOE ROGAN JOE ROGAN
It will be epic.
I don't know much about Joe Rogan really - is it true that he is highly critical of the Catholic Church as an institute of oppression (as per the sometimes reliable Wikipedia description)? If so, what are his main issues (i.e. confusions)?
@@angelicdoctor8016 he'll probably play dumb, bring in DMT like topics off the bat and lead his viewers to more confusion.
Joe Rogan could have a conversation with the Bishop with a neutral person to steer the conversation but going to Joe's field and playing by his rules won't be prudential.
(Personal opinion)
did he mention ten commandments. oh yes thats just kids stuff., jesus evolution to two comandments . theology of seven sins seven virtes. confession and forgivness of sin. much more understandable than this highbrow philisophical mud. instead of hypothetical train example discuss drone strikes, breaking not kill command. In the film the mission de niro goes for kill, jeremy irons went for marterdom. by this example i was tickeled by Chestertons thread of catholic religion. only saints manage the ten we and our society break them all the time.
Context?
hello grade 10 ng beda
Those catholics who defend Catholicism above all are not helping Christianity where are they in faith and belief, they are catholics without understanding think of god father of all,bot a god with favorites, and when some consider the favorite then we have conflicts, and that's where we are , so how could we ever understand unity in diversity.
My (limited) understanding of the Catholic position on trolly problem. You pull the switch which results in the 1 guy dying bc pulling a switch isn't intrinsically evil, and you're not intending the death of the 1 man, rather saving the 4. But you couldn't say push a fat man in front of the train to stop it because deliberitly pushing a man in front of a train is intrinsically evil, it's murder. I would have the intent of killing the guy.
I guess one could argue that the central intent is still to stop the train and not to kill the man, in a similar manner as to how a teacher taking a bullet to protect a student would not exactly be the same as attempted suicide. *However,* the fact that the hypothetical fat man is being pushed onto the tracks against his will, rather than it being his own free choice, is probably what would make this act evil, especially if the person was innocent.
Pulling the lever is an attempt to save five people, with one death as a side-effect, whereas the fat man scenario arguably involves a person’s free will being robbed too, forcefully turning him into the instrument to save someone at the certain expense of his own life.
I think that's almost it, Mark. Feel free to rebut. I have one correction (at least I think it's a correction). For the fat man example, you actually might not have the intent to kill the guy (e.g., you might think he'll survive). However, by object (not intention) - think object, circumstance, intention regarding determination of the goodness of a moral act - it's as you say, an intrinsic evil. Being evil by object is sufficient to make the entire act evil, since if any of object, circumstance, or intention is evil, the entire act is evil (i.e. privated of something that ought to be present in the act - in this case, a privation of protecting the fat man/valuing his life).
@@markcobuzzi826 think you nailed it. Well done.
@@angelicdoctor8016 spot on. Really could follow your reasoning there.
@@angelicdoctor8016
I do not think we are in any real disagreement here, so I likely cannot "rebut" anything. When I stated that the fat man scenario would involve "a person’s free will being robbed too, forcefully turning him into the instrument to save someone at the certain expense of his own life", that phrase appears to allude to how you mentioned "a privation of protecting the fat man/valuing his life". I guess if I were to word anything differently, I would probably say "a privation of valuing that innocent fat man's freedom, over whether he wills to give his life or not in this situation".
So I concluded that taking the proposed action in the fat man scenario, or pushing an innocent bystander against his will into an oncoming bullet's path to save someone else (if we wanted a more realistic version of that moral thought experiment), would be intrinsically evil on that front.
So aborting a child when you discover that either you, the mother, and or, the child could die if your foetus is not aborted. Is this ok morally to abort? To save yourself?
No, it would not be. It is better to have you and the child die than to physically murder an innocent human life.
Ayo ano ba yung 5 ways of morality
You need to watch the whole video.
panoorin mo vid