ActsApologist

Пікірлер

@dryluckycharms2264 21 күн бұрын

i remember this from the retreat!! also first

@dryluckycharms2264 3 ай бұрын

hey apologist why is your character one of the original xbox avatars form like 2001

@actsapologist1991 3 ай бұрын

@@dryluckycharms2264 : Because it looks uncannily like me. Also, 2007 was the peak gaming era. Better times, friend.

@dryluckycharms2264 3 ай бұрын

@@actsapologist1991 yes better times.

@vinzfatima 8 ай бұрын

Great commentary. I wish more catholics would make such Bible Study videos.

@actsapologist1991 8 ай бұрын

I appreciate it! I wish I made more of them too. Need to get back to work on my series!

@johnbrion4565 Жыл бұрын

What you, and so many others fail to see is the attempt at compassionate outreach to this marginalized community and the reality of the reality of the relationship that exists between homosexual couples, sometimes for years or decades. These are people who have shared their entire lives together, been there for each other in times of sickness, addiction, loneliness and also joy, celebration, birthdays, trips etc. there are good aspects of a relationship between homosexuals. If two people are making the attempt to live a holier life the church welcomes that even if they come together to a priest to ask for help. They’ve done everything in their lives together. And now they’re ready to do maybe the hardest thing they’ve ever had to. This shows tremendous courage and should be applauded. More Christians should engage in self reflection and charity towards their fellow man. Jesus invited all the sinners to table with him first. He did not start by first going to the lost sheep with words of condemnation. And on top of this the priest is to use his own discernment in deciding whether or not this couple is honest and true in their desire to live a holier life. Last I checked Christ said “stop judging that you may not be judged.” Bishop Barron does a far better job at explaining the document than actsapologist.

@actsapologist1991 Жыл бұрын

So, what in your mind is the appropriate pastoral care of such a couple? The two people can be blessed with the intention of them achieving their laudable goal. But their relationship as such - which is currently an illicit romance - cannot be blessed. What more ought to be done?

@GS-cj7rf Жыл бұрын

Christ tells us how to judge, and warns that we are to be judged in the same way we judge others-- He never once commands His people to simply not judge at all. What foolishness. Jesus invited sinners to Him, _and specifically and explicitly called them to repent and sin no more._ He never once, not for a single moment, condoned any form of sin. If we are to condone or affirm sin, we are not loving those who are shackled by it. Rather, it is a self-deluding, lazy form of hatred to condone sin under the guise of fake, demonic "love", as defined by the wicked world rather than God or Creator, who Himself is the very source and definer and embodiment of what true love actually is. Real love is found in the truth, in Christ Himself. One cannot have both the world's false sin-loving lie of "love" and also true love, found in the truth and our Lord Jesus Christ.

@johnbrion4565 Жыл бұрын

@@GS-cj7rf when did I say the sexual dysfunction of homosexuality is not a sin or should be tolerated? When did I say it should be condoned? Read again what I said carefully because you won’t find it. You should really be charitable to others. Jesus did say judge not lest you be judged. We should be careful applying a standard to others we don’t even meet ourselves. You are acting like so many others, being emotional, not even reading and fully understanding what the church is saying in this issue. Then falsely accuse me of condoning sin. Not a Christian way to behave.

@pistum Жыл бұрын

For the dirst time, someone actually describes an sporadic, spontaneous pastoral blessing is like. In Latin America, in certain areas, you might find prostitutes asking for a blessing when they run into a priest. I hope this pastoral realities never end up in Rome as I would not want the success of Saint Peter to consider whether the Church has the power to bless prostitutes.

@christophlindinger2267 Жыл бұрын

That's a simple yes, the Church indeed has the power to bless prostitutes. Imagine, it can even bless politicians!

@johnbrion4565 Жыл бұрын

Of course the church has the power to bless prostitutes. Get off your high horse.

@quayscenes Жыл бұрын

Somehow I missed the Denny's in the document. While slightly amusing, I fear this trivializes the intent of the document which does give examples such as: "a visit to a shrine, a meeting with a priest, a prayer recited in a group, or during a pilgrimage." Father Martin has done nothing against the document in my judgement. And honestly, it is hard to deny that his influence is not seen in the document. The Christian world has much room for growth in its understanding of LGBT(Qia+) issues. The document emphasizes that "pastoral charity requires us not to treat simply as 'sinners' those whose guilt or responsibility may be attenuated by various factors affecting subjective imputability." While keeping the German Bishops in check is certainly one intention of the document, providing greater pastoral care and a welcoming environment for the marginalized is clearly another.

@actsapologist1991 Жыл бұрын

In what ways do you think the Catholic Church needs to grow in its understanding of said issues?

@quayscenes Жыл бұрын

@@actsapologist1991 Primarily in the area of compassion. Christians often use phrases such as, "Hate the sin, love the sinner," or, "God cannot bless sin." And we speak as though these "sinners" are not listening! While technically correct (we are all sinners), this language can come off as cavalier and hurtful. Father James Martin points out that we do not customarily use these phrases for other situations where people are not living in perfect accordance with Church teaching - say otherwise well-behaved teenagers not living in perfect chastity, or "quietly contracepting" married Catholic couples (60% of married Catholics) - or any "good" Church-going person with ordinary besetting sins such as gossip, covetousness, etc. So we can certainly grow in the area of compassion. There is also much room for the Church to grow in its appreciation of the physio-psychological component of LBGT orientations. It is not as simple as "sin". Often these are very holy people that simply have this one "orientation" that has historically placed them in the margins. Father Martin points out that there are many model Christians (and almost certainly some canonized Saints) that we know are/were Gay - individuals who did their best to live a chaste life. We have learned the hard way that so-called "conversion therapy" is on balance a disaster. The best place for such people (all people) is inside a loving Church. Wise and prudent pastoral care is needed. This, I believe, is the spirit and intention of the document. Finally, let's remember that the same Jesus who told the woman caught (trapped) in adultery, "Go and sin no more," also told his disciples to forgive "seventy times seven". God help us from acting as self-righteous, judgemental Pharisees who elevate our own status by looking with scorn on the sins of others.

@actsapologist1991 Жыл бұрын

@@quayscenes : With that in mind, what - to your understanding - is the best way to tell people in same-sex romances that their romance is illicit and sinful?

@quayscenes Жыл бұрын

@@actsapologist1991 I am very cautious here. But let me say firstly, this is "above my paygrade" - I defer to the Magisterium. That said, I would positively affirm the Church's long standing teaching that the proper place for all sexual activity is within a Sacramental Marriage (one man, one woman, open to life, blessed by the Church). All other sexual acts (hetero-/homo-/other) fall short of that ideal and out to be confessed, albeit with a recognition of human weakness. Think of Saint Paul acknowledging human weakness by suggesting those who could not remain chaste in his "more perfect" single life (fully devoted to the things of God) ought to marry. Or think of Moses' writ of divorce that Jesus refers to as less than the ideal - but permitted because of hardness of heart. These are clear biblical examples where an "ideal" is stated but an imperfect human reality is acknowleded. In the Catholic tradition, sexual sins are treated as grave matter - by which many elevate instantly to "mortal" and therefore must be confessed before receiving communion. Witness the hyperfixation on masturbation by many in the Catholic apologetics world (see Jimmy Akin's random comment in his interview on Gospel Simplicity) - "awkward". Now, Bishop Barron's Word on Fire organization supposedly has a policy of not discussing "pelvic issues". Cardinal McElroy has gone further by explicitly stating that we should be less fixated on sexual sins. The Catechism foresaw this years ago with its pastoral instruction that, "one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety, or other psychological or social factors that can lessen, if not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability" (CCC 2352). That statement was specifically about masturbation but we now see similar language being applied to all sexual sin. This, in my opinion, is a healthy development. Uphold the ideal, have abundant grace and mercy towards the imperfect - which is all of us, to varying degrees, in our Christian journey.

@actsapologist1991 Жыл бұрын

@@quayscenes Well, what I would say here is that the Church (and churchmen) need to be able to teach uncomfortable, awkward, and painful truths. If they cannot, then the truth becomes a dead letter. A person can always complain that said truths are being said too frequently or with insufficient charity. However, if that same person cannot give a concrete recommendation about the proper frequency or manner of delivery - then that person becomes functionally indistinguishable from someone who simply wishes for the truth to never be spoken. My policy is that if a person cannot make a concrete recommendation of how to deliver a truth, then that person's critique of others' attempts is best ignored.

@sopadeeletras Жыл бұрын

Great video! Glad I found your channel

@actsapologist1991 Жыл бұрын

Many thanks! I hope you appreciate my other stuff

@GospelSimplicity Жыл бұрын

The Denny's part really took this to the next level.

@actsapologist1991 Жыл бұрын

lol. Thanks!

@deweybuchanan5311 Жыл бұрын

😱 "promo sm"

@racerxg4 2 жыл бұрын

Great Lent listening! Thank you

@Burberryharry 3 жыл бұрын

Calvinism is so messed up and a subjective truth.

@zekdom 3 жыл бұрын

3:06 - Are there different definitions of Sola Scriptura among Protestants? (The infant baptism example was on point.) 6:34 - Under a sola scriptura framework (as defined by Westminster Confession of Faith), salvation matters are clear. 7:40 - Does scripture clearly teach that slavery is wrong?

@actsapologist1991 3 жыл бұрын

Good questions, all. Most Protestants will describe Sola Scriptura using similar language. However, they'll differ in the implications they draw from it. They all say Christians should limit doctrine to what the Bible teaches. But they have different criteria for what establishes a doctrine as being taught. Is it enough for it to be implied? Does it have to be stated outright? Regarding slavery - there is nothing in the New Testament which clearly bans slavery. There is explicit teaching which bans being cruel to slaves, but nothing which says, "Don't have slaves."

@byronlewis1330 3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for taking time out to give a wider look at Justification and other related aspects. I have been reading up on it and your presentation like a few others goes into good detail. I will watch this a few times, and I pray more Catholics will watch this and become more conversant with the subject matter so as to give a reasoned defence for why we Catholics belief what we believe! Great work!!

@actsapologist1991 3 жыл бұрын

You are very kind. Thank you.

@fiveadayproductions987 4 жыл бұрын

Hey thanks for the wonderful presentation! Do you know if the slides are available so I can share? Thanks.

@actsapologist1991 4 жыл бұрын

Part I: drive.google.com/file/d/1jewexHfnaTu6tveoa6cqlCHsonbXCwEu/view?usp=sharing Part 2: drive.google.com/file/d/1m3pCpVFcgykFgwF2kBZgM4JSm2Gp2rEv/view?usp=sharing

@fiveadayproductions987 4 жыл бұрын

@@actsapologist1991 Awesome thanks! Any resource recommendations?

@actsapologist1991 4 жыл бұрын

@@fiveadayproductions987 , My blog at actsapologist.blogspot.com/2015/03/index-of-posts.html

@fiveadayproductions987 4 жыл бұрын

Hey hope all is well. Why can't I see your other videos/playlists?

@actsapologist1991 4 жыл бұрын

You can find them here: kzbin.info/door/q64b2tnUH7WqCiDSivFSRwvideos?view=0&sort=dd&shelf_id=0

@fiveadayproductions987 4 жыл бұрын

@@actsapologist1991 Hey only about 5 videos appear. E.g. your Justification Videos don't. Have you set your Channel like that or maybe it's me Thanks anyway some great videos especially on Justification.

@fiveadayproductions987 4 жыл бұрын

Hey good video. On your Channel, I can't seem to access all your uploads. Would it be possible to make these more easily available?

@actsapologist1991 4 жыл бұрын

I'm not sure what the issue is, but you can find them all here: kzbin.info/door/q64b2tnUH7WqCiDSivFSRwvideos?view=0&sort=dd&shelf_id=0

@hanssvineklev648 6 жыл бұрын

Thorough and organized. I actually liked this. I am reminded once again how the Catholic Church could have learned from Reformed thought as iron sharpens iron...but instead doubled down on many, many inconsistencies. (I think Calvinists could have benefitted from an in-church dialogue, as well, though they were never officially granted the chance. Unofficial attempts, like Ratisbon, actually produced results.) This presentation is so filled with non sequiturs, straw men, and question begging that it could serve as a fruitful exercise for Logic 101 students: pick out 100 or more fallacies. Extra credit for the one who brings in the most! You sound like a good person who simply doesn't know how to follow an argument. You're working with dogma as a starting point and then coming up with ad hoc reasons to believe something you didn't work out in your mind first. You didn't get here by pursuing truth. You worked from a given.

@actsapologist1991 6 жыл бұрын

If you'd like, I'd be happy to hear some specific areas where you think my presentation was lacking.

@theStashSmash 6 жыл бұрын

Hey great video! I'm not sure if you read comments but I have a question about the thief on the cross. Is it correct in saying that the thief on the cross died under the old covenant because the new covenant was not in effect yet according to Heb 9:14-17? Jesus' death enacts the new covenant but Jesus promised salvation for the thief while he was clearly alive. Either way I agree that the thief on the cross is an exception.

@actsapologist1991 6 жыл бұрын

Hmmm... that's an interesting idea. A few thoughts come to mind. First, the Good Thief presumably died after Jesus. So if you're saying the Good Thief was in the Old Covenant because Jesus hadn't completed His sacrifice, I'm not sure if that works. But perhaps what you intend is that he died prior to the institution of Christian baptism, so it couldn't be expected of him. I think that argument would have some traction, since it doesn't appear that Christian baptism really got started until after Pentacost. So yeah, good thought. Thanks!

@lillystein9926 6 жыл бұрын

Fantastic presentation! I learned so much! Thank you for the time and effort and passion you put into this.

@actsapologist1991 6 жыл бұрын

It's my pleasure.