Giving the Word to Father Jason Charron (Byzantine Catholic Ukrainian)

Differring from Mr. Taunton on Ukrano-Russian Relations (he could be giving a pov he didn't share) and on Progress and St. Thomas · Giving the Word to Father Jason Charron (Byzantine Catholic Ukrainian)

Steel Manning the Pro Russia Position (Fr. Jason Charron)
Matt Fradd | 22 April 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWdYsvcQ6Vg

"we don't want secular relativism"

0:54 ... that argument is for very selective use, on the Russian homefront ....

2:50 sth "which dictators don't do" ...

Fr. Jason Charron just said that the Austrofascist "dictators" weren't such, since the changes to the constitution in a time of chaos were drawing on a paragraph of the constitution of the First Republic.

Das war sehr schön, es hat mich sehr gefreut!

3:30 If you want criticism of Russia from the right ...
a) I've mentioned that Ukraine is more Christian, over 80 % versus over 60 %
b) I've mentioned that Ukraine, not just in raw numbers, but in proportion, has fewer abortions.

While I'm no fan of Zelensky, personally (he has a weird sense of humour), I don't think Ukraine should pay for having elected him!

Shakespear, Marlowe or Catholic?

The blatant ABSURDITY of Shakespeare's authorship
bastian conrad | 27 Oct. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MkwdE7nZ-w

bastian conrad

@bastianconrad2550

What might be the reason for the absence of any commentary to a proposal for solving the undoubtedly existing Shakespeare riddle???

I

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@hglundahl

The other candidates have deeper problems. This includes Marlowe.

Most people by now know that a merchant would at this time and place not be illiterate. At least those taking an interest in the Middle Ages and the Tudor times.

II

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Plus the Catholic hypothesis actually makes sense of the difficulties:

Was Shakespeare a SECRET CATHOLIC?! w/ Dr. Aaron Urbanczyck
Matt Fradd | 16 Aug 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dWFzXEykbU

I May Have Forgotten to Blog One of These Exchanges

Indeed, I search the title of the video, Did Adam & Eve Evolve? w/ Jimmy Akin & Gideon Lazar, and there is not any post here with this content.

I posted one comment, it involved me in debates with one YAJUN YUAN whose comments are now missing, and now I got one comment more.

Did Adam & Eve Evolve? w/ Jimmy Akin & Gideon Lazar
Matt Fradd | 11 March 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orxnSfWHJ0s

2:51 To Gideon Lazar : why after the Flood?

The Ark was a genetic bottleneck for any created kind, including mankind, so there would have been a greater diversity before the Flood!

YAJUN YUAN

[missing comment]

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@hglundahl

YAJUN YUAN Obviously yes, but he'd be wiser to compare shortly before the Flood to now rather than shortly after to now as you agree he is doing.

YAJUN YUAN

[missing comment]

Hans-Georg Lundahl

YAJUN YUAN One cannot conclude "from the ice age" because they had features adapted to the ice age.

So no, Neanderthals would have been pre-Flood too.

Catholic 'Splaining

@CatholicSplaining101

Encyclical: Arcanum, Pope Leo XIII

“We record what is to all known, and cannot be doubted by any, that God, on the sixth day of creation, having made man from the slime of the earth, and having breathed into his face the breath of life, gave him a companion, whom He miraculously took from the side of Adam when he was locked in sleep.”

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@CatholicSplaining101 Yes, Sir.

But since that sixth day of creation was 2242 or 2262 years before the Flood, this in no way shape or form contradicts what I just said.

Is Writing Above the Station of a Homeless? — No.

Should I Thank Protestants Who Worry? No. · Now, is Pope Michael II the True Pope? Hope So. · For the Feast of St. Thérèse · Advice on Turning the Other Cheek · Is Writing Above the Station of a Homeless? — No.

It may for most of history have been above his resources, but if it's not above his resources, it's not "above his station" either.

How to Love the Poor with Boundaries (Fr. Mark-Mary Ames)
Matt Fradd | 3 Oct. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAgo0vGASvA

"like we're supposed to be fathers 2:43 to the poor and father is also set 2:45 boundaries"

Excuse me, I don't think "we are supposed to be fathers to the poor" is anywhere in the Bible, but if it's in a Church Father or a Scholastic, I happen to have missed it.

I'm pretty familiar with Sts. Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas. If it's in St. Jerome or St. John Chrysostom, I could however have missed it.

Besides, if it were, where does that leave friars? Technically they are precisely poor, so does that mean that people who hold possessions have the right and duty to set boundaries for them, like cutting their "air time" if a sermon comes to touch stinginess?

Some of the examples he gives however, are definitely more avoidable by people taking homeless people they like home for dinner (the last time this happened, the couple had been in Mauretania and were pretty chill with slavery in Mauretania, they could have scared others off from becoming to close with me), than it is for any type of shelter, day shelter or night shelter, which serves the poor en masse and where each poor is inconspicuous between a lot of other poor and lots fewer people who are into looking after the crowd.

I am homeless. I am also a writer.

It is a fact that yesterday and today I could not get a shower, yesterday bc the shower that was open Saturday afternoon had been closed for renovations on October 1st, today because I arrived less than 20 minutes before the shower was closing.

It is also a fact that I had on Good Friday 12 000 blog posts, the majority of which are not "my day was fine" or "check this link" but essays or dialogues, or comments on Quora. The dialogues, like some very little fan fiction, obviously involves someone else's copyright, so I keep it unmonetised on the blogs, I do not try to get it into print without authorisation from the ones I were debating. But some of the dialogues, I basically already have an authorisation, like with Stephan Borgehammar, and the essays obviously are my own copyright.

I get trapped in homelessness, and YOUR "Catholic Church" as holding many shelters has been involved in it, over evil people pretending that as homeless, I should live under boundaries preventing me from even hoping to get even one essay into print. I'm sad to say that Trad Caths have not been without guilt on this issue.

I have however not seen any kind of indication that Novus Ordos or EOFs intend to be anything like more respectful of my right to expression or my free choice of trade.

To some, the fact I am homeless obliges me to modesty and my writing is a sin against that modesty. I obviously disagree.

I remain a Catholic. I have for seven years opted for accepting Pope Michael I and then Pope Michael II as the true Pope. Neither of them has a parish in Paris, this means I can't go to Church, but neither of them has explicitly repeated this kind of oppressive view against the homeless because they are homeless, by people who have seen too many and obviously recall the bad guys better. Obviously, I do NOT imagine a future me taking care of homeless en masse, and as obviously, I do NOT imagine a future me remodelled by my experience into the kind of modesty certain people have expected.

You pretend that Karol Wojtyla is a saint, I suppose.

I consider he betrayed me as well as lot of other Catholics to the Scarlet Beast, by making some kind of peace agreement with psychiatry, around the time the second interreligious prayer meeting was held, and that one a few weeks or months before the massacre of Srebrenica.

Extra:

Can Rich People Go to Heaven? | Fr. Gregory Pine, O.P.
Matt Fradd | 6 Oct. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-QTVRs7ZS0

[To the question and before hearing Fr. Pine]

Obviously yes.

Unless they go out of their way to keep poor people poor despite honest and prolonged efforts.

A certain Franciscan for Renewal that you may know via Matt Fradd was stating that "we are supposed to be fathers to the poor" ...

The one Patristic quote that just possibly could be interpreted that way is the comment on the beatitudes.

Now one says, "many are poor in spirit who are rich in substance, many are poor in substance and rich in desires" ... unless I get a little richer, I can very easily be damned as one of the latetr.

Another says that God has put rich and poor among us so that rich may merit by disposing and poor by their patience.

If this means "disposing" about a finite amount of material alms, and patience about a finite amount of material alms, I'm totally on board.

Some seem to take this as rather meaning the rich is supposed to dispose globally about the poor and the poor are supposed to be globally patient and make no initiatives until a rich person disposing about them makes one for them or suggests they should tell them about them.

To me that version (which would fit the comment by Fr. Mark-Mary Ames) doesn't come off as Catholic, but rather as Protestant or possibly Opus Dei (which at certain times got nicknamed "the Catholic Calvinists" not bc of their view of Predestination, but in reference to their social mores).

[Matt Fradd seems to have set my channel on some kind of automatic delete. Both videos have both of my comments deleted.]

Jimmy Akin gets lots right, some wrong

Can Faith and Reason Coexist? w/ Jimmy Akin
Matt Fradd | 27.V.2020
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISO-Ch0uTHc

With my comments, in chronological order and numbered as to themes:

I

Faith may involve continuing to believe contrary to what for the moment seems to be good evidence.

Not all come into that situation, and it should ideally get cleared up by getting the evidence straightened out, but the case exists and it is featured as a recurring one in "Miracles" at the very end. Especially for beginners. (C. S. Lewis was no Catholic, but I think a moral theologian would also argue for instance you need to believe the Catholic truth that wine is innocent even when an AA club is telling you otherwise - I'd add not to join any AA clubs, btw).

2:01 "what you want is the evidence" - even as one's pre-Christian habits or habits taken over from non-Christian friends would distort what it should look like and how it looks to you right now? See example of a Catholic joining AA:ers, which alas happens (St Eustache in Paris hosts AA meetings certain evenings).

II

2:48 Jimmy, there is hope for you! Tell me when you converted to literal belief in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah!

III

3:16 I believe in miasma, they are what pestilence masks blocked out so physicians visiting plague patients didn't get all bubonic themselves... I believe in earth element being influenced by Mars for iron and Venus for attraction qualities, that's how Marco Polo's compass imported from China worked ... "blague à part" : electricity is a proven phenomenon, but electrons are to my mind a bit too specific a cause to be proven by it. A bit like deducing from the five ways of St. Thomas that God would die on a Cross and be named Jesus.

3:25 I do enough about the experiments to know that electrons as particles are deduced from cloud chambers. I also know I find the reasoning between the cloud chamber experiment, which I used to know details of, and that electrons are particles when in electron shells around a nucleus is not convincing. The evidence of chemistry and valencies, and molecule structures can be seen by electronic microscopy, suggest very clearly that the charges classed as negative are real, and quantified in discrete quantities, and layered into shells with different charge numbers for completion, the best I could do is Thomas Bradwardine who argued that if one aspect of reality is quantum, or atomic as they would have said, so are all, so if charges are quantum, on that idea, presumably so are what carries these as a quality. Interestingly, he argued against quantum and for Aristotelic continuum. The mere fact that electricity exists is neither sufficient to disprove him on that nor to show one needs to trust the experts. There is no general moral obligation to have a stance on what electricity is, as there is on believing the Blessed Trinity, once one knows how God in the Flesh revealed it.

3:29 "who do understand these things" - sufficient to provide electricity does not imply sufficient to analyse it correctly as to essence - "and can prove them" - within their charmed circle, as long as scholastics extend to them the favour St. Thomas did to geometricians about sum of angles (but when he said it was stupid not to believe them, he had presumably already seen a proof).

Proving a thing oneself in detail may not be necessary to believe a thing, but having a good idea about how the details should go, by sketching out a general proof, is normally a requirement for having any opinion.

IV

5:28 Excellent point about blind man holding up a number of fingers to prove sight exists in others ...

5:56 One point. It seems Karl May was born blind and gained sight by an eye operation - he actually did experience colour visions when people told him, especially the tales of his granny, before he could see. A bit like you can imagine a blue object that's not present if you close your eyes.

6:35 One moment, just for the fun of being a bit paranoid ... is there anyone pretending to test me if I am a prophet with supernatural awareness? I'm not, I'm a scholastic, but to some non-Catholics that looks at first like "prophet or fool" and then "fool" starts to edge out when I'm coherent. As a Catholic, you shouldn't believe those people. But obviously, such a test cannot be why you usually don't bother to answer my points, that would be ... "zu anmassend" as they say in German (forgot the English right now).

V

6:46 Above the sky would in fact be literally true, not of God's omnipresence, but of where He receives adoration from angels and from souls of saints and above all from the Blessed Virgin, who is there BODY AND soul. (You are aware bodies exist in space, right?)