NFL Kicker Harrison Butker’s unhinged commencement speech

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school?

oh my

except the Catholic nuns disagree with him. I guess they aren't real Catholics.

Eh. They are all real Catholics. There are some basic principles and doctrine Catholics are supposed to agree with (or at least not publicly dissent from), but open debate on the rest is fine.

So the quip about a "Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school" can be debated since not all real Catholics agree with him.

Sure. Debating what he said is fair game. But it goes too far to say someone is not a real Catholic because he does not have the same views as you on matters that are not core required beliefs.

I would have changed what was said above to "Catholic dude saying his Catholic thing, at Catholic school"

You missed the part where he speaks against basic Catholic teachings. So yeah, the dude is a Catholic, but he’s similar to a Catholic that had an abortion For convenience , or got divorced, and hold them up as good Catholic teachings.

Which basic principles or doctrines did he speak against? Did he say anything contrary to the Nicene Creed? Did he publicly doubt the concept of original sin or sin itself? Did he question the sacraments or the authority of the Pope? Did he speak out against transubstantiation?

NFP and what roles women should play or not in the world simply are not basic doctrine. Having very non-mainstream views on those things are not a sin, but an abortion of convenience is. And he did not present his kooky takes as Catholic teaching, but his views.

Yes, he did say something against Catholic preaching. Jesus Christ for f**k sake. If you don’t see it, you’re not a Catholic.

There is no way you are Catholic and you didn’t see that.

I wish non-Catholics would stop commenting on this thread because they are so incredibly ignorant. It’s almost impossible to speak to them about the subject.

I am the Catholic you are calling a non-Catholic. If you are Catholic, I question your Catholic education as you don't seem to understand the wide latitude the Church gives for personal views on matters that are not core doctrine. I did think the guy almost verged into Calvinism at one point, which I thought was questionable.

DP. I don’t know the canon definition of heresy but he certainly said a lot of stuff that seems like it could warrant some kind of censure. Attacking priests. Attacking Humanae Vitae. Suggesting women’s vocation is to their husband and not god. Going against multiple Church pronouncements that the Jews are not guilty of the crucifixion.

This^^^ except Roman crucified Jesus, not Jews… btw

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All the man did was remind people that they need to know their roles. When raising children someone should be home with them during their formative years and that both parents have roles to fulfill.

There is no one correct way to raise a family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school?

oh my

except the Catholic nuns disagree with him. I guess they aren't real Catholics.

Eh. They are all real Catholics. There are some basic principles and doctrine Catholics are supposed to agree with (or at least not publicly dissent from), but open debate on the rest is fine.

So the quip about a "Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school" can be debated since not all real Catholics agree with him.

Sure. Debating what he said is fair game. But it goes too far to say someone is not a real Catholic because he does not have the same views as you on matters that are not core required beliefs.

I would have changed what was said above to "Catholic dude saying his Catholic thing, at Catholic school"

You missed the part where he speaks against basic Catholic teachings. So yeah, the dude is a Catholic, but he’s similar to a Catholic that had an abortion For convenience , or got divorced, and hold them up as good Catholic teachings.

Which basic principles or doctrines did he speak against? Did he say anything contrary to the Nicene Creed? Did he publicly doubt the concept of original sin or sin itself? Did he question the sacraments or the authority of the Pope? Did he speak out against transubstantiation?

NFP and what roles women should play or not in the world simply are not basic doctrine. Having very non-mainstream views on those things are not a sin, but an abortion of convenience is. And he did not present his kooky takes as Catholic teaching, but his views.

Yes, he did say something against Catholic preaching. Jesus Christ for f**k sake. If you don’t see it, you’re not a Catholic.

There is no way you are Catholic and you didn’t see that.

I wish non-Catholics would stop commenting on this thread because they are so incredibly ignorant. It’s almost impossible to speak to them about the subject.

I'm a catholic, catholic educated, married catholic, children baptized catholic catholic. He said catholic things. Nothing he said was outside of mainstream catholic teachings.

Thanks for chiming in, handmaid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school?

oh my

except the Catholic nuns disagree with him. I guess they aren't real Catholics.

Eh. They are all real Catholics. There are some basic principles and doctrine Catholics are supposed to agree with (or at least not publicly dissent from), but open debate on the rest is fine.

So the quip about a "Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school" can be debated since not all real Catholics agree with him.

Sure. Debating what he said is fair game. But it goes too far to say someone is not a real Catholic because he does not have the same views as you on matters that are not core required beliefs.

I would have changed what was said above to "Catholic dude saying his Catholic thing, at Catholic school"

You missed the part where he speaks against basic Catholic teachings. So yeah, the dude is a Catholic, but he’s similar to a Catholic that had an abortion For convenience , or got divorced, and hold them up as good Catholic teachings.

Which basic principles or doctrines did he speak against? Did he say anything contrary to the Nicene Creed? Did he publicly doubt the concept of original sin or sin itself? Did he question the sacraments or the authority of the Pope? Did he speak out against transubstantiation?

NFP and what roles women should play or not in the world simply are not basic doctrine. Having very non-mainstream views on those things are not a sin, but an abortion of convenience is. And he did not present his kooky takes as Catholic teaching, but his views.

Yes, he did say something against Catholic preaching. Jesus Christ for f**k sake. If you don’t see it, you’re not a Catholic.

There is no way you are Catholic and you didn’t see that.

I wish non-Catholics would stop commenting on this thread because they are so incredibly ignorant. It’s almost impossible to speak to them about the subject.

I am the Catholic you are calling a non-Catholic. If you are Catholic, I question your Catholic education as you don't seem to understand the wide latitude the Church gives for personal views on matters that are not core doctrine. I did think the guy almost verged into Calvinism at one point, which I thought was questionable.

DP. I don’t know the canon definition of heresy but he certainly said a lot of stuff that seems like it could warrant some kind of censure. Attacking priests. Attacking Humanae Vitae. Suggesting women’s vocation is to their husband and not god. Going against multiple Church pronouncements that the Jews are not guilty of the crucifixion.

Good that you prefaced this by saying you do not know the definition of heresy. Here's a good plain English article: https://www.catholicnh.org/assets/Documents/Worship/Our-Faith/Understanding/Heresy.pdf

Some examples cited of what is not heresy--the annulment point is a particularly apt comparison for what the guy said about NFP: "To insist, as some do, that the Eucharist must always be received by everyone under the forms of both bread and wine, that baptism must be done by full immersion, or that the Church should not grant annulments is not heretical. For sure, such propositions contradict established Church positions, but they do not rise to the level of heresy because they do not touch the core of Catholic faith."

[Anonymous]

Hopefully next season, a seething male feminist linebacker will rush the kick and late-hit Butker, laying him out. Then stand over him pointing down "THAT'S for saying women being wives & mothers is better than entering the work force!”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school?

oh my

except the Catholic nuns disagree with him. I guess they aren't real Catholics.

Eh. They are all real Catholics. There are some basic principles and doctrine Catholics are supposed to agree with (or at least not publicly dissent from), but open debate on the rest is fine.

So the quip about a "Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school" can be debated since not all real Catholics agree with him.

Sure. Debating what he said is fair game. But it goes too far to say someone is not a real Catholic because he does not have the same views as you on matters that are not core required beliefs.

I would have changed what was said above to "Catholic dude saying his Catholic thing, at Catholic school"

You missed the part where he speaks against basic Catholic teachings. So yeah, the dude is a Catholic, but he’s similar to a Catholic that had an abortion For convenience , or got divorced, and hold them up as good Catholic teachings.

Which basic principles or doctrines did he speak against? Did he say anything contrary to the Nicene Creed? Did he publicly doubt the concept of original sin or sin itself? Did he question the sacraments or the authority of the Pope? Did he speak out against transubstantiation?

NFP and what roles women should play or not in the world simply are not basic doctrine. Having very non-mainstream views on those things are not a sin, but an abortion of convenience is. And he did not present his kooky takes as Catholic teaching, but his views.

Yes, he did say something against Catholic preaching. Jesus Christ for f**k sake. If you don’t see it, you’re not a Catholic.

There is no way you are Catholic and you didn’t see that.

I wish non-Catholics would stop commenting on this thread because they are so incredibly ignorant. It’s almost impossible to speak to them about the subject.

I'm a catholic, catholic educated, married catholic, children baptized catholic catholic. He said catholic things. Nothing he said was outside of mainstream catholic teachings.

Thanks for chiming in, handmaid.

You never see these same high emotions raised when rich homosexuals buy a baby from a brood human.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school?

oh my

except the Catholic nuns disagree with him. I guess they aren't real Catholics.

Eh. They are all real Catholics. There are some basic principles and doctrine Catholics are supposed to agree with (or at least not publicly dissent from), but open debate on the rest is fine.

So the quip about a "Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school" can be debated since not all real Catholics agree with him.

Sure. Debating what he said is fair game. But it goes too far to say someone is not a real Catholic because he does not have the same views as you on matters that are not core required beliefs.

I would have changed what was said above to "Catholic dude saying his Catholic thing, at Catholic school"

You missed the part where he speaks against basic Catholic teachings. So yeah, the dude is a Catholic, but he’s similar to a Catholic that had an abortion For convenience , or got divorced, and hold them up as good Catholic teachings.

Which basic principles or doctrines did he speak against? Did he say anything contrary to the Nicene Creed? Did he publicly doubt the concept of original sin or sin itself? Did he question the sacraments or the authority of the Pope? Did he speak out against transubstantiation?

NFP and what roles women should play or not in the world simply are not basic doctrine. Having very non-mainstream views on those things are not a sin, but an abortion of convenience is. And he did not present his kooky takes as Catholic teaching, but his views.

Yes, he did say something against Catholic preaching. Jesus Christ for f**k sake. If you don’t see it, you’re not a Catholic.

There is no way you are Catholic and you didn’t see that.

I wish non-Catholics would stop commenting on this thread because they are so incredibly ignorant. It’s almost impossible to speak to them about the subject.

I am the Catholic you are calling a non-Catholic. If you are Catholic, I question your Catholic education as you don't seem to understand the wide latitude the Church gives for personal views on matters that are not core doctrine. I did think the guy almost verged into Calvinism at one point, which I thought was questionable.

DP. I don’t know the canon definition of heresy but he certainly said a lot of stuff that seems like it could warrant some kind of censure. Attacking priests. Attacking Humanae Vitae. Suggesting women’s vocation is to their husband and not god. Going against multiple Church pronouncements that the Jews are not guilty of the crucifixion.

Good that you prefaced this by saying you do not know the definition of heresy. Here's a good plain English article: https://www.catholicnh.org/assets/Documents/Worship/Our-Faith/Understanding/Heresy.pdf

Some examples cited of what is not heresy--the annulment point is a particularly apt comparison for what the guy said about NFP: "To insist, as some do, that the Eucharist must always be received by everyone under the forms of both bread and wine, that baptism must be done by full immersion, or that the Church should not grant annulments is not heretical. For sure, such propositions contradict established Church positions, but they do not rise to the level of heresy because they do not touch the core of Catholic faith."

What about our highest calling is to serve husbands instead of God?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hopefully next season, a seething male feminist linebacker will rush the kick and late-hit Butker, laying him out. Then stand over him pointing down "THAT'S for saying women being wives & mothers is better than entering the work force!”

I mean in his speech, he said that men should lean into being masculine. So he at the very least should be able to take a tackle, Not a dirty one just a tackle. He’s never taken a tackle before Because kickers are built like women they’re not strong and muscular they shouldn’t be tackled.

But he’s all in and I’m happy to see him take a tackle

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school?

oh my

except the Catholic nuns disagree with him. I guess they aren't real Catholics.

Eh. They are all real Catholics. There are some basic principles and doctrine Catholics are supposed to agree with (or at least not publicly dissent from), but open debate on the rest is fine.

So the quip about a "Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school" can be debated since not all real Catholics agree with him.

Sure. Debating what he said is fair game. But it goes too far to say someone is not a real Catholic because he does not have the same views as you on matters that are not core required beliefs.

I would have changed what was said above to "Catholic dude saying his Catholic thing, at Catholic school"

You missed the part where he speaks against basic Catholic teachings. So yeah, the dude is a Catholic, but he’s similar to a Catholic that had an abortion For convenience , or got divorced, and hold them up as good Catholic teachings.

Which basic principles or doctrines did he speak against? Did he say anything contrary to the Nicene Creed? Did he publicly doubt the concept of original sin or sin itself? Did he question the sacraments or the authority of the Pope? Did he speak out against transubstantiation?

NFP and what roles women should play or not in the world simply are not basic doctrine. Having very non-mainstream views on those things are not a sin, but an abortion of convenience is. And he did not present his kooky takes as Catholic teaching, but his views.

Yes, he did say something against Catholic preaching. Jesus Christ for f**k sake. If you don’t see it, you’re not a Catholic.

There is no way you are Catholic and you didn’t see that.

I wish non-Catholics would stop commenting on this thread because they are so incredibly ignorant. It’s almost impossible to speak to them about the subject.

I'm a catholic, catholic educated, married catholic, children baptized catholic catholic. He said catholic things. Nothing he said was outside of mainstream catholic teachings.

Thanks for chiming in, handmaid.

You never see these same high emotions raised when rich homosexuals buy a baby from a brood human.

That’s because that never happens. Just like Jews didn’t kill Jesus The Romans did

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school?

oh my

except the Catholic nuns disagree with him. I guess they aren't real Catholics.

Eh. They are all real Catholics. There are some basic principles and doctrine Catholics are supposed to agree with (or at least not publicly dissent from), but open debate on the rest is fine.

So the quip about a "Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school" can be debated since not all real Catholics agree with him.

Sure. Debating what he said is fair game. But it goes too far to say someone is not a real Catholic because he does not have the same views as you on matters that are not core required beliefs.

I would have changed what was said above to "Catholic dude saying his Catholic thing, at Catholic school"

You missed the part where he speaks against basic Catholic teachings. So yeah, the dude is a Catholic, but he’s similar to a Catholic that had an abortion For convenience , or got divorced, and hold them up as good Catholic teachings.

Which basic principles or doctrines did he speak against? Did he say anything contrary to the Nicene Creed? Did he publicly doubt the concept of original sin or sin itself? Did he question the sacraments or the authority of the Pope? Did he speak out against transubstantiation?

NFP and what roles women should play or not in the world simply are not basic doctrine. Having very non-mainstream views on those things are not a sin, but an abortion of convenience is. And he did not present his kooky takes as Catholic teaching, but his views.

Yes, he did say something against Catholic preaching. Jesus Christ for f**k sake. If you don’t see it, you’re not a Catholic.

There is no way you are Catholic and you didn’t see that.

I wish non-Catholics would stop commenting on this thread because they are so incredibly ignorant. It’s almost impossible to speak to them about the subject.

I am the Catholic you are calling a non-Catholic. If you are Catholic, I question your Catholic education as you don't seem to understand the wide latitude the Church gives for personal views on matters that are not core doctrine. I did think the guy almost verged into Calvinism at one point, which I thought was questionable.

DP. I don’t know the canon definition of heresy but he certainly said a lot of stuff that seems like it could warrant some kind of censure. Attacking priests. Attacking Humanae Vitae. Suggesting women’s vocation is to their husband and not god. Going against multiple Church pronouncements that the Jews are not guilty of the crucifixion.

Good that you prefaced this by saying you do not know the definition of heresy. Here's a good plain English article: https://www.catholicnh.org/assets/Documents/Worship/Our-Faith/Understanding/Heresy.pdf

Some examples cited of what is not heresy--the annulment point is a particularly apt comparison for what the guy said about NFP: "To insist, as some do, that the Eucharist must always be received by everyone under the forms of both bread and wine, that baptism must be done by full immersion, or that the Church should not grant annulments is not heretical. For sure, such propositions contradict established Church positions, but they do not rise to the level of heresy because they do not touch the core of Catholic faith."

What about our highest calling is to serve husbands instead of God?

I think this is the section of his speech you are referring to and he does not say that, nor, based on the speech as a whole, would I think he would say a women's highest calling is not to serve God but instead her husband. That would certainly be a contradiction of core Catholic beliefs:

"....how many of you are sitting here now about to cross the stage, and are thinking about all the promotions and titles you’re going to get in your career. Some of you may go on to lead successful careers in the world. But I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world. I can tell you that my beautiful wife Isabelle would be the first to say that her life truly started when she began living her vocation as a wife and as a mother."

I will say I had a very negative reaction to him dragging his wife into this, but from a Catholic point of view it is okay if distasteful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school?

oh my

except the Catholic nuns disagree with him. I guess they aren't real Catholics.

Eh. They are all real Catholics. There are some basic principles and doctrine Catholics are supposed to agree with (or at least not publicly dissent from), but open debate on the rest is fine.

So the quip about a "Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school" can be debated since not all real Catholics agree with him.

Sure. Debating what he said is fair game. But it goes too far to say someone is not a real Catholic because he does not have the same views as you on matters that are not core required beliefs.

I would have changed what was said above to "Catholic dude saying his Catholic thing, at Catholic school"

You missed the part where he speaks against basic Catholic teachings. So yeah, the dude is a Catholic, but he’s similar to a Catholic that had an abortion For convenience , or got divorced, and hold them up as good Catholic teachings.

Which basic principles or doctrines did he speak against? Did he say anything contrary to the Nicene Creed? Did he publicly doubt the concept of original sin or sin itself? Did he question the sacraments or the authority of the Pope? Did he speak out against transubstantiation?

NFP and what roles women should play or not in the world simply are not basic doctrine. Having very non-mainstream views on those things are not a sin, but an abortion of convenience is. And he did not present his kooky takes as Catholic teaching, but his views.

Yes, he did say something against Catholic preaching. Jesus Christ for f**k sake. If you don’t see it, you’re not a Catholic.

There is no way you are Catholic and you didn’t see that.

I wish non-Catholics would stop commenting on this thread because they are so incredibly ignorant. It’s almost impossible to speak to them about the subject.

I am the Catholic you are calling a non-Catholic. If you are Catholic, I question your Catholic education as you don't seem to understand the wide latitude the Church gives for personal views on matters that are not core doctrine. I did think the guy almost verged into Calvinism at one point, which I thought was questionable.

DP. I don’t know the canon definition of heresy but he certainly said a lot of stuff that seems like it could warrant some kind of censure. Attacking priests. Attacking Humanae Vitae. Suggesting women’s vocation is to their husband and not god. Going against multiple Church pronouncements that the Jews are not guilty of the crucifixion.

Good that you prefaced this by saying you do not know the definition of heresy. Here's a good plain English article: https://www.catholicnh.org/assets/Documents/Worship/Our-Faith/Understanding/Heresy.pdf

Some examples cited of what is not heresy--the annulment point is a particularly apt comparison for what the guy said about NFP: "To insist, as some do, that the Eucharist must always be received by everyone under the forms of both bread and wine, that baptism must be done by full immersion, or that the Church should not grant annulments is not heretical. For sure, such propositions contradict established Church positions, but they do not rise to the level of heresy because they do not touch the core of Catholic faith."

He’s deliberately teaching against Vatical II. The Pope says that “that to be Catholic one must adhere to the reforms brought about by the landmark event.”

https://www.ncronline.org/news/francis-no-concession-those-who-deny-vatican-ii-teachings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school?

oh my

except the Catholic nuns disagree with him. I guess they aren't real Catholics.

Eh. They are all real Catholics. There are some basic principles and doctrine Catholics are supposed to agree with (or at least not publicly dissent from), but open debate on the rest is fine.

So the quip about a "Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school" can be debated since not all real Catholics agree with him.

Sure. Debating what he said is fair game. But it goes too far to say someone is not a real Catholic because he does not have the same views as you on matters that are not core required beliefs.

I would have changed what was said above to "Catholic dude saying his Catholic thing, at Catholic school"

You missed the part where he speaks against basic Catholic teachings. So yeah, the dude is a Catholic, but he’s similar to a Catholic that had an abortion For convenience , or got divorced, and hold them up as good Catholic teachings.

Which basic principles or doctrines did he speak against? Did he say anything contrary to the Nicene Creed? Did he publicly doubt the concept of original sin or sin itself? Did he question the sacraments or the authority of the Pope? Did he speak out against transubstantiation?

NFP and what roles women should play or not in the world simply are not basic doctrine. Having very non-mainstream views on those things are not a sin, but an abortion of convenience is. And he did not present his kooky takes as Catholic teaching, but his views.

Yes, he did say something against Catholic preaching. Jesus Christ for f**k sake. If you don’t see it, you’re not a Catholic.

There is no way you are Catholic and you didn’t see that.

I wish non-Catholics would stop commenting on this thread because they are so incredibly ignorant. It’s almost impossible to speak to them about the subject.

I am the Catholic you are calling a non-Catholic. If you are Catholic, I question your Catholic education as you don't seem to understand the wide latitude the Church gives for personal views on matters that are not core doctrine. I did think the guy almost verged into Calvinism at one point, which I thought was questionable.

DP. I don’t know the canon definition of heresy but he certainly said a lot of stuff that seems like it could warrant some kind of censure. Attacking priests. Attacking Humanae Vitae. Suggesting women’s vocation is to their husband and not god. Going against multiple Church pronouncements that the Jews are not guilty of the crucifixion.

Good that you prefaced this by saying you do not know the definition of heresy. Here's a good plain English article: https://www.catholicnh.org/assets/Documents/Worship/Our-Faith/Understanding/Heresy.pdf

Some examples cited of what is not heresy--the annulment point is a particularly apt comparison for what the guy said about NFP: "To insist, as some do, that the Eucharist must always be received by everyone under the forms of both bread and wine, that baptism must be done by full immersion, or that the Church should not grant annulments is not heretical. For sure, such propositions contradict established Church positions, but they do not rise to the level of heresy because they do not touch the core of Catholic faith."

What about our highest calling is to serve husbands instead of God?

I think this is the section of his speech you are referring to and he does not say that, nor, based on the speech as a whole, would I think he would say a women's highest calling is not to serve God but instead her husband. That would certainly be a contradiction of core Catholic beliefs:

"....how many of you are sitting here now about to cross the stage, and are thinking about all the promotions and titles you’re going to get in your career. Some of you may go on to lead successful careers in the world. But I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world. I can tell you that my beautiful wife Isabelle would be the first to say that her life truly started when she began living her vocation as a wife and as a mother."

I will say I had a very negative reaction to him dragging his wife into this, but from a Catholic point of view it is okay if distasteful.

You can twist it any way you want but the Benedictine nuns disagree,

How about NFP is not natural?
Or priest/bishops can’t be friends with parishioners?


I can do this all day/nigt with the amount of heresy in this speech.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hopefully next season, a seething male feminist linebacker will rush the kick and late-hit Butker, laying him out. Then stand over him pointing down "THAT'S for saying women being wives & mothers is better than entering the work force!”

So dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school?

oh my

except the Catholic nuns disagree with him. I guess they aren't real Catholics.

Eh. They are all real Catholics. There are some basic principles and doctrine Catholics are supposed to agree with (or at least not publicly dissent from), but open debate on the rest is fine.

So the quip about a "Catholic dude saying catholic thing, at catholic school" can be debated since not all real Catholics agree with him.

Sure. Debating what he said is fair game. But it goes too far to say someone is not a real Catholic because he does not have the same views as you on matters that are not core required beliefs.

I would have changed what was said above to "Catholic dude saying his Catholic thing, at Catholic school"

You missed the part where he speaks against basic Catholic teachings. So yeah, the dude is a Catholic, but he’s similar to a Catholic that had an abortion For convenience , or got divorced, and hold them up as good Catholic teachings.

Which basic principles or doctrines did he speak against? Did he say anything contrary to the Nicene Creed? Did he publicly doubt the concept of original sin or sin itself? Did he question the sacraments or the authority of the Pope? Did he speak out against transubstantiation?

NFP and what roles women should play or not in the world simply are not basic doctrine. Having very non-mainstream views on those things are not a sin, but an abortion of convenience is. And he did not present his kooky takes as Catholic teaching, but his views.

Yes, he did say something against Catholic preaching. Jesus Christ for f**k sake. If you don’t see it, you’re not a Catholic.

There is no way you are Catholic and you didn’t see that.

I wish non-Catholics would stop commenting on this thread because they are so incredibly ignorant. It’s almost impossible to speak to them about the subject.

I am the Catholic you are calling a non-Catholic. If you are Catholic, I question your Catholic education as you don't seem to understand the wide latitude the Church gives for personal views on matters that are not core doctrine. I did think the guy almost verged into Calvinism at one point, which I thought was questionable.

DP. I don’t know the canon definition of heresy but he certainly said a lot of stuff that seems like it could warrant some kind of censure. Attacking priests. Attacking Humanae Vitae. Suggesting women’s vocation is to their husband and not god. Going against multiple Church pronouncements that the Jews are not guilty of the crucifixion.

Good that you prefaced this by saying you do not know the definition of heresy. Here's a good plain English article: https://www.catholicnh.org/assets/Documents/Worship/Our-Faith/Understanding/Heresy.pdf

Some examples cited of what is not heresy--the annulment point is a particularly apt comparison for what the guy said about NFP: "To insist, as some do, that the Eucharist must always be received by everyone under the forms of both bread and wine, that baptism must be done by full immersion, or that the Church should not grant annulments is not heretical. For sure, such propositions contradict established Church positions, but they do not rise to the level of heresy because they do not touch the core of Catholic faith."

He’s deliberately teaching against Vatical II. The Pope says that “that to be Catholic one must adhere to the reforms brought about by the landmark event.”

https://www.ncronline.org/news/francis-no-concession-those-who-deny-vatican-ii-teachings

What did he say that was contrary to Vatican II? Francis himself has permitted traditional Latin masses, so I am guessing that is not it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why do you folks always put Bill Maher out there as if he's someone to listen to? Really, I'd like to know why anyone cares about what Bill Maher says. What authority does he have for me to care about his opinion?

I'm sure you tout John Oliver as "someone to listen to," amirite? How about Rachel Maddow? Yep, thought so.