Пікірлер

• 
  @benjaminaranha97042 сағат бұрын

  I know that Salesians (founder St. John Bosco) also have a congregation of women

• 
  @FrederickLakeElementaryКүн бұрын

  Very great videos. And also, I have realized that “Sum Nerdus” this channel’s old name, means “I’m a Nerd” in Latin. These videos are made of the most utmost quality, and the man behind this is truly a pious, man of God.

• 
  @CatechesisVidsКүн бұрын

  Thanks! Yeah I used to call the series "Sum Nerdus", and the channel "Six Candle Studios".

• 
  @FrederickLakeElementaryКүн бұрын

  Thank you for telling me this information.

• 
  @DANventures5142 күн бұрын

  In the neighborhood where I'm residing there is the Order of St. Augustine (Friary) and the Augustinian Monastery of St. Rita of Cascia. Our town is divided by two parishes, the religious order (OSA Friars) for the northern villages and the diocesan in the town center & southern villages.

• 
  @papentert4092 күн бұрын

  if you don't have enough information, try to ask before you prepare this video. try to know mono and Mia first

• 
  @CatechesisVids2 күн бұрын

  A number of Orthodox said this, so maybe I will explore the question again at a later date, but the Oxford Dictionary of Christianity frames the issue exactly as I did and with the same terminology.

• 
  @d.o.77842 күн бұрын

  So, does your wife understand all this? I still find it confusing and kind of redundant

• 
  @CatechesisVids2 күн бұрын

  I believe so. What do you mean by redundant? Or do you mean why all the many religious orders exist?

• 
  @simonslater90242 күн бұрын

  Protestant’s are NOT Christian. Protestant so called churches DON’T EXIST. Protestant so called baptism IS INVALID. The Bible a Catholic book condemns protestant’s protestantism and orthodoxy who have NO sacrament’s

• 
  @CatechesisVids2 күн бұрын

  That is overstating the matter. In the creed every Sunday we confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. Any Protestant who baptizes in the trinitarian formula validly (if illicitly) performs the sacrament of baptism. Protestants may be spoken of as not Christian in one sense, and Christian in another. They are not Christian in the sense that they do not participate in the fullness of the Body of Christ that is unity to the Roman Pontiff and the Church militant, but they are true Christians in that they are heirs of the promise because of the baptismal character and it is possible that they achieve salvation. For this reason different popes have referred to them both as Christian and as non-Christian.

• 
  @christian.editz13 күн бұрын

  I'm Coptic Orthodox from 🇪🇬☦️ Orthodox Priest can marry but Monk's can't.

• 
  @CashFreedman4 күн бұрын

  Random question but how does the Roman church recognize saints if they died outside of communion with Rome?

• 
  @CatechesisVids3 күн бұрын

  Generally it doesn't, hence the controversy surrounding the elevation of figures like Gregory Palamas to sainthood. But ultimately, a saint is just a member of the Church triumphant and the Church is free to count whomever it wills among that number and propose their cult for common generations. Once promulgated, it is infallible that a particular individual is in Heaven. This means that at the moment of the individual's death they must have had charity between themselves and God, been free of mortal sin, and been sufficiently incorporated into the Church to be saved.

• 
  @jaspermay58132 күн бұрын

  It _never_ does. The heretic Palamas was condemned before the end-times robber council.

• 
  @CatechesisVids2 күн бұрын

  @jaspermay5813 I presume you are referring to the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council. All Ecumenical Councils are infallible. Vatican II is just as infallible as Trent.

• 
  @MegaTechno20004 күн бұрын

  Excellent thanks

• 
  @MegaTechno20004 күн бұрын

  That was excellent... Thanks

• 
  @bengrauartwork6 күн бұрын

  this is a very clear introduction to these differences. It will take time for me to retain and actively be able to discern each difference since they seem to blend but are very clear in several instances. awesome video.

• 
  @lebell796 күн бұрын

  Very concise and clear explanation! Well done! I also liked the esthetics of the visuals.

• 
  @sanmartinovallevictorjuven51876 күн бұрын

  Truth doesn't need to be imposed or forced on people, if Truth is in fact the Truth. I could agree to some degree with what are you saying but then I remember the Catholic church censored and opposed heliocentrism at Copernicus time. As a Catholic I don't like your message.

• 
  @CatechesisVids6 күн бұрын

  As a Catholic, you are obliged to accept what the popes say on the matter irrespective of your misgivings, but I can try to explain it more clearly. On what basis would you say truth doesn't need to be imposed? Not every person is open to argument, or has the mental acuity to understand theological truth if explained to them. For their sakes, foolish arguments ought to be forcibly removed from society - particularly if published by clerics who have a special duty not to mislead the laity.

• 
  @sanmartinovallevictorjuven51876 күн бұрын

  @@CatechesisVids Truth is both empirical and logical and if a doctrine represents it perfectly then reality itself would reaffirm it, like the laws of physics can't be imposed because it's so obvious they are true and people can demonstrate they are. Also the popes said many things, and nowadays I doubt Pope Francis would agree with you.

• 
  @CatechesisVids5 күн бұрын

  You are under the mistaken impression that just being something is certain that it can always be explained in such a way that it is clear and that people accept it. But that is not the case. Take for example the flat earth movement. It is obviously empirically verifiable that the earth is round, and yet that movement refuses to die no matter how many proofs are shown. Just as the Church demands that laws be promulgated to remove wanton sin from society, such as the Church's demands that politicians work to make abortion illegal, so must good states remove errors from their midst. A secular state is ill equipped to do this, and likely should not try, but this is still the ideal.

• 
  @sanmartinovallevictorjuven51875 күн бұрын

  @@CatechesisVids That's why ideas are always debated and discussed, that flat earthers are clearly wrong doesn't mean that you have to force them at gun point to affirm the laws of physics. As Truth is reaffirmed by reality, it doesn't matter how much people can oppose it, it would never change. I don't think the establishment of some sort of dictatorship or theocracy would be better for society, nor that the Church supports this ideal at all.

• 
  @CatechesisVids5 күн бұрын

  No particular broad government is necessary in the Catholic worldview (sans the intense condemnations of socialist states), but a good government should remove bad ideas from society - especially if promulgated or found on print as these can be distributed much more widely. This is the clear position of the Church from the quotes found in the video. Particular situations must be analyzed practically as well, and there would be no way of doing this in something like a liberal democracy.

• 
  @catholicdoomer6 күн бұрын

  This is a very good introduction. One thing I don't know much about is what is a third order, but I'm starting to think it will be good for my spiritual life to join one of them. I think in my hometown there's at least third orders from Benedictines and Franciscans.

• 
  @CatechesisVids6 күн бұрын

  Thanks for watching, good look on your faith journey.

• 
  @JellyBeanFluff6 күн бұрын

  I'm aspiring to be a Third Order Carmelite and this video will help me explain what I'm trying to do to my family, friends, and coworkers. Thank you for the video, and for all that you do. May our Lord bless you! ❤

• 
  @CatechesisVids6 күн бұрын

  Wonderful! I'll say a prayer for your discernment.

• 
  @richardmiranda6405 күн бұрын

  Why are you trying to do something to your family, friends and coworkers?

• 
  @gailadams92942 күн бұрын

  Congratulations!! I have finished the year as an Aspirant and now in the second year of Formation. God willing, I will be making my First Promise Dec 2024. May God bless and guide you on your journey to o eternity!🙏🏻✝️🕊️🕊️

• 
  @Mega19897 күн бұрын

  Thanks for making a great video. I’d like to add the vocation of Deacon. Deacons in the Catholic Church are considered Clergy, with an emphasis on service. There are two types. Transitional Deacons, which are usually seminarians who are close to being ordained a priest. It is a step before that ordination and helps them to transition into their true calling as priest. And there are Permanent Deacons that are lay men who go through a period of preparation in a Diocese for a period of 4-6 years in most cases. Permanent Deacons serve at the will of the local Bishop, usually within their local parish. A deacon may also assist a priest during Mass by reading the Gospel and preaching, among other things. A deacon may also administer the Sacrament of Baptism; bring Viaticum to the dying; preside for prayer services; officiate at wakes, funerals, and burial services; and witness marriages. Deacons are also able to bless religious articles.

• 
  @CatechesisVids6 күн бұрын

  Thanks for watching! In my experience, religious orders really only ordain deacons transitionally to priesthood - not permanent deacons. So it was beyond the scope of this video to cover deacons individually. But I could be mistaken on that. Thanks for writing up the summary of deacons.

• 
  @thehunterfiles56367 күн бұрын

  There are actually male members of the Missionaries of Charity: The Missionaries of Charity Fathers The Missionaries of Charity Brothers Active The Missionaries of Charity Brothers Contemplative I did some work previously with the Missionaries of Charity Brothers in India and they were actually the first Religious Community I reached out to

• 
  @CatechesisVids7 күн бұрын

  According to the missionaries of charity website, they do not have any male members. www.missionariesofcharity.org/about_us.html Are the missionaries of charity fathers a new order?

• 
  @desmondhutchinson60957 күн бұрын

  Can you explain what Denzinger is?

• 
  @CatechesisVids7 күн бұрын

  It's a resource book of official Church pronouncements since the Early Church.

• 
  @rattata307 күн бұрын

  I think monks and friars are better than diocesan priests, specially in my area, although we don’t have monks or friars!

• 
  @naijagerd79096 күн бұрын

  By "better", what do you mean exactly?

• 
  @rattata306 күн бұрын

  @@naijagerd7909 they work

• 
  @j0nb0y57 күн бұрын

  I’m not suggesting this for everyone, but I have celiac disease and have never gotten sick from the Eucharist. I go to Mass every Sunday and have yet to get sick from the holy Eucharist.

• 
  @robertthomson15877 күн бұрын

  I'll never forget a quote that I read many years ago: "the main purpose of the Catholic Church is to get as many souls as possible into Purgatory".

• 
  @tollermaus7 күн бұрын

  This is very good. You should know, however that friars of the Order of Preachers, aka Dominicans, take only one public vow, that of obedience to God, the Blessed Virgin Mary, St. Dominic, the Master of the Order and his successors, according to the Rule of St. Augustine and the institutions of the Order. It is the latter which imposes the obligations of chastity and poverty. Holy Father Dominic, pray for us.

• 
  @CatechesisVids7 күн бұрын

  Yikes, I should have double checked their website. Thanks for letting me know.

• 
  @sa866477 күн бұрын

  When is a Nun (Sister) able to be called “Mother” such as mother Teresa? Thanks for the informative video.

• 
  @CatechesisVids7 күн бұрын

  I believe it's just that she's the head of an order or house, but I might go more in depth on nuns in a future video. Women in charge of religious houses have historically been permitted crosiers (bishops crooks) too, which is an interesting thing I'm curious to research more about.

• 
  @benjaminaranha97042 сағат бұрын

  A nun is not abled to be called "MOTHER " A senior nun is appointed as in charge of a group of nuns functioning under one roofShe is then called Mother of/for that group

• 
  @andresmaynez30607 күн бұрын

  And what about aliens, if we find them, are they bound as well to original sin even if they are not descendants of Adam?? Or what about the Neanderthals?? Did they also have original sin?

• 
  @CatechesisVids7 күн бұрын

  I don't really think aliens exist, but if they do and they have souls they're just human. So we'll baptize them too and forgive original sin.

• 
  @andresmaynez30607 күн бұрын

  @@CatechesisVids yes but how can they bear original sin if they are not descendants of Adam??

• 
  @CatechesisVids7 күн бұрын

  Good point. Adam as true and natural father is the source of original sin. One could go the C.S. Lewis route and say they get their own Adam on their own planet, but like I said I don't think aliens exist so I'm not that concerned.

• 
  @andresmaynez30607 күн бұрын

  @@CatechesisVids either that or you go with the orthodox definition of ancestral sin. Edit: if not aliens, what about Neanderthals and the other species of “humans” that went extinct long time ago, did they have a soul like ours and if they did, did they have original sin??

• 
  @CatechesisVids7 күн бұрын

  If they intermarried with the sons of Adam then yes, otherwise it would seem no.

• 
  @Misc7417 күн бұрын

  Excellent video. One very powerful motivation for holiness in the early Church was the persecutions by the Roman Empire which lasted to about the year 313 AD when the Emperor Constantine ended them with the Edict of Milan. After this Edict the Church grew very much, which is good, but unfortunately a lot of people were becoming Christian for less-than-ideal motives; For example: "if the Emperor is a Christian, maybe I should be Christian to get myself a good job!" So the Church grew greatly but also became a little worldly you might say. Then a group of Christians who were a bit bombed out by this decided to go to the desert, at first as individual hermits, and eventually as small communities. This would be the beginning of monasticism. With Saint Anthony of the desert at the lead. I really like this line taken from his biography by St Athanasius, which is like the very first description of the monastic life: "Those who wished to take heed of themselves would practice the discipline in solitude outside their own villages."

• 
  @cassandragoodgall33807 күн бұрын

  I loved this video. I work for Salesian priests and I didn't understand until now. Thank you

• 
  @CatechesisVids7 күн бұрын

  Glad it was helpful!

• 
  @CatechesisVids8 күн бұрын

  A few details I should clarify: Benedictines, while in practice they do live a life of celibacy and poverty, do not take explicit vows to that effect in their rule. Rather they have a different set of vows particular to their order that includes "stability" which adds contrast to Franciscans who have lived as wandering preachers in the past. Here is a Benedictine website with further details. www.conceptionabbey.org/monastery/monastic-vows/ Likewise, the Dominicans do not have explicit vows of poverty and chastity, but both of these ways of life are contained within their singular vow of obedience. www.friarly.com/the-vowed-life.html#:~:text=We%20make%20only%20one%20vow,the%20Master%20of%20the%20Order. I apologize for any confusion. Basically I should have said evangelical counsels, and not stressed the vows as such. Edit: A few more supplemental notes for clarity since this is a complicated topic. -My stickfigure guys have hoods if they are monks, and no hoods if they are mendicants, but this is just for clarity as mendicants (such as Capuchins) may also have hoods. - I describe the mendicants as intermediate movements, but I want to make clear that it is not as though Christian charity did not exist among religious until the 1100's. This should be obvious, but I want to say it expressly. -The Poor Clares are associated with the mendicant movement, and like their Franciscan counterparts they rely on the donations of others to live their life, but they have historically been nuns rather than sisters who do external ministry (like the sisters of charity). This is a little confusing, so I wanted to point it out specifically just so no one is confused why there are Poor Clares who live cloistered lives. Like all religious orders, there are a lot of variability with regards to this - and some Poor Clares do live active lives like their Franciscan counterparts. -Someone in the comments has mentioned that there are Missionary of Charity Brothers (and Fathers), so a male movement was created in the same tradition as the Missionaries of Charity. I should have found a better example of an all female order to mirror the all male Jesuits.

• 
  @Bonzi1nho8 күн бұрын

  This is definitely one of your best videos, absolutely saved me from understanding all these names 😅😅

• 
  @CatechesisVids8 күн бұрын

  Glad it was helpful!

• 
  @Calciu_838 күн бұрын

  Even Christ permits divorce on the bases of sexual immorality in Mathew 5:32 It's unfortunate that papists would rather be unironically and literally cucked, than ever get divorced.

• 
  @CatechesisVids8 күн бұрын

  I take it you didn't watch the video, since that verse is directly explained.

• 
  @Calciu_838 күн бұрын

  @@CatechesisVids I did, and I reject your interpretation of Mathew 5

• 
  @CatechesisVids8 күн бұрын

  K.

• 
  @Calciu_838 күн бұрын

  St Photini was the women at the well that was divorced multiple times and yet Christ still found her worthy to be mentioned in the Holy Gospel and to preach to her people about Him.

• 
  @CatechesisVids8 күн бұрын

  What makes you think she didn't repent of her sinful life?

• 
  @Calciu_838 күн бұрын

  @@CatechesisVids idk how you got that idea after reading my comment

• 
  @CatechesisVids8 күн бұрын

  Well you left two comments, and the other tries to excuse divorce.

• 
  @Calciu_838 күн бұрын

  @@CatechesisVids please delete your account

• 
  @turro32128 күн бұрын

  The Athanasian Creed just obliterates the greek errors (this same creed that IS present in the councils of toledo); also the arguments from the researcher Dwong.

• 
  @S.LouisIX18 күн бұрын

  Short and sweet, love it

• 
  @CatechesisVids18 күн бұрын

  Thanks for checking out the channel

• 
  @Dave-qj1vx18 күн бұрын

  Frank Pavone is now laicized only because he was persistently disobedient and focused on turning Priests for Life into a business and not a cause as it once was.

• 
  @CatechesisVids18 күн бұрын

  Obedience is one of the vows a priest makes, so that makes sense.

• 
  @slytlygufy19 күн бұрын

  You understand neither Orthodoxy, nor the Church's teaching on divorce.

• 
  @CatechesisVids18 күн бұрын

  Well I certainly understand the Church's teaching on a divorce, and I feel pretty confident about my understanding of Orthodoxy's teaching as well - though there are particular regional variations that I may not have heard of because Orthodoxy lacks a singular unifying teaching.

• 
  @countryboyred19 күн бұрын

  How is our apostolic succession “weakened”? That’s a ridiculous claim. Orthodox apostolic succession is every bit as valid as Romes (or more valid because they remain true to the ancient faith)

• 
  @CatechesisVids18 күн бұрын

  The ancient faith is allegiance to the bishop of Rome. The Orthodox episcopacy is weakened because the true apostolic succession is the one united to the Pope. Is it valid? Sure. Is it licit? Not by a country mile.

• 
  @countryboyred18 күн бұрын

  @@CatechesisVids When Rome was Orthodox and not in schism it’s good to be in communion. And according to Rome it’s not licit but in reality it’s very licit. Orthodox apostolic succession is not weaker than Rome. It’s way stronger. We’ve retained the ancient liturgies. Just take one quick glance over at you guys and it’s easy to see who has really kept the faith.

• 
  @KingRichardDeLeonheart5 күн бұрын

  For the Same reason you think the orthodox succession is more valid Catholics believe theirs is more isn’t that obvious?

• 
  @alexanderjdivic47843 күн бұрын

  @@CatechesisVids "The ancient faith is allegiance to the bishop of Rome. " That's just not true. Why have Catholics made so many changes over the years if they are so convinced that "The ancient faith is allegiance to the bishop of Rome" ? If your church truly believed that it would remain unchanged.

• 
  @thomas7778032 күн бұрын

  ​@CatechesisVids The Vatican has come out and admitted that not only was submission to the Bishop of Rome not the norm for the first millennia, but have also admitted the documents originally ment to espouse this like the Donation of Constantine were forgeries. Rome does not hold to the ancient faith.

• 
  @arph979421 күн бұрын

  The replies to the comments is sad. Making a channel full of videos, when all you do is divide with incorrect proclamations in your video. Claiming people who are recognized as Saints by your church as heretics for believing in miaphysitism. Sad.

• 
  @CatechesisVids21 күн бұрын

  Material heresy does not divide from the body of Christ unless it be preached or believed in defiance of Rome, thus a saint or church father could be a heretic on some particular point and yet have lived before a council solemnly declared their position untenable. My channel is intended for Catholics, though all are welcome to watch. The one church that Christ founded is found most fully in that religion that is known by allegiance to the Roman Pontiff, and it is to these people that my videos are directed and to their building up.

• 
  @ziesha.marie1122 күн бұрын

  Thank you!

• 
  @giovanniserafino173123 күн бұрын

  So let me get this straight. A man is ordained to the priesthood and is permanently configured to Christ the high priest with all the sacramental powers which can never be taken away. He then loses the clerical state and is now a layman. So now we have a layman who is still permanently configured to Christ the high priest and retains all his priestly powers. Is he now a layman priest? Where is the Sanhedrin and Pharisees when you need them?

• 
  @CatechesisVids22 күн бұрын

  Layman is a legal category in this context. It doesn't mean he in any way loses the sacrament of holy orders, he merely loses the right to use those powers (which are administered by the Pope). Likewise all Orthodox priests lack these same faculties, but they do not recognize the Pope as their sovereign so they ignore the issue.

• 
  @giovanniserafino173122 күн бұрын

  @@CatechesisVids Since faculties are required for Catholic priests to validly absolve sins, and to validly celebrate the sacrament of confirmation,( when not automatically granted by canon law) and proper jurisdiction is required to validly witness marriage, are you suggesting that these three sacraments among the orthodox are invalid, because they don’t have the faculties or jurisdiction of the Catholic hierarchs?

• 
  @giovanniserafino173122 күн бұрын

  @@CatechesisVids Getting back to canonical terminology. From an ontological perspective a validity ordained priest can never be a layman or actually return to the lay state. Such terminology denies the permanent ontological change which takes place at ordination. It would be better to say, that the priest is dispensed from the duties, obligations and responsibilities of priesthood, and now assumes the duties, obligation and responsibilities of a layman. This is a far better solution than stating, a priest has been “ reduced to the state of the laity“ which is an ontological impossibility.

• 
  @CatechesisVids22 күн бұрын

  You're confusing licity with validity. A priest or bishop can illicitly do things they can validly do. So the sacraments work, but it's a sin to perform them.

• 
  @giovanniserafino173122 күн бұрын

  @@CatechesisVids I think I understand the difference between licitly and validity. Granted, bishops possessing the fullness of the priesthood, always act validly in regard to sacraments. Priests, however, in certain sacraments ( penance and confirmation) need faculties from the Ordinary not only for licitly, but for validity. My question is since validly ordained Orthodox priests administer both the sacraments of penance and confirmation without Roman faculties, do they do so validly? Perhaps this is above your competency ? However, it does remain an interesting question..

• 
  @user-uq2rr4xt9g23 күн бұрын

  Marriage does not have an "indelible mark", only Baptism, Confirmation, and Holy Orders.

• 
  @CatechesisVids23 күн бұрын

  I never said it did. Please read the pinned comment.

• 
  @StCloudConcertina24 күн бұрын

  It is a very big deal who's mentioned as pope in the Te igitur. Consequently, when someone is named who is clearly not the pope, such as Francis, it reveals more what kind of "faith" it is. We no longer have widespread options to receive the sacraments from priests. We cannot go to those, for example, who clearly deny dogmas, such as No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church, engage in false worship with non-Catholics, and accept the new order & its false popes (who have committed these atrocities).

• 
  @CatechesisVids24 күн бұрын

  If you no longer have options to receive the sacraments maybe it's time to consider returning to the one church Christ established.

• 
  @chrishanzek893025 күн бұрын

  I would argue that the average person wrongly uses the term 'defrocked' and not laicization.

• 
  @CatechesisVids25 күн бұрын

  I don't know why I didn't think of that one - the term never really crossed my mind when writing this episode.

• 
  @bambooboobamb333526 күн бұрын

  Orthodox isn't offshoot from catholic, I hope you can correct that and avoid spreading misinformation.

• 
  @CatechesisVids26 күн бұрын

  No heresy or schism admits that it is not the true faith, so I would hardly expect you to claim otherwise. And yet it is true; the Orthodox must accept Francis Pope of Rome and return to the fullness of that one fold with one shepherd in Christ to enter into the fullness of Christianity.

• 
  @bambooboobamb333525 күн бұрын

  @@CatechesisVids Orthodoxy is very good considering that it doesn't accept Popes that accept people that engage in modern day Sodom and Gomorrah activities. It is not a simple thing but is blasphemous and I hope one day you will not accept churches that accept such actions. It is a historical mistake which would have never been accepted in past and it is of the falling of the unholy and has nothing to do with religion of Christianity.

• 
  @CatechesisVids25 күн бұрын

  Pope Francis said that the seminaries are too full of "faggotry" like two weeks ago, and a week before that he denied the possibility of homosexual unions being blessed qua union. You're barking up the wrong tree with that one.

• 
  @bambooboobamb333525 күн бұрын

  So nice to delete my comments and try to hide the truth from people inorder to misinform the public. If you will keep delete my comments inorder to make yourself look righteous, there's nothing more to say but may God guide you to the true faith and away from darkness and unto the light at the end of the tunnel.

• 
  @CatechesisVids24 күн бұрын

  No one's deleted anything, although the sort order can look a bit weird sometimes on KZread. I'll post a comment and it won't appear for multiple hours sometimes.

• 
  @michaelm39326 күн бұрын

  To avoid confusion, you should not use the word character as applied to matrimony. That is a technical theological word applied only to baptism, confirmation and orders.

• 
  @CatechesisVids26 күн бұрын

  I didn't use "character" to refer to marriage in this video, only holy orders. But I also believe you are mistaken about the word's usage as the word can be used less narrowly.

• 
  @michaelm39326 күн бұрын

  @@CatechesisVids you did in the NB retraction. The Church speaks precisely when dealing with such grave theological matters. You use and cite canon law, thus seeking to speak precisely. I do believe you used character in the video.

• 
  @michaelm39326 күн бұрын

  Character,p in dealing with the sacraments is always specifically used i.e. the sacramental character

• 
  @michaelm39326 күн бұрын

  Just read the article entitled character in the Catholic Encyclopedia. Prots use is otherwise.

• 
  @CatechesisVids26 күн бұрын

  I do want to be as precise as possible, and it's an important reason I cite so many elements of my scripts. However, you are mistaken about the narrowness of the word character. Here it is used in relation to marriage by the pontifical council for the family: www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/family/documents/rc_pc_family_doc_20001109_de-facto-unions_en.html Edit: I see what you mean about Catholic encyclopedia's division. This seems archaic. Words change in meaning and Catholic encyclopedia is very old. The old meaning seems to be very specific to be a synonym with "indelible", but it's not used only in that sense today.

• 
  @taylormoore312127 күн бұрын

  I'm pretty sure God's grace can overcome the mistakes of man such as a invalid baptism. God certainly is omnipotent in every way and in no way would deny His mercy or sacramental graces to a contrite sinner despite the circumstances surrounding the baptism in question. Super easy problem for God to overcome 😅 That being said, sure the Church should take the appropriate steps to properly ordain the priest once awareness has been established. That's just darn right appropriate. But to say that all the confessions heard, blessings, and other priestly functions are invalid......well I think it's safe to bet God was there through all that.

• 
  @CatechesisVids27 күн бұрын

  Though the hand of God works always towards good even out of evil, we should not presume upon the unique character of his sacramental grace in situations where the sacraments he instituted are not present due to impossibility; a priest who is invalidly consecrated does not validly confect the eucharist for instance, and so it would be unfitting to say the sacrament of the eucharist persisted or was consecrated in spite of the absence of a minister. However, God might certainly have given special graces of some other sort, according to his own holy will, to those who believed themselves to be receiving the body of Christ - perhaps akin to a spiritual communion in the case of the eucharist.

• 
  @taylormoore312127 күн бұрын

  @@CatechesisVids I understand and appreciate your reply. Seems to make our God a bit small to say his grace is contingent upon the perfect ordination of a priest. What if a person is becoming a priest for vain or egoic reasons? And not with pure intention? That makes the sacrament of marriage void in some cases. So how would we know if a priest has the same purity of heart. Sure cannon law says these things to preserve the integrity of the priesthood as it should! But God is not confined to cannon law. It's the other way around. And certainly His grace can overcome any shortcomings of humans.

• 
  @CatechesisVids27 күн бұрын

  It's not that we make God too small by saying a priest must be baptized to become a priest, we puff ourselves up and make ourselves too large to presume God owes us the sacraments - or that he owes us his grace if we don't follow the rules of his bride the Church. It's just descriptively the kind of thing that holy orders are to say they require baptism. Holy orders presupposes a participation in the life of Christ that involves baptism - one who does not belong to Christ cannot serve as his minister or act in persona christi as a priest does. I don't entirely know what you mean by egoism here. Being full of vanity would not in itself invalidate either an ordination or a marriage.

• 
  @taylormoore312127 күн бұрын

  @@CatechesisVids I appreciate the reply. I am not in disagreement that baptism is an absolute must for priests or any clergy to properly administer priestly functions. And I am not saying to presume anything. I think it's the Church's duty to preserve the integrity of the sacraments. But she, despite being the bride of Christ, is still really a mess full of messy situations and imperfections. I am only making a point that from the Gospel we are called to have an abundance in trust. I think it's appropriate to trust that God can do great things when we fall short. Conversely to the point about being inflated thinking God owes us the sacraments. I agree that humility is a huge component to receiving God's love and grace but one can also induce scrupulosity by overreacting to a shortfall of people. To say somebody's confession isn't valid can really cause some scrupulosity. So I'm only speaking to the balance of law and the mercy of God. Both are important and should be balanced.

• 
  @user-uz7dy5vi7u28 күн бұрын

  I always wonder what happens if a priest just completely loses faith… theoretically couldn’t they just leave? Is there any binding contracts they sign that would prevent them from doing so?

• 
  @CatechesisVids28 күн бұрын

  They don't sign a secular contract saying they have to remain a priest as far as I'm aware, so there's no coercive force from a governmental perspective. But they would be out of a job, and the Church would take away their faculties. Becoming an apostate of any kind is a good way to merit Hell however, especially a priest.

• 
  @bradpaul857622 күн бұрын

  Yes, a priest can just walk away from the Church………..all this legal stuff is irrelevant to those who see through it as man made rules.

• 
  @christophersalinas27223 күн бұрын

  @@bradpaul8576lol

• 
  @TheMountAndBladerX1028 күн бұрын

  Interesting. I always thought that if you visit another diocese, youre also bound by their holy days of obligation. The more you know.