Please see an updated note to this show, beneath the description below

When we strip Catholic character from the faith, we wind up with a political party rather than a religion. I’ll be talking about the removal of statues from a California public school, and responding to Dennis Prager’s wacky thoughts about the death penalty and his inability to understand a pro-life philosophy that doesn’t contradict itself.

UPDATE

Hey fans. I feel some listeners may have gotten some wrong ideas from this episode, and that’s my fault. I was probably not very clear. So, to be clear, Vericast Network isn’t going away just yet (and it may not go away at all). I just need to slow down for a while and see where God leads me.  I’ll be doing fewer shows but I’m not going dark.

Also, I have been very moved and heartened by your feedback, and hearing what the work of this apostolate has done for you. Thank you for it. It certainly has given me more to think about. Maybe God is speaking through you guys.

By the way it still costs a few hundred bucks a month to keep the site and file server alive, and we’re still serving up past episodes to the global public even though I’m doing fewer new shows.  So if you are one of our donors/supporters, I hope you continue with your support for a little while so that I don’t have to cover the expenses on my own, because I really can’t afford to do that.  Know that your continued support is getting our body of work to others, which is especially important now since YouTube has been cracking down on our “offensive” content lately.  Luckily our distribution system doesn’t rely on youtube, so we’re still serving up audio episodes to our distribution channels (iTunes, etc.). Thank God! And thank you all!

-Tim

SHARE
  • Gabriel Dannemiller

    Perhaps it’s only me, but this just made my day a bit more disappointing. This was not at all what I expected.

    I knew you were on hiatus Tim and I went to Cal to see if he knew any more than we did. I prayed for you during your away time. I wish there could have been some sort of update from you before this. But that’s water under the bridge.

    I’m really sad to hear that essentially, I won’t get to hear Credo anymore (which was excellent) and that I cannot expect to hear Vericast media on the regular anymore. I know you have a life outside of here but I truly believe you had something special going – a fire – and I’m left feeling that that is now gone. I may be the only one who feels that way, but I’m okay with that.

    Additionally, here in your first episode back, you state something that I am very confident you are incorrect on. The Church’s teaching on the death penalty is what it always has been traditionally – that it can be appealed to in certain cases. Even though JPII said it is “very rare, if not practically non-existent” he did not say that is against Church teaching (and you know JPII was a man of careful wording). I heard some very interesting arguments for it on EWTN radio just a week or so ago as well. Perhaps you might look into that. I’m not an advocate for killing those that do wrong, but I’ll stand by the teaching of the Church to the day I die. The wording of the Catechism is 2267: “The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude…”; I think that is very clear.

    Not wanting to stop on a sour note, I’m glad you’re alright and it was great to hear your voice again on the airwaves.

    • tjhaines

      I’m sorry that you’re disappointed. But it may not be the end of the road. Let’s see what the Holy Spirit wants.

      “Even though JPII said it is “very rare, if not practically non-existent” he did not say that is against Church teaching”

      He didn’t say it’s against Church teaching, because that isn’t the premise of the topic. He went out of his way to highlight how exceptional it is for the death penalty to be permissible, because it mustn’t be thought of as being an exception to the principal, but rather an application of the principal of human life/dignity. Executing a prisoner when it is the only way to protect the population is protection of the lives of the populous. I feel some Catholics regard this as an exception to the principal and say “It’s sometimes okay to execute a murderer”. That statement says something wholly different from what the Church says.

  • cheeriosinmypocket

    Hey Brother! Great to hear you! You are in our nightly family rosary prayer basket, and you, Vericast and all Vericats are in my morning intercessory prayers. I’ve never had facebook or twitter but it sounds like a good decision to scale back on some things.

    One blessing I’ve been focused on this summer is a very little book titled, “Trustful Surrender to Divine Providence.” Here are 2 quotes: “Nothing happens in the universe without God willing and allowing it (with the exception of sin). So, nothing occurs by chance in the whole course of our lives’.” And, “In short, the purpose for which God acts is a high and holy one, His own glory and the good of His creatures…He seeks to make them all perfect by drawing them towards Him and making them sharers in His divinity as far as they are capable. But because of the close ties He has established with us by the union of our nature with His in the person of His Son, we in a still more special manner are the object of His benevolence and tender care. A glove is not more fitted to a hand or a sword to a scabbard than what He does and ordains in us and for us is suited to our strength and capabilities, so that everything may serve to our advantage and perfection if we but cooperate with the designs of His providence.”

    You are seeking Him and are doing His will. Good work, Tim!

    God bless you and keep you,
    Mariann/catholicchild

    • tjhaines

      Thanks for your support and helpful wisdom. You were one of the people I occasionally thought of during my break. We go way back at this point, do we’re practically best friends lol. I appreciate what you bring to the comments and especially appreciate what you offer me personally through them. I mean that.
      I may not be disappearing. Maybe this wasn’t clear. I’ll still be doing some shows and things, and see where the Holy Spirit leads me. Please continue to pray for me. God be with you!

  • AflowerofStTherese

    I feel you Tim! <3

    I haven't gone through the whole recording yet, only the personal part.
    That's part of the public ministry. You will at one point feel the burn, most especially when your personal life gets in the way.

    God uses our trials to mold us in the way he sees perfect.
    1. Trust in him.
    2. Pray and seek refuge with Our Lady. Pray..pick up a devotion. Especially during those moments when you feel you're at it alone.

    I work in a big parish so I know what it means to be so overwhelmed by the pressure , criticisms and demands of the people you are serving. IT's in no way compared to vericast, but it's there. NO gratitude, and most challenging at times when I know I am doing something that is touching people's live and paving way for the second coming. So please, just pray and hang in there.
    YOu have to surround yourself with people with the same goals and interest.
    I'm sorry if I'm one of the crazies that overwhelms you here. But I am very grateful for the work that you do, and a grateful beneficiary as well.

    God Bless you Tim, I promise you a rosary per day. And God bless your audience as well.

  • Debby Dee

    You have my support and prayers, dear Tim! What ever degree you avail yourself through Vericast is welcomed and a blessing. I once wrote to you that it was a happy accident that I stumbled upon Vericast and was filled with such joy to have found the show which remains true to this very day. It was good to hear your voice again. You make a difference and I am glad to be apart of the Vericast family. May Our Lady’s Mantle surround you, God’s blessings be with you, and peace….peace be with you my friend.

    • tjhaines

      Thanks for your support and prayers and thanks for the nice things you said here, and on the last episode of the dialogue during the break. It was very heartwarming for me. As I said to catholicchild, “I may not be disappearing. Maybe this wasn’t clear. I’ll still be doing some shows and things, and see where the Holy Spirit leads me”.
      I may just gear things down and not do as much. Or I may just fade into the sunset. The only thing that’s certain is I won’t be doing as much as I had been doing in the past. Thanks again for your prayers and support. God bless and be with you Debby

  • Matt

    Dear Tim,

    Thanks for having the courage to be vulnerable with your audience and for opening up about what you’ve been going through. I knew Vericast was a big part of it (not the only part), because it had been showing in your content and demeanor for a while.

    Although this tug of war continues within you and it’s continuing to pull you back and forth both inside and out, as we saw on this episode, you’ve chosen the path of surrender and have the wisdom to know God is leading you through what you need to go through at this time in your walk with Him.

    My personality is similar to yours in ‘ways’, much different in other ways. I can and do emphasise with your struggles with regards to running the Vericast Network and can honestly say I couldn’t do it, not at this stage anyway. It is important you take better care of maintaining a healthy balance that serves you moving forward.

    One suggestion that comes to mind is scheduling a full 12 weeks off a year, 6 weeks around Christmas and 6 weeks around Easter, and to only commit to one show a week/fortnight in the interim, with other occasional pieces when spontaneously promoted to on rare occasions, like a random blog post or short recording.

    Not all friction is “mean spirited”, Tim. Please take a moment to meditate upon this Proverb:

    Proverbs 27:17 (DRA)

    17 Iron sharpeneth iron, so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.

    Being ‘comfortable’ with friction is a virtue of the Faith.

    When we butt heads as Catholics we are challenging ourselves to dig deeper into our understanding, an understanding that should always be deepening and never stagnating.

    Remember what Cardinal Ratzinger himself affirmed, who is a Moral Theologian, by any Catholic standard:

    “Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia. (“Worthiness to Receive Communion – General Principles,” July 2004)” Cardinal Ratzinger

    The Catholic Faith does not and cannot change. Our understanding of a truth can deepen and our disciplines can adjust accordingly. However the essential underlying truth/principle of a Church dogma can never change. The death penalty was not abolished with the Catholic Church. It was exercised throughout all of Catholic Christendom when we had union between Church and State.

    To abolish and forbid the death penalty altogether today would be to ‘change’ an unchanging Old Covenant and New Covenant tradition. That doesn’t mean a State ‘must’ exercise the death penalty. That’s for each sovereign government to decide. It just means the option is there and nation states have a right to exercise it for the worst crimes (some of which aren’t even seen as crimes anymore we’ve become so dumbed down and stupefied through moral liberalism).

    This brings me to a final tip of the day, remember to carefully “pick your battles.” You’re causing unnecessary stress/friction for yourself when you slam Catholics for not sharing your views on the death penalty when they are not bound to share them by Magisterial authority.

    I understand this is confusing and I sympathise with Catholics who are confused about what is simply popular opinion (which changes) and what is binding by the Magisterium. I really do. It can be confusing because as you noted in this episode, we have fallen as a Church in so many ways in recent generations through the militant secularisation of our culture.

    By fallen, I’m talking about we the people, not God of course. The Catholic Church is the One True Church, full stop. God has not and will not abandon His Church or the faithful. We, being fallen human beings however, can slide in our practice and disciplines from the highest to the lowest among us, and we have been sliding for far too long now. God, help us! 😀

    I love you and appreciate you as a Catholic, a man and as the face and voice of Vericast.

    God bless you, brother.

    • maranatha

      P.S. Tim, I listened to the entire episode before posting my thoughts and an important one slipped the mind. If an obligation to your supporters is the sole reason you came back, that’s not enough. Your listeners have God, the Sacraments of the Faith, the Church, Our Lady, a local community, priests, books, etc, to support them in their walk with Christ.

      You have already given them as much as they’ve given you, probably more. I’ve personally read and heard a number of moving testimonies about you and your work.

      If you need to walk away from Vericast completely, there is nothing stopping you from returning should the Holy Spirit reignite that fire within you down the track.

      You’ve won souls to Christ through this work by His grace for His glory. If one soul was brought to Christ (or returned to Him) through the Vericast Network, the work you’ve done here is truly priceless. Who can put a human value on eternal salvation? No one.

      Those who truly support you and your well being, will support your decision to walk away. Just make sure you request your loyal listeners subscribe to an email list first so you have their details on record. That way if you ever decide to make a Michael Jordan style come back, you’ll already have a loyal fan base ready to go when you make the announcement, “I’m back.”

      When one door closes another one opens. If the time has come to bring Vericast to a close you can trust God will open another door for you (even if it’s purely a contemplative one). I understand your need for silence and solitude, and share it. Just be careful because that too has its own dangers and temptations if we aren’t careful.

      I wish you well Tim whatever you decide.

      Peace be with you.

      • tjhaines

        ” If an obligation to your supporters is the sole reason you came back, that’s not enough. Your listeners have God…etc”
        I don’t think you’re looking at this correctly. We all have God, the sacraments, etc. That’s obvious. But we all also rely on the people, agents, agencies and so on that sort of “fill in the gaps” for us and to accompany us in a personal way.
        As I said in the episode (I think), I also want to leave avenues open to the Holy Spirit. It isn’t JUST about the audience.

        • OurLordCometh

          It sounded like you were saying you were back purely out of a sense of obligation to the audience. I could’ve heard it wrong or misinterpreted your words.

          If your reasons are deeper than that, good for you. If a soul conviction has brought you back to us, rather than a sole sense of obligation to the fans, fantastic! 😀

          The message was written supportively. I wasn’t implying you have to do anything either way. I simply said, (in essence), the choice is yours and that guilt shouldn’t be what dictates your decision…

          • tjhaines

            “It sounded like you were saying you were back purely out of a sense of obligation to the audience.”
            I don’t think I said that, but it’s possible that I didn’t express my thought very effectively during the show, and that’s why you got that idea.

            “The message was written supportively. I wasn’t implying you have to do anything either way.”
            Oh I know! And you had some good ideas in there. I’m grateful to you.

            God be with you

    • tjhaines

      Thank you for the supportive and wise comment.
      I’m not a stranger to friction. But this is one of those topics that gets to me me, because people inflate this or that bit from the Catechism etc. and create practical doctrine out of it—Doctrine that conflicts with the principal. If human life is dignified then the death penalty is wrong. If the death penalty is ever not-wrong, then neither is abortion. Life is sacred and dignified or it is not. You have cases such as just wars where the protection of life unfortunately involves killing the enemy. You could think of it similarly here, where the death penalty may be permissible in the protection of the public. But that is not an exception to the principal, it’s the application of the principal. The way some Catholics understand it, or apply it, it becomes a new, and conflicting principal.

      • OurLordCometh

        Thanks for hitting me up with a reply Tim, I’ve missed our exchanges.

        Glad I was able to offer a few words of encouragement. I was merely piggy backing on the wisdom you already shared.

        As for capital punishment, I understand this is a sensitive topic for you. The thing is it’s a sensitive topic for ‘everyone.’ Supporting the death penalty, as I do without shame or hesitation, doesn’t mean I’m lusting for vengeance or wishing execution upon anyone, far from it.

        It’s the opposite actually. I , like you, have contemplated this subject deeply and listened to the arguments from both sides (in a Catholic context). Believe it or not, I was ‘against’ the death penalty for most of my life. My support for it was inspired by my conversion to Christianity believe it or not . True story 😀

        Your perspective and my perspective are very different on this one.

        To slam the death penalty outright would be to slam every saint/pope who has ever defended it throughout out history for valid, Biblical, Traditional and godly reasons.

        There is nothing ‘special’ about today’s prisons. There was nothing stopping Catholics from giving life imprisonment sentences when we had union between Church and State.

        Sacred Scripture and Tradition both make a strong case for the death penalty. The Holy Spirit through the Magisterium of the Church draws upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition when declaring dogmas. They are the two pillars of the Faith.

        It’s literally impossible for a pope to outright abolish the death penalty for this reason. It’ll never happen…ever. St. JPII was as strong opponent of the death penalty ‘personally’ as you are. He didn’t outright abolish it because he didn’t have the authority too.

        Any Catholic who thinks this could happen must also believe that a pope can declare Sundays are no longer a holy day if he so wished. Dogma can’t contradict Sacred Scripture and Tradition.

        I know I’m giving a superficial answer here. How much can one share in a short disqus message? In my view your logic is flawed. In your view my logic is flawed.

        The death penalty in a Catholic sense is not without mercy. The mere fact that a criminal convicted of it, no matter how heinous the crime, can choose baptism and/or Confession with a priest before the execution is carried out, ‘tempers’ the act of justice. The mere fact he/she is offered this opportunity to save his/her soul even when facing justice ‘tempers’ the act of justice.

        This life is a means to an end, heaven or hell., ultimately (no one stays in purgatory forever) Today we deify human dignity to the point where we are worshipping the creature more than the Creator (in my view), and disregarding the suffering of the victim for the physical preservation of the perpetrator. This anti-death penalty movement in my view is Masonic (in the wider culture), that doesn’t mean every person against it is inspired by Freemasonry. JPII dedicated his papacy to Mercy, it’s no surprise he chose to personally stand against capital punishment in a respectful manner i.e. without declaring what he could not. regarding it.

        What’s better for the person who committed the worst of crimes? A lifetime locked in a cage or a swift execution? If a man isn’t going to repent before God in the face of death, what chance does he have of repenting before he dies unexpectedly?

        Whose to say what approach will save more souls in the end? I believe the latter will. I also believe the latter honours God’s justice and mercy more faithfully, and that there is a much stronger argument for this approach to justice in Sacred Scripture and Tradition (for those severe crimes worthy of death), for the betterment of the victim/s, criminal and society.

        The thing is I’m not pushing you to agree with me. I’m simply asking that you respect our differences and acknowledge what Pope Benedict himself affirmed i.e. Catholics aren’t bound to disagree with the death penalty.

        Why divide on matters we aren’t dogmatically bound to agree upon? Why not simply respect a Catholics right to believe what the Church herself once had instituted as law (and has always allowed governments to implement as a right)? Vatican City, after she formally become a sovereign State, had the death penalty in her very own laws before it was removed in this softy, bleeding heart, effeminate and out of control ‘New Age’ era we find ourselves in today 😀

        I believe in the God who is perfect mercy and justice, and on rare occasions the death penalty is the most appropriate act of justice (as is giving that person the chance to redeem his/her soul before the sentence is carried out).

        But again, I’m not pushing you to agree with me. I’m solely asking that you respect the Catholics who disagree with your ‘personal’ convictions on this one.

        Love you brother! 🙂

      • OurLordCometh

        Tim, in the past I would’ve protested when you spammed a message. Henceforth I’l take the humble approach instead, respecting that this is your house and your rules, and you are giving your all here to the fans without expectation.

        Seeing your recent struggles has helped me to see how trivial my issues with (occasional) censorship was.

        On that note, you have my personal email address. If you’d like to discuss the valid arguments and examples I raised in that message, (feel free to fact check them first), hit me up with an email. I’d love to discuss this further with you, (simply because I love discussing Church teaching), although I’m sure both our minds are already made up on this one 😀

        In any case, be well.

        • tjhaines

          Spammed a message? What are you talking about? And what are you talking about “censorship”? I have banned all of TWO PEOPLE in the five years this site has been running. I have not censored you.
          A few years ago someone cancelled his subscription (back when we were doing that) and badmouthed me and the network all over the place, because he was so outraged over being “censored”. Turns out the mistake was his. He wasn’t censored, his comments weren’t deleted, and he wasn’t blocked. He realized it, and apologized, but never renewed his subscription or cleared the reputations he tarnished. Apparently he thought his comments were more valuable than my reputation.

          If I wanted to censor you, ban you, whatever….I’d just do that, without denying it. Having said that, I haven’t censored you, so get over it.

          • OurLordCometh

            I was polite and sincere. You absolutely have censored me on occasion in the past. I investigated it on numerous occasions to ensure that I was in fact being censored, and even contacted you privately regarding the matter.

            I was a bit pushy back then. This time I was simply surrendering to the censorship without protest, which turned out to be an issue on disqus’ end on this particular occasion. I had every reason to believe you had censored me based on these past thorough investigations.

            Tim, I NEVER respond to DEMANDS for an apology EVER nor do I ever demand one from others. It;s childish and self-entitled. I’d even call it a form of extortion. Sincere apologies come without such demands..If they don’t come, so be it. I haven’t got a list of “every person who I FEEL owes me an apology” for instance and have no interest whatsoever in keeping one.

            I didn’t demand an apology when expressing my frustration to you in the past regarding the comments that were spammed. What I did was express my frustration and protest the spamming (within reason) to get the message published. It’s not like I threatened you or anything. I did complain and sometimes repost the message only to have it spammed again within however many minutes or hours, it varied.

            Again, at the time I saw my pushiness regarding this as justified. Today, after seeing how much this kind of thing has been weighing on your soul, I’ve come to see that it affects you in ways I didn’t realise and wasn’t sensitive to. It’s now a trivial matter to me whether I’m censored or I’m not.

            “Thank you” for helping me grow in maturity in this regard.

            No, you won’t be getting the apology you have demanded, just a thank you. You do have my sincere respect, support and care.

            God bless you brother.

          • tjhaines

            “You absolutely have censored me on occasion in the past.”
            Again, if I wanted to censor you I wouldn’t sit here and deny having done it. You’re mistaken somehow. Just as you were mistaken this time.
            ” I investigated it on numerous occasions…”
            You’re not being censored, and I’ve asked you more than once to explain yourself whenever you make this same, old, tired allegation. You’ve never explained yourself. You didn’t explain yourself this time either. I had to “investigate” on my own…because I have nothing better to do with my life I guess.
            “Tim, I NEVER respond to DEMANDS for an apology EVER nor do I ever demand one from others”
            I wasn’t demanding an apology I was eliciting one, because I’m owed one. Whether an apology is demanded, invited, elicited or asked for, when it’s owed it’s owed.
            “…It;s childish and self-entitled.”
            Complaining about your comments being censored is childish and self-entitled. Nothing you, or I, or anyone else writes in comments is so important, so special, or so valuable as to generate this type of outrage that it may have been censored; and to such an degree that you have to bring it up almost every time you write a comment or an email. If you don’t want to apologize, then don’t. We’re all friends here. I don’t care if I get an apology from a friend. It’s enough that he/she knows they’re wrong. God keep you.

          • Resurrected

            Facts are facts… Both platforms, this disqus one, and your previous one, I had problems with censorship.

            You can deny it. That’s fine. I’ll assume you are sincerely mistaken.

            No apology is owed in this instance and none will be given.

            Yes, we are friends and brothers in Christ.

            “Iron sharpeneth iron” ;-D

            Good day and God Bless.

          • tjhaines

            “Facts are facts…”
            And yet, for all your talk, you provide none. And you never have, despite being asked a few times in the past.
            “Both platforms, this disqus one, and your previous one, I had problems with censorship.”
            You’d better solve that issue, because if there’s a problem its yours. I haven’t censored you.
            “No apology is owed”
            There certainly is. You were wrong, plus I un-flagged (made public) the comment that DIsquss filtered. If there was ever a clear example of an apology being owed, it’s this one. If you can’t see that, then I would question whether you have sufficient faculty for “investigating” censorship too.

          • Christendom

            Tim,

            A public disagreement does require both a public and private apology.

            Further to our private discussion to iron out the misunderstandings that exist between us, I now publicly apologise for my personal contributions to this misunderstanding.

            I believe and accept your assertion that you were not aware my messages were spammed and did not see them in the spam folder.

            My sincerest apologise to you and your Vericast fans for mistakenly giving the impression that you were actively censoring my messages. I own it. If I could take back those messages, I would.

            (Tim can verify my identity with a simple IP check.)

            God bless you and your fans.

        • tjhaines

          By the way the fact that your commenting shows you haven’t been censored, so I don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.

        • tjhaines

          Hey, your comment was flagged as spam BY DISQUSS!!!!! NOT by me! I’ll have an apology now

  • pointvicente

    Tim, great to hear your voice again. The “audience” can be cruel and insensitive I agree. My apologies if I have ever made any unnecessary requests, comments, or anything to cause stress. I truly appreciate hard work when I see it. With you I see blood sweat and tears and let me tell you something, it is a beautiful thing. Why? Because it is directed and ordered towards truth. We may request, ask, demand, but and the end of the day we are just participants in the one true faith trying to understand the truth. I believe that if anything moves you to take up the microphone, I would hope its not to appease fans but to bring out the sword to fight in a spiritual battle. I’m going to believe when I hear that voice rockin’ the mic it is the Holy Spirit at work. Thank you for the work you put into the apostolate and for taking the time to upload this podcast. We will support you all we can. God Bless.

    • tjhaines

      Hey brother. The audience (the general catholic audience) is a big stress but it’s the smaller of all of the apostolate’s stressors. I may have inadvertently blown it out of proportion in the episode. Requests is not the same as “pushy”. Don’t sweat that. It’s all good. I should say too that while there is the stress of “the audience” there are also the joys of the audience…folks like you and others. Your (plural) support has helped me a great deal. Thanks brother.

  • Foreign Grid

    I know what you mean =^=
    Sometimes we all need a break. Hopefully this year Ill take a 1 year break myself.
    Do as the spirit commands you Tim. Thank you for all your work. Without you or Wilson I don’t think I would have survived high school as a Catholic. You were the first online ministry that actually fed me intellectually and emotionally. And because of you, my mother wouldnt have ever heard Orthodox Catholicism either. You have my eternal gratitude.

  • Foreign Grid

    Btw Tim, have you ever heard of Marino Restrepo? For me, he has become another such Godsend. My uncle calls him Marino the Hammer because he hammers you until you step it up xD But alway with charity. Please consider watching him. When I listen to him sometimes I feel a fire in my soul which helps during the druge of life. Legit, every time I feel broken or depressed, I listen to him and afterwards I don’t feel so bad. He is ecclesiastically approved and has been doing a ministry around the world in churches for around a decade or so even in his old age. On YouTube he is Peregrinos del Amor. His stuff titiled in English is in English.

    God Bless.

  • Mariah

    For the times that you can’t hold a prisoner for fear that they are still dangerous while being in prison/ can’t be held, I always think of supervillains. Like if we lived in a superhero world, there may be cases where a supervillain has to be executed for the safety of the world. I can’t see a case where that would happen in the real world.

    I liked in Avatar: the Last Airbender (a fantasy TV show) the hero, Aang, was told by all his fellow good guys that he would have to kill the main villain. The main villain had powers that I’m guessing would have made keeping him locked up very difficult. Aang refused to kill, however, and it worked out that he was able to render the villain powerless instead of killing him. So even in instances of supervillains, there is potentially a better way.

    In the Flash TV show, they do a good job locking up their superpowered adversaries. Especially for scifi stories, the answer to superpowered criminals may be just better prisons.

    So in short, even in fictional scenarios, the “exception” to capital punishment should still rarely if at all be valid.

    • Christendom

      Thanks for your comment Mariah, and for supporting TIm’s work.

      A brief note regarding your thoughts on the death penalty:

      The ‘loophole’ remains and as such is open to interpretation. People have a tendency to oversimplify this issue based on todays biases and prejudices while ignoring Sacred Scripture, Tradition, and even what many of our past popes and saints have stated, etc, (prior to this popular anti-capital punishment movement that permeates throughout the entire secular and modernist Catholic culture).

      Our modern prison system is far from a utopia and it’s proven far from effective at combating crime. It’s often said that criminals come out worse than when they went in. It’s also widely know that rape, murder and assault continues to happen in our prison systems, often at a much higher rate than in the general population.

      Murder and the sins of Sodom cry to heaven for vengeance according to Church dogma. We’ve been desensitised to the severity of these crimes through our secular (Protestant/Masonic) formed culture and have fallen into viewing Church teaching through the prism of the enlightenment/reformation thought when it should be the other way around.

      Our criminal justice system is meant to serve justice (punish) and it’s meant to be corrective (rehabilitate). It has become perverted in modern times because governments are no longer guided by Church ‘dogma’ on these matters. The abolishment of the death penalty never has been and never will be a dogma.

      A sentence of hard manual labour or execution depending on the severity of the crime are the best means we have for having a functional justice system that serves our society in my view, including the victim, criminal and wider community.

      Hard manual labour would be corrective because it would humble those who have committed a serious crime and keep them far too busy and drained to congregate into gangs etc. The experience would, more often than not, help them to become better citizens/people.

      Every society needs a “line in the sand” however where we say “this cannot be tolerated under any circumstances.” As long as there is no line in the sand, “anything goes.”

      As Pope Benedict correctly stated while still a Cardinal, you aren’t bound to personally believe in the death penalty in the same way as I’m not bound to be against it.

      We can respect each others different views here without degrading the other person or causing friction amongst ourselves.

      Much love to you.

      • Mariah

        Your main problem with the death penalty teaching seems to be the prison system. It seems like the logical response would be to fix the prison system rather than resorting to overusing the loophole.

        This sentence from the catechism illustrates that the loophole is extremely narrow, “Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm – without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself – the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “‘are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.'”

        I’m not sure how you can follow the catechism and be for the death penalty, based on that quote and the surrounding text.

        • Christendom

          Hi Mariah,

          The Church has a 2000 year history. The popular ‘opinion’ regarding the death penalty today, is that, a pastoral ‘opinion’, and it’s very modern.

          The Catechism is a splendid document, we are blessed to have it. However every single sentence in the Catechism isn’t ‘dogmatically’ binding, as Ratzinger acknowledged shortly before his own time as pope began.

          The Catechism contains dogma and opinion, and being able to differentiate the difference between the two requires a careful examination of the text.

          For example, if I was to glance at the Catechisms teaching on same-sex acts, I could easily interpret it to mean the Church now supports same-sex rights, insofar as homosexuals should be legally free to commit these acts. However upon carefully reading these paragraphs we see the following in paragraph 2357 “Under no circumstances can they be approved.”

          “No circumstances.” That’s different than saying “practically non-existent.” One is an emphatic conclusion, the other merely ‘alludes’ to a conclusion. It’s an opinion.

          Paragraph 2267 affirms the death penalty is still ‘accepted’ as Church teaching, “Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.”

          Yes, you can cite the latter words and say “the need is practically non-existent.” But this does not change the reality that the traditional position of the Church has been in favour of the death penalty, and it does not stand against the use of the death penalty in principle to this day (and never will).

          Certain things can change, such as whether the Mass is said in English or Latin,. Actual dogmas cannot change. That would ‘break’ with Tradition and Scripture, and the Church cannot break from Scripture and Tradition ‘dogmatically.’ Matthew 16:17-19 makes this absolutely clear.

          The latter part of the paragraph is a pastoral ‘opinion.’ It’s not a dogmatically binding teaching. There is a difference between the two. Observing the nuance is required when it comes to discerning this differentiation.

          I’m not trying to convince you to agree with me. I’m merely sharing my own personal position and explaining that it’s not against Church dogma. We can respect each others differences here and both be in good standing with the Church.

          I base my opinions on tradition and dogma rather than popular modern opinion that ‘veers’ from tradition. In my view tradition and dogma, are far more grounded in logic and reason, and effective in ‘reality.’

          Communism sounds lovely in ‘theory’ for example. It’s hell on earth in practice.

          The only plausible alternative to capital punishment in the extreme cases where it is necessary would be to hole those guilty of murder and rape in solitary confinement until the day they die. We couldn’t place them in populated areas because this puts those around them at risk of being murdered, raped and/or assaulted, and we have a duty of care.

          That means holing a person up in isolation for however long they have left to live, and that could be 50 years or more. That wouldn’t be healthy for the person, and it forces the tax payer to pay for their lifelong isolation.

          In my personal opinion, again based on Scripture and Tradition, capital punishment is the better solution between the two, and far more effective in the real world.

          I don’t say this coldly. My highest hope and prayer for every single criminal justly convicted of the death penalty irrespective of the evil they committed, would be that they accepted baptism/confession /salvation for their soul first.

          Hope this helps to clarify your question. Again, I respect your right, as a Catholic, to personally be against the death penalty, and take no issue whatsoever with that, even though I don’t personally share this view.

          I very much appreciate the polite tone of your response and the sincerity of your question. Thank you.

        • Christendom

          P.S. It might be helpful if I added what’s most ‘personal’ to me regarding this issue, because obviously ‘emotion’ cannot be separated from such a weighty decision.

          How can I justify the death penalty ‘within’, as a matter of conscience, emotionally, regardless of the logic and reason applied?

          Well, to share this in the most emotional/intimate/personal way possible, the human dignity of the victim and society takes precedence to me once we fall into the extreme crime realm of treason, rape (and the sins of Sodom), and murder (not manslaughter obviously).

          To lead you to a deeper enquiry on this, I encourage you to take a few moments to imagine being brutally raped. Say it happens from an intruder who broke into your home while you were asleep and no one was there.

          Now imagine, as another scenario, the person you love most in this world was raped, whoever that is to you, male or female. They went through this gruelling scenario and all that came with it.

          Then there is the horrible and exhausting ordeal of a trial. Finally, after all that, the rapist is found guilty and convicted to time in prison.

          As a Catholic, you would have God and the Church to help you heal from this unimaginable trauma. Whether or not you ever fully recovered from the torture of this, the sick and violent violation of your human dignity, is another matter altogether. The greater likelihood is you’d be deeply scarred for life, in some way.

          Now imagine this rapist is a bisexual and continues to rape other prisoners through a gang he joined there.

          Now imagine this rapist is ‘let go’ after 10 years in prison, and he rapes someone outside of jail again.

          What about the dignity of his endless line of victims?

          What about protecting the dignity of ‘society’ from this rapist?

          Why ‘allow’ him as a society and justice system to keep raping from our own negligence and legal impotence in the first place (once he’s fallen to such an extreme depravity)?

          Where do we draw the line?

          The dignity of the victim and the protection of society takes greater precedence to me once we are in the extreme realm of crimes, without question.

          That doesn’t mean I lack sympathy and compassion for the criminal (hence my deeper desire for the salvation of his soul before the execution of his body). Maybe he has had a hard life, and was himself abused as a child.

          Does that make the permanent scars of his victims any less heavy to carry?

          Will that help the victim/s cope with the traumatic ordeal of being violated in this way, always fearing in some part of them, that it could/will happen again?

          These are the kinds of questions I ask. My reasoning doesn’t revolve around the criminal. It’s guided by actual Church dogma, tradition, and sacred scripture, (God), and centres around the victim and good of society first and the criminal last.

          Hope this helps you understand where I’m coming from in a more personal manner, because we are talking about a deeply personal matter here. That’s why it’s natural for even Catholics to fall into infighting when disagreements exist among us regarding it despite not being Magisterial bound to completely agree.

          God bless you Mariah, and thanks again for engaging in this discussion in a respectful way

  • Lu

    I was SO happy to see that when I opened PocketCasts, there was a new Vericast episode! I have been checking the site, your Twitter feed and even Facebook (I kinda detest Facebook) – wondering when you would be back. I can’t begin to fathom how much time, energy and effort running things must take and I pray that you find the peace or resolution that you so deserve. I know we’ve never had a conversation, but you have helped me more than you will ever know, and I’m really glad that you’re back – in whatever capacity that may be.

    • tjhaines

      Thank you for this wonderful and meaningful feedback. I’m sorry that I kept you and the rest of the fans waiting for so long, and without updating you. Thanks for understanding, and thanks so much for checking up so consistently. I’m very moved. Stay tuned…and please continue to pray for me and for the apostolate. Thanks again, 1000 times over! God be with you

  • Barry MCGrath

    Hello Tim,
    It’s good to hear your show again I appreciate both the time effort you undertake with your broadcasting from a Catholic perspective.
    I find it disturbing that the removal of Catholic icons from a Catholic school are used as “inclusive”, maybe we should emphasise our Catholic identity for the benefit of the children at the school in the first place.
    With the removal of Catholic character you wind up without the fullness of the Catholic truth and therefore cease being Catholic in identity.
    As an aside Tim I came across a show of Mother Angelica the EWTN foundress who asked the question “what would happen if every Catholic in America prayed the Rosary?” In her opinion America could be turned away from its course of mass destruction of human life.
    Hope to hear from you again as and when you are ready
    God bless

  • William Martin

    Good to have you back! I also want to apologize about making a comment about the whisky. I’ve had problems with it in the past and I was being judgmental. You have a lot of good stuff for us.
    God bless

    • tjhaines

      I don’t remember you making a comment, but don’t sweat it. It wasn’t “comments” about it that annoyed me it was the few folks who went on a rampage about it, and I don’t think you were one of them lol.
      Thanks for the comment. God be with you.

  • TheRani

    Oh cool, you’re back! It is good to hear new content from you again, even if it’s just once a week or a couple times a month or something. Scale it back to something that you’re comfortable with and doesn’t burn you out. And definitely take breaks when you need them. But maybe next time let people know about it on Twitter or something so that we don’t worry, “Is Tim OK? Is he sick? Is he dead? What happened to Tim?”

  • Blue_Sky

    I’m praying for you brother in Christ. Tim, you have God given skills.

  • Kangsta CoasT

    Sup tin

  • Kangsta CoasT

    It’s nice for agree to disagree again. you do say niceness is not the same as goodness. goodness saves souls niceness just get by on the “now”.

    Not only revelation where it says, “and when the son of man returns, will he find faith on earth?” Notice the question mark and who is asking this. It’s Jesus. He knows the answer already. The answer is very few are saved aka the remnant. The problem is that you support Vatican 2 and all the anti popes. Jp 2 clearly kissed the koran and respect the diabolical religions on the assissi prayer meetings. He teaches that every human is god. You say that human is sacred regardless weather they murder. But this is unbiblical.

    “Why do you call anyone good? Only the father in heaven is good. But ye are your father the devil, the offsprings of the serpent”

    I want more truth with clarity if you can give me that without censorship

  • DAVID NOLAN

    I got a bit of a shock there, great to hear your voice again Tim.
    You were badly missed.