Mary Was Absolutely Sinless! | The Jimmy Akin Podcast

[@hap1678]

I’ve been watching Jimmy longer than I have Wagner, but Jimmy harping on the fact that he’s a new convert when Jimmy was doing apologetics one year as a Catholic is pretty ironic.

[@JohnnyOskam]

Jimmy doesn’t have an issue with him doing apologetics. He has issue with him misrepresenting him and creating click-batey content disparaging him. I don’t think Jimmy was doing that in his first few years of apologetics.

[@hap1678]

@ Wagner didn’t misrepresent him, check out his latest video. He pulls clips out of context, and Jimmy here is certainly wrong on the status of this dogma

[@jamesms4]

@@hap1678 Clearly Wagner did misrepresent him.. Wagner said that Jimmy believed you could disregard non-infallible teaching willy nilly. Jimmy showed from his own words to AJ during the interview he said the opposite He even compared Jimmy to the Women's Ordination Movement that says you can disregard Male only Priesthood because it is allegedly not infallible. Why would he make that comparison? Jimmy clearly said HYPOTHETICALLY you could disregard non-infallible teaching for a serious & good reason. He also indicated he did not believe such a reason existed and explicitly said you can't just disregard such teaching without sin just because you don't fancy it. Wagner doesn't even begin to address this charge. He dodges it and gas lights it. I found it funny he accuses Jimmy of poisoning the well by pointing out Wagner's lack of experience (which is self evident) & yet in his very response video Wagner dismisses Jimmy's argument because he is citing (Wagner's word) two "Bad German theologians". That is some Chuzpah. He poison's the well and begs the question all at once. You may be impressed by this amateur Wagner but I am not. Jimmy's video here stands. Yer boi is gas lighting.

[@redgoesface1671]

​@@hap1678watched all the videos. Wagner is incorrect.

[@findingtruth7323]

@@redgoesface1671 How can you possibly say that? Jimmy might have a reputation for being knowledgeable, but this exhange clearly exposed his lack of depth on the topic. I know many people who enter into Catholic apologetics throught people like Jimmy and they assume he’s an authority in theology, it’s important to note that he’s largely self-taught. His academic background is incomplete-he studied philosophy in college but didn’t finish. Wagner has a masters in theology, he is formaly trained and reads very complex scholastic text in Latin. Jimmy is skilled with words and adept at handling basic apologetics questions-the kind that Catholic Answers typically tackles, like "call no man father," sola scriptura, or why Catholics pray to Mary. Decades of experience have made him polished in those areas but when it comes to more nuanced and advanced topics, he just falters. his explanation of the development of doctrine has been criticized for its lack of precision by more then just Wagner. In his book on the Magisterium, he made factual errors, and in this recent discussion, his failure to provide nuance straight made him to say outright incorrect things. This pattern likely stems from his habit of oversimplifying complex theological concepts to make them more digestible for the popular mases who are not concerned about distinctions and traditional debates and controversies. While this approach works for basic pop apologetics and radio, it also results in a loss of clarity and accuracy when addressing deeper theological issues and people who will not be scared to dive deep into a certain subject in fear of losing the audience

[@halleylujah247]

Galatians 5:14-22 May the spirit of unity, kindness, and peace bring us all closer to Christ.

[@Wolfschanzeful]

As a dumb layperson I happen to think Jimmy dodged the core criticism that Wagner made. Simply put: 1. Is the universal ordinary magisterium infallible?' 2. Can I Catholic in good standing dissent from something taught in the uom? 3. Is Mary's sinlessness taught in the uom? Did Jimmy explicitly address this crucial problem? Seems to me like he decided it was a better idea to mention false claims (Wagner DID NOT claim Jimmy supported female deacons), and talk in circles instead of addressing the very matter at question.

[@halleylujah247]

​@@WolfschanzefulOkay I disagree with you. Also didn't read your points. I don't know you, too much to read here, and I don't need to read it to know I disagree. Did you mean to put it in my comment? Why?

[@halleylujah247]

​@@WolfschanzefulOkay I disagree with you. Also didn't read your points too much to read, I don't know you, and I don't need to read it to know I disagree. Did you mean to put it in my comment? Why?

[@ChristianHockenbury]

@@halleylujah247why are you responding asking why he replied without reading his reply?

[@sgtadhesive9044]

​@Wolfschanzeful 1:08:20 is the start of his conclusion where he restates all he covered in a general matter. He addressed all your points. Except 3 because that wasn't the issue in question. It's whether Mary's sinlessness was taught definitively.

[@desmondhutchinson6095]

I really don’t think Christian is Autistic, he just says that sometimes as a joke

[@triconcert]

He's out of his depth.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

Wagner is in fact not autistic. He has said he is not. He has joked about “autistic levels of research into St. Thomas” but clarified that it was a joke.

[@Thomas-dw1nb]

It's his Zoomer humor.

[@ChristianHockenbury]

@@triconcert he’s really not

[@deutschermichel5807]

As a braindead Zoomer myself I can understand why Mr. Akin might struggle to understand our skibidi humour

[@newglof9558]

I have much respect for Christian Wagner but I feel like I ought to step away from his content for a bit. The parasocially vibing with a bro who happens to know a lot about Scholasticism is not really where I need to be spiritually or intellectually right now. Still absolutely respect him and his apostolate. And Jimmy I apologize for my calumny against you regarding this. I humbly ask for your forgiveness. Edit: I wasn't expecting to find myself at 29:00. Embarrassing but I did it to myself.

[@GabrielPereira-hm1cz]

Christian is great in many things, but he takes his view as more certain that they are. Remember we follow the Church not a youtuber, so always check what they say.

[@Radio_entelechy]

May I ask what the respect you have for Christian is based on?

[@newglof9558]

​@@Radio_entelechyhe's clearly well read and knows the content he presents extraordinarily well, and has given pretty solid, pretty no-nonsense advice for progressing in the intellectual and spiritual life. He can be a bit of a "bro" and sometimes dismissive, which I think turns some people away I just don't find his content as particularly helpful to me personally as I used to.

[@starshipchris4518]

​@@newglof9558 I tend to agree. I've stepped away as well. His content gave me some great points for rectifying my absent spirituality and improving my Catholic education. He convinced me of the need to go back to Latin, and to read. I also love supporting the Moriscos. At this point, my biggest take away is to speak less, obey and read more. I think all the lay Catholics would do well to do the same. Let the Bishops and theologians handle these matters.

[@TheChurchofBreadandCheese]

Just focus on mental prayer and giving up mortal and venial sins lads. I speak to myself too 99% of catholic KZbin content is at best a waste of time and vain curiosity and at worst leads to despair or confusion

[@sirzorg5728]

I would like very much for you two to sit down and have a catholic-to-catholic good faith discussion to work this out. The last thing we need is more divisions within the church.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

1:05:33 Jimmy, St. Alphonsus is talking about the debt of original sin here, not actual sin. The quote is just not relevant to this discussion. The debt of sin is not the same thing as actual sin, and a person can have the debt of original sin without having actual sin. It was a debate during his time on whether or not the immaculate conception meant St. Mary was free of the debt of original sin. That is a different debate entirely as to where or not she had actual sin, which no Catholic theologian in his day would have said that she actually sinned.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

The debt of sin was the theory of why St. Mary did not have the preternatural gift of bodily immortality and why she needed saving by Christ on the cross.

[@catholicguy1073]

The Immaculate conception refers to being born without original sin. That’s not the same as actually sinning during her life. I think like all people she was tempted to sin and what makes her different is her choice to not sin. Perfect obedience to God.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

@@catholicguy1073 I’m not sure you understood my comment. Here are some principles: The Immaculate Conception being conceived without original sin. Original sin is not synonymous with the debt of sin. The debt of sin is not synonymous with actual (personal) sin. St. Alphonsus’ discussion was on a debate over whether or not the Immaculate Conception meant St. Mary was free of the debt of sin. The debate was NOT over whether she had actual sin. Jimmy mistook this, applying it to a discussion of actual sin where it has no real relevance.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

@@catholicguy1073 the debt of sin is the explanation for why St. Mary still needed to be saved by the grace won by Christ on the cross (retroactively applied to her conception), and why she did not have bodily immortality (amongst other preternatural gifts). She had this debt dispute being free of both original and actual sin. So Jimmy bringing the St. Alphonsus quote up was a red herring, probably an unintentional one.

[@DeclanReimer]

real

[@Ch3fRuben]

This was the gentlest, most patient, justified and iron clad refutation I’ve seen towards a bad-faith set of accusation I’ve seen in a while online. Stay awesome Jimmy!

[@zacharymiske6220]

Except Wagner isn't autistic and jimmy seems to revel in pointing out he thinks Wagner is...

[@pianobard5478]

@@zacharymiske6220 also the credentialing was extremely cringe

[@mewster1818]

​@zacharymiske6220 you would know he absolutely wasn't attacking autism if you actually watched to the end where he provided sincere advice about how to better communicate.

[@halleylujah247]

@@zacharymiske6220 He seems to? Are you assuming motives?

[@zacharymiske6220]

@mewster1818 what if you didn't need to lose weight, but I publicly gave you advice on how to lose weight? Just cus I'm such a special hyper nice guy.

[@benedictkirby7]

Christian made a response to this video. It's really good actually. He makes some really compelling arguments.

[@anzot6903]

And cited sources THAT JIMMY CITES directly contradicting Jimmy's position. Ligouri in particular (in his 12/21 stream) was a huge lacuna that Jimmy completely misconstrued.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

@@anzot6903, yep, St. Alphonsus states in Discourse VIII of Glories of Mary that St. Mary’s absolute sinlessness was infallibly taught by Trent.

[@hotblackdesiato7340]

This has got to be THE most polite and effective floor-wiping I've ever seen. I wish I had a fraction of Jimmy's charity, patience, and grace, not to mention his knowledge. I hope the young lad will take your lessons to heart. If not, he's going to learn the hard way as I have too many times. God bless, Jimmy! Thank you for cementing my feet firmly within Mother Church!

[@quindariousgooch88]

Accusing people of committing mortal sins, threatening to sue them, and calling them mentally ill, is in no way "polite and effective". Stop idolizing an old man praising him for slander

[@Averyaveragedeskin]

Care to comment on Christian's response or do you still believe it was an effective floor-wiping?

[@owlintrenchcoat]

Yeah, Jimmy is very good at sounding polite and kind in tone while he's being demeaning and petty. One thing that's been rubbing me the wrong way about him for a bit.

[@simeonwaia]

Thank you Jimmy Akin, for turning this personal attack against you into a teachable moment. I certainly learnt some things I didn't know before.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

You should go watch Wagner’s rebuttal

[@simeonwaia]

@@carsonianthegreat4672 Why???

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

@@simeonwaia because it was very compelling and showed how Akin misrepresented him

[@simeonwaia]

@@carsonianthegreat4672 I don't care about the drama. I watch Jimmy's content because I like learning and I like the way he teaches. I also like how he doesn't name and shame others (in this instance he was responding), that's all I care to know about this.

[@based_chap]

As someone who watches both Jimmy and Christian… I actually didn’t expect this

[@thomasthellamas9886]

What did you expect? Somebody is actually responding to Wagner. We knew this would happen eventually.

[@timothyrosson8408]

As someone who passed judgement on you because of Christian’s video without really looking into the context; you gained a subscriber. Thank you for making this

[@no3339]

@@timothyrosson8408 Jimmy lied about Christian committing the sin of calumny, and he is also wrong about the sinlessness of Mary being a dogma. Consider watching more than two videos before flip-flopping on a topic that has an objective answer.

[@susand3668]

@@no3339 where are your receipts? By definition, and listening to the words of Mr. Wagner and the words of Mr Akin, presented side-by-side, the objective conclusion is that Mr. Wagner did indulge in un-Christian calumny. Now, it is great that you are helping with the algorithm that YT uses to invite others to watch this video, but I have other things to do, so this is all that I will say to you here. You are in my prayers -- it is the reason I read comment sections, so that I may open my mind and heart to some more of God's people, whom He loves and longs to raise up to Heaven.

[@branomusuka9683]

@@no3339 yes bro they think that what he said IS true but theres a lot of wrong bro ,

[@AnOpinionatedMan]

​@@no3339 The dogma only pertains to her lack of original sin. Her sinless nature as taught by the Church is NOT dogmatic. There are levels to the teachings of the Magisterium and not everything the Church holds true is dogma.

[@no3339]

@@AnOpinionatedMan It is infallibly taught by the OUM. The reason for the explicit dogmatization of the immaculate conception is because that was the thing needed to be clarified (because the perpetual sinlessness was so obvious).

[@johnritter9947]

Slanderin’, Criticizin’, Calumniatin’ = ☹️ Likin’, Commentin’, Subscribin’ = 😃

[@alicewoodhurst5154]

This comment isn’t getting the attention it deserves 😂👏🏻

[@no3339]

@@johnritter9947 there was no slander or calumny from Christian, don’t be ridiculous

[@susand3668]

@@no3339 , did you listen to this video? I think Mr. Akin established Mr. Wagner's trespasses quite well. That Mr. Akin forgives Mr. Wagner is also quite indisputable.

[@no3339]

@@susand3668 I watched all three videos in there entirety, and I suggest you do the same

[@fordhamdonnington2738]

@@no3339let’s start with “beyond shameless”

[@JamesLeman-1]

I'd love to see these two meet and discuss, even if over Zoom. I've got a lot more experience watching Jimmy, and he's obviously the GOAT, but Wagner seems to be well-intentioned and knowledgeable, too. I'd rather them have a good relationship than this become some kind of internet rivalry.

[@gerry30]

I've actually got Prof. Edward Feser from his Matt Fradd interview playing in the background. Feser is pointing out how the Church has many infallible teachings, but only a few that are "ex cathedra" from the extraordinary infallible form. He's also pointing out the ordinary infallible magisterium of the Church by the constant teaching of the Church. Making an argument to falsify a perennial teaching of the Church going all the way back to the early Church fathers is equivalent to trying to falsify Catholicism as a whole. So a person doubting allegedly having a good reason or not, cannot be a good Catholic denying or positively doubting the sinlessness of the BVM.

[@susand3668]

Did you read the title of this video, and what Mr. Akin said about his own beliefs? He did not "falsify a perennial teaching of the Church." I think you mis-heard him. He said that the Teaching of the Church is that Mary was and is without sin, and that he, Mr. Akin, agrees with this Teaching. But that in extraordinary circumstances, a theologian can remain Catholic while doubting (privately? I am not sure if Mr. Akin mentioned that part) a *Teaching* of the Church that is not *Infallible*. And he listed the ways that a Teaching can be recognized as Infallible. (Edward Feser can argue about his understanding of infallibility, but Mr. Akin is simply stating what the Church teaches about her own teachings.) The fact is that the Church (and Mr. Akin within the Church) still teaches that Mary is and was always without sin.

[@piface3016]

@@susand3668 Gerry's point is that the Church cannot teach error unanimously. This is why the universal and ordinary magisterium is considered infallible. It's because the Church cannot teach error unanimously for a long period. That's the source of the doctrine, not some paragraph from canon law. Jimmy is just wrong here.

[@consecratedsoul]

Correct, Catholics cannot privately or publicly for “good reasons” reject perennial teachings of the Church as this belongs to the Ordinary Infallible Magisterium of the Church where the Holy Spirit has witnessed, taught, and blessed such a teaching for a centuries.

[@gerry30]

@@susand3668 No. You don't understand what I wrote or what Feser stated. It's not simply falisifying a perennial teaching of the Church (ie. having a good reason for doubting or denying ) but it's a falsification of Catholicism as a whole. Akin is making a strawman argument in answer to the question "Do you have to believe that Mary was without sin, never sinned... uuhmm... to be a Catholic?" Akin also described the impeccability of Mary as quoting JPII as a "tenet" of the Catholic Faith. So, he is saying "for a good reason" a person can deny a tenet of the Catholic faith and be a Catholic in good standing. Jimmy is ignoring and I would direct you to Fr. John Hardon's Catholic Catechism on the discussion of the infallibility of the University of the Faithful.

[@susand3668]

@@piface3016 Mr. Akin was not disputing the teaching. He is not disputing the Infallibility of the Universal Ordinary Magisterium. His carefully nuanced explanation is that it is difficult to prove unequivocally the universality of any one particular Teaching as *having been taught "DEFINITIVELY"*. The sinlessness of Mary (which Mr. Akin believes in, as do I) is one of these Teachings. Personally, it is unimaginable to me that anyone can read the Bible and *not* see that Mary was sinless throughout her life. But there are others, who are honestly doubting, and who should not be halted in their journey into the Church by their intellectual inability to see what seems so obvious to me. Thing is, if we believe in "ex opere operato", we should be willing to let the Holy Spirit lead the doubter into a full understanding through the reception of the Sacraments. No?

[@laurenlooolll]

Keep up the good work Jimmy, God bless you

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

St. Alphonsus Liguori, Doctor of the Church, states that the Blessed Mother’s absolute sinlessness is defined as infallible by Trent. He does this in Glories of Mary, Discourse VIII.

[@JustinColletti]

A cursory look at this issue suggests that this is incorrect. In its response to this prompt, Magisterium AI returns the following answer, which completely undercuts this assertion, providing multiple citations: "St. Alphonsus Liguori, in his work "The Glories of Mary," particularly in Discourse VIII, discusses the sinlessness of the Blessed Virgin Mary. While he emphasizes Mary's unique grace and her freedom from sin, it is important to clarify the context of his statements regarding infallibility and the teachings of the Council of Trent. "The Council of Trent, which took place in the 16th century, addressed various aspects of original sin and justification but did not explicitly define the absolute sinlessness of Mary as a dogma. However, the Council did make it clear that Mary was not included in the general decree concerning original sin, indicating a recognition of her unique status. "St. Alphonsus, reflecting on this, articulates the belief that Mary was preserved from all sin, which aligns with the theological understanding that would later culminate in the dogma of the Immaculate Conception defined by Pope Pius IX in 18543. "In "The Glories of Mary," St. Alphonsus presents arguments and reflections that support the belief in Mary's sinlessness, drawing from Scripture and the teachings of the Church Fathers. He emphasizes that her sinlessness is a result of God's grace and her unique role in salvation history. "*While he does not claim that the Council of Trent infallibly defined her absolute sinlessness, he does affirm the belief in her being free from sin, which is consistent with the Church's teachings that developed thereafter.*" "*In conclusion, St. Alphonsus Liguori does not state that the Blessed Mother’s absolute sinlessness is defined as infallible by the Council of Trent; rather, he supports the belief in her sinlessness, which is a significant aspect of Marian theology that was later formally defined in the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.*" (Emphasis mine.) While Magisterium AI is not infallible, it is generally pretty reliable, and an initial look at the issue strongly suggests that this assertion is incorrect. I believe that Jimmy also addresses this general issue in this very video, though I don't recall if he mentions Liguori specifically. I believe he does bring up Trent though and goes through much of the same reasoning.

[@gerry30]

@@JustinColletti I just found this: "Hence, although the saints in heaven desire nothing more than what they possess, yet, in fact, there is something they could yet desire. It is also true that the sins which they have committed, and the time which they have lost, do not bring suffering; but it cannot be denied that the most good done in life, innocence preserved and time well employed, give the greatest content. Mary in heaven desires nothing, and has nothing to desire. Who of the saints in paradise, says St. Augustine, if asked whether he has committed sins, can answer no, except Mary ? *****It is certain, as the holy Council of Trent has defined, that Mary never committed any sin, not even the least;***** not only she has never lost divine grace never bedimmed it, but she has never kept it unemployed; she never did an action that was not meritorius; she never said a word, or had a thought, or drew a breath, that was not directed to the greatest glory of God;” St Alphonsus Liguori, Glories of Mary, Part 2, Dis. 8 www.ecatholic2000.com/liguori/glories37.shtml

[@anzot6903]

@@JustinColletti Are you using AI to generate a response? Because those things are SO inaccurate for actual research. You've gotta go to the actual sources, bro.

[@JustinColletti]

@@anzot6903 Did you read what I wrote? Yes, this is a quote from an AI designed to summarize consensus views on matters of Church doctrine. It cites and links to actual sources to support its summaries that you can read directly. While it should not be used as the final arbiter in any matter of doctrine, it is a useful starting point that tends to provide reliable summaries and provides citations and resources for additional reading. The problem with AIs is not that they can’t figure out what consensus IS. Rather, the problem with AI is that on many subjects outside the faith, the consensus is often WRONG. On issues of Church doctrine this isn’t really a problem however, as the consensus view on Church doctrine is normative for all Catholics. I hope that helps make sense of it. God bless and be well.

[@bgk-jo7yg]

@@JustinColletti Magisterium AI couldn't even quote canon 23 of session 6 from Trent (the canon that mentions Mary being sinless) when I asked it to - it quoted a completely different canon. I also asked it whether or not Trent ever even mentions Mary being sinless and it said no, which is again false. It's clear this AI cannot answer very specific questions. Instead of relying on a faulty AI chatbot you should read the actual sources themselves. St. Liguori literally says that Trent defined mary as sinless: "IT IS CERTAIN, AS THE HOLY COUNCIL OF TRENT HAS DEFINED, that Mary NEVER committed any sin, not even the least; not only she has never lost divine grace never bedimmed it, but she has never kept it unemployed; she never did an action that was not meritorius; she never said a word, or had a thought, or drew a breath, that was not directed to the greatest glory of God; in a word, she never relaxed or stopped one moment in her onward course to God; she never lost anything through negligence, for she always corresponded with grace with all her power, and loved God as much as she could love him." [St. Alphonsus Liguori, The Glories of Mary, Discourse VIII] So Magisterium AI is wrong yet again. And yes, Jimmy did specifically mention St. Liguori in this video and quoted him out of context and claimed that Liguori believed that Mary being sinless is merely "very probable", rather than certain.

[@Eviac]

It is truly proper to call you Blessed, O' Theotokos, the ever-blessed, immaculate and the Mother of our God. More honourable than the cherubim and more glorious beyond compare than the seraphim, who a virgin, gave birth to God the Word, you truly the Theotokos we magnify, amen.

[@deutschermichel5807]

How is this prayer called?

[@waltem8]

@deutschermichel5807 Axion Estin. It is the usual prayer we pray after the consecration and the epiclesis in the Diving Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.

[@NederlandseKatholiek]

I don't see anything even close to wrong in this prayer

[@waltem8]

@@NederlandseKatholiek that's because there isn't anything wrong with it.

[@susand3668]

@@NederlandseKatholiek did anyone say there was something wrong with this prayer?

[@ComputingTheSoul]

Why don't you actually talk to each other on a stream?

[@jeremias-serus]

Why didn’t Wagner reach out before spreading lies about Akin?

[@PhillipCummingsUSA]

@@jeremias-serus Nobody spread lies about Akin. Obviously, he's not used to correction.

[@JustinColletti]

@@PhillipCummingsUSA I don’t know, did you actually watch this video? Can you support your statement?

[@calebgasca]

@@JustinColletti I’ve watched both videos. Wagner never lied about Akin. If you didn’t watch both then be silent before making accusations.

[@paulmualdeave5063]

@@PhillipCummingsUSA With great reason is the new without reason/willy nilly. Interesting thought process.

[@agentjs09]

I've never watched anything by Christian Wagner, but less than 10 minutes in it's clear he suffers from something that so many in their 20s suffer from, and which I also suffered from at that age. It is a lack of humility, and a hubris about how much you actually know. Sometimes I wish I could go back in time and tell my 20-something self to shut up and just listen once in a while.

[@thomasbailey921]

@@Dan-mm7gc Hey, look, you suffer from the same deficiencies!

[@jtt8886]

​@@Dan-mm7gc How about the hubris of calling out in public in an embarrassing tone on KZbin someone who had been in Catholic apologetics for decades?

[@anzot6903]

This is a classic ad hominem. Both Wagner and Akin asserted propositions in support of conclusions. Evaluate those, not tone or apparent virtue. Are the arguments valid and sound?

[@fungusbeef]

@@anzot6903The beginning of theology is humility. There’s a Jay Dyer effect here where social media groupies are flocking to defend a guy who is clearly intelligent but simply has not been Catholic for long enough to pick the sort of fights he’s chosen to pick. Age and experience actually do matter, and in theology humility and tone matter immensely, contra the opinion of every 24 year old in the world. Posting a video titled “beyond shameless” intended to disparage someone else is completely inexcusable and if one’s theological knowledge has not revealed to him why this is a Bad Move, then perhaps he ought not presume to teach others.

[@bobjenkins3rd]

Wagner is right though. See his latest video.

[@ArianaRock-g7y]

I am cradle catholic and still learning about the teachings of the church.

[@FullDottle]

The most charitable smackdown I have ever witnessed. I absolutely loved it and have so much to learn in order to espouse such charity.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

Is the charity in the room with us?

[@roinois]

Hoping to see dialogue between Jimmy and Christian. Both are great and I hope they can work through this disagreement.

[@ThomisticTheologyandPhilosophy]

@@adeodata6364I think the point needs to be made that he has a lot of great content on Thomism and scholasticism in general and has translated a lot of out of print theology and philosophy manuals to English. That being said he’s got a real problem with causing drama and slandering others.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

@@adeodata6364 what charity? He made all sorts of personal attacks against Wagner

[@adeodata6364]

@@ThomisticTheologyandPhilosophy I agree.

[@adeodata6364]

@@carsonianthegreat4672 Considering the way Christian attacked him, he was pretty kind, let's say.

[@neilnelson253]

Mildly annoyed Jimmy Akin is the best Jimmy Akin.

[@t.j.armendariz354]

He’s so peaceful with it

[@debranaumczik6286]

😅 for sure, and continues calming to Teach. .Love his Style , so real and practical...very virtuous and these Apologetics make me smile.. especially when Calm and explained ...🙏🏻✝️ Thank you Holy Spirit and Holy Trinity for there teachings ...

[@St.DemetriostheMyrrhGusher]

I've thought about this a lot today because as a supporter of Scholastic Answers, I momentarilly felt as if Christian really had committed calumny, and perhaps he has but not in the video that is being critiqued. 1. You had enough time to find comments in the comment section of other Wagner videos in order to cast doubt on his credibility because of his alledged autism, but not enough to edit the full context of those clips into the video in which you accuse him. 2. You misrepresented Wagner's critique. We all agree that one can withhold assent to the consensus of the theologians without binding of sin for grave reason, however, he is contesting that Mary's freedom from venial sin is a dogma taught by the Church which follows from the Consensus of the Theologians, the Concilliar Decrees regarding Justification, and the Dogmatic Declaration of Ineffabilis Deus. This is why in that clip of Hasan and Christian speaking on what can be dissented from for grave reason they agree. 3. Just because Christian is a young Catholic and you have written manuals does not mean that Christian does not have the ability to teach to the faithful and you do. You undersold Christians credentials, specifically highlighting his anglican roots, in what I would argue is an attempt to diminish his credibility to the Faithful (which by the Christian is going to be studying at the Angilicum as far as I am aware, and is even headed to North Africa next week to teach Morisco converts as they prepare to be entered into the Church). You also, multiple times, painted him as some kind of magesterial dissenter to diminish his credibility again. All in all, this was a poor response. You should speak to Christian privately next time, and he should have done the same for you.

[@no3339]

Disagree, I think it was important for Christian to do this publicly. No correction would’ve been offered from Akin after being told about his mistake, if we’re being honest. Not sure why many are acting like this situation is some kind of shouting match full of cursing, with no substance. Theologians across time have had disagreements that were fruitful - even with much harsher words.

[@maryjordan4129]

Wagner owes Jimmy an apology. Period.

[@St.DemetriostheMyrrhGusher]

@maryjordan4129 Perhaps you should go watch Wagner's response to Jimmy's video. If it doesn't make it abundantly clear how much Wagner was ripped out of context and misrepresented I don't know what will.

[@no3339]

@@maryjordan4129 other way around

[@redgoesface1671]

Just on the last point you're wrong. Being young and barely in the faith means precisely that he shouldn't be teaching according to sacred scripture.

[@ericgatera7149]

Perfect. Just perfect rebuttal. And informative at the same time. Thank you Jimmy. Recent convert really need to be careful about their confidence: "For if a man does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church? He must not be a recent convert, so that he won’t become arrogant and fall into the Devil’s condemnation." - 1 Timothy 3:5-6

[@calebgasca]

I liked when he was misrepresenting Wagner and Loading the audiences expectations in the beginning. What was your favorite part?

[@schluuz_]

​@@calebgasca Personally, I liked his treatment of the criterion for infallible teachings according to the Catholic Church and his demonstration that the teaching found in CCC 493 "By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long" is not, by those criterion mentioned, infallible. I also liked the part where Jimmy states his personal beliefs on these teachings as well, but argues nonetheless from the sources he provided those truths which appear (to me) to soundly follow in terms of the exact "doctrinal note" this teaching I quoted from the Catechism of the Catholic church falls under. What was your favorite part beyond the 9:08 mark, Caleb? Do you think Jimmy Akin's arguments are sound? If not, why not?

[@calebgasca]

@@schluuz_ from a methodological perspective I have no level of authority to decide between who is correct on the doctrine being debated. My critique is on Mr Akins attitude and approach to how he addressed Wagner.

[@schluuz_]

​@@calebgasca Thank you for your reply! I am a little bit confused by your response, so if you could clarify some things I would greatly appreciate that! If you really believe you have no authority to decide between who is correct on the doctrine being discussed on a methodological perspective, why even engage Jimmy's video response to begin with? It seems reasonable to me that your critique about Jimmy's attitude towards how he addressed Christian may or may not be warranted, but this would depend upon the meat of the content that was addressed, and the statements made about each other both from Christian's and Jimmy's perspectives. Otherwise, I can't seem to understand why you would watch a response video if not to make judgements about the doctrinal content of the response, but rather only to make statements about the mannerisms with which they respond. Does my thinking here make sense?

[@calebgasca]

@ because jimmy is a giant figure compared to Wagner so I think he needs to be more reasonable when addressing someone small like Wagner. I also think Akins veiled legal threats and accusations of sin are both incorrect and inappropriate.

[@baileelong497]

Very insightful, educational, and charitable! Youve given me much to consider and dig into. We appreciate your time and thoroughness, Jimmy.

[@defeatingdefeaters]

Jimmy is on fire 🤘🏼

[@Aethelhart]

I'm really glad you're responding to this. I watched his video right after it dropped and he made some interesting arguments about why your position was wrong, and, honestly, at first rebuttal, he seemed correct that you were wrong on this point, not to say that he was right to handle it how he did, but he made interesting arguments that I wondered if you were aware of. As such, I was really hoping you would respond because I was curious how you would address his counter arguments. For context, I am a long time fan who has watched and read almost everything you have put out over the better part of the last decade, including Teaching with Authority. So I'm not unfamiliar with what you have to say in these sort of things.

[@anthonymarchetta8796]

So I am at 16:10, and Jimmy, I believe you are misrepresenting Wagner here. He wasn't accusing you of any of those sins, but rather accusing you of making a similar TYPE of error as the ones who makes those claims about the female priesthood, masturbation, etc.

[@anthonymarchetta8796]

You even try to respond this with the quote "You 'said' people like Jimmy Akin make these claims", but that still doesn't mean it rises to the level of accusation you claim, because "like" is an ambiguous word. In this case they are "like" you in making a similar type of error, not in making an identical error (if Wagner is right). Respectfully, Jimmy, when you accuse someone of calumny you need to be very careful that you also aren't misinterpreting them.

[@ShaloneCason]

Lumping Jimmy in with people "like" him is basically saying that Jimmy is one of those people. Any common listener would interpret him as saying that Jimmy said those or similar things. Which is legally dangerous, especially if it's untrue.

[@anthonymarchetta8796]

​@ShaloneCason This is simply false. I watched the video when it came out - you can actually see one of my questions in THIS video - and I did not understand Christian to be saying that Jimmy held those opinions. In fact, I think it is fairly clear that he was talking about people who held Jimmy's position vis-a-vis infallibility, that they used Jimmy's opinion to justify disagreeing with the Church on these other teachings. I don't recall anybody who listened to the stream thinking that Jimmy himself held those opinions. And Jimmy is simply wrong that the way it is worded alone means that he holds those opinions. He is assuming a lack of ambiguity in the word like that does not exist.

[@desmondhutchinson6095]

@@anthonymarchetta8796I believe Jimmy addresses this at the end of the vidéo. I understand you may not have watched until the end if you felt he was being unfair to Christan and left the vidéo. He mentions the charitable interpretation of Christian’s comments at 1:14:00 So I believe you will be eye to eye with christan here.

[@anthonymarchetta8796]

I did watch to the end of the video and I still think that Jimmy is wrong that it is merely one charitable interpretation of Christian's comments. The plain reading of the words does not imply that Jimmy denies the Church's teaching on subjects like female ordination and contraception; rather the plain reading of the words is that people use the same logic Jimmy does to deny that Mary's sinlessness is infallilby defined to deny that contraception and female ordination are infallibly defined. Jimmy said again that he believed Christian was being calumnious but that simply is not what Christian was saying. BTW, I am not saying Christian's point was correct either. Just that it was different than what Jimmy is claiming. You need to interpret it UNcharitably to get Jimmy's interpretation.

[@catcans]

I'm fans of you and Wagner and I hope to see you two discuss these errors together, although I will be completely out of my element trying to keep up 😂

[@shamuscrawford]

Ahahahah I love Wagner too but I was cracking up when you called him autistic. That was hilarious.

[@josiahhockenberry9846]

Dude. If Jimmy Akin was a wrestler, his stage name would be "The Baker", cause he just served the largest humble pie I've ever seen.😮 Stay awesome, Jimmy. 😎

[@branomusuka9683]

"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." -1 John 1:8 "for all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God" -Romans 3:23 "Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and doesn't sin." -Ecclesiastes 7:20 "Behold, I was born in iniquity. My mother conceived me in sin." -Psalm 51:5 "...There is no one who does good, no, not one." Psalm 14:3 From the mouth of Jesus himself: "...No one is good except one-God." -Mark 10:18 From the mouth of Yahweh himself: "...the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth..." -Genesis 8:21

[@triconcert]

LOL!

[@branomusuka9683]

@@triconcert yes you didn't reply Because you dont have proof ,you just writed LOL -(Laughing Out Loud) you just did nothing, explain yourself you pagan!

[@Levij83]

We need a t-shirt STATIM!

[@marksteo6178]

@@branomusuka9683…and so, where is the Church teaching on these citations related to this discussion? Does the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church given to Jesus’ followers by Christ Himself have any authority for what you believe regarding the sinlessness or the Blessed Virgin Mary, mother of God? If you cannot accent to Christ’s authority in His Body, the Church at this time, then perhaps you can approach the question of certain beliefs with and open mind as you may want your comment readers to do for you kind person. m

[@vinciblegaming6817]

15:36 christian NEVER said YOU said any of those things. He's saying people use the lack of infallible statements as a REASON to legitimoze those things by those who DO hold to those views. A lot of people have a lot of respect for you. And they trust you. You need to go back and listen to what he actually said. He's arguing against your reasoning on what is binding. Not that you hold those specific views.

[@mikeprew]

Jimmy literally mentions that in this video 🤦‍♂️

[@bman5257]

You’re clearly wrong. “You have people who arise like Jimmy Akin who say”

[@vinciblegaming6817]

@@bman5257 people who argue like Jimmy Akin are people who use the same underlying argument, not arrive at the same conclusions. If I say progressive Christians use the same arguments like Martin Luther in dismissing Pauline letters, I'm not saying Martin Luther dismissed Pauline Letters. I'm noting that Luther's arguments against the deuterocanon are the same arguments used against the Pauline letters. I don't know about you, but I'm confident Jimmy Akin is smart enough to know the difference.

[@A_New_Crusade]

Common Wag W

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

@@bman5257 you are ignoring the word “like” in that sentence

[@TheHolyOnes33]

So from what I can grasp from this video is that if you struggle with a teaching that is not defined by a pope then you must do a careful and vigorous study on the topic and if you still disagree with it it's best to keep it to yourself because it's more than likely you're wrong in some capacity.

[@ShaloneCason]

That's actually a great tldr for this video.

[@dr.tafazzi]

Yes, it's called withholding assent. What's forbidden is public dissent, which is what many trads do on many topics like Natural Family Planning

[@deutschermichel5807]

​@@dr.tafazzithere is a debate on NFP? Trads gonna argue about non-issues lmao

[@dr.tafazzi]

@deutschermichel5807 Rather than a debate it's them going "nuh uh" to the church being crystal clear on the issue. Weird hill to die on but what do I know.

[@jendoe9436]

@deutschermichel5807 yeah, some extreme Trads are very against NFP cause they believe people who use it aren’t using it any differently than normal contraception. Saw one pretty hateful Trad in a comment section who believed any Catholic who engaged in the act outside of the couple’s fertile period was no different than a pill popping, rubber covering one night stand couple 🤷‍♀️ Sometimes I’m not sure if radical Trads believe we should embrace God’s gift of giving human’s reasoning and control for the marital act that balances openness and practicalities of the couple’s life, but should instead follow base instincts by going at it like rabbits whether the time is right or not to bring a child into the world. There can be very valid reasons for child spacing, not that most extreme Trads will admit to it though. Came across one quite hateful extreme Trad who thought women who had to have their tubes removed, a hysterectomy, or other extreme health issues that required the permanent removal of a reproductive organ and thus could never be pregnant again, were made ‘garden utensils’ by their husbands and the couple were no better than hedonists if they later engaged in the marital act. The Trad commenter (who admitted being pregnant would pose a HUGE health risk to her) then went on to flex how she was a “proper Catholic woman” because she didn’t remove anything from her body despite the health risks and they ‘simply abstained’ during their cycle. Yeah, I am not kidding on that. And the OP for that comment thread legit needed surgery because the last child left terrible trauma in her system and another pregnancy would 99% likely kill her and the child. So you had an extreme Trad tell a fellow Catholic woman who discerned and discussed her issues with her husband and church people that they were a harlot and the husband’s “garden hoe” for accepting the surgical removal of her reproductive organs, despite the couple already having children and another pregnancy would kill her. There’s a reason I despise extreme Trads.

[@chrissiah999]

Thanks for sharing the faith, Mr. Akin. This is a good lesson for all of us on not misrepresenting others and actual teaching of the church. Mr. Wagner is definitely a smart person and he seem to be very confident that he was right but attacking you publicly really does not display any charity. Prayed for you both.

[@chicago618]

16:00 he did not commit slander on the legal level. Slander involves more then just saying something about one in public you believe is false if it is false. Other elements would be it had to be done with . IOW you have to show that he did so with the worst motives possible. It’s obvious he didn’t. You may feel that way but you’d have to show he had maliciousness in mind in making his claims. There is also fair commentary defenses to a slander accusation. He was saying all this in a commentary about your statements. But if you feel so confident in it then go ahead and speak to any lawyer who specializes in these cases and let us know who thinks you have a case at a lawsuit which you were clearly insinuating. 37:51 Pius IX not XI 1:08:32 Pius IX not XII You’re a very smug and arrogant individual. Set aside who is wrong or right. Let’s say you’re right. To talk down to him in a “Hey little boy listen to the grownups” type of manner is snide and pompous. Just because he has been a Catholic for only three years doesn’t mean he hasn’t studied the sources or material longer. The fact that you have someone like Fastiggi who also says the contrary to you and who has been doing apologetics longer than you tells me you just wanted to arrogantly belittle him. You mimic the way liberal theologians or biblical scholars talk down to conservative orthodox Catholics who defend the Faith. You mask your arrogance and pride in the form of wanting to be helpful. Just criticize his views and leave out the personal out of it. What did his being autistic have anything to do with this topic? It would have never occurred to me or anyone that that was anything important to notice. But you found a tweet or comment where he says he’s autistic and proceed to condescendingly tell him how to deal with it. I’m like what? I have my own problems with Wagner. He can be problematic too in social media but you really present yourself with your nose held high here. You can do better. We all can.

[@aureum7479]

Exactly

[@thomasbailey921]

Great job ignoring the fact that Mr. Akin did not initiate this confrontation. If Mr. Wagner shouldn't be "talked down to," then maybe he needs to be far more careful about how he publicly criticizes his elders. Elder in both knowledge AND age, might I add. Mr. Wagner posted (at a minimum) 3 multi-hour length videos with Mr. Akin's face plastered negatively on the thumbnails. But when Mr. Akin provides a single response video (without Mr. Wagner's name or image in either the title OR thumbail), then somehow he is the problem? Sounds like you came into this discussion with your mind already made up and soundly closed. And yes, Mr. Akin is also factually correct, so he has that going for him as well.

[@chicago618]

@@thomasbailey921 How did I ignore that fact? Hmm? How? Of course I’m aware who initiated this. So what? My response didn’t impinge on that fact. I didn’t criticize Akin for responding to him but on the nature of the response. So if I read you correctly you’re saying Akin’s very snide and condescending tone is warranted. Ok, at least you admit Akin was all of that. His elder? You have an equally smug attitude that Akin has so it doesn’t surprise me you are reacting very emotionally to my criticism. His elder? What does his age have to do with it? As for knowledge perhaps he does but knowledge expressed arrogantly and snidely is a vice. You dismiss Wagner’s knowledge too easily. It seems that you’re the one who already has his mind made up of who you think is right. The length of Wagner’s video is not the problem and any criticism of the nature of Akin’s response has no bearing on it. It is condescending and arrogant independent of whatever Wagner said or how many times and how long his videos were. I also said, if you were able to calm yourself down, that I also said I have probably with Wagner and his personality on social media. I didn’t have my mind made up despite your mind reading skills. I have listened to both sides and Wagner’s response to Akin’s response and will listen to Akin again if he chooses to respond. Unlike you Im no fan boy of either one but gladly listen intently to each one calmly and rationally unlike yourself.

[@chicago618]

@ How did I ignore that fact? Hmm? How? Of course I’m aware who initiated this. So what? My response didn’t impinge on that fact. I didn’t criticize Akin for responding to him but on the nature of the response. So if I read you correctly you’re saying Akin’s very snide and condescending tone is warranted. Ok, at least you admit Akin was all of that. His elder? You have an equally smug attitude that Akin has so it doesn’t surprise me you are reacting very emotionally to my criticism. His elder? What does his age have to do with it? As for knowledge perhaps he does but knowledge expressed arrogantly and snidely is a vice. You dismiss Wagner’s knowledge too easily. It seems that you’re the one who already has his mind made up of who you think is right. The length of Wagner’s video is not the problem and any criticism of the nature of Akin’s response has no bearing on it. It is condescending and arrogant independent of whatever Wagner said or how many times and how long his videos were. I also said, if you were able to calm yourself down, that I also said I have probably with Wagner and his personality on social media. I didn’t have my mind made up despite your mind reading skills. I have listened to both sides and Wagner’s response to Akin’s response and will listen to Akin again if he chooses to respond. Unlike you Im no fan boy of either one but gladly listen intently to each one calmly and rationally unlike yourself.

[@tommasorulez1949]

@chicago618 you sound like the smug one lol. Respect your elders young man. The reason he is being smug to you is because you were smug in your initial comment and again in your response. Take your own advice and be fair when you critique someone. Ad hominem attacks don’t make your case more valid. I agree jimmy was slightly smug but he had the right to be after Christian’s videos. There are better and less smug ways to critique people especially someone like Akin who has done so much for the faith.

[@markgraff8326]

Jimmy keep that Armor on and many prayers for you.

[@FernandoLopez-bv2uh]

Jimmy often teaches us about the history and intricacies of the Catholic Church. In this video, he also teaches us how to react with grace and patience to someone who is attempting to harm us. I only wish I could react like this when I am slandered. Thank you, Jimmy.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

Why does this read like a LinkedIn post?

[@Brother_Augustine]

Aw Jimmy! You put up with so much. My heart goes out to you. Your content showed me that faith and reason can harmonize and that gave me confidence to be a monk. I'm a big fan and so are my confreres. You touch so many lives and do so much good for the kingdom. Thanks so much for all you do. Godspeed!

[@RonathanDeezly]

an issue i have with this video is that you claim that to have been a Catholic for 32 years and a professional apologist for 31 years but slight christian’s abilities to perform due to his youthful faith. just seems like a gotcha with no substance since you were in the same position once.

[@susand3668]

The reference Mr. Akin made to Mr. Wagner's being only in the Church for 3 years is a way to reduce the gravity of his errors in understanding and the rashness and uncharity he showed in his videos that he made before Mr. Akiin responded.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

@@susand3668what charity? Akin attacked Wagner with a slew of insults for no reason. Regardless, Wagner demonstrated that his position is the correct one in his most recent video from yesterday.

[@john9486]

Christian is very clearly referring to the type of argument made and how that's similar to the one Jimmy made. Similar to how Trent Horn does when protestants argue like atheists.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

Yeah, Jimmy misunderstood what he was saying

[@PatricksBreastplate]

Then Jimmy is either not very bright or else he edited the clip to make it look like he was being slandered. That’s worrying.

[@susand3668]

"We must resist the temptation to bend the sources into saying what we want them to say." Very wise words. I do not know when, but I am sure that Mr. Wagner *will* be grateful for your correction, as wise men always are.

[@catholicguy1073]

Delusional. Wagner is not correct here on this.

[@susand3668]

@@catholicguy1073 ? Did I imply that he was correct? Didn't I express the hope that he will repent someday?

[@michaelshelbysuberlak]

Likin’, commentin,’ already done subscribin’! ❤

[@ImJustHereToGrill]

The issue is that Jimmy and Wagner have fundamental disagreements about the ordinary and universal magisterium. Jimmy is putting forward that the magisterium has not bound Catholics to hold that Mary remained sinless until her death with divine and apostolic faith. Wagner is arguing that it has and denying this exposes a fundamental misunderstanding of how the magisterium works. Wagner is revealing a methodological issue present in many apologists who take a minimalist view of what must be held. This is a war that has been going on for a while.

[@IsaRedcup]

Jimmy, i am so happy you made this episode. I couldn't deal with all the lies against you. We should always correct our brothers in Christ in charity but always truthful. Wonderful video and wonderful answer!

[@marvelator8303]

Jimmy, I was someone who was misled about your views because of Wagner's video. Thank you so much for taking the time to defend yourself against this misrepresentation. I love Wagner's work, and I am virtually certain that he meant well in his original videos, but you are completely right, and he was wrong to make the claims he made about you and about the nature of magisterial teachings. Thank you for all that you do. (P.S. I think Christian's remarks about autism were probably a meme, so that might be a further example of the boomer-humor/zoomer-humor disconnect 😂)

[@jendoe9436]

Kudos to ya for going the extra mile to look into Jimmy’s position and not just accepting another’s views of Jimmy’s position. I have sometimes struggled with going outside my own bubbles to look into other people’s positions without someone else’s filter clouding my view. Sometimes that humble pie is pretty big to eat, so I have to take some time out to take care of things😅 Now if the original person I followed just misses a point once or twice, I normally give the benefit of the doubt. After all, we all make some mistakes about others based on limited info and so long as the person accepts their mistake and corrects themselves then it’s good with me. But if the person has repeated patterns of misrepresenting someone, aversion to issuing correction, or hostility to being told they were in the wrong, then I stop following them because they obviously are not a trusty person to rely on.

[@RC-qf5rp]

I believe Jimmy is GenX. Joking around about Autism is not cool. No humor disconnect, just poor taste.

[@melesioalbavera8689]

@@RC-qf5rpactually joking about autism is incredibly funny, calm down joke police.

[@SaintPaul-bp3qr]

@@RC-qf5rpWomp womp

[@po18guy-s4s]

He is still young, so he still knows everything.

[@marksteo6178]

correction: “thinks he knows everything“

[@deutschermichel5807]

The two should reconcile

[@JustinColletti]

@@marksteo6178 Yes, that’s the joke 🙃

[@susand3668]

Ain't it the truth!

[@po18guy-s4s]

@@susand3668 Got kids, huh? 🙂

[@pcola4594]

Mr Akin, considering your vast experience and knowledge. (Decades according to your video), Surely you could provide the Catholic world with a complete list of infallible teachings?

[@TVuksic928]

Hey Jimmy! I had a comment/concern at 1:05:12. You quote St. Alphonsus as agreeing with your position, but in reading "Glories of Mary" I had thought that this section was referring to the debitum peccati question, not the question of incurring of any punishment from actual sin. I had thought this because it seemed from my reading of the rest of the chapter that he considers actual sinlessness being part of her special grace as certain, or at least presumes it as a basis of argumentation as to why the Son would bring about the immaculate conception: -"And thence [Saint Thomas] argues that 'the Blessed Virgin never committed any actual sin, not even a venial one. Otherwise,' he says, 'she would not have been a Mother worthy of Jesus Christ; for the ignominy of the Mother would also have been that of the Son, for He would have had a sinner for His Mother." And now if Mary, on account of a single venial sin, which does not deprive a soul of Divine grace, would not have been a Mother worthy of God, how much more unworthy would she have been, had she contracted the guilt of Original Sin, which would have made her an enemy of God and a slave of the devil? And this reflection it was that made Saint Augustine utter those memorable words, that, 'when speaking of Mary for the honour of our Lord,' whom she merited to have for her Son, he would not entertain even the question of sin in her; 'for we know,' he says, 'that through Him, Who it is evident was without sin, and Whom she merited to conceive and bring forth, she received grace to conquer all sin.' Therefore, as Saint Peter Damian observes, we must consider it as certain 'that the Incarnate Word chose Himself a becoming Mother, and one of whom He would not have to be ashamed.' Saint Proclus also says, 'that He dwelt in a womb which He had created free from all that might be to His dishonour.' It was no shame to Jesus Christ, when He heard Himself contemptuously called by the Jews the Son of Mary, meaning that He was the Son of a poor woman: "Is not His Mother called Mary?" [Matt. 8: 55] for He came into this world to give us an example of humility and patience. But, on the other hand, it would undoubtedly have been a disgrace, could He have heard the devil say, 'Was not His Mother a sinner?"- With the quote you produced being in a later section, introduced as a new topic, and speaking about being in Adam, it seemed to me that it was about the debitum, which wouldn't have a bearing on this issue and wouldn't really be fair to use for support. I'm open to a correction on the applicability of the quote, or some misunderstanding of the debt/sinlessness question I demonstrate above, including suggested reading. My family are big fans of Mysterious World! Hope you stay well and God Bless.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

Yep, Jimmy misunderstood St. Alphonsus here.

[@TVuksic928]

@@carsonianthegreat4672 It was brought to my attention that additionally in Discourse VIII in the same book (I had not read that discourse before and did so since my comment), St. Alphonsus calls Mary's sinlessness certain and defined by Trent. I do hope you are able to see this Jimmy. Your vid had many different appeals and arguments, I am not trying to "gotcha" on the whole topic as this was a small part, but it would be distressing if St. Alphonsus' position was misrepresented to grant your view the authority of a Doctor to so many viewers, and I hope there could be a clarification, either to justify his inclusion from a broader context of his work I am unaware of, or to correct the record and exclude him from your argument.

[@pop6997]

Christian is an excellent chef. That's it. 👍 For excellence as regards Catholic apologetics, engaging content that is well presented & delivered I go to Jimmy. Jimmy grew his solid reputation organically over many many years....some want to skip that process & engage in theatre, which is a pity if the person had potential. 🤷‍♀️

[@Joker22593]

Thanks for the clarifications. I saw others misrepresenting your views, Jimmy, and I'm glad you set them straight.

[@Iamb_33]

Don’t let it get to you jimmy. Love the work you do, people on the internet have no morals or integrity. Just all talk. Stay blessed jimmy. God bless

[@josephdantonio9187]

Honestly, I feel both parties have come out of this exchange looking quite poorly. I hope this exchange ends here.

[@lyterman]

I think Christian is very knowledgeable and a promising apologist. I do think he's quick to attack others in a frankly uncharitable way, and I think he is quick to say certain opinions are off-limits, when I've heard other knowledgeable apologists say they are permissible. I really hope this helps him correct some of that stuff because I think he has a promising future. Thank you for being gentle as always, Jimmy.

[@brackguthrie9470]

He needs to learn some humility!

[@koffeeblack5717]

Yeah he's got great potential but lacks genuine humility and charity.

[@magikarp2063]

I don't get it. The first 10 minutes of this video seem far more uncharitable then anything Wagner did. If you just listen to the way Wagner talks about Jimmy he clearly has respect for the man and is just trying to explain why he thinks his position is wrong while Jimmy keeps trying to put down Wagner simply for being young or not Catholic for that long (so what?). As for the substance of the arguments you can check Wagner's response to this and judge yourself but also they should just talk about it not make these kinds of videos in my opinion.

[@koffeeblack5717]

@@magikarp2063 What Wagner has shown is that you have to dig so deep into a very niche and recherche historical analysis to understand that the more probable view is that hold=believe. I think Wagner is right on that note, sure. But the uncharity comes from Wagner explicitly saying that Akin HABITUALLY disregards the universal magisterium. It's clear that even if Akin, on one of a couple topics, lacks a degree of nuance that only a small percentage of experts have, he still has a pretty good grasp of the difference between the ordinary and extraordinary magisterium, and that he sincerely tries to conform to both.

[@magikarp2063]

@@koffeeblack5717 Agree.

[@brigidwenner6847]

In a way, I'm kind of glad he went after Jimmy instead of another theologian. Jimmy is very careful in his language, it's difficult to catch him mis-speaking and to misconstrue was he said. Another theologian may have had to come out and apologize for imprecise language. Not Jimmy.

[@Big_G5654]

I think you actually got smoked

[@gerry30]

That was actually just the lighting of the cigar. I don't think I've ever seen a beatdown this extensive in Apologetics and it's only part 1. kzbin.info/www/bejne/e2HSoHivZ99nfac

[@jtt8886]

Then why doesn't Christian ask to debate Jimmy instead of creating more KZbin videos just to get views?

[@Big_G5654]

@ Wagner has asked to speak to Catholic answers apologists multiple times, they all refused

[@EzeBall1710]

😹

[@rahulmathew9730]

Waiting for Christian's apology now. Wonderful stuff again from Jimmy. Always calm and patient 👍

[@PhillipCummingsUSA]

Imagine insulting someone for 15 minutes and then demanding an apology for something you made up.

[@CatchCraftInc]

Lol something tells me Christian won’t change a bit

[@Catmonks7]

It’s sad to see Catholics online being uncharitable to each other. Gives ammo to orthobros, Prots and atheists online to use against Catholic Church. Hopefully they reconcile. I’m a fan of both channels

[@deutschermichel5807]

Yes. Hopefully this controversy will be forgotten soon

[@batemanwave]

all akin said was that he’s been Catholic for longer than Christian.

[@cvn65almaraz]

Amen Jimmy! It's unfortunate that a fellow Catholic targets his own brothers/sisters is Christ when we've been trying hard to bridge the gaps amongst other fellow Christian denominations. Truly humble Jimmy and many blessings brother.

[@marionladdwilliams5003]

Jimmy, I'm 54 and in OCIA. Many of your videos and books have been so helpful. Thank you for clarifying the point on the complete sinless life of Mary.

[@edwardman1742]

I love Jimmy, but I feel he’s being quite passive aggressive here.

[@lastnamefirstname850]

He's human after all. Probably a little bit pissed about the whole thing.

[@jtt8886]

If some young person was making videos to attempt to embarrass you on KZbin, you'd be bothered too.

[@jamesms4]

Much like your post here eh?

[@edwardman1742]

I’m not saying he shouldn’t be bothered. I would be too! I’m saying he is, in a passive way, belittling Christian by repeating how long Christian has been a Catholic (with even a cheeky congratulations) and at the same time waving around his credentials and length of membership. Just seems a little childish to me.

[@jamesms4]

@@edwardman1742 Rather Christian is not a peer of Akin. He has been showing great disrespect to an elder which according to the Bible is forbidden. You may exhort an elder if you feel they are in error but younger ones may NOT rebuke them. An Elder however may rebuke a younger. Jimmy acted entirely correctly. Wagner did not. Also it reasonable to point ouy Wagner's lack of experience and knowledge. So I am sorry but I absolutely cannot in principle agree with you.

[@BruceinKansas]

Mr. Akin, this response is an excellent example of a patient and gracious response to calumny. Mr. Wagner would do well to adhere to your mentorship and guidance. Well done, sir.

[@maryjordan4129]

Excellent explanation. Thank you Jimmy!

[@dashry1283]

As someone who was originally pretty convinced by this video of yours Jimmy, after watchi g Wagners new video. It seems to be to be thst he very conclusively correct on this matter.

[@zekemiller9680]

Really sorry to hear this happened to you! You'll probably be dealing with more confused people like the example you share for a while to come. I'll be praying for you!

[@luke9747]

This was very informative

[@stooch66]

I have never listened to Mr Wagner, but it is clear that young and new converts need to chill out and study much more before spouting off on what the Magisterium teaches. In fact, most lay people should chill out and just submit to the Church.

[@deutschermichel5807]

Real. I have watched some videos partially of the guy. He is smart and has potential. I hope he and Jimmy reconcile.

[@pcola4594]

…. And submit to what though? My parish priest? My local bishop? Are they the final authority? What if my priest tells me something heretical? Do I hold to that indefinitely until a new priest tells me something different?

[@BensWorkshop]

@@pcola4594 You can look up what the Catechism teaches, or indeed the magisterium.

[@pcola4594]

@@BensWorkshop Well the original poster said to chill out and submit to the church. I’m just trying to figure out what he means. I mean Cardinal Cupich says that receiving the Eucharist kneeling on the tongue is selfish, prideful and against Vatican 2, Father Martin teaches and is blessing same sex couples. They are very much in the church. Are they right?

[@susand3668]

@@pcola4594 "You can look up what the Catechism teaches, or indeed the magisterium." And I think you have unfairly represented the positions of both Cardinal Cupich (who is not so blatant in his suggestions about the etiquette of receiving communion) and Fr. James Martin (who is pushing the envelope, but is careful not to go beyond the letter of the law, so to speak. Please note that blessing a couple [numerically two] of people is not the same as blessing a union [an institution, as in covenantal marriage] of people.)

[@davidfabien7220]

I like your meekness Jimmy and yet you are such a learned person in matters of theology. I've learned so much from you and from your humble attitude. You are a reflection of Christ. The meek shall inherit the earth. May the Lord continue to bless you and give increase to your ministry.

[@sabhishek9289]

He is wrong about Mary though. Mary wasn't absolutely sinless. She called God her saviour meaning that she needed a saviour because she was a sinful woman.

[@davidfabien7220]

Of course, in the first place Mary was saved by Christ. God is not restricted by space and time. Jesus' sacrifice is eternal and transcends time and that's why he could save Mary before she was born. Are we just like Mary: full of grace, the Lord is with us, blessed are we among men/women, blessed the fruit of our womb Jesus, mother of God. When did we crush Satan's head and Satan struck our heel.

[@footspike55]

Akin is not very meek at all. He's incredibly prideful.

[@dr.tafazzi]

​@@footspike55defending your name against defamation, especially when part of the work you do relies on your reputation, is good, not prideful. Did you watch the video?

[@ubermensch4304]

​@dr.tafazzi He was clearly being passive aggressive. Why did he hint at Wagner's autism? Why did he threaten to sue? Are Christians supposed to be litigious against each other?

[@Sil-Von]

I genuinely think that this is one of the negative aspects of the proliferation of social media. People who have not put in the years of work and study hop on a platform and amass a following of people who give them more credence than is warranted. Years spent in relative obscurity, spiritual formation, and study prior to public platforms seem to be increasingly undervalued. I hope this changes

[@larrywells5908]

I found myself passionate sometimes about a subject and sometimes I disagree with someone but usually if I rewind, re-listen and rethink what the person was saying sometimes it wasn't an issue at all. But first and foremost the Bible teaches, and this is not an exact quote. It says go to your brother first with a problem. Try to work the matter out one on one, no one else needs to know about this. If you find this doesn't resolve things, and the matter is serious enough to need further attention then come back with a friend or two and try to work it out again. And then lastly and finally if it's serious enough you need to take further steps then do so wisely. There's great wisdom in handling matters in this way. You may find you were wrong initially or you may correct your brother and the matter be resolved in private. Step 2 if you talk about this amongst a couple of close friends you again may find out that you're wrong but if you're not your friend May listen to you when there's a couple more friends with you. And if absolutely necessary step 3 is there for you also. But always ask yourself what is motivating you to even talk about something publicly. I find when it comes to social media if someone has something to say about someone else. It's usually about personal gain and selfish reasons and not out of kindness and compassion. This is a very serious thing. Just like Jimmy said it's already came back around to him on capturing christianity. Are words can be like feathers in a windstorm once they're out there you can't always get them back and you've done damage that cannot be reversed so treat these matters seriously people please!!! Thank you Jimmy God bless

[@Neb-ie5mj]

Don’t let the internet destroy us. Talk it out.

[@philipshelt]

Beautiful response Jimmy. Extremely informative and wonderfully humble and Christian. Thank you for this response.

[@IHSGuy]

This is an excellent example of how Jimmy's irenic approach is not just pleasant, it is often superior in establishing the truth of the matter being discussed. His insistence on being charitable and clear in his refutation strengthens the weight of his argument. This younger generation of more reactionary apologists would benefit from emulating Jimmy's method. It's not a matter of being "nice"; this approach makes him a better apologist.

[@Jd-808]

But its lame and gay and doesn’t satisfy my passions

[@susand3668]

@@Jd-808 LOL!

[@ThatElephantSeal]

I actually truly wish him well and hope he has the humility to admit wrongdoing. Ive been humbled of late and its a bitter pill to swallow when you realize that you dont know everything.

[@LostArchivist]

It can be a bitter pill, but it can be a sweet medicine if embraced as it is necessarily true as we are finite and it opens the road of the student and all true knowledge is wonderful to an interested student.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

What wrongdoing?

[@Jon-LJsm]

Thank you for the detailed response!

[@ronciego9249]

Jimmy is one of the standards for all apologists today. Always charitable...the difficulty, I think, in being an apologist is not in debating and making arguments, but in maintaining charity while debating...

[@quindariousgooch88]

"Charitable" h3 literally called Wagner autistic and is threatening to sue him ☠️☠️☠️

[@PhillipCummingsUSA]

Taking someone's slightly ambiguous phrasing and applying it in the most worst fashion to accuse them of grave sin is charitable?

[@ronciego9249]

@PhillipCummingsUSA Could you clarify your question?

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

@@ronciego9249 he is saying that Jimmy’s tone and his taking the most negative interpretation of Wagner was not charitable.

[@BensWorkshop]

I watched your discussion with TJ which was interesting and a good discussion. I got the distinct impression that you must have an extremely good reason to take a different view that would be such a narrow slim exception that if you were a great theologian who could make a very compelling case to disagree. To cut a long story short, for 99.9% of people, no you can't disagree with non infallible teaching.

[@susand3668]

Well said!!

[@mazda7873]

Hey Jimmy, I am big Wagner fan, I've followed him since the beginning and I listened to a big chunk of your video, I can understand your position WAY better now, even if I do not fully agree with it 100 percent. I know him fairly well and I am sure you guys will be on good terms soon ! God bless and have a happy Christmas !

[@jtt8886]

I just wish Wagner actually tried to reach out to Jimmy first before trying to embarrass him on KZbin. Bad form.

[@francescoaccomando7781]

Marian dogmas: 1. The title of Mother of God (431ad) 2. Perpetual virginity(649ad) 3. Immaculate conception(1854) 4. Assumption to heaven(1950)

[@KingDavid1979]

For the customes of people are; For one cuts a tree out of the forest the work of the hands of the workman with the axe. They deck it with silver and gold , they fasten it with nail and with hammer ; that is move not. Jeremiah 10-1-4 🎄🪓🥢🔨and they also worship a dead man as their king and savior alongside with Halloween to remind them who is the king 👑.Ezekiël 37-24-25. Wait ? Son and mother of god die on a cross? Pfffff

[@francescoaccomando7781]

@@KingDavid1979 What are you on about? What you wrote makes no sense.

[@KingDavid1979]

@@francescoaccomando7781 mother of god , son of god die on a cross? Make more sense pffffff 😂💀👻merry Halloween 🎃

[@KingDavid1979]

@@francescoaccomando7781 (👻✝️🕳👈) christianism

[@francescoaccomando7781]

@@KingDavid1979 Are you able to make a coherent argument?

[@ChristianTheChicken]

What constitutes a "very strong reason?" I'm sure many Protestants and unknowledgeable people would consider themselves to have "very strong reasons" to not believe and so feel justified in not believing for what are in fact very bad reasons. You touched on a couple of examples, but didn't really give a good explanation of the thing itself.

[@TurtleMarcus]

Obviously the Church herself would decide if a theologian has a good reason or not.

[@jamesms4]

He qualified it with the word "hypothetically" thus we don't need to show what constitutes a very strong reason". Reasons brought forth by Protestants presupposing false Protestant doctrine or reasons from unknowledgeable people by definition would not be strong reasons.

[@catholiccrusader123]

18:04 wouldn't this mean that you can disagree with it only if there is a higher teaching of the Magisterium contradicting it? But this doesn't help your case on this topic.

[@catholiccrusader123]

Also the Magisterium and the Church has continuously taught the sinlessness of Mary, so it would be habitually wrong if you disagree with that.

[@ChristianHockenbury]

This is the substantial issue that needs to be addressed!

[@emiliobazzarelli4270]

@@dave_ecclectic I’m the source Jimmy cited says “only if there is some superior theological source” which nobody claims that a superior theological source has said that Mary sinned. Christian’s entire point is that Mary’s sinlessness is taught by the universal and ordinary magisterium and is therefore infallible

[@dave_ecclectic]

​@@emiliobazzarelli4270 -It seems as though what is being argued is whether something is blue or is it cyan.- I see now' Not Mary's sinlessness, but her perpetual sinlessness is the difference of what is being discussed. This is like the *until* something has been said *up to this point but not **_after_*

[@paulmualdeave5063]

@@emiliobazzarelli4270 That is correct, but Christian’s error is in saying Jimmy is placing this in category one teachings. Jimmy is placing it as a category three teaching. Wagner ends the video, which Akin discusses around 24:00, with category three teachings. It’s rather amazing that he didn’t contemplate this and coming to the conclusion that Akin is talking about that very topic. We can without assent to category three teachings. Christian shows a limited knowledge of this in this section. I say limited because Jimmy points out Donum Veritalis, which states that any withholding of assent needs to be private and we cannot turn the public against that teaching. Christian did not mention these requirements and now you can feel justified in publicly rejecting a category three teaching when Donum Veritalis states that you cannot. Congratulations, Christian is teaching a SSPX error.

[@StevWasHere]

Very gracious response, Jimmy. It was one of those vids that made me unsub from his channel. Lot's of potential though so I hope he embraces some humility.

[@gerry30]

You shouldn't act so rashly, last night I saw his response. It's beyond devastating to Jimmy's position. He brought the receipts and demolished him with actual Catholic theologians of the highest rank literally saying the exact opposite of what Jimmy claims. If Jimmy doesn't humble himself and acknowledge proper correction, he's simply being a gracious con-man. There is literally no other option. It was that much of an "own."

[@StevWasHere]

​@@gerry30 Looks to me like he just doubled down. And he's got part 2 to come? "I wasn't going to respond but people encouraged me". He was never "not going to respond" He suffers from chronic narcissism.

[@gerry30]

@@StevWasHere Haven't seen that since there have been a number of opportunities for him to respond to people like Dyer and he hasn't bothered. Plus, multi-hour videos are not the best format for the most views. It strikes me more that he likes the deep dives and is so far in, it's an effort to make "popular" videos. Like a classical musician that has gotten far enough interested in it to be focusing on Joachim Raff and doesn't want to talk about Beethoven's pastoral Symphony since it's so basic. It also looks to me like he was actually reluctant about posting the original video and then after what I would charitably call Jimmy's misleading rebuttal, he took the gloves off and demolished Jimmy's position and showed that Jimmy is really the incompetent party involved. Unless Christian literally faked all of those sources and quotes covering literally every angle, you can't look at that part 1 response and see that Jimmy utterly punched over his weight, tried to bluff his level of competence and expertise and was completely unprepared on the nuts and bolts of the topic and walked himself right into the buzz saw.

[@dashry1283]

After watching Wagners recent response its very clear jimmy wss incorrect all along i was originally of the opposite view

[@PhillipCummingsUSA]

@@StevWasHere You obviously can't accurately judge narcissism if you watched this video and didn't see it dripping off Jimmy. I'm just sayin.

[@SilverCottage]

I feel so sorry that Jimmy has had to remind us of his stellar bona fides. I don't know of any public apologist who is more careful about his opinions or more attentive to authoritative realities. I have SO much respect for him. I am glad he does a thorough job of laying it all out for the enthusiastic young man who is advertising his ignorance on a pod cast. It seems like everybody and his brother has a podcast these days and I think the enthusiasm for podcasts exceeds the expertise of the people giving them at times. Jimmy Aiken has the appropriate Bona fides and this young man that is criticizing him does not.

[@pianobard5478]

"dealing with autism" I'm dying lmfaooo

[@secessionblog3189]

I was at work and I completely lost it😅

[@rappmasterdugg6825]

Discomfort with cameras or looking people in the eye is a classic sign of being on the spectrum. I say this as one on the spectrum, with a child and grandchildren also residing there.

[@polodown4729]

😂

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

Wagner was joking. He has said he is not autistic.

[@pianobard5478]

@@carsonianthegreat4672 i know, that’s why I’m laughing

[@barbwellman6686]

Learned something today! Thank you.

[@WorldRenounced]

Jimmy, you are my favourite apologist and debater. Keep up the excellent work! God bless you.

[@gerry30]

Here's another problematic claim that popped out at me. Around the 37 minute mark Jimmy says, "The only statement in Ineffabilis Deus that is taught under infallibility is the one where Pius XI defines the Immaculate Conception nothing else in the document is definitive and so nothing else is infallible, this is the standard understanding of all competent theologians." This is, to be charitable imprecise. What is really meant is that the only statement in Ineffabilis Deus that is taught using the EXTRAORDINARY infallibility of the Church is the definition of the Immaculate Conception. It does not mean that "nothing else is definitive and nothing else is infallible." To the contrary, there are numerous statements in the document that are contained in the Ordinary Infallible Magisterium. Take the first sentence: "God Ineffable - whose ways are mercy and truth, whose will is omnipotence itself, and whose wisdom “reaches from end to end mightily, and orders all things sweetly” - having foreseen from all eternity the lamentable wretchedness of the entire human race which would result from the sin of Adam, decreed, by a plan hidden from the centuries, to complete the first work of his goodness by a mystery yet more wondrously sublime through the Incarnation of the Word. " While the document only utilizes the extraordinary Magisterium in the definition, the document is literally marinating in statements that are part of the ORDINARY INFALLIBLE MAGISTERIUM of the Church. They are from the Creed, the Scriptures, the Commandments as well as reiterations from binding statements of Popes and Councils. By claiming that nothing is infallible beyond the definition it becomes a figurative mine field of potential heretical propositions. You can't say that the Holy Spirit guides the Church isn't an infallible statement in the document because the extraordinary definition only concerns the Immaculate Conception.

[@therevbev1]

I’m a Protestant who LOVES listening to you! Obviously we don’t agree on everything. But I appreciate your respectful responses to those who disagree with you. Thanks for teaching this young man with grace and truth. God bless you!

[@thomasthellamas9886]

What Protestants do you listen to?

[@RexJudaeorum]

Please cite the theologians besides John Henry Newman who use "obiter dicta" as a category. Your claim that can 23 of Trent is "obiter dicta" appears weak. The canon mentions explicitly that the Church holds the Blessed Virgin to have been preserved from venial sin throughout her entire life.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

Yep, and St. Alphonsus states that Trent’s teaching on her perpetual sinlessness is infallible.

[@jep6752]

As someone who is just learning at the moment, I felt that the comparisons between age and experience, although having some merit, was overdone in the introduction. But I am interested in the exchange that hopefully will come from both sides.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

Wagner just dropped his response video

[@jep6752]

@@carsonianthegreat4672 saw it

[@jcf150_9]

I have not watched this video yet. I have watched a few of Mr Wagner's videos and have found a lot of them to be very uncharitable. The outright delight in what he perceives to be "shortcomings" in others is a red flag to me. It is unfortunate that this video had to be made but I am sure JImmy handled things greacefully as always. Eager to watch.

[@edwardman1742]

Delight in others “shortcomings” is EXACTLY how I felt as I watched him, but I couldn’t find the words. You nailed it.

[@jaykwonzzz]

Uncharitable? Almost like discussing Wagner's autism, right?

[@winstonvontoast6163]

@@jaykwonzzz Which to absolutely no one's surprise he admitted to having autism on Twitter. Akin is almost 60 years old, so when someone says "because I am autistic" he is going to take the comment seriously because it will alter his response to said person. It is not really uncharitable.

[@jcf150_9]

@@winstonvontoast6163 Yep I felt like it was a fair remark. Either Christian actually struggles with autism or he doesn't. If he does, it was reasonable and kind of Akin to ackowledge it in a kind way and try to give Christian the benefit of the doubt on why he may be attacking a fellow Catholic publicly in a somewhat toxic or socially weird way. If he doesn't struggle with autism and is instead joking about a disability while also acting like a teacher of the Faith.... well then Jimmy's comment serves as a deserved jab for that.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

@@winstonvontoast6163Wagner is not autistic

[@ChristopherSchaub1]

Is there a clear list of all infallible Church teachings somewhere? It would be great to have a page dedicated to it and maybe even a link to upsell your book on the magisterium. So often Protestants Don't understand infallibility and it would be great to have a clear link to send

[@brigidwenner6847]

I would like to have that, as a Catholic, too. Would help with scrupulosity.

[@pdg14]

There is not to my knowledge, however we are not only bound to follow teachings that are "infallible"

[@ChristopherSchaub1]

@@pdg14 Agreed. But I think it would be helpful to show a definitive list, mostly to dispense with the Protestant nonsense where they think every word uttered by any pope is infallable. It comes up a lot and it would be nice if we could just send a handy url to anybody. Most of the infallable teach Protestants would agree with! Trinity etc.

[@vinoneil]

I've asked this same question a few times. I wish there was a clear, and easily accessible answer, but there isn't. Even ecumenical councils and past popes have said and done confusing and seemingly contradictory things over the centuries. See a recent video by Michael Lofton and the work of Erick Ybarra.

[@ChristopherSchaub1]

@@vinoneil Very frustrating. If these teachings are truly infallible, it should be easy to keep a list! Otherwise, what's the point of declaring them infallible if nobody can find them? It fosters disharmony in the Church to say teaching are infallible and then not be able to enumerate them. I'm Catholic, but this kind of stuff is really madding!

[@elf-lordsfriarofthemeadowl2039]

Thank you for this Jimmy. I also was mistaken when you said disagreeing with NonInfallible Teachings "with good reason" as being like "with a convincing reason". Which smells like Relativism and Personal Interpretation.

[@justfromcatholic]

According to Ludwig Ott: Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma: Mary's Immaculate Conception: de fide Her freedom from concupiscence: Sententia communis Her Freedom from actual sin Sententia fide proxima Those three are not the same level.

[@DysmasOfBabylon]

The freedom from Sin is Dogmatic

[@catholicguy1073]

@@DysmasOfBabylonno what was dogmatic was her being born without original sin which then leaves open the possibility during her earthly life that she could sin or that she was tempted by sin but refused to sin. I take the latter approach. However I find it amusing how many people think the dogma of the Immaculate conception think this then means it was dogmatically stated that she didn’t sin her entire life. Where is this a dogma? It’s not one and that is not what the Immaculate conception is. The immaculate conception is Mary being born WITHOUT ORIGINAL SIN. That’s it.

[@DysmasOfBabylon]

@catholicguy1073 it's literally in the same document, so you haven't read the document you are taking someone else's perspective for your opinion. Leading you to reject a Dogma. Making you a heretic.

[@DysmasOfBabylon]

@catholicguy1073 it says it 10 times in the same document which is infallible ex Cathedra. Nice try protestant.

[@catholicguy1073]

@ it’s not in the dogma of the Immaculate conception that Mary was sinless her entire life. And while the Church teaches that Mary was sinless her entire life I have not seen any document that shows this an infallible teaching not that it is not taught. Perhaps learn about different levels of Church teaching before attacking someone 🤦 And stop being an ass. If you can’t communicate properly don’t respond.

[@TurtleMarcus]

Christian seems to have a very black-and-white way of looking at it. He is the one taking the minimalist approach of "anything not infallibly defined may be rejected" and therefore, to him, the impeccability of our Lady has to be infallibly defined to be true.

[@TurtleMarcus]

@@Dan-mm7gc It's a paraphrase or summary. Christian seems to interpret Jimmy's position to be "anything non-infallibly defined may be rejected" (magisterium minimalism). And then he tries to show that the impeccability of our Lady is indeed infallibly defined. Indeed, by focusing on this specific case of our Lady's impeccability, he implicitly accepts the premise (anything not infallibly defined may be rejected). But that premise and interpretation of Jimmy is wrong. Jimmy is actually taking a maximalist approach, being of the opinion that you should believe everything the Church teaches, no matter the theological note, and only in exceptional circumstances are you allowed to dissent from some kinds of teachings.

[@TurtleMarcus]

@@Dan-mm7gc My comment was my interpretation and evaluation of the topic at hand, for what it's worth. You are free to ignore it.

[@christopherjohnson1873]

I've been avoiding Christian's videos in part because of these egregiously clickbaity thumbnails/titles. Cringe thumbnails/titles are endemic to KZbin but it seems like he's a particular offender in this category

[@susand3668]

Sadly, I have to agree.

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

You should go watch his most recent response. It’s very compelling

[@virginiacharlotte7007]

Unfortunately, this approach does suggest that this young fellow is aiming to build a quick following for his channel off the back of conflict clicks and Mr Akins established name , rather than engaging with Jimmy directly and in a real time podcast. Doing the latter might benefit both of them, and the audiences, a whole lot more in long run.

[@susand3668]

@@carsonianthegreat4672 I did. Mr. Wagner did not prove that the Doctrine of Mary's perpetual sinlessness -- which we all agree is a genuine Teaching of the Church -- was ever taught as being infallible. This is the only point that the debate hinges on. Clearly, Mr. Wagner does agree that non-infallible Teachings of the Church must be held with "religious submission of the intellect and will", which is not "an assent of faith", as canon 752 asserts. But he wants Mr. Akin to hide this Teaching (clearly laid out in canon 752) from a potential convert. Why?

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

@@virginiacharlotte7007Wagner has avoided talking about Jimmy Akin for over a year now even though his fans have been asking him to make a video. It was only after this egregious error by Jimmy that he finally made the video. You should stop jumping to conclusions about the character of people you don’t know

[@CatchCraftInc]

I was pretty miffed at this fella coming after you Jimmy, but I’m glad we got this video out of it. Very informative

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

You should go watch Wagner’s newest response. It was very compelling

[@CatchCraftInc]

@@carsonianthegreat4672the one with “THIS IS A CRIME” as the thumbnail? I’m good lol

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

@ yes, the one where he is ironically using Jimmy’s own laughable accusation of criminality as the thumbnail. His video is thorough and informative. You can’t adequately weigh each side in an argument if you hide from one

[@CatchCraftInc]

@ if that’s seriously what one side is putting front and center of their argument I don’t want to listen to what that side has to say

[@carsonianthegreat4672]

@@CatchCraftInc are you really that upset about a thumbnail that reframes Jimmy’s criminal accusation in an ironic light? Wild It really just sounds like you don’t want your preconceived notions challenged, and that you’re searching for any excuse you can

[@cadenphilley9728]

Hey Jimmy, genuine question (from a relatively recent Anglican), why aren’t these teachings about Mary found more explicitly within Bible (it seems to me that much of Mariology is dependent upon Typology)? As for myself, I see myself as having a lower view of Mary than the Catholic-Orthodox and a higher view than the Protestant-Evangelicals. (For example, I see Simeon’s prophecy about a sword piercing her heart too, to tie her to the mystical event of Crucifixion but I am unsure of sinlessness and Immaculate Conception due the verse about “none being sinless” save Jesus). If you end up seeing this, thank you for your time and God bless you!

[@countryboyred]

Because most of the teaching about Mary isn’t based on scripture, it’s based on church tradition. Why do you only believe something if it’s written down in scripture? Don’t you trust the historic witness and tradition of the church?

[@cheerfulturtlegirl]

​@@countryboyredWe can believe in traditions. What we cannot do is affirm a tradition if it conflicts with holy Scripture. God is not the author of confusion. We cannot clearly find the claim that Mary was sinless using Scripture. What we can see is that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Mary did not need to be sinless in order to be chosen to be the mother of Jesus. This is a major reason I cannot become Catholic as I believe many of the Marian doctrines conflict with holy Scripture. I am Anglican as well from ACNA.

[@countryboyred]

@ does something have to be explicitly in scripture to be believed in? Also her perpetual virginity is in scripture. Ezekiel 44 is talking about Mary. Why would you follow a tradition that wasn’t invented until the 1500s? Anglicans lost their apostolic succession when they started having women priests. There is nothing in scripture that conflicts with holy tradition because, news flash, the scriptures themselves are part of holy tradition. Who do you think compiled the Bible? The Anglican Church? Was Irenaeus an Anglican? Don’t be absurd

[@holdintheaces7468]

Wagner and his friends maliciously went after Amber aka The Religious Hippy, and her husband, saying some extremely unchristian things about them using his platform over and over again. I am not at all surprised he did this to you. Pray for him and his friends to find their way rather than spread hate.

[@PhillipCummingsUSA]

The Religious Hippy posts glamour shot photos making abortion all about her instead of the victims

[@gerry30]

That's a nice distraction from the simplicity of the problem: A Protestant asked "Do I have to believe that Mary was sinless to be a Catholic?" Jimmy ultimately answered, "No." in an unnecessarily confusing and frankly incorrect manner. The answer should have been a clear, 'Yes." And if he wanted to talk more broadly about the liberties extended to "theologians" he could have, but instead he relied on "It hasn't been infallibly defined." It was a bad, imprudent answer to an essentially simple question.

[@jamesshives5679]

@@gerry30 The hubris of you people. Jimmy Akin gave a carefully worded answer to the question, and all you can say is that he should have given a more generic answer because some people will not listen to what he actually said. It was only an "unecessarily confusing" answer to someone who doesn't bother to listen carefully.

[@gerry30]

@@jamesshives5679 You know what I think is hubris? Jimmy Akin claiming that the theologians at the Council of Trent were incompetent and he's actually the authority. The fact is Jimmy has been shown to be wrong about the theological note of the teaching and a person is not free to deny an infallible teaching of the Ordinary Magisterium of the Church. Wagner pointed this out and Jimmy didn't do his research to find out that Wagner was actually just repeating the scholastic Theologians from the actual Council of Trent on the very canon that Jimmy is disputing. Jimmy thinks the guy who wrote it, doesn't know what he wrote. This is because after bragging about how he is the big researcher it turns out that Jimmy didn't look far enough and stuck with one 20th century outlier opinion. Why do you think he was lazy and dismissed Wagner's arguments out of hand without doing due diligence? Was Akin being humble?

[@jtt8886]

​@@gerry30It looks bad using KZbin to try to embarrass someone older and more experienced than you He could have easily reached out to Jimmy.. Christian is trying to get KZbin views and has succeeded I guess.