The Church Doesn’t Teach What You Think It Does (Guest: Jimmy Akin)
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 08. 2024
- Today we’ll talk with a man who has publicly defended the Catholic Faith for more than 30 years. We'll find that Catholics often are wrong about what they think the Church definitively teaches.
Guest:
Jimmy Akin is a convert to Catholicism and the author of many books, including Teaching with Authority, The Fathers Know Best, Mass Revision, and The Salvation Controversy. He is a Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers.
Links:
• "Teaching with Authority" (book): shop.catholic.com/teaching-wi...
• Jimmy Akin website: jimmyakin.com
• Jimmy Akin CZcams channel: / @jimmyakin
• Jimmy Akin's Mysterious World (podcast): sqpn.com/podcasts/jimmy-akins... - Zábava
Jimmy Akin! whoo-hoo!
Really appreciate this video.
Jimmy Akin drew me here. Just subscribed to your channel 👍
''As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest also may stand in fear.''
1 Timothy 5:20
yeah Strickland got what was coming to him I agree
Have you guys seen the beautiful full interview with Pope Francis from "60 Minutes" finally published yesterday? (Not the short clips, but the ca. 44 minutes' long one.)
@Crisis Magazine - the Calvinist book you’re thinking about is actually a tractate called “A Tip Toe Through TULIP” by Jimmy Akin
I am 67 years old and still waiting for a sermon on this! Leviticus 18:22 has been translated in common English versions as: Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination.
And when you’re an abomination you try to obscure that bit of scripture. What would St Catherine of Siena say?😅
@paulyosef7550
Did they specifically brought up Leviticus 18:22 here in this video and which version would be the most faithful one?
1) If they did can you please write the timestamp.
For one that reads your comment, it seems you are touching "a subject" that is still causing disputes and controversies and people react both differently and understand differently.
2) How do *"you"* understand it?
3) What does St. Catherina of Siena have to say in that regard?
4) Have you seen the beautiful full interview with Pope Francis by "60 Minutes" finally published yesterday on CBS News? (None of the previous short clips, but the ca. 44 minutes' long one.)
Looking forward to your 4 replies. Thanks.
PAX CHRISTI 😇
It is true that you do not need to take on every false statement in the world. There are way too many of them. But it is not true. You are an important guy, I think. You are a significant and influential voice for the truth of the Catholic Faith and for the general sense of being a faithful catholic with a diverse range of interests and an encouraging personality.
So good
I very much enjoy Jimmy's videos and highly recommend them.
The man in GOD’s hands 🙌
Jimmy, are there any debates you've done with EO?
Jimmy mentioned “Catholic World View”. What is the catholic World View? Anthony Esolen would be a great guest on this topic.
Eric please add timestamps! 🙏
A question I have as a catholic… is the choosing of the pope considered an infallible act of the church? If so, what implications does it have when a pope becomes guilty of serious habitual sin or actions that are scandalous or gravely harmful to the reputation of the Catholic Church? Are the faithful asked to believe that the Lord willed it to be that a pope was to be elected that actually ended up damaging the credibility of the Catholic faith?
While it's certainly true that religious submission of intellect and will doesn't apply to everything a pope says, it does apply to all authoritative magisterial teaching, even that which isn't taught definitively (infallibly). If multiple instances of authoritative magisterial teaching contradicted each other, we would need to submit to the teaching taught at a higher level (e.g. dogmatic constitution > apostolic exhortation).
Good information Jimmy…agree with you on the debate with White and with the other two protestants, with you and Trent .White only needs to be RIGHT. He’s never interested in learning something different OR seeing another perspective.🙏
47:26 At a certain point in Church History, Nicaea was more and more getting buried, and St. Athanasius had to actually dissent from a man who to many appeared as the real bishop of Alexandria (patriarch), a bishop George.
At a certain point there was good evidence Pope Liberius had signed some Arian stuff. In fact, it was the Third Sirmian formula which was ambiguous, and on top of that he had signed under duress.
Felix II was on this occasion quasi antipope, stepped back when Liberius had cleared himself, and became the next pope and a saint.
29:30 - Admittedly nit-picking, I wish JA would've answered Eric's question over the _principles_ involved without shooting from the hip or background peripherals. I wish he would've used direct, in-line phraseology and systematically defined terms without a long-winded response; since the question of authority IS what it boils down to for everybody. I think Eric was on to something here that was getting to the bedrock of the current Crisis. I do thank both for the content drop.
With all due respect, I believe that I heard Mr. Akin say that there was no Catechism of the Catholic Church before the one put out by Pope St. John Paul II? According to a person who is a scholar on such things there were hundreds of catechisms before then. The one that was universally accepted for hundreds of years was the Catechism of the Council of Trent or the Roman Catechism. Perhaps I misunderstood, but are you saying there was no catechism before Vatican II? I am no scholar but I would beg to differ.
There were many catechisms before, but in a completely different manner. Catechisms of Trent and St. Pius X were a basic instruction tool in a question and answer structure. JP II's catechism is a "brick" book that sensitized in a substantially detailed manner all the main teachings of the church and was designed to be consulted by bishops.
Also I got the feeling he was meaning online- there was no easy to find cathechism and easy to search for non-catholics as there is today. Now anyone who is curious can search the cathechism online for answers if they're motivated enough 😊
Eric…c’mon man!
39:03 The Pope “could introduce a *NEW* infallible teaching that previously was not a teaching at all” ⁉️ (emphasis added).
That doesn’t sound right.
The assumption of Mary was a traditional/popular belief but never a teaching until the pope declared it as such, if I'm not mistaken.
Also, JP II had to practically define that women couldn't be priests and that wasn't a teaching because, well, there were times when people wouldn't raise questions like that one.
So... I guess it wouldn't be something completely new. Also, in order make such statements, the pope naturally needs strong arguments in a such important e rare circumstance.
''Fiducia Supplicans'' is a perfect example of a non infallible teaching that in principle under normal circumstances should still constitute submission of mind and will however because of it's self contradicting nature and by it's own admission as a ''novel teaching'' that objectively contradicts the perennial definitive teachings of the Church, Sacred Scripture, and Natural Law it must be rejected out of respect for the Holy Office and God.
but not subjectively "contradicts" if in groomed error appearing to "objectively contradict..."
this is false. The church has never forbidden blessing sinners in groups of two.
Wait a minute! What do you mean it admits to being "a novel teaching"? It doesn't even contain the word "novel."
@@jimmu2008 “The value of this document, however, is that it offers a specific and *innovative* contribution to the pastoral meaning of blessings” -Fiducia Supplicans P.3 “Presentation”
@@consecratedsoul that's different than saying it is "novel" and putting it in quotation marks as if it were a direct quotation. And then you have to ask what part of it is "innovative." And it emphasizes, by putting it in italics, that the innovative part is to the "pastoral" meaning of blessings. What fs basically does is emphasize non-liturgical blessing as an effective prayer for the petitionists, not as something which implies approval.
My Bigfoot theory is this: if such a thing exists, it must, somehow, have an ability to weave in and out of normal dimensional space, so when we are seeing it, it is because it ventured into our normal space, but this isn't its primary home. OR, it has some remarkable camouflage ability that it uses most of the time, though I think the first one sounds more likely with the abundant lack of evidence.
I think a less out-there theory would be that most of the population is small, like less than a meter in size, but occasionally they grow big. Kind of like catfish. Look up how much bigger the "biggest catfish" ever caught is than the average.
I would like to point out that as a Catholic even as a former vatican 2 Catholic I never saw prejudice in the Church towards non Catholics. The pope is full of beans if he says that we need to throw out our Catholic Tradition and embrace mortal sin and cause Sacrilege by giving the Body and Blood of the Lord to Mortal sinners and I have lots of non believing friends.
I believe your sister’s dog almost never barks. We had a cockerpoo (?) when my children were little and Patches NEVER barked or even whined. You knew he had to go out because he’d stand at the door and look over his shoulder at you and stare!
So often I would get scandalized by something Pope Francis was reported to have said only to learn more context later and realize he meant something different. That's happened enough times that I don't worry anymore. But it is unfortunate when the words of a Pope can be so easily misconstrued to the confusion of others. But People Francis has a wonderful pastoral heart; I feel like his heart is absolutely in the right place, just not always his words.
Pastoral heart? Is it pastoral to bless homosexual couples? To hope that hell is empty? If that's heart, then we need a Pope with some brain.
I wish you sentiments were true but it’s hard to reconcile who P. Francis appoints and who he cancels. Fr. Martin and others have publicly stated that the church’s teachings are wrong. I can’t reconcile that.
Popesplaining. There is a scandal every time we turn around, and it's not manufactured by haters. He does it every time (causing the scandal)
@@damnedmadmanPlease watch the 60 Minutes interview with Pope Francis that just came out.
@damnedmadman Pope Francis neither blesses nor authorizes the blessing of homosexual couples. He just repeated and clarified it in an interview with 60 minutes. Read carefully from the source; not from what his detractors (or his sycophants) say the source says.
Francis lacks the virtue of prudence with his willingness to make a mess. How could the Cardinals choose such a man?
@bryincda. How could they choose such a man? Why, because the Cardinals are guided by the one, wholly authentic, ever-infallible Holy Spirit of God…just like the rest of the Catholic Magisterium! I mean, isn’t it completely self-evident? The Catholic Church don’t make mistakes. (Oops, sorry. “Doesn’t” make mistakes.)
@@HannahClapham We get the leaders we deserve.
@@HannahClapham The Church never makes mistakes, unless you happen to believe that the principle of non-contradiction is true.
@@bryincda. When you all say things like that, it makes you sound like a conspiracy theorist or a flat earther. Mormon prophets say they don’t mistakes, either!
@@HannahClaphampope idolater.
Calvinism came after, so it is how Calvinism separates from Catholicism that is required. A bit hard right now with the pope confusing everyone about the Church and using his power to force honest Catholic priests out of the Priesthood.
Jimmy Akin points out that in working together in opposition to abortion, US Catholics and evangelicals have come to know each better and dropped some of their hostility to each other. John 17 shows Jesus desiring unity in his church. Is this cooperation an example of God producing good from an evil?
Too bad they still say terrible things about the blessed mother
@femaleKCRoyalsFan. Really? I’ve never heard one single Protestant say one single “terrible thing” about Jesus’ blessed mother! Not. Ever. Even. Once.
@@HannahClapham I have protestants tell me constantly that Mary "sinned" yet they never show me any verse in scripture that records her committing a sin. Then they twist scripture to say "all have sinned" means absolutely all, even though we're told that "(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)" so clearly literally billions of people for at least 9 months of their lives have committed no sin. They even deny science which has proven that cells migrate to the mother and to the baby during gestation so they're seeming insistence that Mary sinned, doesn't even make logical sense, yet they are dogmatic in this unscriptural belief that she sinned. That's a terrible thing to say about the Mother of God.
@@user-lf6sr3if8o. Mary certainly doubted Jesus’ ministry at one point. Most of the early church fathers saw her as a normal human, and thus a sinner.
If you’re right, then perhaps we’re guilty of ascribing to her too little honor. (We adore the Lord’s mother, nonetheless. What’s not to like?)
On the other hand, if you’re wrong, you might well be guilty of a certain amount of idolatry. I think we’re risking less offense.
@@HannahClapham so what verse exactly are you saying shows Mary committed a sin?
👍
Classic popesplainer.
Defending the pope from mischaracterization is bad... because it just is OK?
@@tafazziReadChannelDescription Akin"s defense of pope from mischaracterization is mischaracterization. Unfortunately.
@@Pawel_Jozwik No, I've checked his claims and he's accurate. I'd be even less inclined to stress that a magisterial document is fallible, because it's not up to the laity to judge, it's the job of theologians to propose their synthesis of teachings that are in tension, Jimmy may be a theologian but basically all of his audience isn't.
@@tafazziReadChannelDescription Yes, it takes theologian to come to conclusion that black is white, and white is black, when anyone can see that black is black and white is white. "Yes, yes, no, no, anything more than this is from the evil one"
@@Pawel_Jozwik this is not the situation we're in. Do you believe in the dogma of the indefectibility of the church?
Why have JA on your show ??? especially with ‘aliens’ !!!!
Because we don't gatekeep on things the Church doesn't gatekeep on.
Pass on anything akin. Skip this episode
Why?
Are you jealous of his patristic beard and cool hat
Jimmy Akin is awesome!
AKIN believes in aliens. Can you find a trad catholic next time?
that's not true, he said multiple times that there's not enough evidence for a strong belief in intelligent aliens.
However he correctly notes that Divine Revelation does not say there aren't intelligent aliens.
If Aliens existed and they joined IKKSP or FSPSP or FKSPS, would they be forced to speak in Ladin and wear lace?
Stop being disrespectful. If you listened to the full interview he gets into these things. And maybe you should listen to what he has actually said in the past and the reasons for the things that he has said.
Fr Malachi Martin btw also believed in Aliens. In fact he is on tape saying so.