Robert Barron | – Overcoming Extremism in the Church: Clerically Speaking Podcast (Part 2)


Friends, in this second video clip from the Clerically Speaking Podcast with Fr. Harrison Ayre and Fr. Anthony Sciarappa, our discussion centers on the theology of the Church, or ecclesiology. I express my concerns regarding the abuse scandal, the phenomenon of disregarding ecumenical councils, and the tendency to downplay the role of evangelism in our ecclesiology. My recommendation for moving forward in our mission is to read closely the documents of Vatican II, and to read them in community and with charity.

Listen to the Clerically Speaking Podcast here: [support us]

———VIDEO LINKS———

Bishop Barron on Vatican II: [support us]
Bishop Barron on Social Media and the Catholic Culture of Contempt: [support us]
Bishop Barron on Inside the Life of a Priest: Clerically Speaking Podcast (Part 1): [support us]

———WATCH———

Subscribe to this Channel: [support us]
Word on Fire Institute Channel: [support us]
Word on Fire en Español Channel: [support us]

———WORD ON FIRE———

Word on Fire: [support us]
Word on Fire Institute: [support us]
FREE Daily Gospel Reflections (English or Español): [support us]

———SOCIAL MEDIA———

Bishop Barron Instagram: [support us]
Bishop Barron Facebook: [support us]
Bishop Barron Twitter: [support us]

Word on Fire Instagram: [support us]
Word on Fire Facebook: [support us]
Word on Fire Twitter: [support us]

Word on Fire en Español Instagram: [support us]
Word on Fire en Español Facebook: [support us]
Word on Fire en Español Twitter: [support us]

———SUPPORT WORD ON FIRE———

Donate: [support us]
Word on Fire Store: [support us]
Pray: [support us]

About The Author

Bishop Robert Barron These are brief and insightful commentaries on faith and culture by Catholic theologian and author Bishop Robert Barron. The videos complement his weekly sermons posted and podcasted at WordOnFire.org.

Comment (49)

  1. One could argue that the Church entangled itself within it's own dogmatism (including 'infallibility', making it hard to explain why a former doctrine or ritual is less valid than a later).

    Admitting to the historicity of the Church, partially being more Roman than Christian and erring at many instances – while correcting itself at others – would help to navigate through the Gordian Knot of modernization and globalization and their respective dramatic, structural changes in societies.

    If one council doesn't suffice – e.g. in regard to bring back the Protestants or the Orthodox, lost during the Reformation and the Schism – while reaching out to decolonized communities, maybe another does?

    If the 1962 mass wasn't superficial , let people have it, once a month if they ask for it (as it is already tolerated).
    When the 'Grey Order' of the Catholic Youth Movement was still debating liturgy , Willi Graf was already sentenced to death for speaking out against genocide , commited by the German Army in Russia.

    (February 22nd 1943 – Execution of Hans and Sophie Scholl)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISZl3iLRjMA

    Vatican II may have not achieved the revitalization of mass, it intended, but these aren't really the questions of our time that challenge Christians.

    https://www.americamagazine.org/arts-culture/2019/11/14/review-why-did-so-many-catholics-leave-after-vatican-ii

  2. God bless you Bishop!
    I may have never known "The Lamb Who takes away the sins of the world" if were not for Vatican II. Simply because I don't speak Latin. But since Vatican II, I now have the mysteries conveyed to me in my language, and now the Church has given me opportunity to participate and acknowledge these mysteries which otherwise I may have missed or have been ignorant due to the language barrier.
    I can not thank the Vatican II council enough! For the Lamb saved me!

  3. The jellyfish laity and clergy should just admit there was a church before V2 and the crazy stupid trads should just admit that this is the same church after V2. There is one church.
    As for ambiguity. Let us eliminate that. Because however wonderful we feel about lyrical essays, if it has caused one soul to be lost, it was not worth it.
    Our Lord will judge perfectly in the end. May the wicked hypocrites whoever they are be ashamed at Our Lord's righteous judgement.

  4. The whole problem is the overestimation of the importance of the individual by the individual. There are tons of people demanding that things ought to be the way they want it, and they claim it to be a wish for "clarification". There is a huge lack of humility, and this problem eerily resembles the maladies of modern western society. God bless you, Bishop Barron!

  5. The fertility goddess of the Andes Pachamama. Why was that taken into the Vatican with the permission of Francis? 'Thou Shalt not Have False gods before me'. Why did Francis visit a mosque? islam wasn't created until 700 plus years after Catholicism. Why did Francis pose with obama smiling broadly for photographs and purposely looking grim when having photo with President Trump? After all it was President Trump who put Jesus Christ back into prominence within the White-House after obama dispensed of Him. And why does Francis favour such a person as obama while he and his party advocate the murder of full-term babies in the womb….Abortion? Much has since changed within our Faith since Vatican 11 Homosexuality being heralded by Clergy. You obviously are not aware of these obvious misdemeanours or you choose to hide these facts.

  6. Bishop Barron, Thank you for the many lectures and intellectual discourses you provide as a shepherd of the Church to those thirsting for leadership and wisdom from the hierarchy of which you are a part by the fact you are a bishop. I cannot help but notice, you speak very passionately about this topic and emphasize your "impatience for Catholics" who feel that Vatican II Council has brought about more problems than good for The Church in their individual parishes, possibly due to poor implementation or possibly because it did not answer a problem that was going on in the Westernized parts of the Church. The problem of the west is that culture is trying to overtake it and distort the foundational precepts of the Church. And I agree it may have expanded the Church into areas of Africa and Asia that before were very closed to a liturgy/church that was in a foreign language and culture they could not or refused to assimilate to.
    However, I have never heard you speak out with such passion against those who would water down the faith to a lukewarmness that is prevalent in modern western culture. I speak specifically of Catholics, especially those of our leaders in American government, who profess to be Catholic but hold beliefs contrary to Catholic dogma concerning abortion, the importance of the Mass, the sanctity of marriage between man and woman, et cetera. I know you have covered these in prior talks but in those discourses you have always shown compassion and openness to discourse and kindness and not the rebuking tone you have taken in this session.
    We have not lived through the pedophilia scandals, those are very much on going as the Church in North America continues to hide the investigative reports concerning Bishops and Cardinals who covered up for others and participated in the scandals themselves. Until all are called to answer for their complicity in the scandals we will continue to suffer the ramifications of them.
    We are going through a de facto schism in the Church currently, perhaps that is why there are so many who are leaving the Catholic Church because why would I go to a restaurant that does not feed me or is feeding me from the trash? Ecumenism is turning into a bowing to culture as opposed to emphasized the Trueness and centrality of the Catholic Church in the redemption of man through Christ. There is an attack on the values of Catholics. One example being seen is the embrace of open borders and global warming being more important that the sanctity of life. If a church turns a blind eye to Catholics endorsing abortion and hides those complicit in pedophilia but rebukes those who want national sovereignty and free markets then why should I care to be a part of that church?

  7. Dear Bishop Barron:

    It is a paradox that a bishop has CERO PATIENCE with some of the faithful on the issue of Vatican II but most bishops have a LOT OF PATIENCE with heretics of all sorts (within and without the Church).

    Be patient.

    And let's reject both fallacies ('post hoc ergo propter hoc', and 'single causality') but with due respect for intelligent questioning of aspects of the whole phenomenon and event. Ratzinger was critical of some aspects of Vatican II. Many faithful have their legitimate views on aspects of different Councils: there are critics of aspects of the Council of Trent (without denying the dogmatic definitions) and of Vatican I, etc. So this Vatican II Council should be respected in the same way: distinguishing different levels of teaching, the extra-doctrinal events during, within, and after the Council, etc.

    BUT above all, recover your patience.

    It is abnormal for Bishops to be so patient with extreme progressive heretics, and then get so intolerant with traditionalists, who are better in doctrine and in practice. To equate traditionalists to protestants is simply wrong. Do not dismiss every sort of judgment to plain 'private judgment' (this fallacy is a form of clericalism, a way to shut up the mouth of critical laity: "Father knows better, boy").

    By the way: I accept Vatican II and a hermeneutic of reform and continuity (Pope Benedict's 2005 Christmas Adress), but at the same time, I have great respect and charity towards traditionalists who have denounced most of the abuses in the last 60 years (covered up by the Hierarchy).

    You also are unfair when getting angry because other Catholics assess critically the abuses committed within the Council and after it and in the name of it.

    You yourself speak about the Church that existed before the Council in a despective manner, which is also unfair. But if someone is allowed to criticize the Church of the first half of the XXth Century and to hope for her reform in a way that departed from Trent (let's say, less clerical, with less Latin, with different liturgy, etc.), then any catholic must be allowed to criticize the Church of the present day in her non-dogmatic elements, and to hope for her reform in a way that departs from some aspects of Vatican II. "Cum Petro et sub Petro", of course, but with all the freedom that both the Church and the State recognize to everybody, without fear of angry bishops using all their power to silence some faithful (at the same time, the most radical progressives are freely moving around).

    Be patient, as we, simple Faithfull, have to be patient with our Bishops.

    God bless you!

  8. I've quite often wondered what Bishops actually do these days. Over the past several decades, so many have fallen away from the faith that you would think if the Bishops really are successors of the apostles, then they would be using their influence and status to try and reverse this decline. For instance, by visiting the schools and churches within their diocese, preaching the gospel to parents, especially about hell being real. For the laity, they could ask fallen away family members and loved ones to attend a presentation at church given by the Bishop. Have they become embarrassed about what our faith actually teaches? We need Bishops who aren't afraid to put themselves in the firing line, those who are more concerned with the fate of peoples souls rather than the maintenance of the cathedral.

  9. Excellent commentary by Bishop Barron in the environment of all the nut jobs on YouTube right now. He is a clear reasonable accurate voice on the Church. Bishop Barron is light years ahead of some of these guys who are ecclesiastical anarchists.

  10. St. Benedict lived in a cave instead of attending his local Mass. Why? Perhaps some Catholics are experiencing something similar to what St. Benedict did. Perhaps their choice to return to the Latin Mass and a more traditional Catholicism isn’t just arrogance, but a call from God.

  11. WHO are the Extremists? A Pope who writes an encyclical 123 pages long that includes the name "Jesus" twice — or the traditional Catholics who look up and ask "How could that happen?" Or a Pope who writes 123 pages addressed, in truth, to the secular world instead of really being addressed to Catholics? Or a bishop who teaches that Catholicism and Jesus are merely a privileged path to Heaven, when Jesus himself taught that He was the only way? Objecting to that nonsense makes me an extremist? The Apostles were extremists, weren't they?

  12. I am a 75 year old Australian Catholic woman who was present at Mass on the very day the Priest turned to face the congregation. I loved it that as a whole community were were praying in English. I believe we were luckier in Australia that Vatican II was actually taught well and we loved the whole idea of being a more alive more responsible more educated and more 'legitimate' part of the Church. Why is it that a group of young lay members of the Church, specially in the USA, have taken up the cause against Vatican II in ways very rarely heard here?

  13. Auctorem Fidei, a bull of Pius VI, dated Aug. 28, 1794, condemning the errors of the Synod of Pistoia, decreed: "33.The proposition of the synod by which it shows itself eager to remove the cause through which, in part, there has been induced a forgetfulness of the principles relating to the order of the liturgy, *by recalling it (the liturgy) to a greater simplicity of rites, by expressing it in the vernacular language, by
    uttering it in a loud voice"* ; as if the present order of the liturgy, received and approved by the Church,had emanated in some part from the forgetfulness of the principles by which it should be regulated,—rash, offensive to pious ears, insulting to the Church, favorable to the charges of heretics against it."

    https://hymnsandchants.com/Texts/Church/Papal/Constitutions/AuctoremFideiEnglish.pdf
    http://www.clerus.org/bibliaclerusonline/en/dxi.htm

  14. Bishop Robert Robert Barron, it is possible that you are off the true Way, or mistaking the Order of Priorities in regard to the Truth and "branches" of all sorts of philosophies, which the Truth can contain without any conflict. If these philosophies they are in the Light of the Truth and at the service of the Human's minds in the exaltation of the Truth. It is common practice for philosophers to instrumentalize the Sacred Scriptures /Jesus Christ Good News, in the dark meanders of some kind of human thinking/reasoning, admirable, but non important or necessary and most of the time heretic thoughts. The Perfection of Divine Revelation has been given to all of Us for the purpose to save our Soul to Eternal Life, as was gain for us by Jesus Christ by His sacrifice on the Cross. If the Son of God, a Man God, has teach us, in a super abundant way of Grace and Sacraments, in simple pedagogy, using Parables and Stories how to reach the Kingdom of God, what is the purpose of these human hyperbolic treatise of speculative philosophies, sophisms needed for? (To try to prove that God is wrong?…Eve is enough…) In simple logic, if such type of thinking and convoluted linguistics were necessary, do we/you think Christ will had not the opportunity to instruct us? Indeed once He did it with the Doctors of the Temple of Jerusalem, calling them: White Sepulchers and a Race of Vipers. To this and for all of Us: If we are not innocent and simple as these children YOU will not enter the Kingdom of God. Our Saints and Martyrs amply testify to that Truth. We are off tracks (Pope Francis) and driven by false prophets, (of course not all) Masonry from within the Church and from the secular World, following the prophecies: but first the Great Apostasy, now in act. (Saint Paul Apostle). At the due time we will be answering, in Judgment, how we have taken care of God's Vineyard: no one excluded. Regard , respectfully, Paul Candiago (candiago.p@bmts.com)

  15. Start by removing worshiping Mary, saints, etc. Follow that by doing away with infant baptism and instituting full emersion baptism. Remove the Pope's power, then we can have a conversation. You guys are so wrong.

  16. Do we really have the time to complain about how 53 year old document. Yes perhaps, but let’s adjust to today’s world. Pandemic, Climate change mass migrations; corruption in the church; etc. The world has changed since V II , there is a resurgence in the extraordinary form of the mass . People are curious research the past and crave devotion and piety which has no place or time in today’s society. It does in your heart though leading you to think if only? Breathe and exhale God’s name and you will see, there is space for both as V II has allowed. As always Bishop B displays the truth we cannot question this . Move on there is room for all/ both / we are the Church, we follow the trinity , we accept what we have and sculpt our own possibilities. Be kind Love one another. Ave Maria/ truth is we miss the great Pope. Karol Wojtla . Natural he is the Greatest Pontiff in modern times…

  17. Jacques Maritain correctly saw that the Council had misfired. So did the future popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI. There have been many councils in Church history that have failed. This because it was taken control of by revolutionary forces that initiated changes that have led to the virtual collapse of Christianity in western Europe. Why not admit the failures?

  18. where are the WOMEN in all of this re-reading and analysing, Bishop Barron? . Are we not 'the church' as well. What we need is a ecumenical council on the Church and WOMEN and including this history; Mistakes and HEALING

  19. I have sat through countless hours of your videos, seen you speak in person and read three of your books. I have never heard you get so worked up about anything as you do against the so called Rad Trads. Not the sex abuse scandal, abortion, the Vatican bank scandal, heretical priests, etc. 

    Vatican II certainly was a legitimate Council and carries with it all the weight as any other council. But you said it yourself, the expanded room for interpretation opened a wide door, much like the way to perdition, or in this case protestantism. I'll take the un-hunky-dory pre vatican II church.

  20. Bishop Barron got it so right. Not because one horrible thing happens in one place, it must be logically happening everywhere. Indeed, we can't deny how the Euro-American Church is experiencing great problems and concern is warranted, but we should know that Catholicism has long gone beyond the geographical and cultural borders of the West. The problems in the West should not be the lens with which they view the global Church.

  21. We are allowed to condemn the councils, especially if they teach us to sin, in any way whatsoever. No matter if the bishops are under the guidence of the pope, if any element of it teaches anyone at all to sin, the whole of the council gets declared by the laity to be completely heretical and it gets thrown out- same with the administration in Heaven as well, when, not if that happens.

  22. Every one therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven.

    33But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven.

    34Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword.

    35For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

    36And as a man's enemies shall be they of his own household.

    37He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me.

    38And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me.

    Wow, that guy was a real extremist, get him outta here.

  23. I remember when Vatican II came out. It was not given to the laity, nor was it discussed by the Priests so that we all
    understood the theology and inclusion within the Parish church. Like many other aspects of the church, Vatican II was only for the clergy.
    As the laity began to see the changes within their parish there was confusion, rebellion and rumors. True or not true, how can the clergy say St. Christopher is no longer a Saint! Those that held strongly to the doctrine of the church felt
    as if there was no longer a cornerstone.
    Anger arose and many left the church or
    remained but believed whatever they wished. Because nothing was grounded,
    Parishioners, began to wonder.
    I appreciate Bp. Barron explaining how this decisions were made and somewhat what they meant for the entire church. 60+ years later I have a
    desire to read the documents in their entirety. Thank you Bp. Barron.

LEAVE YOUR COMMENT