In the modern world there is a cultural disposition to latch onto fluff or novelty and jettison, abandon, or ignore substance. We’re attentive to what doesn’t matter, and we ignore what does matter. This is not a time for Catholics to forget who we are. As a Church we need to dispense with what I call “the Catholic mascots” and get serious about this thing we call Catholic.

SHARE
  • TheRani

    I like your blogs, but it’s good to hear your voice again, too! I’ve missed this.

  • AflowerofStTherese

    Thank you Catholic Church! Thank you Holy spirit!

  • Barry MCGrath

    Hello Tim,
    Interesting subject matter your contrast between the significant and superficial.We must deal with the reality of less and less human interactions as a consequence of technology,the downside in my opinion is that there will be more isolation and community fragmentation.
    What you mention concerning the church we have the two extremes need each other but the church needs neither isn’t it ironic that the original mass was Aramaic not Latin which nobody seems to mention
    Thanks for the show

    • tjhaines

      Thanks Barry, I’m glad you enjoyed the episode. Indeed, no one calls for a return to Aramaic or to the Greek. Folks are very picky about what traditions they think we should adhere to. Just as folks on the other side are very picky about what “the spirit of vatican 2” is. You can’t make this stuff up!
      God be with you brother

  • Kangsta CoasT

    Exactly u mean by “fluff”

    • tjhaines

      “But my criticism resides more so on the reality that this show is more leaning towards progressive progressive modernist views”
      You are misusing the term “progressive”. You are using it the same way that liberals use it. A progressive, as the Church has always understood the term, is someone who advances Truth, not someone who departs from it, which is what a liberal is. That is how the Church has historically understood those terms. The liberals of the 60s began using the term “progressive” to describe themselves, because they wanted to falsely present themselves as being orthodox. They tried to hide their liberalism behind the term “progressive”, because progressive was traditionally understood as being an orthodox disposition. So modern liberals stole the term “progressive” for their sordid purposes, just as radicals have hijacked the term “Traditional” for theirs. Liberals hide their error using an orthodox term (Progressive), and radicals hide their error behind an orthodox term (Traditionalist). I’m sorry if I don’t participate in the con game that you’ve taken part in.

      Having said that, I’m not actually a progressive even in the traditional/historical (correct) sense of the word. I’m more of a fundamentalist. The difference between you and me is that I know the history and fundamentals of the faith, and you do not. You’re just an echo chamber of the modern-day rigorists. You make arguments that are not informed by the whole Truth, and draw conclusions that don’t make any sense.

      “Does he know protestantism is a heresy ”
      Actually modern protestantism is not a heresy, since in order to be heretical a protestant must first have the True faith to begin with. By definition modern protestantism is not a heresy. The protestantism of the reformation era was a heresy. Folks like you think you know everything, but demonstrate that you actually know nothing. You twist and misuse terminology, you apply false-knowledge and treat fallacy as facts. You take very precise and deliberate theology (usually in segments!) and you convert it as wild cards to apply generally to a host of conditions for which it was not intended. You talk a good game, fooling Catholics who don’t know any better, and disordering their Catholic identity. Shame on you! You shouldn’t worry as much about the protestants as you should worry about yourself. Because modern protestants are in error, but they don’t have the perspective of Truth to see their error clearly. You at least have the perspective of the Truth, and yet you have permitted your emotions, your fear, and your pride to lead you into an error that is malignant and devastating to others.

      “…Hence thereby the absolute necessities such as being baptized as in water baptism as oppose to baptism by desire”
      Again, you demonstrate that you don’t know what you’re talking about. As far as I know, baptism by desire is a theological theory. It isn’t actually Church teaching.

      “Sry to break your knee caps but tin is simply guided by humanism or humanistic philosophy”
      You’re not breaking my knee caps. You’re just showing everybody how crazy radical traditionalists can be. You make crazy arguments and say fanatically stupid things like “Tim is guided by humanism”. These are claims that suit your agenda and fuel your rhetoric, but they find absolutely no accord with Truth or reality. But you guys don’t care about reality, you only care about generating and sustaining a fantasy and you’ll do anything, say anything, and attack anyone’s reputation as is necessary to sustain that fantasy.
      I’ve been learning about and defending the faith for most of my life. I’ve been defending Tradition and orthodoxy for 20 years, at great cost to myself and at great cost to my professional career. I have lost a great deal because of my defense of Tradition and orthodoxy. And what have YOU done? You come onto the internet talking like a theologian but sounding like a CCD student. You do nothing, you risk nothing, you lose nothing. Wow, what a hero of the faith you are!

      “He hates tradition and lies about the timeline where Vatican 2”
      I love tradition. I just hate what people like you have done with it. You have bastardized Tradition. You bastardize the whole of the faith for your own purposes. You are not interested in what Catholicism really is, you’re only interested in a caricature of the faith.
      You aren’t the first person to come here calling me a liar. I lie about condoms, I lie about atheism, I lie about abortion, I lie about this, I lie about that. It’s incredibly predictable behavior. People who can’t make a case based on facts always rush to call me a liar, because all they can do is besmirch my reputation; they can’t actually build an argument of substance. By calling me a liar you have gone to the fluff, and bypassed substance. You have proven the case I made in this episode.

      • Kangsta CoasT

        Idk why you sound very bitter for the most part. Idgaf about the little terminology game. What sacrifice? This show? I can spot countless heresies I can’t even start on to picking which one. So to go back to modern progressives I did not use it as a “liberal” I used it as it is understood not making theories how the word came about. Take it as this,. Progressive modernist is a form of false conservative “Catholicism” dealing with the compromise of unwarranted beliefs eg “THERE IS salvation outside the church”, “Catholicism” is just one out of many demonic religions, “it’s no use trying to convert people to Catholicism bcoz the church is just “sick”. Claims and beliefs only a progressive modernist can compromise or accept. Notice I use the word compromise. You can claim to be a balanced “orthodox” but the average Joe doesn’t give af whatever you mean . Telling , “hi everyone I’m an orthodox!”. What orthodoxy do you mean the heretical eastern orthodox sect which separates itself from Roman catholicism?. Or are you one of those people who plays the mascot game and I’m glad you bring up those tricky names. You’re very tricky and yet almost make a clown that it’s you being described by the very same strawman analogies. Idk what false history you’re smoking but that’s not make you have any authority to categorize anyone to a level that if which anything like a “ccd student”. You play with names and categorize innocent uncategorized ppl what a shame that rofl

        I just know countless of your heresies and I’m Catholic I’m not using the terms to generate any agenda. Just leave it as it is. You don’t love tradition, you hate converting protestants, you think protestantism is not a heresy and you believe outside the church THERE IS salvation hence thereby treating Catholicism not as “orthodox” (whatever you mean by this) but just one out of many religion. And that’s the Vatican 2 sect you hold clapped and unopposed. Do you know

        • tjhaines

          “Idk why you sound very bitter for the most part.
          Five years of dealing with online “crusaders” who misrepresent the faith, mischaracterize the Church, and attack me for representing who and what the Church and faith really are will do that to any rational person.

          “Idgaf about the little terminology game.”
          That “terminology game” is how Truth operates. Truth is precise. You can’t treat terminology any way you choose. Only the ignorant and the deceptive do things like that. Which is why you do things like that.

          “I can spot countless heresies I can’t even start on to picking which one.”
          Well since my “heresies” are so abundant, I’m sure you wouldn’t mind pointing out a few, so that I can respond to them, expose your error and ignorance, and demonstrate to the other readers how fallacious and foolish radical traditionalists and their arguments really are.

          “So to go back to modern progressives I did not use it as a “liberal” I used it as it is understood”
          No, you used it incorrectly, you got called out on it, and now you’re back peddling in order to save face and to manufacture credibility. Sorry, that’s not going to work. Someone who doesn’t even know the historic use and significance of the word “progressive” is not qualified to make the arguments you’re making, or to press the allegations you’re pressing against me.

          “Progressive modernist is a form of false conservative “Catholicism””
          Progressive and Modernist are two terms that don’t go together. So, again, you’re not using the term correctly.

          “THERE IS salvation outside the church”
          So Jesus can save a godless criminal on the cross, but he can’t save a person outside of the Church? The question of salvation isn’t whether a person IS saved outside the Church, it’s a matter of whether they are able to be saved by God’s mercy at the end of their lives. This is a complex theological issue that you have absolutely no grasp of, and yet you presume to cast judgement on the Church mind?

          “Notice I use the word compromise. You can claim to be a balanced “orthodox” but the average Joe doesn’t give af whatever you mean”

          Let’s leave “Joe” out of this. Your real problem isn’t what the average Joe thinks. Your problem is you. YOU fail to understand what balance is, because it doesn’t fit into your limited and fictitious paradigm for what “the Church” is, in your mind. Balance is not compromise, it’s acceptance of the fullness of Truth. You do not want the fullness of Truth, you only want the Truth that agrees with your disposition. The modernists do the same thing.

          I’m not going to respond to the rest of your message, because it’s full of insults and empty allegations. Which is kind of a funny thing, since you make a total ass of yourself in every sentence while trying to attack and discredit me. So I’ll let your comments stand on their own, and the reader can decide for themselves. But if you’re going to be a consistent pain in my ass, I’ll just ban you, and that’ll be that.

        • Foreign Grid

          …. what?

  • Kangsta CoasT

    Can the white supremacists like tin foil curry still be debated when all he’s good at is ban ppl recklessly without knowing. All I did in this dead corpse mascot network is spark some light on how he is insensitive towards tradition and loves compromising to the diabolical and coin yourself progressive. That’s how the word progressive modernist should be utilize. Don’t let liars and deceivers fog your brain with some sort of metaphysically neurochemical transmitters such as deceit for example

    • Kangsta CoasT

      It’s not about how tin the foil oppose euthenasia etc. But my criticism resides more so on the reality that this show is more leaning towards progressive progressive modernist views. In other words, it is a show rather than the more traditional wording, “apostolate” since it just can’t have the SUBSTANCE of a true radical traditionalist. Who does he convert? Does he know protestantism is a heresy and preaches that anyone just could not lose salvation and remain in a state of grace (which a soul may not have attained in this life to begin with) despite a thousand murder or fornications a day as claimed by matin luther?. ,Hence thereby the absolute necessities such as being baptized as in water baptism as oppose to baptism by desire , full 100% profession of the traditional “faith” (confirmation) and then of course, if you do not drink and gnaw the flesh of the son of man you have no life within you or eucharist. It’s as if this chennel has gone full retard on liberalism. Filled with fluff towards all heresies and indeed where it is clapped and unopposed. Sry to break your knee caps but tin is simply guided by humanism or humanistic philosophy not the holy ghost. He hates tradition and lies about the timeline where Vatican 2 counter church has modernized all of 1.5 billion Catholics. He doesn’t explain the reason why the church got sick in the first place. Henceforth not opposing anything but the tradition. Which tradition do he oppose? Regeneration? I learn nothing from the vague af clown. And yes I have many evidence jp 2 was kissing the koran, praying with pagan idolators on the assissi prayer meeting with which I know the full meaning of that, he drink the chalice of devil etc those were footages of his apostacy and religious indifferentism. I heard no opposition front this chennel. I found the full truth about it from the traditional Catholic assuming idk wtf does tin mean by “orthodox”. He makes it confusing so as to prevent getting crushed

    • tjhaines

      I have no idea what the hell you’re saying in most of the beginning of your comment.
      That being said, I did not “coin myself” a progressive, I very specifically said that I’m not a progressive, even in the traditional/correct way that the Church understands that term. If you weren’t so busy putting words in my mouth, fabricating “truths”, forming terrible arguments and flirting with heresy, you might have learned to be a better reader.
      “That’s how the word progressive modernist should be utilize”
      And this is how radicals think. They reject the traditional meaning of a something in Church thought (in this case, the use and application of the word “progressive”), and they assign a whole new meaning to it that is incorrect, but that fits their narrative. The liar and deceiver here is you. And you are making that VERY, VERY, VERY clear to everybody, with your own words. Thank you for it.
      I’ll say it again. Modernists hijacked the word “progressive” to suit their needs, and radicals have hijacked the word “Traditional” to suit theirs. What’s common amongst them is they’re all in error, and they all spit on the mystical body of Christ, while all claiming to be “real Catholics”.
      Have a nice day!

      • Kangsta CoasT

        “Modernists hijacked the word “progressive” to suit their needs”

        You’re lying tin. It’s a story you create to dodge. I can see how passive and scared you look behind your cellphone. Because I know how to refute your arguments. You never refute mines and Everytime I post something substantive you quickly annihilate it to the pending, “hold on, this is waiting to be approved by vericast”. I can wait to do damage to your conceited ghost.

      • Kangsta CoasT

        The word progressive is hijacked by regressive rigorist like you who wants the Catholicism to mutate into more of Protestant secularist. I applaud only your compromise and how no one should convert to your “apostolate” since it isn’t an apostolate. It tells people they will be saved by God’s mercy regardless of committing billions of mortal sin and dying in such state unrepented. You just Pat someone in the back and say, “it’s okay.” That no one is actually even in danger of becoming a protestant. You just hate salvation that has to do with full conversion , resistance, spiritual violence . Why can’t you point people to full acceptance of church teachings. Why do you oppose euthenasia as though their extra physical life mean something outside the church. It is you that hijacks but you created this whole word salad of terminologies. Stfu with that liar!

      • Kangsta CoasT

        “They reject the traditional meaning of a something in Church thought (in this case, the use and application of the word “progressive”), and they assign a whole new meaning to it that is incorrect, but that fits their narrative.”

        I have shown that it is you. I have many evidence that you’re a heretic. During the “scorched Earth” dialog segment for instance, you have claimed that Protestant don’t need to convert. “It doesn’t matter that they are protestants”. You tell ppl that’s what you tell them. And exactly what narrative am I trying to suit? That’s nothing but the fact you’re a heretical or formal ones. I keep pressing on the issue not terminology. Progressive is not an exclusive term it’s a common noun stupid just like “warrior” is hijacked by sum bandwagon you emerge stupid ball franchise. Anyone can coin that term. Why do you accuse me of liberalism as though the word progressive is not a common noun but a sacred word exclusive to be used as in catholicism. liar!

        “The liar and deceiver here is you. And you are making that VERY, VERY, VERY clear to everybody, with your own words.”

        That’s pathetic argument to suit your pathetic word salad narrative. Why don’t you oppose the evidences against Vatican 2 instead of resorting to attacking who I am as person. Again am not promoting any agenda. I rely on having genuine concern about the crisis and how very few will be saved many annihilated. Please just deal with the crisis properly stop trying to sound fresh as though you just came out of vocations class

        • Foreign Grid

          How is ‘white supremacists like tin foil curry’ not word salad?

  • Kangsta CoasT

    Can the white supremacists like tin foil curry still be debated when all he’s good at is ban ppl recklessly without knowing. All I did towards the accoladeless mascot (son of bkn bridge) is undo it and spark some light on how thin is insensitive towards tradition and loves compromising to the demon religions aka the “diabolic” and sh8 his panties into coining progressive. I exposed to everyone such poop party and how the word progressive modernist should be coined. Don’t let liars and deceivers fog your brain with some sort of metaphysically neurochemical transmitters such as deceit for example

  • Jon

    I heard something new the other night that blew me away. Someone told me that if you have knowledge that the TLM is more meritorious than the Novus Ordo, and had a chance to go to a TLM (on any given day) but choose to go to the Novus Ordo, then that could land you purgatory time bc you rejected to earn more merit.

    It was so incredible, I’m still contemplating on how ridiculous it was. I mean I just go to Mass. Either way I’m receiving Jesus which is infinitely meritorious, no matter which form of Mass you go to.

    Good to see you again, Tim. I was actually getting a bit worried. 😉