Bonagura Defends the Latin Doctrine on Infallibility

Infallibility: An Antidote to Intellectual Madness | David G. Bonagura, Jr.: The gift of infallibility illuminates the Church when she teaches what God has clearly revealed to her. https://t.co/Qyleqm2XyJ pic.twitter.com/e4LMtFiieA

— The Catholic Thing (@catholicthing) June 26, 2022

More Genealogy

Wynand De Beer’s recent book Reality: From Metaphysics to Metapolitics is clearly relevant to a host of contemporary issues and has much to offer Catholics who find themselves living in a nominalist civilization.https://t.co/P4BYHZG7gP

— Catholic World Report (@cworldreport) October 4, 2021

Wipf and Stock

A Latin Apology for Roman Claims

Pope Peter defends the papacy while explaining its role and limits by Casey Chalk Joe Heschmeyer offers many of the standard Catholic arguments but also presents fresh material in his welcome and well-timed book.

Pope Peter: Defending the Church’s Most Distinctive Doctrine in a Time of Crisis by Joe Heschmeyer

A product of (Roman) Catholic Answers, so I expect no nuance or discussion of non-Latin ecclesiology or views regarding primacy.

Yet, as Heschmeyer rightly notes, popes can be both wrong or sinful, even egregiously so, without compromising the doctrine of papal infallibility. Infallibility does not mean impeccability. Nor does it mean everything the pope says or writes must be obeyed unquestionably. When the pope or the bishops exercise the powers of the ordinary or extraordinary Magisterium, we are right to obey. The rest of the time, as Heschmeyer rightly notes, we retain the right to ignore, or, given certain extraordinary circumstances, criticize what our Holy Father says or does.

This begs the question: When is the pope not exercising the powers of the ordinary or extraordinary Magisterium when he is putting forth his opinions regarding faith and morals?

A Manual for Creating Atheists

Friends, @peterboghossian's wildly popular book, “A Manual for Creating Atheists,” outlines his process of “street epistemology,” which is intended to be a process of anti-evangelization.

On the “Word on Fire Show,” Brandon Vogt and I discuss his book: https://t.co/osMY3nkghN pic.twitter.com/OXXDp5Ir2E

— Bishop Robert Barron (@BishopBarron) September 14, 2020

A Debate on God's Existence

Just watched a great debate on God's existence between Fr. Gregory Pine (@ThomisticInst) and Ben Watkins of (@RealAtheology). It's as cordial and thoughtful as my debate with @cosmicskeptic (if not even more so!). Keep up these great debates @mattfradd! https://t.co/5YnRN80lRi

— Trent Horn (@Trent_Horn) September 2, 2020

The Lack of Learning among Latins...

He is so right. The problem is that Catholics have not learned history but apologetic history - and so they don't know anything about the diversity of history. And of course, church history has almost been eliminated in seminary education.https://t.co/Nj3l1iP7MH

— Ulrich L. Lehner (@ulrichlehner) August 21, 2020

A Spiritual Transformation of an Empire

Full clip: https://t.co/bfdSWsjF7L

— New Polity (@PostliberalTho1) August 21, 2020

They Attend Byzantine Catholic Churches

But are they Byzantine in their thinking? Matt Fradd and Trent Horn:



full episode

Yes, I’m a parishioner at a Byzantine parish. Next Tuesday I will have my pastor come on the podcast to talk about it.

— Trent Horn (@Trent_Horn) January 5, 2020

And here is that podcast by Trent Horn: #250 – Why I attend a Byzantine Catholic parish (with my pastor!)


Of course the papacy is the key controversy, and it is not clear to me that Trent Horn has left behind Latin theology. Applying the model of the civil government of Israel, the monarchy and the vizier (vicar), to the understanding of the Church is not straightforward if the power of the keys given to St. Peter is passed on to all of the bishops, not just the bishop of Rome. Who is the pastor of the Church? The bishop of the local church, if we accept the monoepiscopate as a fixed norm. (And it is not clear to me that it is so.) But if the Church Universal is a communion of bishops and their flocks, is there a place for a primus? A leader or a facilitator and spokesman? A leader may be a facilitator and spokesman, but one can be a facilitator and spokesman without being a leader, in the sense of having authority over those one represents as a spokesman. There is no historical evidence that St. Peter exercised primacy as it is defined by the Latin Councils of Florence, Trent, Vatican I, and Vatican II or claimed by various bishops of Rome over the past 1500 years. So if the primus episcopus is overstepping his boundaries and attempting to lord his primacy over the church, what recourse or sanctions do other bishops have? What else is there besides warning the bishop of Rome that he is in danger of cutting himself off from the communion in charity that is proper to the Church Universal? If a Latin thinks that there is no recourse whatsoever, and that other bishops must just suffer or bear it though not necessarily obeying commands the bishop of Rome has no authority to give, he still thinks like a Latin.

And Trent Horn's latest podcast: St. Peter: Pope or Nope?


Downloadable versions of the two podcasts can be found at player.fm and podbay.


Matt Fradd did do a subsequent interview with Fr. Michael O'Loughlin, which I will have to finish.

Pope St. Stephen I on Baptism

Craig Truglia: The Lost Letters of Pope Saint Stephen I

More Apologetics-Based Catechesis?

Crisis: A Remedy for the Catechetical Poverty of Our Time by Christian Browne

How about something that is based on presenting salvation history through the Roman liturgy tradition and Sacred Scripture? Or would that be too much to ask of the Pauline Missal?

Centralization Must Be the Answer!

A standard Latin polemic concerning the papacy: The Grass Is Not Always Greener in the East by CASEY CHALK

Eastern Christian Books: Maximos the Confessor on Scripture's Difficulties

Eastern Christian Books: Maximos the Confessor on Scripture's Difficulties

Discerning the Historical Causes for the Fall of a Polity

I recall having read in certain Latin apologetic works on Church History that attributed the success of the Muslim invasions of the Christian world to the moral laxity and softness of Christians and their heresy (the Nestorians and Monophysites!). This may strike one as being an expression of Latin triumphalism, given the weakness of the Latin churches today

What if it is the case that the invasions were successful because the Christian polities were simply too weak? Must we find some moral blame for this? Or what if the polities failed because they were not Christianized enough -- not with respect to the "private" lives of individuals or expressions of orthodoxy, but because the polities lacked the excellence proper to it?

While those who lived with empire may have seen it as the only way to deal with external threats, what if they were wrong? Could it be said that the Byzantine theme system was close to being an expression of republicanism? Or were they effective purely for military reasons? What if despite the expression of public orthodoxy, the imperial government was not the form desired by God?

Would God save those who refuse to do what is necessary to save themselves? Lepanto, other victories have been interpreted as God intervening (especially through the intercession of the Mother of God). Still, Christians usually had to do their part in securing victory over the Muslims. While God's primary causality is not to be denied, and miracles are possible, what if God prefers Christian polities to participate in the Divine, in their own way, but attaining the excellence proper to them? Could God miraculously have intervened in preventing the Holy Land from being conquered by the Muslims? Did He withhold this help because of the private sins of the Christians living there, or as a consequence of other failures? Or did He have other reasons for allowing this to happen?

A Response to Born of a Virgin?

Related:

FORMED

CWR: Fast-growing "FORMED" program harnesses the power and reach of "the new Roman road" {GIVEAWAY}

Insight Scoop: Fast-growing "FORMED" program harnesses the power and reach of "the new Roman road"

Seems like the rising stars in American Roman Catholic apologetics and catechesis, Timothy Gray, Brent Pitre are more focused on Sacred Scripture than using the Fathers or recovering the Patristic tradition -- outreach to the Protestants? The influence of Catholic reverts and Protestant converts? So what form of Roman Catholicism will be reformed? A new Spring in America or was an opportunity lost in the postconciliar era? Is it accurate to say that the influence of Ressourcement theology in the United States is marginal?

official website and FB

CWR: The History, Enemies, and Importance of Natural Law
Philosophy, says Dr. John Lawrence Hill, "played a fundamental role in my conversion to Christianity. I think most non-Christians—at least if they are thoughtful about these matters—really haven’t confronted themselves with the contradictions of their own worldview."

Eastern Christian Books: Conciliar Christology

Eastern Christian Books: Conciliar Christology


A question: Is Timothy Pawl an analytic philosopher?

Moral Matters by Mark Dooley

Crisis: Catholic Philosopher Challenges Modern Spiritual Wasteland by Sean Haylock

Moral Matters by Mark Dooley

Dr. Michael Augros on Catholic Answers

Who Designed the Designer? - DL

The Glory of God

Explore beautiful Hubble Space Telescope images from each year the telescope has been in orbit: http://go.nasa.gov/1zQf6bb #Hubble25

Posted by NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration on Thursday, April 23, 2015

Man, know your limits. The Lord created all of this to express His glory and to remind you that despite your greatness in His material creation, there are still boundaries which you cannot pass.

Dreams of interstellar space travel, Babeilian pride and man's desire to ascend to the heavens by his own power.