Gay Confirmation; Co-Redemptrix Confusion & more | FORWARD BOLDLY
Christine Niles | 13.XI.2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJALrSptY6g
5:36 This is one beef I have with some Vatican II-ists and even some Trads.
Do they encourage gay men to leave homosexuality for and by marriage, or is their sole offer of conversion a conversion to chaste gay?
How many of the ex-gays who are married are Catholics or were Catholics at the time of leaving homosexuality?
9:22 JRRT invited other Inklings into his home. One of them is known to have been openly gay (he was an Anglican).
I recently heard a horrific story from JRRT's priest son, Fr. John Tolkien, about his childhood.
17:24 Do they have the authority to do that?
Or are people so openly heretical also outside the Church and therefore without authority?
If I were you, I'd contact Pope Michael II to see if he is fine with doing a consecration or leaving it to bishop Clary.
23:19 [Mary is a great stumbling block.]
For a very specific sector of the world.
I thankfully grew up in Vienna, part time, and my mother didn't, she went to a Bible school for summer camp some year before I was born, so, Mary never was a stumbling block to me the way such ideas were to my mother for some time.
23:45 Catholic Apolegetics doesn't need to come as a ministry.
The well known ministry Catholic Answers is unfortunately heterodox on some issues, and even obtuse to limit dishonest.
I saw Trent Horn state that "Cardinal Baronius stated that the Bible doesn't teach us how the heavens go, but how to go to Heaven" and I think he even said "in the context of the Galileo affair" ...
Now, the one 17th C. source I know of with that phrase is Galileo's letter to Grand Duchess Cristina of Tuscany. And while he says it was said by a Church man who has reached a high place, he doesn't say who that Church man is.
IF it was Cardinal Baronius, a very holy man, a direct disciple of St. Philip Neri, then it wasn't in the Galileo affair, even if Galileo cited it in his affair. How do I know? Because Baronius died 30 June 1607, before the affair broke out. Catholic Encyclopedia cites him as Venerable, meaning, it is placing a very high moral authority in fake service of Heliocentrism or agnosticism on the issue to state such things about Baronius.
However, IF it was Baronius, it could have been in stating Tycho was as licit as Ptolemy as to Geocentric model.
IF it was instead, as I suspect, since it was a man Galileo knew, Cardinal Maffeo Vincenzo Barberini, future pope Urban VIII, then he obviously turned around for any generosity toward Heliocentrism the statement could have entailed, since as Pope he confirmed a judgement against Galileo.
Meanwhile, I'm a writer, and I do Apologetics as part of that. The "Apologetics Section" of my blogs, well, it's not all of my Apologetics, just essays in English on these issues, exists side by side with other writings, some of which are not specifically Christian (though I hope compatible with Christianity).
1) Creation vs. Evolution, against both Atheists and inconsistent Christians who believe Deep Time and possibly even Human Evolution from apelike creatures.
2) somewhere else, named after a comment by Tim O'Neill, an Atheist whom I respect more than most of them, since he doesn't peddle Antimedieval and Anticatholic takes, dedicated to arguing the Gospels are trustworthy to Atheists, Jews and Muslims, and arguing parts of OT are trustworthy to mainly Atheists, and arguing existence of God, also to mainly Atheists.
3) Great bishop of Geneva! whose patron saint is obviously St. Francis of Sales. Yes, against Protestant errors.
Last essay on each would be: "A Km Deep Global Ocean ... Navigable Or Would the Ark Have Floundered?" / "What Are Pagan Gods, Specifically Greek and Norse and Hindu?" (whenever Pagans sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, but apart from that?) / "Obscurity and Perspicuity"
So, I'm not the first Catholic Apologist to not do a ministry, also true of Chesterton and Belloc (but not of Catholic Truth Guild, whom I also value).
In this connection, being a Catholic Apologist is not a position in the Church, and therefore not sth the Church needs to vet one's moral fibre for. If Milo Yiannopoulos wants to do Catholic Apologetics, so be it.
25:32 It so happens, in 2005, the election of Ratzinger temporarily made me think "we have a Pope" (among those in the Vatican).
I am very disappointed, partly with what he did, partly with what I found out he had done as "Cardinal" ... with all affection I once had for him, as a budding Trad, when he died, I drank a Guiness in memory, not of a Catholic, but of a Bavarian (with lots of Catholic culture, but I didn't dare to find him as having actually kept the faith).
He is also known on earth (whatever he may be known for in the hereafter) of heavy disingeniousness on the issue of Fundamentalists. Both because he was active in the CCC, with its §283, and because he was taking some (indirect?) part in the document THE INTERPRETATION OF THE BIBLE IN THE CHURCH. It has a section that's both a calumny against actual Fundamentalist Protestants, and a sleight of hand disrecommendation of Fundamentalist positions related to Biblical inerrancy.
So, Tucho citing Ratzi ... no, doesn't mean Tucho is right. As said. There is a specific section of the world that finds Catholic Mariology a stumbling block. Evangelical and even Lutheran / Anglican types of Protestants aren't all of the non-Catholics.
Plus, the point of "co-" connoting sometimes equality doesn't go to the issue that the doctrine has been clearly explained as not denoting that. It's like saying one needs to ditch the phrasing in Catholic Encyclopedia which says we "worship Mary with hyperdulia" because some have taken "worship" as meaning adoration. The United States are a great country, and its Evangelicals are a great section of the non-Catholics, a section in which my mother started raising me as a Christian, but neither the US, nor the Evangelicals, are all of the world. And the same is true of Protestants in the Germanies, to whom Ratzinger was probably being diplomatic.
25:47 "too far from Scripture"?
From Scriptural truth? No. She clearly did sacrifice along with Her Son on Calvary. From Scriptural terminology? So what!
1) Deacon, 2) Presbyter, 3) Bishop is "straying from" Scriptural terminology, since in NT times, the terms were 1) Deacon, 2) Bishop, 3) Apostle / Evangelist / Angel / Teacher, possibly also Prophet.
Normal moral theology says, it's praiseworthy to want to be a priest. It's usually not safe to want to be a bishop, you become one of obedience, not your own choice.
The NT says "he who wants to be a bishop, is after a good job" (paraphrasing), but also "do not many of you be teachers, since they will have a stricter judgement" ...
The NT terms bishop and teacher map on to what normal theology says about presbyter and bishop.
We are not bound to use Scriptural terminology in all we express.
26:12 I thought he was a bulldog for orthodoxy in 1992, and to some extent still in 2005.
29:06 Pope Michael II disagreed on that one.*
29:44 Doesn't the document also speak against Mediatrix of all graces, even as a doctrine?
As welcome as that would be to Protestants, count on backlash from Orthodox, if so.
It was Anthony Bloom, The Archbishop's Prayer School**, which taught me, those redeemed need to be forgiven by Our Lady, and then She prays for them. THEN God saves.
He was founder and for many years bishop - then archbishop, then metropolitan - of the Diocese of Sourozh, the Patriarchate of Moscow's diocese for Great Britain and Ireland (the name 'Sourozh' is that of the historical episcopal see in Sudak in Crimea).
36:29 "until He decides to abolish it"
The usual Catholic view is, He decides to come back and replace it. When the King is physically present, speaks audibly before all, the Viceroy ceases to rule.
This is also the view of Vatican in Exile. Papacy took a pause between 1958 and 1990, it was comparable to another near pause when there were two Popes and therefore both could be seen as dubious, which lasted just a bit longer, 39 years, not 32.
However, the guys usually considered as Sedevacantists actually seem to think Christ has decided to abolish papacy, by allowing an intruder after Pius XII and by allowing all cardinals named by Pius XII and Pius XI to die out before an alternative election could be held. Their view is, only Cardinals elect Popes. That's a law introduced by Popes, and can be either abolished by a Pope or temporarily sidestepped in an emergency such that Popes had not foreseen it.
38:43 My online content is free.***
I don't have a patreon, I don't even have paypal.
There are perks to reading me on paper offline (I've printed out some, but not on a commercial level), like getting things in the logic and topical context instead of scrolling, or reading in a more peaceful environment than over the web (and frankly, many of my posts are totally too long to be easy to read without computers, I don't recommend accessing me on cell phones).
This is why I, for my part, would appreciate someone starting a publishing house. As homeless, I cannot do that myself, partly trouble with bank accounts, but even more, I have no network for selling around me, and I have no place to stock a pile of copies of a book safely.
* "That one" meaning the words after "but" in the following quote:
you can still use the title, but the church is rejecting 28:59 formally adopting that title for Our Lady formally adopting it, including it in the church's prayers, 29:05 you know, referring to her that way in official rights, that's all the church is doing. It's rejecting that as a formal title adopted by the church for Our Lady.
** Probably identic to either "1970 – School for Prayer" or "1986 – The Essence of Prayer (Contains Living Prayer, School for Prayer, God and Man, and Courage to Pray)" ... I backtranslated the Swedish title Ärkebiskopens böneskola into English. It was promoted in Catholic parishes, and I would say, rightly so. From my memory, it contains nothing against the Catholic faith.
*** In response to her appeal for support, from those affording.
