Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
The Philosophical Roots of Wokeism with Bishop Robert Barron | Acton University 2023 Day 3
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 06. 2023
- The Acton Institute is a think-tank whose mission is to promote a free and virtuous society characterized by individual liberty and sustained by religious principles.
This direction recognizes the benefits of a limited government, but also the beneficent consequences of a free market. It embraces an objective framework of moral values, but also recognizes and appreciates the subjective nature of economic value. It views justice as a duty of all to give the one his due but, more importantly, as an individual obligation to serve the common good and not just his own needs and wants.
In order to promote a more profound understanding of the coming together of faith and liberty, Acton involves members of religious, business, and academic spheres in its various seminars, publications, and academic activities. It is our hope that by demonstrating the compatibility of faith, liberty, and free economic activity, religious leaders and entrepreneurs can contribute by helping to shape a society that is secure, free, and virtuous.
Visit our website: www.acton.org/
Subscribe to the Acton Line Podcast: www.acton.org/...
Visit the Acton Bookshop: shop.acton.org/
Follow Acton on Facebook: / actoninstitute
Follow Acton on Twitter: / actoninstitute
Follow Acton on Instagram: / acton_institute
Bishop Barron is one of America's leading intellectuals. PERIOD.
I believe Robert Barron is suffering uncontrollable self-groomed oscillation between his "heart and mind" (NIV Acts 4:32) as not "one".
This condition risks spiritual death to vulnerable family members who he is grooming with his false non-economic status inducement of "a higher way of love" (20/7/22 in his response to Lex Fridman at time 51:46 on "Christianity and the Catholic Church") of consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ to consecrated male female marriage vowed to God for economic advantage of his family by tax-exemption embezzlements and lower insurance cost by fraud causing extreme tensions withstood by Pope Francis on 17 June 2021 by his simultaneous authorisations of:
(a) in his role his ensuring in his case of alleged embezzlements of his procreation role gift charity donations by ten of his Vatican state citizens/employees, including Cardinal Angelo Becciu,
(b) in his identity his insuring of his need of union of his identity as a consecrated celibate married by vows to man in Christ in the case of the Italian Parliament "Zan" anti-homophobia bill as an unacceptable risk of fraud on his identity.
I'm not a Catholic, but Bishop Barron is one fantastic compelling speaker. I even liked his talk on the reformation.
Can you link the reformation talk please?
Bishop Robert Barron is the undeniably one of the Greatest Thinkers of our Time. Plain and Simple.
The truth is he's just one of many within the Catholic hiearchy. They're all trained in philosophy and beyond
@@MrBluemanworldwhat do you mean? you were once a Catholic ?
I view Barron as a radical conservative.
to Michael Ryan, but Bishop Barron is not one of the "Greatest" at having faith since belief, as always in some uncertainty, is the keeping or allowing of the inseparability and qualitative equality of thinking and having faith. This is not kept/allowed by Barron's assertion of consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ is a "higher way of love" or "higher vocation" than consecrated male female marriage vowed to God.
@@michaelmontague8903 You want to but its just goal post shifting.
This is the first time I consider a talk to be a major miracle. The clarity, scope, range and rhetorical power of this talk, paired with the Bishop's typical humility, is radiating to me. And this matters so much because this seems to be one of the most consequential and difficult ideological battles of our time.
Thank you so much, Bishop, for this - may God bless you and exalt you to the heavens in time. May you stay his humble and faithful servant, as a light to the world and as a true form of beauty.
Fellow people in this comment section, if you read this, may I ask you: What can we do to fulfill the promise, or the hint, that the Bishop has given us of how to fight this particular ideological battle? If Beauty is the way in, how can we make the Church, how can we make God's word, how can we make a commitment to Love and Justice (and all Virtue) more beautiful? If God grants you the energy (which I greatly hope), I urge you to find ways in the context of your life to be part of this move of the Spirit that the Bishop announces here. God wants his creation healed and full and beautiful, and there is work to do. I pray that all who consciously embark on this journey find true joy and deep meaning in the pursuit of this noble mission.
God have mercy on us!
Speaking is not a miraculous event. People have been doing it for 10,000 + years.
When humility includes smugness is it really humility?
I heard the Bishop make many claims. For a claim to be true it requires evidence. The Bishop did not bring much evidence, just claims.
@@BrianHoff04 Yes, Brian, I agree with you. True humility is to exercise the cardinal virtue of "prudence" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, Australia and N.Z. edition, 1994, m.1806). "Prudence ... guides the other virtues by setting rule and measure."
This "rule and measure" is keeping/allowing in uncertainty of belief (humility) of the inseparability and qualitative equality of thinking linear process and having faith geometric progress as kept/allowed by the multiplier in economics first stated in international economics in 1930 and tested from 1931 by economist statistician, Colin Clark, from 1946 joined in a consecrated male female marriage on the reference point of the two immediately successive consents to joining in consecrated marriages of Mary, mother of Christ and Mother of God, celibate vowed to man in Christ (Luke 1:38: "let it be to me") and male female with St Joseph vowed to God (Matthew 1:24: "Joseph ... took his wife"). In 1964, Colin Clark in his identity role simultaneously authorised his conclusion be applied by him in his employment role by the UNO Food and Agricultural Organisation and Pope St Paul V1's, Vatican Council 2 "Commission on Population".
This conclusion was of "just about paripassu rate of growth of population and food supplies in the developing countries." ("Coin Clark Reminisces with Bruce McFarlane and Derek Healey", Adelaide University, Australia, 2 August 1977, p.29 of transcript of audiotape).
Bishop Barron fails in humility by asserting consecrated celibate marriage is a "higher way of love" than consecrated male female marriage in his Yutube podcast interview by Lex Fridman on "Christianity and the Catholic Church" at time 51:36 of this CZcams podcast.
@@BrianHoff04 Ok, let's continue. It is clear that Speaking it's a common thing for people to do. But i don't think the original commenter pretended to say that speaking was some form of supernatural grace. We can't know for sure, but to interpret it in this way, in the full context of the original comment, is not the most adecuate interpretation. I think it is clear that this person was just talking with hiperbole here. The second point you raised was a rethorical question, if you think Bishop is acting smugg, ok. I don't see were he is doing that, but even if it were true his speach could still be true from start to finish. I don't really see were do people want to go atacking the character of others instead of their arguments. Finally, yo say that Bishop Barron has made many claims, but has not brought up much evidence to back them up. I would need you to specify what claims exactly has he made without evidence that weren't a passing comment or a position that would require another entire lecture to defend. I think that, for the purpouses of this specific talk, he has presented a good amount of evidence for his claims. He defined what he understood as wokeism to be, then he claim that it's basic roots were in the ideas from certain intelectualls (Foucault, Derrida, Marx , etc..) and multiple times he cited those intellectuals to reforce this connection that he claimed. What else are you looking for?
@@BrianHoff04 Dear Brian Hoff (if this is your name?), thank you for replying. Maybe you are already tired by the other answers you have received, maybe not. Still, I offer a quick response to your 2 claims:
1. Speaking is not a miraculous event
While I agree that normal speech is common and therefore not miraculous, there is also a sense in which it is wonderful that human beings can speak at all. If you think about all that language affords us, you can indeed marvel at how wonderful this simple fact is.
However, I did not refer to this in my comment, but rather I marveled at the qualities of this particular talk for the stated reasons. Since miracles are extraordinary or wonderful true occurences, I would submit that this talk could in principle be a miracle. But of course it lies in the eye of the beholder whether you consider something as wonderful or extraordinary in some way (and as true for that matters, as it is common today to dismiss radically wonderful and extraordinary events as neccessarily untrue)
2. Humility mixed with smugness is not true humility:
I completely agree and am thankful for people like you who are not easily fooled simply by some rhetorical devices or claims of a person to be humble. However, I do not perceive the Bishop as being smug, or at least at so few occasions that it does not undermine my trust in the authenticity of his message and his willingness to submit to God to make him increase in humility. But of course, only God knows a person's heart, so I can only offer my particular view to you.
If you have taken the time to read this, thank you very much for being open minded and enganging in civil discourse. We need people who are willing to make and listen to rational argument, maybe even in this Internet space (which is much less fun of course as in person, but it is not nothing).
God bless you and may your life flourish!
Beautifully said, thankyou. Bishop Barron is such a help because modern philosophers are nuts and horrendously verbose. Yet they allow for the elite club of academia (to know the secret knowledge- like gnosticism and freemasonry). Thankfully Bishop Barron is the professor for the lay artists, writers, politicians and entrepreneurs, to be guided by.
I pray Bishop Barron is canonized as a Saint. He's converted too many otherwise unconvertable hearts, like mine. Nothing short of a miraculous intellect.
He pointed me back home!
➡️⛪️❤️🙏
Are you expressing a wish for his death? You do realize that he has to die first, don't you? He's a cult figure, not an example of saintliness.
That’s a little bit much.
@@anthonymccarthy4164 Correct. Bishop Barron is in uncontrollable "oscillation between persistent forms of regressive 'familyism' on the one hand and an affirmation of radical individualism on the other that, in destroying the family reverses the progress of humanisation, heedless of the long-term consequences of so doing." (a warning by Pope Francis' delegate, Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, as President of his Council for the Family, on the UNO "The International Day of the Family", 15 May 2014).
Bishop Barron in this oscillation in error purported to presume in his interview by Lex Fridman on "Christianity and the Catholic Church" at time c.51:46 of the CZcams podcast that consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ is "a higher way of love"; that is, a "higher vocation", than consecrated male female marriage vowed to God. This is a groomed non-economic false status inducement of emotionally and/or psychologically vulnerable family members for economic advantage of the families of these diseased 'familyist' family member groomers by tax-exemption embezzlements and lower insurance cost by fraud.
@@anthonymccarthy4164 No, that is obviously not what they meant, and no, he is not a “cult figure.”
Thank you for making this available to a wider audience
The lecture starts at about 21:37.
21:37 for Bishop Barron
@@tytyvyllus8298 Yeah, you're right, I mistyped the timestamp. Thanks for the reply.
should have read the comments before waiting 5minutes ...it's good if you went coz then wooohooo you'd be in the YT replay! Thankful for the gift of this video and messages. Bishop Barron is the harbour from the chaotic tides of dangerous ideas and leadings going around
Doing the lord's work
Helpful thank you😊
One more intellectually and spiritually stimulating lecture by Bishop Barron. May God always bless you to continue on your mission to enlighten the world.
to cruizing, I believe Robert Barron is suffering uncontrollable self-groomed oscillation between his "heart and mind" (NIV Acts 4:32) as not "one".
I believe that in this condition Barron gives grave "scandal" of drawing into a risk of "spiritual death" (CCC, 2284) to psychologically and or emotionally vulnerable family members who Barron in his diseased 'familyist' family member identity is grooming with his false non-economic status inducement of "a higher way of love" (20/7/22 in his response to Lex Fridman at time 51:46 on "Christianity and the Catholic Church") of consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ to consecrated male female marriage vowed to God.
This grooming by Barron is for economic advantage of his family by tax-exemption embezzlements and lower insurance cost by fraud causing extreme tensions withstood by Pope Francis in his consecrated celibate marriage role identity on 17 June 2021 by his simultaneous authorisations of:
(a) in his role his ensuring in his case of alleged embezzlements of his procreation role gift charity donations by ten of his Vatican state citizens/employees, including Cardinal Angelo Becciu (proved for Becciu and five others on their criminal indictments in Pope Francis' Vatican court on 16/12/23),
(b) in his identity his insuring of his need of union of his identity as a consecrated celibate married by vows to man in Christ in the case of the Italian Parliament "Zan" anti-homophobia bill as an unacceptable risk of fraud on his identity in need of union.
Always refreshing to listen to Bishop Barron
to alexs ..., as not joined in a consecrated marriage either celibate vowed to man in Christ or male female vowed to God, Bishop Barron cannot keep/allow the inseparability and qualitative equality of the good, the true and the beautiful.
Watching Bishop Barron wearing his collar and his cross while giving a excelent talk in philosophy and history, is a testimony of the intelectual richness of Christianity offers to the world. God bless you Bishop Barron. The "dumming down" of the teachings Christiany is over!
"intellectual richness" or "rich" by grooming? Purporting presuming in error that consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ is "a higher way of love" (Barron, mid-2022, "Christianity and the Catholic Church" interview by Lex Fridman at time 51:46) or "higher vocation" (roman catholic church role group teaching in Pope St John Paul 2's Council for the Family "Guidelines", TTMHS, PCF, 1995, 35) than consecrated male female marriage vowed to God en"rich"es families of diseased family member 'familyist' groomers by tax-exemption embezzlements and lower insurance cost by fraud with this non-economic false status inducement.
Warning: Listening to Bishop Barron may significantly boost your intelligence. 😇
At the risk of sounding blasphemous, Bishop Barron has transformed my life since 7 years ago when I discovered his videos. I have been so blessed and I share his resources everytime. I pray to get a job soon and be able to purchase the Word on Fire bible volumes.
Amen! He also articulates our faith in such a way that it it makes sense to anyone listening. May God Bless and Protect him.
@@guennieknight1576 It is not my "faith" but in uncertainty my 'belief' as my keeping/allowing the inseparability and qualitative equality of thinking and having faith. Faith cannot be made sense of as sense cannot be made faith of.
to Snowy..., but not your, in uncertainty, belief as the keeping/allowing inseparability and qualitative equality of thinking intelligence and having faith.
@@oliverclark5604 What amazing word play that essentially means nothing.
Woo-wooo words that, if you are sincere, bring a positive feeling without meaning anything.
Every time I feel lost and confused with God and our society Bishop Barron always clears away the fog and I can start to see clearly again. God bless you Bishop
Patienta, it is better not to "see"; that is, not to see what is hidden, yet believe (cf. Jn 20:29).
With respect for Bishop Barron who is a victim of embezzlement and fraud, he sees celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ is "a higher way of love" (his interview with Lex Fridman, "Christianity and the Catholic Church", time 51:46) than male female marriage vowed to God.
This groomed false status inducement is for economic advantage of the families of the diseased family member 'familyist' groomers. This grooming hides or occults that this incest connected status is false.
This economic advantage is by tax-exemption embezzlement and lower insurance costs by fraud. This grooming is of psychologically and or emotionally vulnerable family members with this non-economic status inducement.
This is the cause is the "worldwide catastrophe" referred to by Pope Francis on 10 June 2021. This catastrophe is of sexual abuse, including by roman catholic church personnel, of psychologically and or emotionally vulnerable family members.
This sexual abuse follows from lack of protection by consecrated members of consecrated marriages, both celibate and male female. "the great majority of sacramental marriages are invalid" was how Pope Francis saw this on 16 June 2016.
An occult, incest connected inducement can only be out occulted by consecrated marriage, either celibate or male female on the reference point of the other. This is what I believe Mary "believed" (Luke1:45).
Bishop Barron purports to know consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ is a "higher way of love". I believe that this "knowing" (Genesis 3:5) is occult.
From Oliver Clark, age 76, a consecrated celibate catechist of roman catholic church role group religion of the Archdiocese of Brisbane, Australia who on written direction, dated 28 September 1994, through my Brisbane Kenmore Catholic Community parish of my Vatican superior, the Vice-President of Pope St John Paul 2's Council for the Laity, Bishop Paul Cordes, to "sustain what you consider to be your rights" by my consecrated marriage out occulting this occult, incest connected evil infecting families has found over 40 complainants of criminal sexual abuse by over 20 roman catholic church priests, both secular and religious, and religious brothers. On complaints against six of these that I reported, these six, including my parish priest and my archdiocese superior as coordinator of faith education, have been convicted of sexual abuse of children and sentenced to be jailed.
Bishop Barron is just brilliant.
to James Hollands, yes, Bishop Barron's complicity by allowing tax exemption embezzlement and insurance fraud is "brilliant" in harming psychologically and or emotionally vulnerable family members with the non-economic status inducement I record in my reply to Simon Ahrendt.
@@oliverclark5604 ok if I get a moment I’ll try and find your reply to him and see what your talking about. Thanks
This was a very good talk by Bishop Barron! Thank You!
not a christian, and i'm quite comfortable saying that this man is a genius and has his finger right on the pulse of the world. not being pulled by the world, but observing it with a clear eye. you can't look at a growing epidemic of people who think their soul is in the wrong body and NOT consider it a religious or mystical claim.
jung said a major function of organized religion was to stop people from having idiosyncratic religious experiences.. there's a lot of truth to that.
I have never heard a person struggling with their relationship with their bodies gender say "My soul is in the wrong body". Have you heard someone say that? Because unless they say that then they are not making a religious or mystical claim.
@@BrianHoff04 well, for starters, i have heard them say that. there's an acknowledged protected group called "two spirit" in canada used to justify gender theory in an aboriginal context, somewhat post hoc if you ask me.
anyway, i don't much care what people say. words are cheap, and transgender people are notoriously inarticulate on the whole. the term gender is indistinguishable from the stereotypical essence of a particular sex. it's an immaterial pattern of behavior, it's transpersonal, and it has to do with manifesting action in the world. if it's not a classical soul, it's only because the classical soul is
1. immortal whereas gender is tied up to the body in some way, much like a racial stereotype.
or 2. gendered because the classical soul is not gendered.
basically, if you split the soul in two (or how ever many infinite genders there hypothetically are now) and ran it through a freshman social science class with a dialectical materialist teacher, and back it up with some phony science done by pedophiles then you get this amorphous concept of gender.
gender however, is very poorly measured, much like a soul. we can only see it by its results, it's tied up with personal decision making and free will in a way that is entirely impossible to pick apart. it makes people do things that make no physical sense, much like a soul gives our body an inclination to the spiritual so we aren't just a horny meat robot.
so yeah, regardless of whether someone claims to be operating in the realm of materialism or not, gender has a lot more in common with a soul or a deimon (in the socratic sense, possibly the dante sense depending on how psychotic it makes a person) than it does with say, an apple or a stone.
@@notloki3377 yes, I believe that gender as a "pattern of behaviour" is a 'do-ing' role, not a 'be-ing' identity.
Diseased family member 'familyists', for the economic advantage of their families by tax-exemption embezzlements and lower insurance cost by fraud, groom their psychologically and or emotionally vulnerable family members with the false inducement of purporting presuming gender is a "higher vocation" 'be-ing' identity when it is a 'do-ing' role.
In consequence, those so groomed have a higher chance of contracting the diseases of paedophilia with some of them acting it out as criminal.
Bishop Barron is evidently one such victim of this grooming in his "knowing" (Genesis 3:5) that consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ is "a higher way of love" (at time 51:46 of his interview by Lex Fridman, "Christianity and the Catholic Church", CZcams podcast mid-2022).
Wokeism beautifully presented by Bishop Barron.
I learned a little history and pedigree of the WOKE. It is a very interesting topic.
In regards to history, which events seems most important to you?
@@BrianHoff04 C11thAD mandating celibacy for secular priests and purporting consecrated marriage to be a sacrament to conceal occult, incest connected sexual abuse within the family by helpers of the family, both secular priests and religious, ostensibly to retain donations to priests within the church and not used to maintain priests' families.
It was a complete misrepresentation of what the word woke even means 😂.
"A system of thought!"
Thank you Bishop Barron.
Have a wonderful life!
Justice and Love- wow!
Amen Glory to God in the Highest level of Love. ❤😘😁😘
to Anne McQuade, I believe Robert Barron is suffering uncontrollable self-groomed oscillation between his "heart and mind" (NIV Acts 4:32) as not "one".
I believe that in this condition Barron gives grave "scandal" of drawing into a risk of "spiritual death" (CCC, 2284) to psychologically and or emotionally vulnerable family members who Barron in his diseased 'familyist' family member identity is grooming with his false non-economic status inducement of "a higher way of love" (20/7/22 in his response to Lex Fridman at time 51:46 on "Christianity and the Catholic Church") of consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ to consecrated male female marriage vowed to God.
This grooming by Barron is for economic advantage of his family by tax-exemption embezzlements and lower insurance cost by fraud causing extreme tensions withstood by Pope Francis in his consecrated celibate marriage role identity vowed to man in Christ in his keeping/allowing its inseparability and qualitative equality with consecrated male female marriage vowed to God on 17 June 2021 by his exercise of an absolute power of his simultaneous authorisations of:
(a) in his role his ensuring in his case of alleged embezzlements of his procreation role gift charity donations by ten of his Vatican state citizens/employees, including Cardinal Angelo Becciu (proved for Becciu and five others on their criminal indictments in Pope Francis' Vatican court on 16/12/23),
(b) in his identity his insuring of his need of union of his identity as a consecrated celibate married by vows to man in Christ in the case of the Italian Parliament "Zan" anti-homophobia bill as an unacceptable risk of fraud on his identity in need of union.
Oliver Clark, catechist in the RCC role group archdiocese of Brisbane, Australia and joined in successive consecrated marriages, male female from 1991 and celibate on the death of my wife from 2017.
This is great that discussions can also move to this level, especially looking at philosophical roots of movements in any age. I was a student in the 90's when the post structuralists thinking started to challenge status quo in hermeneutics and Biblical Theology.
However my only critique is that Bishop Barron makes the error of compeltely denying the historical contexts of critical thinkers emphasising power vs victim dynamics in the past as well - why is this important? Well because Europe experienced tremendous revolutions since the fall of the Roman Empire, The Protestant Reformation and several wars and the development of modern warfare technologies which culminated in idealisms of the early 20th centuries and in the end during the world war II. I havent even touched the atrocities committed during the colonial and post colonial ages and now again in Eastern Europe.
Religion was widely used as a very strong advocate of nationalist movements and the Biblical text was applied uncritically to justify nation propaganda.
It is within this dark sides of the power house polarities that , civil rights movements gave birth to post structuralist ideas - that the reader determines the truth of the text - basically be free to apply your own meaning to interpretation (Derrida). Hyper individualism and freedom to break free from status quo ideas and ideologies. But it makes the flawed error that suspicion and collectivist thinking starts to become a totalitarian ideology itself. Any movement needs an inner critic that can help the group to reflect critically about its own paradigm and blind spots.
I agree that power vs victim can lead to massive stigmatisation that has been witnessed under the woke movement, yet critical thinking needs to empower society to ask: what will happen if we continue to hate each other? what will be different? what will change for the good?
Being “woke” to social injustice is a moral imperative for Christians
You have good intentions. You might try listening to BB.
@@benhills1340I tried listening to it but in the first 15 minutes alone he talked so much nonsensical hogwash that it was unbearable. BTW - I actually studied theology, sociology, philosophy and religious science. None of the claims the bishop makes about the origins of "wokeism" (which is just an umbrella term for everything conservatives don't like) has any value whatsoever.
@@MrSeedi76 well don't do it if it is unbearable for you. Merry Christmas.
Thank you for your good work.
God bless from France.
Brilliant and fast run through decades of dangerous philosophies that have brought us to where we are. love the ..."how many people were excluded for you to be so proudly universally inclusive...?"
to Blake Evans, Bishop Barron is complicit in the allowing of psychologically and or emotionally vulnerable family members to be groomed by diseased family member 'familyists' for their families economic advantage by tax exemption embezzlement and lower insurance costs by fraud with the occult as hidden, incest connected as substitute mate, non-economic, false status groomed inducement of consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ been a "higher vocation", or as Barron put it: "a higher way of love" in his interview with Lex Fridman at time 51:46 of his podcast: "Christianity and the Catholic Church", than consecrated male female marriage vowed to God.
where do you feel we are; rev.bl. In my childhood schools were very violent; I had to undertake National service to fight folk a long way away who were no different from me; my friends were threatened; authorities ignored violence toward women and children. My Uncle was listed missing at sea during his military service. My father was insulted for going to relative's funeral as it was Roman Catholic Mass. My own sons have opportunities I could not imagine. My friends are free to practice their faith, raise their families as they choose. We know live in the Freest, safest most prosperous era in Himan history and it gets better and better.
This is one of the best talks I've every heard from Bishop Barron.
Truly excellent and remarkably concise… In a nutshell - this is simply true. Thank you Bishop
It's always a privilege to listen to Bishop Barron.
Yes , yes , and YES !
Really appreciate this video.
I could do without the sweeping disparagement of “one political party.” The first question asked after the talk and the answer is revealing, and puts the earlier comments in perspective. On this score, I would not mind hearing a thoughtful critique of the “other” - heck, all - political parties based on the standard of love. We all might benefit if this were truly the standard. Good help us all.
All God's attributes are one - he is all-powerful but all-good, and his power is the same as his goodness. (He is all truth, all beauty, all goodness, all justice, eternal life, etc., and all are one in God.)
PS St. Augustine said this also in 'On the Trinity'.
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
Isaiah:45:7
@@MrSeedi76 :)
This is so brilliant, it's scary. It actually sounds like we've come full circle from the original sin that caused our initial suffering. Only today, we don't need temptation, we do it voluntarily. The ultimate regression from obsession with self.
God bless Bishop Barron.
So appreciate the wisdom, intelligence and faithfulness of Bishop Barron.
But not believing in a false faith.
Wokism is necessary to counter the far-right. Its a balancing act, deliberate so as to pull things back to a middle way.
I think much of what the Bishop attributes to 'wokism' even more characterizes the far right. For the trumpists there is no truth, no objective good; there is power, and whatever alternative reality is needed to get and maintain power is fine with them. There is certainly no love in that crowd; not even common decency. That is more Foucault than the 'woke' people he imagines.
Barron knocked it out of the park - wow, so deep!!
Thank you. What you say makes sense.
To be fair, Bishop Barron should also speak out on the rise of fascism.
That would be exceedingly difdicult to do. Can fascism criticise fascism? No!😊
Do three lefts make a right?
@@johnphelan8300 "The only difference between [Communism, Nazism and Fascism] was the difference between murder, killing and taking a life." - Fulton J. Sheen.
After listening this conference of bishop Barron, I came to the conclusion that: a) Bishop Barron mixed theology and philosophy to reach his conclusions which is “unphilosophical” and “antitheoligical”. b) Bishop Barron brought religion to politics something that Jesus never did, but ironically Marxist priests did, specially in Latin America. c) Bishop Barron’s tomist point of view of Christianity is out of touch with modern times, obsolete and already debunked”.
You nailed it.
"All human conflict is ultimately theological" - Dr Henry Edward Cardinal Manning
Bishop would be able to serve even more if he eventually became Pope.
People share this video, let others makeup their own minds because the truth seems to rise to the top.
Your excellency Bishop Barren, Thank you for your enlightening my spirit and mind
One of the most brilliant talks of Bishop Barron. Thank you.
Inverts family member identity and gender role asserting gender is identity.
You can skip the first 21 minutes if you came here for Bishop Barron's speech.
The last sentence of the talk betrays the vanity of the entire presentation of Bishop Barron and reduces it to performance. Performance can be defined as a correspondence between actor and audience so that both are in agreement. The function of the performance is to reinforce the certainty of both parties that they have completely grasped the underlying nature of the phenomena being discussed. The last sentence of the talk speaks about the emotion characteristic of people who find their lives and experiences mirrored by the history that they are studying. People who are touched by wokeism recognize that what is being done to them has been done before and that history reveals the social costs borne by the many for the benefit of the few. Bishop Barron is apparently unaware of the exercise of power once it becomes structurally embodied in an institution. That blindness is an occupational qualification for becoming a bishop in the first place.
Yes, I agree and very accurately put.
But out of respect for the true 'do-ing' role as a helper of the family within the family of Bishop Barron I believe that he is a victim of grooming by diseased family member 'familyists' with a non-economic 'be-ing' identity status by association inducement of "a higher way of love" or "higher vocation" (Pope St John Paul 2's Council for the Family "Guidelines", TTMHS, 1995, 35; cf. St Paul, 1Cor7:25-34) of consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ to consecrated male female marriage vowed to God for economic advantage of the families of these groomers by tax-exemption embezzlements and lower insurance cost by fraud.
Bishop Barron in groomed error purports presuming this "higher way of love" at time 51:46 of his interview by Lex Fridman on "Christianity and the Catholic Church" in mid-2022.
I have been around the liberal end of the political spectrum for 70 years and until a few years ago never heard of wokeism. It has become so weaponized that people have a visceral reaction to it when they hear it and 99% of people can not even define it. Why use the term wokeism when what you are talking about is critical theory or Maxism? I guess I was not paying attention to all these theorists. Justice and love are at the center of my type of liberalism. As far as d e i is concerned the Catholic Church is the best example of this in action. It is made up of hundreds of cultures but with a group of central dogmas accepted by all.
Very true. I think the term wokeism has no use anymore. It's only ever used as an umbrella term for everything conservatives don't like. I also hate the constant mixing of politics and religion. It's very much against what Jesus taught us. And Jesus wasn't a conservative in the first place. He wanted a "back to the roots". Back to the original meaning behind it all. And quite obviously since he was God in the flesh he knew better than anyone how to interpret the Bible.
The conservatives of his time were threatened by Jesus because he undermined their power over people just as conservatives today are threatened when their power and influence are undermined.
As Christians we are called to transform the world by love not by fighting against equal rights for all. Bishop Barron doesn't seem to have a good grasp on that concept.
I wish that Bishop Barron would someday share his thoughts and profound insights with we, the less educated and monolingual🤷🏻♂️❤️🙏🏼
I wonder if the bishop could give a talk about how we got to lawless Trumpism and white privilege which we on this site seem to enjoy. What about the idol of America consumerism and exceptionalism?
Possibly discussed here : current "woke".. excessively looking at what the individual wants...this leads to excess and not accepting societal norms and charity of others.
@@lindamcdermott2205 very true, but that is the foundation of our country, our ethos, “I can say, do, have what I want”. Embodied in the cult leader and his followers.
I believe you are psychologically transferring the Biden family 's criminality onto President Trump
Learning mathematics especially mathematical analyses is a powerful antidote to modern french philosofy! The brief course I had to take studying economics kept me sane in dealing with my ”humanist”, artistic mother & sister….
to acfatemi, yes, keeping/allowing inseparability and qualitative equality of economic and non-economic advantages.
I believe Robert Barron is suffering uncontrollable self-groomed oscillation between his "heart and mind" (NIV Acts 4:32) as not "one".
I believe that in this condition Barron gives grave "scandal" of drawing into a risk of "spiritual death" (CCC, 2284) to psychologically and or emotionally vulnerable family members who Barron in his diseased 'familyist' family member identity is grooming with his false non-economic status inducement of "a higher way of love" (20/7/22 in his response to Lex Fridman at time 51:46 on "Christianity and the Catholic Church") of consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ to consecrated male female marriage vowed to God.
This grooming by Barron is for economic advantage of his family by tax-exemption embezzlements and lower insurance cost by fraud causing extreme tensions withstood by Pope Francis in his consecrated celibate marriage role identity vowed to man in Christ in his keeping/allowing its inseparability and qualitative equality with consecrated male female marriage vowed to God on 17 June 2021 by his exercise of an absolute power of his simultaneous authorisations of:
(a) in his role his ensuring in his case of alleged embezzlements of his procreation role gift charity donations by ten of his Vatican state citizens/employees, including Cardinal Angelo Becciu (proved for Becciu and five others on their criminal indictments in Pope Francis' Vatican court on 16/12/23),
(b) in his identity his insuring of his need of union of his identity as a consecrated celibate married by vows to man in Christ in the case of the Italian Parliament "Zan" anti-homophobia bill as an unacceptable risk of fraud on his identity in need of union.
Oliver Clark, catechist in the RCC role group archdiocese of Brisbane, Australia and joined in successive consecrated marriages, male female from 1991 and celibate on the death of my wife from 2017.
This was not a talk about "wokeism" but a terrific discourse on Catholic social teaching. I was very pleased with this as most conservatives do not know the definition of "woke".I am also happy to observe that Bishop Baron is definitely woke and gives no safe quarter to anyone who believes in conservatism. He once again calls us to be true to our Catholic identity, which teaches the inherent dignity of every person and exercises in the words of Pope St. JP I,a "prefential option for the poor."
I felt a view on Roman Catholic teaching; a minority one ... not reelected in Vatican teaching or in most places around the Word or even in USA.
Bishop Barron doesn't know what woke means either 😂.
Thank you Bishop Barron
Keep going Bishop thank god for you.
Woke simply means to be AWAKE to prejudices of all kinds. We must be sensitive to our own biases and do our best that such biases do not injure or offend others if we can. It therefore includes inclusiveness, equality, NOT BANNING BOOKS, NOT DENYING SAME SEX COUPLES MARRIAGE, and BEING SENSITIVE TO THE MANY VARIETIES OF LEGITIMATE BEING. It also means understanding history from the viewpoint of the MINORITY as well as the majority. These are concepts that aren't at all difficult.
to Michael Montague, in the subjective judgement of Pope Francis there is a great minority who are not included as "the great majority of sacramental marriages are invalid" (Pope Francis, 16 June 2016).
Well, the term Woke earliest use in literature is from 1920s. It has many meaning in our vernacular.
a) Key word to degradant in social media post and as to trigger Bots to censor
b) Having an awareness of systemic injustices, involving racial, or sexual identity
c) Derived from African-American Vernacular meaning "alert to racial prejudice and discrimination"
d) Insult toward liberal idealism
e) Awake:’ I had to have coffee this morning to stay woke’
f) A bowl-shaped frying pan
g) Being unaware of an unfaithful wife
Marriage has been defined as a union between a man and a women for over 2,000 years..now you want to redefine the word? give me a break
@@miken2604 Of course I want to broaden the concept. If you had done ANY study of the history of languages, you would already know that words are being constantly redefined. That makes them LIVING languages. Fortunately, even in a country like Ireland, persons of the same sex can now commit themselves to each other in the unity of marriage. You seem to be the perfect example of one who doesn't want to AWAKEN to your own biases.
@@michaelmontague8903 language does change but we do not completely define the word marriage which has always been between and man and women as God created it to be. Call to gays couples a civil union of u like but it’s not truly a marriage as designed my Jesus
Truth is elegantly simple 😇 thank you
Some things are just wrong
I watched the video. It was full of claims. It lacked verifiable truths to a great extent.
I will admit that, to the speakers benefit, it was indeed elegant if you perceived it as truth. He seems to be claiming it's true & you seem to have believed him without evidence. Good for the speaker. He did not have to prove his claims.
@@BrianHoff04 1-truth is objective
2-never underestimate erudition of
your interlocutors
3-being humble is BEGINNING of
Wisdom
,to great extent?? Veritatis splendor ?? Maybe??
@@BrianHoff04 What would be the truth?
@@tomgreene1843In the beginning God created male and female.
Need to listen a few times, take notes. Great education to take on wokeism deeply informed why it’s wrong, harmful and dangerous!
Barron's purporting gender is 'be-ing' identity, when a 'do-ing' role, is "wrong, harmful and dangerous" as for economic advantage of families of diseased family member 'familyists' by role tax-exemption embezzlements and lower identity insurance cost by fraud by their grooming their psychologically and or emotionally vulnerable family members, such as Robert Barron, with what is this false status inducement causing acting out of the paedophilia condition as criminal.
Barron did this purporting presuming in error in his interview by Lex Fridman in mid-2022 on Christianity and the Catholic Church at time 51:46 asserting consecrated celibate marriage vowed to man in Christ is "a higher way of love" than consecrated male female marriage vowed to God. This purports to presume separation of singular identity and plural roles causing uncontrollable "oscillation between persistent forms of ... affirmation of radical individualism ... and ... regressive 'familyism' " warned against by Pope Francis' delegate as President of his Council for the Family, Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, in his address at the UNO on "The International Day of the Family", 15 May 2014.
26:00] Terence Mckenna used to tell a slightly different story about Renée Descartes and Ulm. The story that Uncle Terence used to tell was that after having joined a Hapsburgs army with the ambition to go wenching and soldering across Europe, after that unfortunate affair at Prague of the Winter King and Queen, said Hapsburgs army retreating across Europe had occasion to stop in Ullm; there one night in a fever dream young Renée received an angelic visitation, and the angel of the LORD instructed him: "The conquest of Nature is to be achieved by number and measure." And, that was the birth of empirical science - by angelic visitation. That's the story I heard.
A while back bishop Barron talked with James Lindsay about wokism and I am sure he got a lot of this information from him. Is that conversation available anywhere?
Beautiful. Wow. So good.
Truth.
Bishop Barron just made the case against Tucker Carlson’s “Great Replacement Theory” involuntarily. LOL.
He made a case against both left and right. Catholic Social Teaching is a mixture of the good in both political ideologies while condemning the bad in them.
@@Lerian_V Bishop Barron should have mentioned that the banning of books in school libraries is not the solution. I appreciate most of his speeches about Catholic faith, but he lacks a bit of humility. I find he talks with a condescending tone, and avoids the horribles things and beliefs that in the name of the church have been committed in history. Never heard Bishop Barron said “I hate” pedophiles in the priesthood and the corruption in Vatican finance matters, just for wokeism.
@@JosephDaher-hr2of He can't say that because some books are too evil and corrupting that they deserve a ban. The Church does not believe there's absolute unconditioned right to free speech or expression.
Do you have examples of the objectively horrible things that have been done in the name of the Church that he hasn't talked about in any of his speeches or commentaries? Would you like at least two videos (he's made several and has written at least one book) on the issue of sexual abuse and corruption in the Church?
very edifying. thank you bp. b
Love and justice...
Don't tell this in Ireland ...especially to the media! someone who cannot know what things really are - at least as a working hypothesis - should probably not have a driving license.
I was left with the question of, ‘why?’ What was the purpose of that speech? Other than to have an opportunity to express his “hate” (his word). Calling out “one political party”? I like a lot of Bishop Barron’s work, but found this to be pretty unnecessary.
@@anotherlook6930 Not really. When Barron refers to “woke theorists” and the like, to whom does he refer? “Wokeism” is right-wing branding. It isn’t a thing.
That’s why Catholicism and the other Christian denominations are losing followers by the millions. Their leaders started to mix politics with religion in an attempt to help a particular political party. That’s happening not only in USA but worldwide.
“There’s an endless play of difference….Meaning always deferred…I never know what things really are. It’s always open-ended….There’s no such thing as a real grasp of truth but only an endless play of opinion, perspective, point of view…Always deferring meaning….This isn’t the final answer here…This isn’t the truth. There’s always something new that can come…Something fresh, some new way of configuring a text, some new way of thinking about it….Permanent deferral of meaning and truth....Don't be tied to old perspectives. Be open.”
Bishop Barron asks if this sounds familiar. It sure does. It sounds very similar to a lot of what is coming out of the Vatican these days. One example being the way in which those Catholics who hold to the long-standing teachings of the Church are condemned as being 'rigid'. Another example is the constant reference to the "recent magisterium", meaning that the previous magisterium of 2,000 years is no longer important. And there's all that talk about being open to the Holy Spirit. The Instrumentum Laboris for the Synod on Synodality could easily have been written by a deconstructionist.
Yes, deconstructing maliciously groomed 'do-ing' roles of psychologically and or emotionally vulnerable family members, such as of Bishop Barron. This grooming is to purport to presume in error economic 'do-ing' roles to be non-economic 'be-ing' identities. The purpose of this grooming is for economic advantage of the families of the diseased family member 'familyist' groomer. This grooming is with this occult as hidden, incest connected as substitute mate, non-economic false identity 'be-ing' status inducement for economic advantage of these families of these groomers by tax-exemption embezzlements and lower insurance cost by fraud.
Belief is always in uncertainty (John 20:29: "Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe") otherwise tempted to be "knowing good and evil" (Genesis 3:5).
Maybe Bishop Barron should start his own church if he has has a problem with "what's coming out of the Vatican theses days". I know of another guy who did - he was called Martin Luther.
@@MrSeedi76 I'm not aware of Bishop Barron disputing any of the Church's infallible doctrines although questions have beeb raised concerning things he has said with regard to people going gto Hell. With regard to Luther, many of the criticisms he made were accepted as valid. Corruption was pretty rife at the time. eg. Popes with children. Unfortunately, Luther did not stick to non-doctrinal criticisms.
Brilliant. Clear.
Language is dynamic, not static, so the term 'woke' is continually morphing, but originally it was an adjective derived from African-American Vernacular English (AAVE) meaning "alert to racial prejudice and discrimination.
28:00] The "radicalization of the self..." Over that last number of years I've come to the unfortunate conclusion that for the post-postmodern types, for whom so-called 'woke' is their new religion that the process of the "radicalization of the self" has been pursued to the point where the ego has been exalted to such a degree that it has turned itself inside out and popped out the other side, the results of which is that the post-postmodern and the woke can no longer distinguish other people as fully people, everyone else is just another something to be ordered or commanded because *it* has no real agency of its own - everything is just a pet.
Barron’s whole talk seems to boil down to a question: do you like Beethoven’s seventh symphony? Cos if you don’t, you’re woke 1:01:00 How very silly! Are you folks seriously buying this? Is one to find the objective good in a symphony?
This is petty ‘philosophy’. Good luck sorting that out, a society that must converge on banalities-a society so sickly pale as to require us all to push for its ‘beauty’; does this not sound oddly off, that objective beauty should require advocacy? Pleeease-this doesn’t help.
Friend, what’s truly silly is that summation of my talk. All I can say is listen to it again.
@@BishopBarron What has recently occurred to me Bishop, is that social media is the pool filter of the internet. Never let these comments affect you.
@@BishopBarron I beg to differ, for I do think the said split wraps up your talk. You said it yourself; yet of course it may be further abstracted: to be woke is to hold no universal values. No doubt, that is your thesis. ‘Universal’ is a strong word - the strongest! What you said about the symphony demonstrates just how strong it is: ‘universal’ is ‘objective’. This I find extremely troublesome, in a variety of ways; succinctly, in that it begets a materialistic appraisal of existence, were the latter to be understood as the pursuit of value, thereby asserting the sufficiency of material values - a rather grim take on human potential, I do know. There is no need for an ideology to lead us ‘back’ to materialism - this, we have not deprecated - not even ’em woke ones! Wokeness is yet another materialistic disease.
This lecture was robust, and most of the comments are complaining about what "woke" actually means, and how Bishop botched it. Amazing.
True but if you wanna talk about wokeism (which is not a philosophy but an umbrella term for everything conservatives don't like) then you might at least actually explain where the word comes from.
And one thing - equal rights for everyone should be something the church fights for - not against.
Power and freedom are related. There has been an overfocus on power an freedom. But life is not all about power and freedom. It has become another idol. I don't have the freedom to drink car lubricant or hang out for a while with a wild lion. And that is fine. Its part of life.
Interesting observation. Why aren't you free to do those things? It seems like one has a choice whether or not to do those things. Maybe you don't like the consequences of those decisions.
Really want to give this a thumbs up, but it's stuck on 665
The elusiveness of Truth or God is the real meaning of the relativism, not to reduce Truth to opinions.
It's a hopeless enterprise to give a short answer here. I mainly wanted to express myself, words are shadows when used to try and communicate. The Bishop starts off connecting wokism to Kant and Hegel, the modernists who such as Derrida and Foucault recognized the tainting of concepts to a negative bias, and with these tremendous old and modern thinkers he says he hates "wokism". Sorry, I can take only so much Orthodox Churchers but reached my limit, I'm too modern and too individualistic. Good luck. Ps usually when he stays out of politics he shines, but any clergyman is out of their waters of expertise with sciences, modern art and the political current situation
There will never be a US-American pope as that would be seen as putting too much power in one country. Bishop Barron's teaching abilities would be very useful as Pope someday.
Thinking determines what you do, or it justifies it
Great talk. Hits the philosophical nail on the head. Now I have a problem with the framework, its application only to the left. Most of what the bishop said applies at least as much to Trumpism. I would like to see such an intelligent man give a talk about the philosophical roots of that movement. I see no way it can be reconciled with Catholic social teaching.
Take for example the Great Replacement Theory. That’s wokeism from the right.
Reactionaries are not necessarily ideological.
He will never do it.
@@user-pe7rb7ev8q You haven't listened to him enough. He has several videos directed at both ideological sides. I have been a subscriber for about 12 years now.
@@Lerian_V Thank you. I will watch more videos, I might have been to fast to express an opinion.
I knew this 12 years ago. You guys are so behind us.
"You guys" meaning who? And who is "us"?
PS
We love you.
Classic Bishop Barron.
Why would anyone have to ask that question of someone else? What gender am I? You’re asking someone else to tell you who you are. How is that good? You have an internal operating system that does that. ❤
OK... I agree that we all have an internal operating system that absorbs what it encounters or experiences and tries to make sense of that which would then result in thoughts, expressions, actions, & feelings.
What if the internal operating system, for some reason we do not know yet, results in a feeling that there is something amiss in our relationship with our bodies gender? Are we saying that can't happen? Shall we say "suck it up, buttercup"?
Awww... you'll grow out of it... then they don't. Now what?
I will not pretend to know the answer. I also will not ignore that it appears it can happen, is happening, has happened many times before, that life like that must not be pleasant, and it seems we should try to help. Is that the wrong thing to do? Could we just start at that question?
@@BrianHoff04 their minds need nurturing. Their souls, also.
He is the Arch Bishop Fulton Sheen, from the 20th Century, Bishop Barron of the 21st. Century!
WOKISM is being AWAKE to everybody else’s prejudices except ones’s own!
Nope. Wokeism is just an umbrella term for everything conservatives don't like.
The definition of Aquinas that love is to will the good of the other provided the very background for Europeans to cross the ocean and attempt to redefine the societies of the people that they encountered so as to mirror the chaos existing in Europe including the struggle for wealth and power existing right under the eyes of the Catholic Church which even in itself manifested that same struggle for wealth and power as witnessed by the giant cathedral dominated City of today and left behind in the architecture. It is the effort to escape its own history that no doubt leads Bishop Barron to condemn Wokeism. The mere fact that he uses the term in such a derisive manner shows his blindness and unwillingness to critique his own position.
Bishop Barron's speech began @21:00
Great analysis!
This is a brilliant analysis however it is important that Bishop Barron recognize that much of what he says is undercut by the mere fact of his own privileged position as a bishop and therefore a person of power addressing a similar group of people with leisure to speculate and discuss and critique. In the real world the masses are engaged in a constant struggle to engage with higher-level structures simply to survive. These structures whether academic or corporate determine whether their voices will be ever be heard and whether forces of oppression including bullets shot out of guns will end their lives or those that they love. The reason that Bishop Barron can discount these phenomena and call it wokeism is that by virtue of his position he is not likely to be personally threatened. Therefore he can speak of wokeism with the requisite distance that his own position provides for him. His entire discourse can best be understood as a game existing at another level of existence than the daily lives of people for whom debates like this are simply impossible and not relevant to their daily lives and circumstances. In comparing the categories of subjective and objective Bishop Barron apparently ignores the fact that experience is often so immediate and chaotic that it is not subject to any other explanation than itself. History exists so that people can get a grasp on what is actually happening to them in everyday life and feel empowered to define what is happening to them so that they are able to resist. The best evidence of a privileged position is that it is structurally unable to critique its confidence that it has a grasp of how things are and that perspective is universal and could be applied to all people regardless of their history and daily experience of life.
Well, that's so much nonsense! Friend, do you even see how aggressive and imperialistic your own rhetoric is here? You have just told me that, because of the office I hold, I have no right to speak and that I can never grasp the truth of things. You have in fact done what so many on the Woke Left do: preclude the very possibility of ever being criticized.
So if you're not z bishop you know everything. You possess pure objectivity.
29:00] The soul *generates* the body. If I could add a single sentence to the corpus of Aquinas it would be that.
As a Black Catholic, I wish clergy would speak to the people who use the word. Taking a black slang word, and making it mean what you want is disingenuous, Bishop clearly has a different understanding of the word that far why blacks used it. God Bless his works but, Christians leaders shouldn’t use the word. Painting everything that not Christian as woke is not okay. It’s not mutually exclusive amongst the the things he spoke about.
Agreed. Adopting the strategy of co-opting and redefining the term has worked for conservative media outlets where "woke" serves as a catchall for anything outside of a certain politically and culturally conservative worldview. It doesn't seem sensible for the Catholic church to follow suit, particularly given the definition of catholic.
How do you think the term should be defined and how is he misunderstanding what it means?
He says very clearly that he defines “woke” as applied critical theory in various social realms. And he is right that critical theory is rooted in Marxist ideology, and Marxism is a catholic heresy.
@@Seliz463 Well that's an odd thing for him to do and I wonder why he has chosen to do it?
Woke originated in the 60's. It was black folks way of identifying a person who identified when prejudice & discrimination was present. "That guy's woke." or "Stay woke". "Get woke".
Tell me how the Bishop's definition preceded the original use or why he has decided to change it's meaning? I suspect the Bishop knows he has changed the definition. It sells better when you bring up Marxist stuff.
@@BrianHoff04the idea of becoming conscientized hails much further back than the 1960s civil rights movement. It is a Marxist methodology predating the civil rights era by nearly a century. And it is the Marxist movement itself that co-opted civil rights era (a la MLK-esque) fundamentally Christian objections to injustice, and manipulated the movement towards critical theory principles. Whatever “woke” was originally supposed to mean-a awakening to the Christian understanding of the moral sin of racism of oppression-the word and movement was taken over by Marxists very early on.
In other words it isn’t Bishop Barron that shifted the definition. He is rather trying to explain why this fight against injustice was taken over and used for political manipulation by Marxist ideologues a very long time ago.
Yes, power. That's part of deconstruction theory - ultimately the aim of everyone is power.
Starting to get some clicks now. Monetized?
Good job. Seems it may have worked. Clicks = truthiness or perhaps alternate facts?
Skip to minute 22
Comment for traction
If I'm my own god, I'm in big trouble.
21:41 for Bishop Barron!
Respectfully, it's not proper to conflate Critical Theory with wokeism. Critical Theory is an umbrella term for a group of sociologic academic theories. It's an academic field. Wokeism is slur hurled at people we don't agree with. I guess we could argue about what "wokeism" is, but it wouldn't yield much meaningful or worthy fruit. That would be like conducting an extensive analysis about what "nigger" means. It's just a slur used to control people. Let's not elevate wokeism by implying that the whole phenomenon has some sort of academic rigor behind it. When we talk about wokeism, we are speaking of a certain group of people. But at the end of the day, the Church stands for unity. The Church stands for Jesus. If someone is saying something evil, simply call it what it is: evil. But most importantly, there is no "us versus them." There is simply us and more us. Our struggle is not with flesh and blood, but with the powers and principalities of the air. People sometimes make bad choices, evil choices. Name the specific evil choice - that takes its power away.
I am a secular Catholic because I believe that Catholic teachings are a good model for living good and moral life but I am not one for rituals like going to churches. The new woke secular Religions are more due to the prevalence of the nihilism and moral relativity of Science than they are due to philosophers like Descartes and Kant. Kant is my go to philosopher, not Aquinas, because Kant's transcendental idealism is a much better model for a good and moral life as well as the universe than Aquinas's greatest good.
In fact, Kant's analytic reason depends on the measurements of Science while his pure reason is the source of Religion as well as math and philosophy and both forms of reason are transcendental. Kant wrote his CofPR to clearly separate Religion from Science, a major part of the Enlightenment, and the new secular woke Religions are simply new forms of Scientism, the secular Religion of Science just like the Enlightenment.
After all, there are many different ways to live good and moral lives besides Catholic social values and teachings as both the Schism and the Reformation well demonstrated. Moreover, Islam, Buddha, Tao, Confucius, and Vedas likewise show how to live good and moral lives and all show tolerance for certain sins of other Religions. The new secular woke Religion's greatest flaw is its arrogant and sanctimonious intolerance of certain sins of other Religions and reliance on the nihilism and relative morality of Science for living a good and moral life. The measurements of Science simply cannot tell us how to live good and moral lives and for that we must depend on our moral intuitions of the Grand Narratives and an acceptance of the transcendentals: beauty, truth, feeling, identity, and consciousness...
See the book 'The devil and Karl Marx' by Paul Kengor.
Jesus
And Jesus said, “I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the learner and wise and revealed them to the innocent and the simple". Mr. Barron locks of humility turns a blind eye to racism, bigotry, injustice and equity. During the time of slavery, Catholics priest did not stand up for truth and justice nor did they defend the innocent. And were merely keeping alive traditional liturgy and practice, but did not confront the church's racist, colonialist and sexist past. You will do down in history as one of them.
The church has a well-known talent for standing on the wrong side of history. It's almost a given at this point.
Start time 21:41
What better example of Foucault's philosophy than someone spouting off on "wokeism"-a term those in power made up to demonize others who think differently or who dissent against the traditional value and truth of things. Don't be afraid of others' truths, Bishop. Wasn't it Christ's truth that inspired you? Isn't that a different truth that that of the Muslim, or the Jewish person. If you are truly for justice and love, Bishop, perhaps you'd be better served just listening for now.
Is there a real counter-argument anywhere in sight?
@@BishopBarron No argument. Just listening ears is all that's required. The answer is blowing in the wind, right? Thank you for your work and all you do.
@@phyllodopeby my lights, I think you are providing a great example of some the frustrations people have with critical theory ‘woke’ analysis. You seem to be casting aspersions without wanting to engage in argument. Perhaps reflecting a distrust of reason & our ability to reach common understanding. You seem to embrace relativism by talking about different truths (as opposed to different understandings of the truth). Personally, I find relativism incoherent but you do you-we can both be right according to relativism. Also you seen to cast the whole talk in terms of an almost binary power dynamics as if there are just 2 groups those for change & those resistant to it. As if there isn’t a vast range of issues, challenges, & dynamics within society. Finally, you encourage someone to just listen, I.e. not speak, bc of who they are as though an idea or argument is correct based on its origin. For people who believe in reason this would be the genetic fallacy. Again, by my lights, it seems odd to post such strong criticisms but then not be willing to engage, or at least offer that prudentially you can’t afford the effort to do so given other commitments. Which people understand. Cheers.
@@markbirmingham6011 Thanks for this. You’re right. I should of held my tongue unless I’m fully ready to engage. I guess I’m just tired of everyone not listening and thinking that criticism of systemic problems is a problem. I’m all for dialogue and learning that leaves to less divisiveness and more love. And I often feel that Bishop Barrón does just that. This particular talk however gave me the opposite feeling. I will continue to listen and process.
@@phyllodope I agree. It’s wrong to view all criticism of systemic problems as a problem. That too would stifle discussion.
That quote from St. Thomas Aquinas 🤯
Aquinas could not know that the female was an active participant in conception, not known until microscopes were available to see the female egg in her ovary. Hence Aquinas asserted inseparable procreation and union in marriage but not 'qualitatively equal'.
Is there a way to obtain a reading list of the philosophical works Bishop Barron references? He explains the concepts masterfully. It is so intriguing that I would like yo read the original works in succession,
Finding a solid history of modern & post modern philosophy (from Descartes through Foucault) might be your best bet. Or could get you started then you can deep dive into originals as you see fit. For me, I get a lot out of commentaries (written & on CZcams). These have proved very helpful when I do engage with the original texts. Good luck!
try Stephen Hicks' Postmodernism.
Johnathan Pageau, and Thomists like Gilson and Maritain are very insightful because they recognize how modern philosophy has tried eradicate final causes and first causes, and keep material and efficient causes. This is why we have seemingly lost purpose and teleology in all spheres of life, and have no natural standard for anything. Understanding this shift in the history of thought helps explain A LOT. You will find it implied in anything Pageau says and it is alarming Barron failed to even explicate this point. I fear he reads the Bible more than philosophy. It seems, ironically, Barron's reading list and effort is not so charitable to reading things he hates. In order to oppose these devilish philosophies, we must face and truly understand them. In this regard, Paul Fry's lectures and the book edited by Cropsey and Strauss are indispensable.
From a Thomist perspective on how final and first causes were eradicated in philosophy, see Gilson's book: From Aristotle to Darwin. For a non Christian but philosophical perspective, see Leo Strauss' Natural Right and History. Basically, all "Straussians" understand this shift in thought and how it was initiated from Machiavelli to Bacon to Descartes. There is a worthwhile book to purchase just about this shift in intellectual history:
philosophy.catholic.edu/faculty-and-research/faculty-profiles/hassing-richard/Publications/final-causality-in-nature-and-human-affairs.html
Sorry the Tube has deleted my comments like 10 times so I can't say too much and will post mere titles separately. Very sorry
Michael Sugrue YT lecture on Frankfurt School
22:32 is when it actually starts