Softening Our Trad Hearts to Leo XIV?

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Shit, this is really not letting me.
Hey, there we go, we're live.

Speaker 2 (00:04):
Are we, we're live.
Oh wow, we're live without anintro video.
That's so weird.

Speaker 1 (00:09):
What's up?

Speaker 2 (00:10):
y'all, can you guys?

Speaker 1 (00:12):
hear us, are we?

Speaker 2 (00:14):
Oh no.

Speaker 1 (00:16):
All right, so Rob's going to come back in.

Speaker 2 (00:18):
That's the most avoiding Babylon thing ever, the
worst intro we've ever done.
We usually have a.
I was waiting for the music tokick on and stuff all right.
So wait, I gotta text rob andtell him we're live that's so
funny.

Speaker 1 (00:31):
You guys can hear us right.
Let us know in the chat.
Okay, good, you guys awesome,um.

Speaker 2 (00:38):
So now, yesterday, um was an emotional day.
It was crazy because I don'tthink anybody was expecting
smoke to come out that early.
Like you and I were texting andwe were like I was like, all
right, so Tim's coming ontonight.
Tim was supposed to come onwith black smoke and I left it

(01:00):
off with him.
I'm like, all right, if we getblack smoke you'll come on, if
it's white smoke, you'll do yourthing, I'll do my thing.
So then when we got white smoke, I assumed he wasn't going to
come on.
So I texted you and I'm like,hey, we're going to go on.
And then tim texted me back andhe's like, oh, no, dude, I'm
available still, let's go on.
So then I had to text you back.
I'm like, oh, tim's coming on,you're not coming.
So it happened at like 11, 30and as soon as it happened it

(01:23):
was the fourth scrutiny andeverybody's hearts dropped and
we were all like, oh no, this isbad.
And uh, rob's coming, Hang on.
Yeah, I don't know whathappened, rob, but we got to go
live.
So, um, like 10, uh, 1130, thatwhite smoke comes and
everybody's hearts drop andthey're like, my gosh man, what

(01:44):
is this?
This can't be good.
They didn't even take that longto go.
So then there were three namesI was concerned with, and
Prevost was one of them and wewent through this whole show
yesterday and I explained allthat and it was because of the
things I heard leading up to it.
I kind of blame Edward Pentonona little bit releasing that

(02:08):
article, because that put me onhigh alert.
Is that maddie or eggy maddie,right?
Yeah, um, so when I'm notreally blaming edward penton, it
was my own doing but, um.
So once we see it's prevos, likethe freaking information just
starts flooding in and it's justdoom.
And I'm watching live streamsthroughout the day and I'm

(02:29):
seeing people's reactions rawbecause everybody was surprised
by this.
So it wasn't like it wasn'tlike anybody had time to like
research and then go on andpresent a reasoned argument.
It was just everybody's heartsdropped.
We were like, oh my goodness,it's an American and he's from
Chicago and he's got this in hispast and it looks like they set

(02:51):
it up for a long time, like itwas just so much information
came out.
So we jumped on last night andit was very doom and gloom.
And, uh, after Tim left theshow, rob and I hung out with
the audience for like anotherhour and I think like right away
it started hitting me a littlebit.
But when I, when I went to bedlast night, it just like, like

(03:15):
really hit me.
And the thing is Rob didn'twant to come on and I should
have trusted his instincts,because we're so used to just
coming on and firing off ouropinions, but when you have raw
emotion like that andsomething's so important, like
it would have been wise to holdoff, but everybody wants to be
the first person to react likeit's the.

(03:37):
That's the stupid world we'rein now.
Right, yeah, now the thing iswe didn't say anything untrue
yesterday, like it's not, likewe lied, like these were all
actual facts that came out.
So we presented them, and partof me is happy we did, because I
think it should give peoplelike a reasonable um caution as

(04:02):
we go into this.
But I woke up this morning.
I went into work at like 2.30this morning, at an early start,
and I was just thinking aboutit all morning, and then around
like 8 or 9 am, I just said Itweeted out.
I said yesterday a lot of uscriticized Cardinal Robert

(04:23):
Prevost, but today we should allbe praying for Pope Leo the
14th, and I said that withoutlike checking what everybody
else was doing.
And then, like, as the day wenton, I just started watching one
by one, all the trads kind ofsoftening their hearts to this
whole thing and just going.

(04:43):
You know what Like there's?
Because I know what we said onthe show yesterday with Tim
especially.
It was like he's going to givethese gestures and you're going
to soften your heart.
And then it's about coalitionbuilding and all this stuff.
But there's something aboutbeing Catholic where you're just
like I want to love the Holyfather, like with all my heart I
want to love the Holy fatherand I think every Catholic has

(05:05):
that instinct.
So probably would have beenwise to just chill out a little
bit yesterday yeah, sort ofrushing on to be the first one
on.
So I'm going to actually justapologize, not because of what I
said was wrong, but because Ididn't even give the new Pope a
chance.

(05:25):
And what would it be?
It's not because it wasn'tCalumny, because none of it was
untrue, but is it detractionwhere you're just sullying the
person's name?
It could be scandal.

Speaker 1 (05:39):
Yeah, it could be some rash judgment and some
scandal.
It could be some rash judgmentand some scandal Because it's
like, yeah, if it's likeimpromptu, if the passions are
flowing and you're just tryingto be the first one on, it can
be a little bit spotty.

Speaker 2 (05:54):
So it's not Okay.
So what I'm saying is I stillthink it was smart to do, it was
still smart to get theinformation out there, because
this is all true, all this stuff, um, I'm getting texted, um I

(06:19):
just wanted to stop and say,yeah, yeah I got it I got it.
My, I'm gonna catch crap I took.
I took I took 100 phone callstoday about this stuff and it's
like what is the?
What is the?
Uh, the position you want totake going into this thing?
I don't think anything we saidwas wrong yesterday.
I think everything we said wastrue, like literally everything.

(06:41):
We know where this guy camefrom, uh, but I still want to
love the holy father.
It's just a catholic instinct.
Yeah, I don't, I don't knowwhat to do about it, like I
don't.
I definitely I said right fromthe bat I don't ever want to be
like opposition to the pope onour channel.
So it's uh, yeah, I don't know.

(07:03):
Man, it is kind of interestingto watch everybody just going
all right, we're going to Tim'stexting me.
I don't, you want to go on.
It's not that, it's that Idon't want to be the one riling

(07:24):
up people to anger against thePope.

Speaker 1 (07:28):
No, I think I mean here here is my take about it,
you know.
First let me just say this I'venever like actually as a
practicing Catholic, got to seewhite smoke go off.
So that just feeling ofwatching it live and finally
seeing the white smoke go off,that was just another level of,
I think, like Catholic joy.
That's kind of unique.

Speaker 2 (07:47):
You know what I'm saying.
Yeah, that was your firstconglomerate.
All right, listen, I got to letTim come on because he was on
with us yesterday, so I'm goingto send Tim the link because I
want to hash this out with himon air.
So I don't know if you want tostay.
I think you can.
I mean, you want to stay, Ithink?

Speaker 1 (08:06):
you can.
I mean, I don't want to makeyou feel like you can't.
I mean you.
I mean, yeah, stick around.
I'm probably only going to givepositive things to say, yeah,
that's fine, I understand that.

Speaker 2 (08:11):
But I want tim to come on, because I don't want it
to be me backpedaling and stuff, but I want to actually talk
about this honestly.
So I sent tim the link.
Let's see him pop on.
Uh, I'm not pope's planning.
Are you guys kidding me?
All right, here's tim.
Tim texts me.
This is the gayest thing you'veever said.
All right, I'm trying to figurethis out, tim, because me and

(08:33):
you talked earlier and I saidstraight out to you I'm like I
don't know, something just feelswrong about like just not
loving the pope, so I don't knowwhat.
What is your take on this?

Speaker 3 (08:42):
I just want to know one, one false thing you said,
or you said you didn't give thePope a chance.
I was on with you and we wereboth like bro, I hope he's good.
I hope he's good.
All indications are he's notgood.
I agree with that.
Well, but this is when peopleget carried away.
This is what Aristotle calls afew and a many problem.

(09:04):
Get carried away.
This is this is, uh, whataristotle calls a few and a many
problem.
The many want palliativecliches, or they want which can
take the form of being positivepalliative cliches, often in
trad world, can take the form ofnegative statements.
That's my thing on my channelis always just truth, straight
line to truth but what aboutwhat?

Speaker 2 (09:23):
what about the um?
Because they were alwaysaccusing us of violating that
canon law where we're likeriling up opposition to our
bishop or something like I waslike canon 13 or something.
They were like you always heardlofton accusing us of that and
stuff like that.
I don't know exactly which oneit is, but it's like if we're,
if we're coming out, because itwas very raw yesterday and I

(09:45):
think we were like holy crap,man, this thing is going bad and
they got their guy.

Speaker 3 (09:50):
Like I still think all that they got their guy so
yeah, you're not schizophrenic,I mean, yeah, it's just a fact.
We, we found out what I likenedto it on my show.
Uh, what I likened it to on myshow today is the difference
between evidentiary anddispositive in law.
So some evidence is merelyevidentiary.

(10:10):
You're building a case slowly,and then some evidence is comes
over the top and it's justdispositive a smoking gun all at
once.
If I left my house and I can'tremember, if I left a faucet
running and I'm freaked out andI've been gone for eight hours,
oh no, it's the faucet runningand I'm rounding the band.
I literally have to round acorner to come back to my house.

(10:31):
The the this is typically howit works at law.
The less, the more approximate,less precise evidence is what
you tend to get first.
So like you round the corner ofyour house and you're literally
just looking at the front doorfor evidence of the worst thing,
like is water pouring out myfront door?
Did I ruin my, my gem?

(10:51):
And you don't see that at first?
But but that's not dispositive.
Then you go in the house andyou're like, okay, it was an
upstairs faucet, I don't seewater down here.
That's pretty good, that's alittle better, better.
Now I'm mounting the steps.
Now I'm getting closer to thething.
I don't hear the faucet on.
That's getting to be better andbetter non-dispositive evidence
.
Until you go in there and youlook at the faucet you thought

(11:13):
you left on.
Then it's dispositive, that's.

Speaker 2 (11:15):
That's all that was happening yesterday we're
looking at things as we'recoming, as we're coming up on
the main event, we're saying,okay, this is the stuff you're
looking like, you're looking tosee if the kitchen's flooded
first, you're looking to see ifit's pouring out the front door.
So I don't think, like I stillthink it was important to get
that stuff out, to give people areasonable expectation of

(11:35):
what's to come Like.
I really think there's, becausehopium, like you said yesterday
, cope Springs Eternal.
Like hopium is a powerful drugman and when I'm watching it
online today, I'm watchingeverybody.
Just like it's a very strangething to watch everybody.
Just go, all right, we'rebehind this and we don't know
anything about him yet.

(11:55):
So I didn't make any kind ofstatements like that.
I was just like, all right,let's just like.
I had no problem saying what Isaid about Cardinal Robert
Prevost.
But there's something aboutwhen, the, when the Cardinal
becomes the Pope, he becomes anew man, and I want to give the
Pope, who has not done anythingat this point, the chance to at
least be a Pope and and provehimself as a Pope.

Speaker 3 (12:19):
Well, no, he doesn't become a new man.
He, he's, literally he's, he'snow, he has a new man.
He's literally he's now.
He has a new office.
He quite literally, in allrelatable senses, doesn't become
a new man.
He's only been Pope for a day,and so we're going to wait and
see.
There's no dispositive evidence, and so I still hope against
hope, cope against cope, thathe'll be the best Pope ever.

Speaker 2 (12:40):
I hope that he becomes the royal.
We, though, like he, doesbecome something new.
He he's.

Speaker 3 (12:47):
He's no longer I, but we so like when a pope releases
a statement, he says we declareit's like he's speaking on
behalf of Christ himself at thatpoint as well sorry, I'm just
an Aristotelian and and we'regoing to go through the dynama
and the, the as anthropo,anthropologically, he still has
the exact same will, the sameintellect, the same rules of the
Holy Spirit, promising never tooverwhelm our intellect or our

(13:10):
will.
Abide they obtain.
And so there's no guaranteethat any one pope will not be a
bad man.
And he is the same.
And the fact of the matter ishe's lived 69 years and there
are a lot of indicators on thisguy.
His big two cardinal kingmakerswere Cupich and Maradiaga.

(13:31):
Unless you, that's a big tell,that's not dispositive, it's
very evidentiary.
These guys do not make mistakes.
Maradiaga was the Pope Franciskingmaker.
Who were his non-cardinal uhpushers?
James martin and um, the, the,the nuncio, the, the currently
very left nuncio, and thenaustin ivory.

(13:52):
So those five that's.
I don't.
I have no apology for anythingI said yesterday which was
solely reducible to uh-oh, uh-oh.

Speaker 2 (14:01):
This is really bad, I'm not, I'm not sorry for
saying what we said because itwas untrue.
I felt it's not like, oh mygosh, I'm so sorry.
It's more like I had like thisweird guilty feeling that's
called the mob, that's calledthe mob.
Nobody was saying anything.
We got off the show and I wentto bed.

Speaker 3 (14:19):
Like I felt this over and over between the morning.
Last night Brian Holdsworth,even eric sammons these guys are
virtue signaling more than aair traffic controller man.

Speaker 2 (14:31):
Here's the thing when , when we're doing that.

Speaker 3 (14:33):
It's pathetic.

Speaker 2 (14:34):
It's pathetic I watched eric sammons, uh,
kennedy and flanders, like I Idid feel like they weren't being
honest I'm not and I love thoseguys, I'm not knocking them
Like it felt like dishonest in away it's.
And there was even today seeingcertain guys coming out and

(14:55):
saying things and I'm like youguys are laying it on pretty
thick man.
It's like can we?
I understand cautious optimismand it really is like the the um
, mimetic desire, right, likeyou don't want to be the one
person alone going against thecrowd, but I, but I still want

(15:16):
to love the Holy father.
Like I don't know how, I don'tknow what the proper, like I'm
struggling through to figure outwhat the what the right thing
to do is here.
Because I'm struggling throughto figure out what the right
thing to do is here because Iwant to be a good In a just
world.
The right thing to do is lovethe Holy Father and not speak
ill of him.
But we've been through 12 yearsof just I think Steph tweeted

(15:39):
it from your account to say weall have Pope Traumatic Stress
for from 12 years of just beingbeaten over the head, right.
So it's like your instinct isto stay in that mode.
But should we take a lighterstance on this?
I don't, I don't, I don't know.

Speaker 3 (15:53):
In a just world, there's one thing that matters
and it's the truth and it's in.
The truth is a person, and wenever have to negotiate.
If you, if you say I want to dotruth plus, I want to lay it on
a little thick, that's calledlying, that's optimism and it's
also inaccuracy.
If you go the other side andyou go I want to do, which
everyone was accusing me of onTwitter, I don't appreciate it

(16:14):
very much.
I want to do truth minus, Iwant to leave off some, some
palliative true facts about thisguy.
That's lying, that's inaccuracy.
I want the exact truth, as thisiceberg is becoming clear and
clear.
And guess what, anthony, thisone shouldn't this pontificate,
should not take three, four,five, six years to start telling

(16:39):
, to start deciphering.
Whether it's good or not.
I give him a week, maybe acouple weeks, but there is one
clear litmus test for him and itis Amoris Laetitia.
It is so we have Jesus versusPope Francis because, remember,
pope Francis was not ablebecause of the Americans, which

(16:59):
is why this guy got elected, theright-wing Americans.
Francis never knew how to dealwith the pushback.
It was slower than he andMcCarrick and the mysterious
Italian gentleman thought hewould be able to proceed with
those four Gaul and agenda items.
He got to one of them.
He couldn't ever get to two,three or four, and the one item
was Amoris Laetitia, chaptereight, together with the

(17:21):
response to the Argentinebishops in September of 2016,.
You have the only correctinterpretation.
What was that correctinterpretation?
I, pope Francis, imright adult.
You know.
Remarriage after divorce is notadultery.
Jesus is wrong.
That's the proposition itstands for very directly, very

(17:41):
linearly.
I don't care how nice this Popeis, I don't care how much gold
he has on his ring or any ofthat stuff.
That's all.
I was talking about this withanother friend I won't name who
it is.
That's called trading.
I want the Latin mass, but Idon't want the Latin mass traded
for homo stuff.
I don't want the Latin massbeing here to stay or homo stuff

(18:05):
.
I don't want the latin mass no,of course not morris letizia
being here to stay.
That's the litmus test, and ifhe's a good guy, it'll be within
the first month he has to tendto it.
If not, he's a bad guy.

Speaker 2 (18:12):
It's that simple okay , so you're a um, a moral
foundation and truth guy beforea practice.
So, like your, your, your thingis are those which, of course,
we all should be like, obviously, like where I would say those
gestures of um, of, of at leastsignaling, like gestures of

(18:37):
goodwill.
Shouldn't we respond withgoodwill in in the beginning,
like I, like?
I think a big thing is heshould respond to the dubia
right off the bat, because thatwould clear everything up.

Speaker 3 (18:48):
Right, it's because it can't be faked or traded.
Can him say yes?

Speaker 2 (18:53):
or no.
What the dubia questions areyes or no?

Speaker 3 (18:59):
Yes or no, but he wouldn't fake or trade upon them
, because that stands for theentire proposition of him being
a good guy.
Will you undo what needs to beundone about Francis?
Can he chant a few things inLatin?
Because the Golan guys are likethese American trads are idiots
.
Say a couple sentences in Latinand they will worship you.
Yes, because of Pope traumaticstress disorder.

(19:22):
Yes, so he can give thatwithout giving up any of the
ghost man, and that's why that'snot the litmus test.

Speaker 2 (19:31):
Yeah, Okay, so your thing is just the main thing
with Francis, so it's like hehas to go back to that.
But I mean there are so many ofthose things that need to be
corrected that you could even goback.

Speaker 3 (19:47):
There's really only one.
There's only one that throwsour church into a constitutional
crisis and it's Amoris Laetitia, chapter 8.
That's the only one that reallythrows our church into a
constitutional crisis and,conveniently, it's the only gall
and agenda item that Francisactually got to because he had
to go so slow.
So it's, it's a tellpraxeologically, the latter

(20:09):
point, and it's a tell um it andit's just most important
constitutionally as a kind offirst thing.
You got first thing and secondthing there.
That's why it's the ultimatetell and I will, I will call
this guy the best Pope ever Ifhe comes out and does it.
I just think because, like yousaid, anthony, people are being
mimetically dishonest today.

(20:29):
They're mimetically lying, theyknow he's not.

Speaker 2 (20:34):
I don't know.

Speaker 3 (20:35):
They know he's probably not going to do that.
He's probably Mara Diaga's man,all right.

Speaker 2 (20:40):
I'll tell you what I think is actually happening.
I don't think it's even memeticdesire.
I think that trads understandpart of the reason Traditionis
came down was because of theopposition and we all gravitated
towards the Latin mass Right.
So if we're still theopposition like we were, we're
hoping for those gestures andthen we want to see it continue

(21:04):
on and then go into some of themajor problems in the doctrinal
issues of Francis.
But we would like to at leastnot be seen as the opposition
from the jump to this guy,because then you're like I don't
, you're setting yourself up tochallenge the pope from day one,
saying's the he's the pick ofthe saint cala mafia and things

(21:26):
like that, which I don't evendeny.
But I also don't want to be thereason that there aren't those
gestures given and that maybethere can be some, some goodwill
between the parties, like ifwe're setting ourselves up as
the proponents to the papacyright from the get-go that's
just such honestly convolution.

Speaker 3 (21:47):
Anytime we're talking and someone starts saying, well
, this might be true, but whatif it's seen this way, then you
kind of have to go intosubjuncted reality.
And well, it's true, but it'sseen this?
I I don't.
I don't know how to reason.
I don't reason like that thinkabout what I'm saying.

Speaker 2 (22:01):
I'm saying it's like we start this papacy off and
we're already going at the guyfor things he did before he even
became Pope.
Like I don't see how anygroundwork gets laid for
anything if we are already inthat position.
That's all I'm saying.
I think, like what we didyesterday, it's like okay, this

(22:23):
is the guy they gave us, he wastheir choice, he is this.
Like every single thing youtalked about leading up to that
conclave was true, like you, noteven specifically about him,
just what they were going to do.
There is the clues of thebrother giving the interview,
saying that he knew he was goingto be the pick a day after
Francis passed.

(22:43):
We do know that he was AustinIvory's guy and Father James
Martin's guy.
We know all of this.
So we know who the guy is.
We get that information out.
But I think there has to besome kind of a like all right,
we're going to, we're going toback off, we're going to accept
you as, but will you, are yougoing to be the St?

Speaker 3 (23:10):
Gallen guy, or are you going to start going in and
correcting some of these errors?
Okay, but so that's why theepistemic ground for this
conversation needs to centeraround.
You said you think he becomes anew man when he's pope.
I I say he's very.
He's the same man.
He literally the strongest leftposition he has, aside from the
fact he's very anti-deathpenalty is um.
The 2014 family synod had thisargument that broke out in one
of the Turkoli minori.
I don't know if you rememberthis, but it was, if we do, an

(23:32):
eventual Amoris Laetitia.
This is what the Africans, likeSarah, were saying.
You're talking about doctrinalauthority to local or national
bishops, conferences on naturallaw questions, and Cardinal
Casper goes yes and Pope Francisended up saying yes.
So in other words, two and twois four.
In Poland, if you cross theborder into Germany, two and two

(23:55):
equals five, and the Africansand some of the Asians shut it
down until Amoris Laetitia.
This current new Pope hasweighed in very strongly on said
question.
He said doctrinal authorityneeds to inhere in the local
bishops.
This is synodality.
This is the strongest leftposition he has and it's the

(24:16):
most important one.
And he weighed in on fiduciasupplicans, but it applies
across all.
Like I'm a, I'm a, I'm a moralphilosopher, I'm working on a
doctorate in action theory.
This is catastrophe at thehighest level.
If two and two cannot be fourin Poland and two and two be
five in Germany, nor cansomething constitute murder in

(24:40):
Poland but not murder in God'seyes in Germany.
And this was the most toxicpoison of Francis, and you know
who said so, benedict.
It's the worst poison in theworld.
It's relativism.
And this Prevost, strongly,everywhere, in multiple
documents, has said this is whatI believe.
And also he's the prefect forthe Dicastery of bishops who

(25:04):
made an enemy out of the onlybishops in the american, in the
usccb, who had my position notwo or everywhere, and he's the
guy that got him.
So he's.
He's the hitman.
Sorry man, he's not a new man.
Now maybe a miracle can happenand he can turn over a new leaf.
New leaf, possible new man.

Speaker 2 (25:24):
That's fairy tale stuff yeah, I'm not saying I'm
not look, I'm.
I'm not saying new man in thatrespect.
I'm saying with the officecomes grace.
And because we've seen thisbefore, where they think they
elected a liberal and then whatwinds up happening is the the
guy becomes the most like he,like I think it was pious the
ninth they elected thinking hewas a progressive, and he comes

(25:45):
in and he winds up being likethe most based pope ever.

Speaker 3 (25:48):
I'm not saying that's going to happen at first for a
few years and then he becamereally based, but and that can
happen he wasn't a, um, adefender of heresy, though.
That's the difference.
Um, nick, do you have thoughts,or like what?
Do you have thoughts?
What's your view on all this?

Speaker 1 (26:06):
Essentially my view is one of optimism, mostly just
because, while I understand therational critique of the current
Holy Father, the concerns aboutprevious statements that he has
made, I do believe that theHoly Ghost is powerful and good
enough that, if it so be in hiswill for him to grace us with a

(26:30):
Pope that can do a lot of goodand a lot of change.
Then that will be what happensand I think it's the Christian
thing to do, ultimately, to dotwo things.
One is again like we have amixed bag kind of before us of
statements.
I think it's the Christianthing to do.
To number one, presume the bestright, just presume the best as

(26:52):
much as possible, becausethat's what we would honestly
want to have done to us.
But then the second thing wouldbe that we would, I would say,
do a better this is mostlydirected at me, but this could
be applicable to other peopleout there Also spend a lot more
time in prayer and contemplationfor the Holy Father so that he

(27:15):
would hopefully cooperate withthe graces that would be set
before him when it comes to hisoffice that now he's in task
with.
So essentially that's now he'sin tasked with.
So essentially that's myposition it's one of.
There is a myriad of people whoare giving various opinions on
all of these things and at themoment it's like, well, we have
kind of a myriad of data.
Let's kind of wait and see,let's hope for the best, right,

(27:40):
you know, expect, you know, Ithink, expecting the worst
ultimately, while we can, on theone hand, you don't want to
fall into a sense of like afalse hope, I do think that you
also need to, at the same time,recognize that things could be
turned out very, verydifferently than potentially
when we might expect.

(28:00):
So I have a more optimisticview whenever it comes to it all
, because ultimately, I thinkthat that's a more healthy
approach to take.
It's not denying any issues,right, I want to be clear with
that.
It's not denying potential, anyissues.
But at the same time, I dothink that when one has to give
as much of the benefit of thedoubt as possible, I got.

Speaker 3 (28:18):
Where do you think you differentiating from me?
I don't know how much.
I don't know your positionuntil I just asked.
I don't know what you'recharacterizing as mine.
So when you say pray more, whatif I said I just spent 23.5
hours praying?
I'm not saying I did, but let'shypothetical this Someone that
prayed for him 23 hoursyesterday needs to pray more.
Or are you saying alternatively, someone that prayed for him 23

(28:40):
hours couldn't come away withthe position like, oh no, this
looks really bad.

Speaker 1 (28:48):
Yeah, sure, I think one could come away with a
position of if you alreadyprayed a ton and walk away
saying, oh, this looks bad.
But at the same time I wouldsay really, regardless, it
doesn't matter how much you prayor whatever your thoughts are,
you're tasked to pray, and sothat's what would be my basic
answer.

Speaker 2 (29:06):
All right, that's not , that's not the point.
I, it's, it's.
Look, we're trying to figureout the proper position in this
right and I and I think I thinkyou know, uh, nick has one
argument and nick, yourdisposition is you just don't
want to.
Um, I'm pretty sure you justdon't want to add to any of the
drama in this.

(29:26):
You're thinking more along thelines of you'll be held to
account for every idle word andyou want to make sure that your
words are very precise and stuff.
But Tim is getting to a pointof truth and it's like I'm
trying to figure out what theproper way to handle this is.
I never want to lie.
This is why I'm glad I broughtTim on because, like, I fall

(29:48):
into mimetic desire very easily.
Like I, I want, I want to.
It's not that I want to goalong with the crowd, it's that
I don't want to have the wrongposition on this.
So I don't want to be a coward,like I'm afraid to say what
needs to be said, but at thesame time, I'm trying to figure
out at what point does sayingwhat needs to be said become
detraction against the Pope,because we're Catholic and

(30:10):
there's like you're not supposedto rile up.
You know like you're notsupposed to rile up opposition
to the Pope.
So I don't know, I don't, Idon't know.

Speaker 3 (30:20):
That's the first important point that I was going
to make to to nick was um, totry you.
I think you're both operatingon a misdefinition of detraction
, so it's impossible.
There are two types of gossip.
Right for people out there,there's calumny.
If you're speaking false things, that's always mortal.
No, no one's doing that.
Yesterday, even the most shrillI don't know who the shrillest

(30:41):
person on the other end of thespectrum would be, certainly
wasn't me, but someone beingmore shrill wasn't even doing
calumny because they weren'tlying Detraction now, and so I
think you're both mistaking.

Speaker 2 (30:52):
Maybe I don't know, maybe I'm getting the definition
of detraction.

Speaker 3 (30:53):
Detraction is when you reveal true, private facts
publicly.
So you're not lying if youcommit detraction and usually
it's venial but you arerevealing true facts, which is
what you guys are pointing at,but they're private facts
publicly.
It's impossible to commitdetraction when you're dealing
with something, when someone hasalready said something publicly

(31:16):
, particularly someone hasalready scandalized themselves
publicly.
So, um, the catechism is veryclear about this, both Trent and
1993.
The only cure to public scandalis a public repudiation, either
by self or others.
So, unfortunately, provost hasalready committed himself to a

(31:38):
fair amount of scandal, right bysaying that the death penalty
is wrong in and of itself, bysaying most of all that the
doctrinal authority of thebishops is essentially a walking
relativism.
And this is a strong positionhe has, which brings me to the
second point.
So the only cure to this it'snot actually detraction, it

(32:01):
would just be speaking publiclyabout public facts.
It's like you said, authorityof bishops is not a mixed bag.
It's very clear and he'swritten it and he's spoken it
very frequently and it's theworst part and it needs to be
clarified his father nicks inthe chat.

Speaker 2 (32:19):
Is that why people are saying bring father nicks on
?

Speaker 1 (32:21):
I didn't it I don't know, I'm aware of what the
definition of detraction is.
My whole point is more so youcan speak the things that are
true, and you can do so in amanner in which, ultimately, is
not helpful for the souls thatare out there.
So what I mean by that is that,on the one hand, yes, you can
speak something that's true andmaybe your intention is good

(32:45):
with it.
Right, the intention is tospeak truth and to call out that
which is evil.
Right, that's, of course,that's fine.
But if the intention behind it,um, let's just say, let's say
it is good, right, but theeffect of it is really, really
negative, especially in acontext in which it's like okay,
he's, my mustache is older thanhis pontificate, you know, it's

(33:06):
like it.
We're kind of just starting offhere I'm afraid it's nice.

Speaker 3 (33:10):
It's going to wind up being nicer than it's
pontificate?

Speaker 1 (33:13):
I hope not, but it's like uh, because I can barely
grow one, but uh it's more it's,it's more like it's pretty nice
, it's pretty nice let's, let'slet the guy you know, let's give
the guy some time, you know,because, because I mean, here's
the thing that I see anyonesaying is let's give him time,
but it looks bad and thatthey're not gonna.

(33:34):
Yeah, go ahead I think you canrightly say, like there's, as
I've said before, there areissues right that can be very
concerning.
But my issue, more so, is thatwhen you run into a lot of the
individuals who do spend a lotof chronic time here online,
it's very easy for people todoom pill super, super quick.

Speaker 3 (33:54):
Yeah, and my point is it's like I've seen a hard
example of someone, becauseeveryone's out there finger
wagging today and no one'ssaying what their finger like,
like the platonic form ofsomeone that that needs to be
finger wagged at about this Ican, I can, I just I'll just say
this I think that um shadowboxing?

Speaker 2 (34:14):
if not, well, yeah, well, first off, I'm not.
I'm a high school dropout, andyou're using words that I'm
gonna have a hard time keepingup with you.

Speaker 3 (34:21):
But I know yourself, anthony, that's what I'm saying.
Like you did not say anythingwrong.
Hard time keeping up with you.
But I know yourself, anthony,that's what I'm saying.
Like you did not say anythingwrong when I was on with you.

Speaker 2 (34:28):
Yeah, well, no, this is why I'm glad I brought you on
.
Like I want to be heldaccountable, especially by
somebody like like you, becauseI don't.
I never want to be a coward.
I'm trying to find the rightposition here because I don't
want to rile up like I don'twant to here.
Because I don't want to rile upLike I don't want to, I don't

(34:48):
want to go into this pontificatejudging Pope Leo on Prevost,
but he is the same person Likeyou're saying.
I just I think I think what wedid yesterday was totally
understandable, especially afterthe Francis pontificate.
The information absolutely ispublic and I think it was the
reason we did it was to givepeople like a reasonable
expectation for this pontificate.

(35:09):
Like, guys, this is the guywe're dealing with Like be
reasonable.
So when I'm seeing everybodygoing, I give my undying loyalty
to the Pope.
It's like whoa.
Like you guys, I was watchinglive streams yesterday and I was
watching everybody's face dropand everybody's reaction in the
moment was holy crap, we're introuble Now.
We came on air and we voiced itfor two and a half hours and

(35:31):
then we did get the fingerwagging from Brian Holdsworth
and Eric Sammons and those.
I don't think.
I don't, I don't know ifanybody was, I don't, I didn't
hear Brian's, but I thinkeverybody was like, guys, can
you just chill out and give theguy a minute?
And I'm trying to, I'm tryingto be open to fraternal
correction and say, ok, wait,maybe I should give the guy a
minute and let him come in.

(35:51):
Maybe he will answer the dubia.
But in the meantime he isbringing a little bit of dignity
back to the papal office, whichwe haven't seen in 12 years.
Like I know they're just.
I know to you, tim, they'rejust.
It's like oh cool, he put some,some dressing on the thing.
But there is something I'm atrad that way I like it.

Speaker 3 (36:09):
I'm just saying it's too easy to trade upon and I
called it before he even did anyof it.

Speaker 2 (36:13):
I'm like no, I know, we talked about it yesterday.

Speaker 3 (36:16):
Well, yeah, I was saying it the day before.
Okay, what they might get is aguy.
That's like all right, I'll saya few extra things in Latin.
Let's have some homo stufflegalized.
Let's keep a Morse litigia onthe books.
We can't have that.
But I, all I'm saying is that'svery clear.
So we, we've established.
Nick, anthony, tim, this wasn'tdetraction.

(36:37):
Uh, language is inherently good.
It's, it's a conditional good.
It's inherently good If itdoesn't run into any of the
vices following upon the firstprinciple of practical reason.
So when you're saying truethings, unless it's detraction,
or you know one of the other, orgossip, you know it can be a
truish gossip between detractionand calumny.
And there are a few otherpitfalls to avoid.

(36:59):
We avoided all of them.
Why is it wrong to judge acongressman by his record, or a
man by his public record, or abishop who has committed scandal
and say I hope, I hope he doesbasically become a new man,
however unlikely.
That's all I said.
That's all you know?

Speaker 2 (37:17):
okay, so, but from so , I have no issue with what we
did yesterday in bringing publicinformation to light, but when
I woke up this morning, you didthe same thing.
You said I am praying for PopeLeo XIV.
Right, I said it yesterday.
Oh, okay, I didn't know if itwas this morning or yesterday.
It's like I pray for PopeFrancis.

Speaker 3 (37:37):
That just shows you how out there I am on the prayer
wagon, you know.

Speaker 2 (37:43):
You see what my point is, though right, it's like,
can't, like he's.
He is making these symbolicgestures of goodwill and and and
bringing a bit of a dignityback to the papal office, which
is one of our biggest criticisms.
To be fair, like it was, likeone of the biggest things was
francis, just he.
He put this false humilityforward and acted like oh, I'm
gonna wear the simple whitecassock because that's the

(38:05):
humble thing.
I'm going to go pay my.
I'm going to go pay my billmyself at the hotel room, I'm
not going to live in theapostolic palace.
All these for show gesturesthat weren't actual humility,
they were false humility.
So this Pope comes back in andhe doesn't do any of that
nonsense, and he brings back notjust that, he comes out with
the, with, with the Crozier.
That's like Pope Pius theKnights Crozier, and it's like

(38:27):
there's things he's doing tosignal to us this is not going
to be the same as the past 12years.

Speaker 3 (38:33):
But you have to, you have to, just on this, think in
in dichotomous terms it's eithera or B.
Given that we know it's notgossip, we, at least two of two
of the the worst cardinals,probably the two worst cardinals
, aside from maybe casper andthe surviving golem guys, supich
, who is very close with, andmara diaga, the francis

(38:56):
kingmaker, they like him.
So that throws us into this aor b situation, knowing that.
And then you pepper in theother guy's world.
Looked pleased his punch and,uh, ivory.

Speaker 2 (39:08):
I know it's either.

Speaker 3 (39:10):
Okay, so he's coming in, and and the presumption now
throws us to the defaultposition.
It's in law.
It's called a rebuttablepresumption, given that the most
important fact we know abouthim bar none who elected?
Who elected him?
Whose man are you?
As Bill Cutting says right,whose man are you?
Everyone's, someone's man whenthey're voted in.

(39:30):
Whose man are you?
Okay, so we know.
So the rebuttable presumption isnow, he's Golan's man, and
that's not.
It's not a non-rebuttablepresumption.
So it's either a that he'sgoing to come in, and what would
he do if he is the Golan man?
He would be a shrew, a muchshrewder than Francis.
He would make overtures.

(39:53):
You combine it with why did weget a North American Pope that
that supposedly likes the Latinmass?
Oh, okay, well, of course, onsituation a, if he's a Golan man
, I'm not sure, though.
That's for me the rebuttablepresumption.
I think it's hard to sayotherwise.
Given who gave us him, this isprecisely how he would act, but
I'm not saying I know that yet.
That would be potentially lastjudgment.

(40:15):
Or B, that's all just a bunchof unlikely coincidence, perfect
storm.
And he's really the world'sbest pope and's going to get rid
of um uh amoris in a week, thenI I still will have nothing to
apologize for.
I'll just be like dude.

Speaker 2 (40:31):
You looked, you had the look of a murderer, bro, but
I'm so thrilled I don't thinkyou owe an apology, though I, I,
I think, um, even even the newsreports that came out today
where it's like dolan was thekingmaker behind the scenes,
like I think that's allpropaganda they're giving us to
make us think something happenedthat didn't actually happen.
Like I, I, I am not naive towhat we are dealing with.

(40:52):
That's not my point.
I still think what we saidyesterday was 100% true.
My, my point is from hereforward, what is, what is the
position I want to take?
From here and give him thatleeway of time to, to, to show
either.
This is, you know, he took thename leo, but is he really
francis at heart?
Like I want, I want to give theman some space and I also don't

(41:14):
want to come out bashing himand ruin the gestures he's
giving by giving him the middlefinger and then he says, okay,
well, you know what?
Maybe francis was right topunish you assholes.

Speaker 3 (41:25):
I wasn't on the whole show.
I did not give him the middlefinger.
I don't advise giving thePontifex Maximus the middle
finger.
I didn't do that any yesterday.
People were saying it's theequivalent of the middle finger

(41:45):
to say huh.
Here's five statements where hesaid doctrinal authority,
relativistic doctrinal authority, should be given to local
bishops.
That's actually, that'smaterial heresy.
I really, I really hope that herethinks this.
That's that's not the middlefinger.
And further to that I wouldjust say um, yesterday, all day
long, I probably said it twodozen times we have to wait and
see, because the question isalways what else can we do about
it anyway?
Which kind of nick said we haveto wait and see.

(42:06):
But I'm just saying therebuttable presumption going
forward is he is the golancandidate, ostensibly now,
because, um, unless you just saysupich and maradiaga and
probably any of that.

Speaker 2 (42:20):
Yeah, I'm still saying he is the holy father,
though.
Right, so it's like so, likethere's a certain position.

Speaker 3 (42:26):
That's all I'm saying .

Speaker 2 (42:27):
Yeah, no, no, no.
I get that.
I just think that with, like,the offices, oh dignity.
So I had no problem with whatwe said yesterday, but my
position today was going to become on and I'm just, I'm going
to, I'm going to take a stepback and I want to give this man
some room to breathe and seewhat he wants, Because even if
he is the St Gallen candidate,he's still the freaking Pope and

(42:48):
he could go.
I don't care what anybody I owenobody anything.
I'm the Pope.
In reality, he owes our.
Lord.

Speaker 3 (42:57):
Jesus Christ, everything.

Speaker 2 (42:58):
Well, that's it right , so he could come in and go I
don't care what.

Speaker 3 (43:03):
Yeah, he owes more than you and I owe as heavy as
the head that wears the crown.
So he owes much, much more thanyou.
Remember all of jesus'spassages on?
See, this is that protestantthing where I start going.
I think catholics have boughtthe protestant lies about the
pope that we at that.
He is actually.
You know, we're worshipful ofhim.

(43:24):
The Pope is beware being astumbling block.
Heavier is the head.
When you're in charge,everything's your fault.
So the Pope is not some guy weworship.
That's what Protestants havelied about us for the last 500
years.
He owes more than I owe or youowe.
He gets more credit and moreblame together.

(43:45):
It's not.
It's not all of the credit,none of the blame.
And jesus, our lord, directlysaid this to his apostles when
he was giving him the keys.
He's like if you become astumbling block, you're going to
be way more punished thanordinary guys like anthony or
tim or nick or you know.
We have to reconfigure that.

Speaker 2 (44:04):
But that's fine, but like what we did yesterday, we
did so what's, what's the?
Like you so you were going tocome on today and it's like, do
we want to just keep releasingall that?
It's like we know who the guy,where he came from, we know who
he is.
What is the?
What is the position to go fromfrom here?
Do we give this guy some roomand let him be the pope?

(44:24):
Because part of it is also notjust the, not just the pope,
it's, it's the disunity betweenChristian brothers.
Also, like there's something toseeing brothers at peace that I
that I do love the idea of,because we're supposed to rally
around our holy father and we'resupposed to have the father be
good to his children and wehaven't had that for 12 years.

(44:46):
I'm tired, you know, maybe it'sa bit of exhaustion from that
and and missing just being ableto just go hey, you're my
brother in Christ.
I don't, I don't want to, Idon't know and I'm on.
I'm genuinely looking for theright position from this point
forward, not from yesterday.
I did what I did yesterdaybecause it needed to be said.

(45:06):
You and I knew what was comingin the lead up to this.
We talked about it the day of,but now this is 24 hours in.
He's made a few gesturestowards us and it's like all
right, from here I want to seewhat the guy does.
And then even, even even beyondthat, like what I don't, I
don't know what is like, I don'tknow if I have it in me to be
that guy again.

(45:28):
I guess I don't know.
Man, the freaking past coupleof years were exhausting.
Just being angry Like I want tolove the Holy father, dude, I
just I think we all just missbeing Catholic and loving the
Pope.
So I don't know, I don't know.

Speaker 3 (45:42):
Of course.
But what we miss and love abouthim is that he's the visible
sign of unity on earth.
He is the sign of unity inChristendom on earth and Pope
Francis was not.
He was a sign of division.
I don't it's victim blaming andit's what did you say yesterday
?
Stockholm syndrome.
I take no blame for that.
Look, I got a thousand problems.
I got a thousand faults.

(46:02):
That's not one of them.
I did not sow discord under PopeFrancis.
He did, he did, he did.
And this guy, his own brother,said he's not going to be
differentiable from Francis.
I played that clip on my shownow.
He was made by Francis prefectof the Dicastery of Bishops.
He was sowing discord among, inmy view and I think yours the

(46:26):
bad bishops elevated to be goodinsofar as they kept their seat,
and the holiest American bishopI could think of was Strickland
and this guy put him down.
So it seems like we're still insubversive world where the Pope
is not the visible sign ofunity.
If the Pope were going to bethe visible sign of unity, I
think he'll.
That might be a second litmustest, though it's not as clear

(46:48):
yeah, john henry weston.

Speaker 2 (46:50):
John henry weston said the litmus test is what he
does with strickland.
I don't think it is.
I think it's definitely thedubia and I and I don't know if
that means that uh, burke has toresubmit dubia to clarify
amorous.
But I do think, like you said,like we're going to get some,
okay cool, you're gonna get yourlatin mass back.
But if we just pretend thefrancis pontificate, like if we

(47:11):
just because I talked tosomebody today in more of the
mainstream world and they werelike what well, what, if, what,
if, what, if?
Um leo just wants to like kindof move forward and he doesn't
want to.
But it's like there are toomany errors that have to be
corrected.
I just want to give the guyenough time to correct them.

Speaker 3 (47:28):
But that's all I was saying yesterday.
And and all I.
I listened to a couple of thethings you said and I was like
nodding.
And then you apologize for whatyou said yesterday, and I'm
like you.
You have to find a fault to apart, locate a false logo.
What did you say yesterday?
That was wrong?
I heard nothing when I was withyou.
So it it's.
It's dangerous to to backtrackand not knowing what, not know

(47:50):
what you're backtracking, andthat that's just where everyone
seems to be now.
Someone on my stream I thinkyou'll agree with everything I
said on my stream, by the way.
Someone on my stream saidtaylor took down his video.
Maybe it was for some I didn'ttake mine.

Speaker 2 (48:03):
Yeah, I wasn't gonna take mine down.
I want it up for posterity'ssake, because I do think this
guy's going to let us down and Iwant to be able to go.
Look, we left it out becausethere is a pressure to not be
the guy that spoke out againstthe public.
It's like we did our show.
I'm leaving that freaking thingup because when it comes time
and I do think that's gonnahappen I hate to say it, say it,
but I mean I, I don't thinkwhat.

(48:26):
I don't think we're crazy forthe things that we brought up
yesterday to assume the thingswe assumed.
But I do think there is alittle bit of presumption there.
You know it's not crazy, butthere is presumption there and I
do want to give this guy enoughspace.

Speaker 3 (48:41):
It's just non-dispositive evidence.
Like if you, if the police pullover a guy that looks like a
murder suspect, that's realevidence, even if he's not the
guy, it's just non-dispositive.
And then if they see, they lookdown and in between kind of his
knees in the car, he's holdinga knife, oh, that's more
evidence, still not dispositive.
Let's pretend he just is a guythat looks like the murderer in

(49:03):
a similar part of town and he'sholding a kitchen knife and he
just bought that kitchen knife.
Maybe it's a Slasher Deluxe andhe just purchased it.
It's mounting evidence.
But what I think a lot ofnormies don't understand, normie
, trads, normie, whateverseculars normie Novus Ordo is
it's real evidence, even upuntil the fact that it becomes

(49:24):
dispositive.
And there's a lot of negativereal evidence against this guy.
The only bit of countervailingreal evidence for hope I've seen
is not the fact that he saidlike hi, what's up, guys?
In Latin it's that on April30th.
So this proves my objectivity.
This is the only thing thatmade me say oh wow, maybe, just

(49:46):
maybe, on April 30th he was atBurke's apartment top secret
summit.
He was at Burke's apartment andmost people have missed that.
I only found that this morning.
Maybe you sent it to me orsomething.
That is a real sign of hope.
Now it's still 90, 10, but ifwe get another real one not not

(50:08):
that he said what's up in Latinthen I'll go oh, it's 80, 20.
And then eventually maybe it'llturn out Hopefully it'll be
within a month he undoes thedoobie and then I'll say that's
why it was meeting with Burke,that's why Burke had that other
nice message.
I mean like I hope for it, man,I pray for it, yeah, so what?

Speaker 2 (50:26):
what is going to be your approach going forward?
Are you just not going to?
I mean, obviously there's goingto be things in the new.

Speaker 3 (50:35):
Like are you?
Are you, how are you going tohandle this?
Going forward, just saying, asalways, just true, just you know
, whatever happens, that's,that's true, that's already of
public record.
Assess it with as much of myyou know.
You know, trained in philosophy, trained in the law,
cause-based approach, when youuse causation as your guide,
causation is the you know,formal cause and truth is the

(50:58):
final cause.
You're not going to go wrong.
You might get the wrong answer,but you're not going to go
wildly astray.
So it's just like hey, everyday we pray for this guy, it
should be reasonably soon.
One thing I will be.
I'll time myself to this mass.
The litmus test is undoingchapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia and

(51:19):
taking that Argentine letterout of the Acta Apostolica setus
and tearing it up and saying,sorry, I chose Jesus over
Francis.
He's going to have to do thatand he'll have to do it swiftly.
So I hadn't thought of thisyesterday.
But the one area our analysiswas wrong.
You and I were saying oh, no,two to four more years of the

(51:41):
mimetic phony pretending Francisis good when it was clear he
was bad right away.
I just don't want to deal withthat.
We won't have to, because if hehasn't done the litmus test
with him, it's bad.

Speaker 2 (51:57):
I don't think he's going to.
I don't think he's going to,though I think for the same
reason, for mimetic desire onhis part, because, because you
saw right from the beginning, hecomes out on the loggia and
right away it's Francis andmodality like he's.
I don't think we're going toget the corrections, but I do
think we're going to get somegestures, like you said.

(52:19):
Now, the difference I'll takefrom you about the liturgy stuff
is that I really do believe LexArandi, lex Credendi, and I
think if he gives Traditionisback, you may not make progress
during his pontificate with thethings you're discussing, but
it's going to form people,because the doctrine in that

(52:41):
mass, if you're actually soakedin it, is going to form people,
to be deepened in their faith,and then maybe you get some
movement in the next generationor something I don't know.
I think those gestures could behelpful in the battle and I
don't think we should just mockthem when they come our way.

Speaker 3 (52:58):
Well, we haven't had any yet.
Real ones, like the undoing ofTraditionis Custodis, as long as
it's not a trade.
Do you acknowledge that itcould be a trade, though?
I mean this?
This is something that umgeorge farmer said to me and I'm
like yeah, this is this isexactly what I said yesterday.
He's like I don't want thelatin mass as part of some trade
for doctrine.
Doctrine always trumpsdiscipline.

Speaker 2 (53:19):
I want tradition is gone, I want the nova zordo gone
.

Speaker 3 (53:24):
I that would be based .
I don't think we're going toget either of those, but if we
get Tradicionas gone, I'mworried.
It's a trade and you can nevertrump the standing festering
canker on the heart that is wehave right now.
When Protestants say, oh, whyare you Catholic?
And you say, well, becausewe've never had habitual error

(53:46):
taught by popes, and two popesallow this heresy to stand.
Now in the act.
A apostolic ascetus, we can nolonger say that so it's.
There's nothing that's a closesecond to there is heresy in the
deposit of faith.
Right now it it's not beenhabitually taught yet.
He has to get rid of it or elsehe's the Golan candidate it's.

Speaker 2 (54:09):
It's not Okay.
So what?
Okay?
So what have you?
Because I don't think you'regoing to get the Dubia answer?
But what if a future documentcomes out clarifying something?
Right so undoing?

Speaker 3 (54:18):
undoing.
Most Dubia are submitted to the, to the CDF, and any Pope can
answer them.
They can be addressed to Popestoo, but they're usually
addressed to the CDF.

Speaker 2 (54:28):
CDF yeah.

Speaker 3 (54:29):
So any Pope can answer him.
But he needs to clarify Okay,fine, I don't care if it's a
resubmission or a do.
I don't care about the boringprocedural details.
He has to undo that.
He's got to yank that out ofthe AAS.
That's the worst thing that wehave as Catholics and
theoretically it could destroythe faith.

(54:50):
Right, we don't have anon-falsifiable position.
I mean same thing as when Idebate atheists.
I'd say they're like look, man,you're a smart guy.
Why do you buy this myth?
Bill Maher was saying it theother day.
He's so dumb.
I always just say look, go finda tomb with Jesus of Nazareth's
bones in it there, stillunresurrected, and I'll grant

(55:12):
you, okay, christianity is false.
I don't think you're going tofind it, but you have to see
that it's not a non-falsifiableproposition.
You're kind of taking away thenon-falsifiability of it man.
You're kind of taking away thenon-falsifiability of it man.
He's a good pope that we're allpraying for and hoping for, and
Eric Sammons and other trad isfeeling the shiver up their leg,

(55:32):
like Chris Matthews when Obamagot elected, because of what
should be a falsifiableproposition that he's a good guy
and he will not abide heresy.

Speaker 2 (55:43):
So it has to be dichotomous that way I think
everybody's just tired of thefight and they're just honestly
I really do, I don't think any,I don't.
I think everybody.
I don't think they're thatnaive, I think they know what
they're dealing with, butthey're tired of the fight and
they don't want to be seen asthe one that's still causing the
problems when you have a newpope in.

(56:04):
I think everybody's just goinglet's do a reset and let's just
give this guy some some time Ithink that's generally what it
is I think, I think lying, whichwhich is more than I've
actually even done.

Speaker 3 (56:15):
I don't think that's a?

Speaker 2 (56:16):
I don't think that's a lie.
I think everybody's sayinglet's, let's stop with the
hostilities and give the guysome time in domestic Thomistic
language, that would be asimulation.

Speaker 3 (56:25):
Like a simulation is an acted out lie.
If you're like, once you moveto start psychologizing,
assessing their motivation.
I'm tired too, man.
I streamed over five hoursyesterday.
I was incredibly depressed.
Last night, woke up feeling alittle better and I'm like I'm
tired too.
But when people say I'm tiredthe way like boomers say it,

(56:46):
like too tired to fight, I'mjust going to submit, I'm going
to say something that's notreally fully true.
Then you're getting into therealm of sort of simulation
where you're saying we're goingto, we're going to.
You know, nietzsche would callit dissimulation and I don't
want to accuse these people ofdissimulating or lying.

Speaker 2 (57:03):
I think it's a ceasefire, though, tim, like you
said, like you we even said theguy is coming here, he's an
American, he understands theAmerican media landscape and I
think it's a ceasefire, like Iliterally think that's what it
is.
Everybody's going, okay,ceasefire.

Speaker 3 (57:19):
I submit to the Roman Pontiff.
Let's see what this guy.
No, I've said that probably,probably, at least not two dozen
, one dozen times yesterday andtoday.
I didn't say I'm not going tosubmit to him, I said that
heresy cannot be.
You realize, this is like thenon-false viable.
This has to be the false viableproposition that the Roman

(57:39):
pontiff cannot habitually teachheresy.
Okay, so what?
We?

Speaker 2 (57:43):
actually, what we actually need is somebody to
bring this to our new AmericanPope, who speaks English, and it
has to be brought to him again.
And we have to like this isthis it's like we have a list of
demands to free the hostages,or something like like this has
to be brought to him.
Like these.
These are our major concerns.
It's not just a matter ofgiving us our latin mass like

(58:06):
these are the things that wehave held under the francis
pontificate.
It wasn't just that he wasawful, because I think everybody
thought the worst case scenarioyou're going to get a moderate
who's not going to be as cruelas francis, which I think is
what we're seeing right now.
You're getting this moderatelooking guy who's not being he
doesn doesn't hate people, likeFrancis had this particular
cruelty.

Speaker 3 (58:25):
You don't really know .
But yeah, he's probably lessmean because because Francis was
like the meanest guy ever, ever.
So even if he's kind of, orsomewhat, mean like, no one's as
mean as Francis, like ever Likeso but we just don't know.
I want to just start sayinghe's really nice.
I don't know that he's mean, Idon't know that he's nice.
There's really no, there's notemperamental indications, aside

(58:47):
from the fact that he doesn'tseem.
He doesn't seem as ostentatiousas Francis.
But heresy is where we can'tnegotiate.
And when you just say, well,people are tired, there's a
ceasefire, I don't disagree withany of that, unless you mean
therefore, heresy is going tostand.

Speaker 2 (59:04):
No, I don't.
I just If the heresy standsthen he's bad.

Speaker 3 (59:07):
It's that simple.

Speaker 2 (59:11):
I actually don't even think it's.
I don't think it's cowardice, Idon't think it's bad, I think
it's.
I think it's.
I'm almost like because all ofour instinct was to go in and
keep pressure on.
But I think there's something.
I think everybody's just going.
Look, we're not going to startthis pontificate off Like we

(59:31):
left off on the last one.
So let's just chill out andjust calm down and let this
thing, let the guys in for 24hours.

Speaker 3 (59:40):
So when you say calm, I say calm down to a feminine
yelling or or something.

Speaker 2 (59:45):
But we're but us going on, us going on, us going
on air repeat.
It's one thing to do the day of, but for us to go on repeatedly
, day after day, and still keeptalking about this stuff like
you're, you're, you can talkabout it normally, but you know
talking about it until theheresy is removed.

Speaker 3 (01:00:04):
See, we have to have.
But that you said calmly.
You also apologized for whatyou said yesterday.
So you're saying you're on bothsides of whether or not that
was even wrong or right.

Speaker 2 (01:00:14):
No, I will say definitively, I don't think it
was wrong.
I think I didn't apologize forwhat I said.
I apologized for my approach,because I think my approach was
wrong to go in with that hostileattitude, because I think if I
go into this thing aggressivefrom the jump, I'm setting a
tone against the Holy Fatherthat I don't want set and I

(01:00:34):
don't want to be the one that'sthe cause of it.
I don't want anybody, I don'twant anybody's punishment to
continue because I was brash orrash in my judgment and just
came out right from the gate notgiving this guy a minute to get
his feet on the ground.

Speaker 3 (01:00:52):
I I sorry, I don't know what approach is, but I,
you didn't say anything when Iwas with you that I deemed wrong
or rash at all.
So I just this is there's,there's a lot of non-false,
viable propositions, which iswhat I was seeing on Twitter.
I'm like I, you didn't sayanything wrong.
You were not like this guy's.
I I'm I'm sure he's going to bebad.

Speaker 2 (01:01:08):
This guy's mean that you know we discussed what you
had already, true, but butprivate it was.

Speaker 3 (01:01:14):
This guy has a really bad record and all the people
who voted for him are the badguys, which is what we were
afraid of, not, you know, sorry,not, sorry.
And so this throws us into a,an ab scenario, a, a prime
scenario.
He's got the look of a bad guy,even if he has golden shoes or
whatever, like it doesn't matter, a bad guy, he will maintain

(01:01:37):
the look of a bad guy until hedoes the main, until he throws
the main switch that the badguys would never want him to
throw, and it's needed for theperseverance of the Roman
Catholic Church.
We can't have heresy on thebooks, we have it on the books
now I agree.
It's simple man, I'm calm.
I just it's really, reallyimportant.
Things can be important andstill be calm about it.

(01:01:59):
I would never yell him down oryell anyone who disagreed with
me down.
It's just persevering in thetruth is what St Paul says we
should do.

Speaker 2 (01:02:07):
I want to run through some of these super chats,
cause I think people gotquestions, so we'll tell.
Action speak louder than words.
Thank you, logan.
Anthony the Pope's planer Never, we need hope, not cope.
But I don't want false hopeeither, like I I.

(01:02:36):
We need hope, not cope.
But I don't want false hopeeither, like I don't want,
because, like I said, the hopiumis a hell of a drug man.
I see everybody jumping onboard and it's like they're
making me know who this guy isin his past, but we want to
allow for grace to be given tohim as he assumes the office.
So I mean, that's kind of how Iwanted to come into this today.
Let's see.
All right, want to look at aPope who changed?

(01:02:57):
Look at Pius IX.
We talked about that already.
Wait and see.
Pope Leo will declare TrumpHoly Roman Emperor.
That's not going to happen.
Um, is it just me?
It is lawful to have zeroattraction right now.
Christian Mario?
Uh, okay, if James Martin SJ ishappy, that's troubling.
Absolutely agree.

(01:03:18):
I mean, this is, this is whatwe talked about yesterday.
So is that?

Speaker 3 (01:03:21):
a mean thing to say Sorry, it's your chat, but is it
a mean thing to say this?
Just dichotomous.
You know.
You know true or false.
The light switch got to be onor off.
If james martin is really happy, that's very troubling.
Can we just agree on that?
Can we just be common sense andnot no one dissimulate or
pretend that's really super bad?

Speaker 2 (01:03:41):
right, but I but I don't, I don't disagree with
that.
What I'm what I'm saying isthis essentially, it's like why
would Rome grant any concessionsif we go at him before he's
done anything as Pope?
Don't ignore it.

Speaker 3 (01:03:51):
Look if he's a really good Pope.
He's not going to not do goodthings because the good people
are a little suspicious.
The great saint Popes Pius IX,pius X, 9th, is only beatified
Pius X, but pious the ninth,pious the tenth, ninth is only
beatified pious the tenth.
They wouldn't have been badpopes just because the, the good
faithful people, were reallylike I really expect you to be

(01:04:12):
good.

Speaker 2 (01:04:12):
That makes no sense that propaganda is a powerful
tool.
Right, and if, and all of, justlike all all the memetic desire
towards okay, get behind thepope, is there.
If all the memetic desire wastowards bash this pope, that
propaganda.
Now you're riling the faithfulup to be already at this guy's
throat and I think that's thewrong approach well, I haven't
seen anyone matching him and wewe already agreed we weren't

(01:04:34):
doing that.

Speaker 3 (01:04:34):
I haven't seen anyone doing it, aside from like no, I
think you're.

Speaker 2 (01:04:37):
You're pretty alone in your approach, like it's got
to be a lonely place to be like.
I like know what.

Speaker 3 (01:04:42):
I mean Like it's matching him.

Speaker 2 (01:04:44):
No, no, no.
I'm saying like even I'mwatching everybody else just
kind of go with a new approachto this guy.
And you're, you're.
You were the one that came outyesterday just stating what
you're seeing.
I think, like even you said tome you were, like it, getting a
little sad about it, that youfelt like out on an island by
yourself a bit I just get sad.

Speaker 3 (01:05:05):
How stupid everyone is.
That that's, that's the honesttruth.
But no, do you think I wasbashing him because if so see,
this is where rash judgment getsreversed.
Brian holdsworth sounded likehe thought that a lot of people
probably me most were bashing.
I didn't say one bash bashfulthing.
That's not what bashful means.

(01:05:26):
Well, I mean, who's bad?
That's what I'm saying I'mgonna tell you though a shadow
man or a boogeyman who name oneperson in the chat.

Speaker 2 (01:05:35):
You know it was bashing francis yesterday, who's
a catholic, not some doucheprotestant you have a very
particular temperament where,like I see very rarely do I see
somebody like you're allfreaking um what are the four
temperaments.
It's like, uh, what are thefour temperaments?

Speaker 3 (01:05:55):
it's like I always forget them.
There's phlegmatic, there's notphlegmatic at all.
Uh, what's, what's the like?
Mean one the no, you're notsanguine or phlegmatic.

Speaker 2 (01:06:09):
You're the other one what's the mean?

Speaker 3 (01:06:11):
one irascible or something you're not passive,
aggressive?

Speaker 2 (01:06:16):
you're just aggressive.
Yeah, you're like aggressive,aggressive and you and you, when
you get something, when youfeel something like you're like
I don't give a crap who agreeswith me.
I'm going with this where Ithink a lot of people steph says
it's just called dma.

Speaker 3 (01:06:29):
No, but I mean I'm, but I what?
But that doesn't mean that Iwas bashing him right.

Speaker 2 (01:06:32):
I don't think you are I'm trying to tell you what,
the what, what I think.
So a guy like brian holdsworthor a guy like eric uh salmons,
those guys have more of aphlegmatic temperament.
Rob has more of a phlegmatictemperament.
Rob has more of a phlegmatictemperament.
They don't.
They don't like conflict, right.
So when they see you, even justcoming out on day one, going,
ok, this is, these are problemsthere To them, they're like oh,

(01:06:55):
I don't know, I wish like itjust sounds mean.

Speaker 3 (01:06:58):
you know, and I think a lot of people have, that it
just says people accusing me ofremember when, when he said the
po it was in latin, you know, Iwas like looking over here
because I don't have a monitorhere said cardinal robert, and I
was like holy cow, but this is,everything's gonna be all right

(01:07:19):
.
I thought it was robert sarah.
I had people on twitteraccusing me of like you, you
just need this for your show andI'm like that's so stupid one
Cause I hate talking about thepill.
It's the most boring topic, tobe honest.

Speaker 2 (01:07:31):
People that say what will you guys talk about?
What will you guys talk?
It's like stop it.
I'm an entertaining person.
I can talk about anything andmake the show entertaining.
It's ridiculous, but exactly.

Speaker 3 (01:07:46):
No, your show would be good, whether it was Pope
Sarah or Pope Francis II, and Ihave all these books.
I have a movie coming out Likethis is the stupid Michael Voris
, who, by the end of ChurchMilton was a major Pope-splainer
, would say that to me.
He'd like text me.
He's like what are you going todo when Francis dies?
I was like go to moreinteresting material.
I'm sick of talking about thisstuff and I'm just showing how

(01:08:08):
the nice guys are.
The nice passive, aggressiveguys are always the mean guys.
The nice guys are always themean guys.
That Canadian, whatever.
They're bitchy behind the scenesthey don't do it to your face.
No, they do.
They do it even right there.
They're literally saying likeoh man, they're accusing me in

(01:08:29):
very rash judgment of likesomething really wicked which
would be hoping that the I wasso hoping this would be pope
sarah, and and you have tobasically be saying that guys
like me, or you weredisappointed or were happy it
wasn't pope sarah, and that's no, that's, that's crazy but but
you also?

Speaker 2 (01:08:47):
there's, they're perceiving it as you're hoping.
This guy, because of his past,is like it's, it's silly, but
you're right, it doesn't makesense because, no, we wanted the
greatest pope ever and we wantthis guy to be the greatest pope
ever, but, but I, but are we?
Are you setting the expectationor the bar so high that you're
you were not giving the guyenough leeway to even do?

(01:09:08):
I mean, we're 24 hours in.

Speaker 3 (01:09:12):
It's not a high bar that he undoes the clear heresy
which is probably what he metwith Burke about.
Burke probably said he couldn'tmake some canvassing deal
because that's illegal.
It would violate UDG 81.
But he probably was like youknow what you need to do.
If you get in, you're gainingtraction.
That's probably what Burke'sdoing.

(01:09:33):
You're saying one of us needsto do it.
I'm sure that's what he's doing.
It is lying like an unspottedtumor on the heart of
Catholicism, not the Latin massstuff, as as important as that
is.
We can't have heresy beinghabitually taught.
It will explode the church.
That's literally what we'vebeen telling protestants for 500
years.
It's not too high a bar, bro,to say it's just no, I'm totally

(01:09:58):
, I'm not even all in on it.

Speaker 2 (01:10:00):
I told you I wanted.
I wanted to come on today andand, and and set a, a ceasefire,
that's it, just like I'm notgoing to.
First of all, I don't ever wantto be the opposition to the
pope anyway, like it's just aweird place to be as a catholic.
But today I was just going tocome on and say some nice things
about what he's done, justbecause I want to see where this

(01:10:22):
guy goes.
I want to give him some spaceto do some things.
He's in there 24 hours and Iwant to allow him to be the Pope
.
And I know, I know, but I'mgoing to.
It's going to be a, it's notgoing to be a false hope that
he's going to be the, the, the,the, you know, the great, uh,
rebuilder of the church, pope,pope.
But if he can do the couple ofthings you're talking about, I

(01:10:43):
want to give him some space todo it and I don't want him to
feel like he's already got theAmerican Catholic right media
after him, because I think thatis a very big part of this
equation.

Speaker 3 (01:10:54):
Well, I don't think it's false hope.
I think there's all hope, hope,legitimate hope also springs
eternal.
It's more conditional than cope, which I said springs eternal,
but I hope he's the greatestpope ever.
That's not.
That's not a counter contrafactual.
Like san augustine says, youcan, you can wish for two
parallel lines to meet somewherein eternity, but you can't hope

(01:11:15):
for it.
You know, sorry, bishop, baron,hope's got to be uh, rational.
It is not yet at that pointwhere it's irrational to hope
that he's the best pope ever.
So I, I guess I'm more hopefulthan you.
I hope that he is the greatestpope.

Speaker 2 (01:11:26):
No, this is this is this is falsifiable and it's,
we're gonna know I think this ismore of a debate between what
approach I wanted to take today.
That was it.
It was like it's, it's.
I just want to have a ceasefirefor a while, like I'm, I don't
know.
I don't think anything we saidyesterday was a lie.

(01:11:47):
I don't think any of it wasincorrect.
I think we gave people areasonable presentation of the
man that assumed the office ofthe papacy.
And don't set your expectationsto be irrational, that's all
Like.
Don't set your expectations.
Don't everybody go and be like,oh my God, he's the most base
pope ever, right off the bat,within 24 hours, because you see

(01:12:07):
that happening too.
I do think it's fun to trollprotestants and say stuff like
that, but like, in reality, whenyou're talking in-house to
fellow catholics, just bereasonable about what we're
dealing with.
Here we have a guy who came in.
However, he got in, maybe hemade some some uh, maybe he had
some conversations with peopleand said, okay, I'll fix this,

(01:12:27):
this and this if you guys backmy candidacy and I would like to
see those things happen, that'sall.
Think how far Francis wanted togo.
Something held him back fromgoing all the way.
I think we have to trust in God.
I will judge Leo on what Leodoes, not what Prevost did Pray
for a St Thomas Beckettconversion.
I think that's whereeverybody's kind of at right now
.
I think everybody just kind ofwants to see what he does before

(01:12:51):
we're just going off.
I don't think it's cowardiceeither.
But do you think it's cowardicethat everybody's doing this?
I don't, I think I think itreally is.

Speaker 3 (01:13:00):
I didn't think it's carryitas um some I've I've seen
um mimetic kinds of I mean justtypical stupid sort of hoi
polloi go along with what, the,what, the flavor of the day
became sometime late last night.
There's always a moralcowardice to to mimetic desire.
Well, it's not.

Speaker 2 (01:13:21):
It's not a pure desire and a financial drive,
like if you see the all, all thelady, are going for it.
You don't want to.
You don't want to lose 90% ofyour like that's audience
captures involved in this aswell.
You know, I mean, that's a,that's a.
That's a huge danger If you're,if you're not saying what needs
to be said because you'reafraid you're going to turn your
audience off.

Speaker 3 (01:13:41):
I'm not, that wasn't my approach A kind of cowardice.

Speaker 2 (01:13:44):
Yeah, that is a hundred percent.
My approach is literally just Idon't want to.
I don't want to be the onecausing people to have
disloyalty to the Pope within 24hours, like I.
We all had, like a naturalreaction yesterday.
It was a fricking, a wild day.
We all found out in the moment,off guard, because it was the

(01:14:06):
fourth scrutiny and we weregetting information pouring in
as it was coming in and we'relike, holy crap, man, what did
we get ourselves into?
These guys didn't even put up afight but the dust settled
overnight and I'm like all right, I see what he's doing, I know
what we talked about yesterday.
But like I don't, I want to becatholic and just freaking like
the pope, like I talked aboutyesterday.

Speaker 3 (01:14:26):
But like I don't, I want to be Catholic and just
freaking like the Pope, I just Idon't want to have, I don't
want to have a Everyone ofgoodwill does, and that's that's
where you get into the theHoldsworth kind of you're not
meaning to do it, but that'swhere you get into real
dissimilar.
Of course everyone wants them tobe good, every, every man be

(01:14:48):
good, every man of goodwill, allthree of us here.
But when you say I don't wantto cause disloyalty to the Pope
by pointing out that he's a hugesupporter of fiducia
supplicants and that he saysthis natural law issue should be
divisible along politicalboundaries, like I said about
Germany and Poland, if I read anarticle saying that, or I even
extrapolate what that means, wegot to go through four causes

(01:15:11):
and you know people, you knowwhatever.
People don't want to hear thatright now, but it's just a fact
that the formal cause of thatdisloyalty to this Pope if
someone got turned off byhearing that, would not be the
reader, that would merely be theefficient cause, the formal
cause of someone feeling a senseof disattachment to a pope that

(01:15:32):
sounds like a moral relativist,particularly on sodomy.

Speaker 2 (01:15:37):
That that that formal cause would not be the reader
of, of the I think that peopleare seeing these gestures of
goodwill and they want to offerthem back and say, okay, we'll,
we'll chill out and let's, let'sjust.
I think that's all it is I.
That's all it was for me.
I don't want to, I don't wantto come out here with the same

(01:16:07):
of suspicion right off thefreaking jump on this pope.
I want to let him, I want towant to see what he does, like
give the man some space to dowhat he's going to do, and I'm
not gonna, I'm not gonna come onevery day going when has he
done it yet?
Has he done it yet?
I want to just give the.
I mean, the guy just became popeand I want to let him figure
out how he wants to do it.
I mean, he's already with thecurial um, uh positions.
He's like I, I'm going to leavethem in place while I sit back

(01:16:27):
and pray.
I don't know, that could betaken one of two ways.
Maybe he really does want tosit and pray and put the right
people in there, or maybe he'sjust going to leave the whole
Francis platoon in there tocontinue operation as usual.
I don't know.
But if the guy says he's goingto sit back and pray about it.
I'm going to let him pray aboutit and see what he does.
When he makes those positionsofficial, then it's a different

(01:16:47):
story.

Speaker 3 (01:16:52):
Agreed.
I mean, I don't know what Nickthinks about this, but I agree
with that.
But I don't think that'll bewrong at that point if he leaves
Cardinal Tuchel in to say thisis really bad.

Speaker 2 (01:17:04):
And Parolin with the China deal.
There's things we're lookingfor, but I want to give him a
little time to do those things.

Speaker 3 (01:17:10):
Yeah, Do we agree on that?
Is there any dissension in theranks?
Nick, do you disagree on that?
He couldn't right.

Speaker 1 (01:17:19):
Yeah, no, my only advice is pray hope and don't
worry, that's about it.

Speaker 2 (01:17:29):
Yeah, no, all right.
So I know you wanted to jump onbecause I was saying I'm sorry.
Yeah, I know.
And I brought you on because Idon't want to back down from
something I did out of memeticdesire, like I want to be held
to account, that's it, but I do.
I do worry about how we'reapproaching this pontificate

(01:17:51):
within 24 hours, that's all.

Speaker 3 (01:17:53):
I'll amend Nick's thing Pray, hope, don't worry,
and never back down to the mobunless you've committed some
serious sin.
Never back down the mob.
The one thing the mob can becounted on.
Never back down the mob.
The one thing the mob can becounted on whether on Twitter,
real life, the Coliseum they'realways stupid.
It's a few and a many problem.
Plato and Aristotle it's theone thing they agree on.

(01:18:14):
Right Is this is a few and amany problem.
The mob manages to geteverything wrong.
So pray, hope, don't worry anddon't mind the mob.
You got to be straightforward.
Clearest path to truth and thetruth is a person and it's Jesus
, which is why you should pray,hope and don't worry and never
back down to the mob.
They killed Jesus, they killedSocrates.

(01:18:35):
Just don't mind the mob.

Speaker 2 (01:18:40):
Yeah, that's a hard one.
All right, tim, I'm going totalk with Nick for a little bit
because I haven't had Nick on ina while.
But, yes, text me.
Text me if I say anything.
That's too, that's too soft.
I just I'm telling you what itis.
I want to go into this with aceasefire like I don't want to
be.
I just don't want to be the guythat's going at it.

(01:19:02):
And it's not memetic desire,it's from.
This is the pope, and I want togive the pope some some room to
be the pope, for before I jumpdown his throat I want to give
him all the room he needs to dothe right thing.

Speaker 3 (01:19:13):
God bless you guys, and let's see him let's see it
happen peace

Speaker 2 (01:19:20):
so the yeah, he was texting me and I want to.
I got, I got other peopletexting me to say and telling me
he's right.
So I mean, I don't know, it wascholeric, that's what it is
Like.
Tim's ultra choleric, so he'slike I don't care if when I see
the truth, it's like the truthis the thing I'm going to push
on, where I think othertemperaments are more like oh

(01:19:43):
man, it's a bad look, you know.
So I don't know I feel bad,Nick, because you know me and
you haven't talked in a while.
But how are you feeling inthese first 24 hours?

Speaker 1 (01:19:55):
I'm feeling good.
I mean, I think that all we cando ultimately is the three
things Like if you break down,pray, hope and don't worry.
It's like prayer is seek, unionwith God.
Hope, knowing that ultimately,even if hypothetically things go
wrong, that he will bring allthings to his glory and that the

(01:20:16):
church is still true.
Holdsworth is in the chat.

Speaker 2 (01:20:20):
Brian, do you want to come on?
Would you want to have Brian on?

Speaker 1 (01:20:24):
Yeah, that's fine.
Is this the real BrianHoldsworth?
I've seen Jimmy.

Speaker 3 (01:20:27):
Akin.

Speaker 1 (01:20:30):
Father Jim Martin and Brian Holdsworth.
So if this is the real.

Speaker 2 (01:20:33):
If you want to come on, because I really do, I want
to get all of the perspectiveshere and I want to balance it
out and I tend to, yeah, bringBrian.
All right, brianrian, I'm gonnasend you the link uh, copy, uh,

(01:20:54):
let's see.
I mean, look, this is justtrying to.
Uh, let me see.
I don't even know if that'sreally him.
I'm gonna say, if that's reallyyou in the chat, you might as
well.

Speaker 1 (01:21:04):
Text for everyone out there the last thing with don't
even know if that's really him.
I'm going to say if that'sreally you in the chat, you
might as well text for everyoneout there.
The last thing with, don'tworry the Lord talks about not
letting like you don't worryabout anything, and I think that
that's something that I feltprayed to in the Francis
pontificate.
Just a good idea not to fallthrough it when it comes to this
, I think this is wrong.

Speaker 2 (01:21:26):
Tim is not a doomer who would rather be right than
trust in the world.
That's absolutely not what thatis.
I'm telling you.
Tim is like he's just a puristlike he it's the only way I
could describe him like he's afreaking purist, and the thing
is he doesn't care if he hurtsyour feelings, like he he he was
the first guy that I wasinteracting with behind the
scenes and like when I had TrentHorn on or when I had those

(01:21:49):
guys on, like he was like I'mjust telling you you're too
agreeable and you you're not.
Like you're backing down onyour positions because you, just
you don't want the conflict,and that's absolutely true.
It's my temperament.
Like I, I don't like starting aconflict with a guy who came
onto my show as a friendly guy,but like there were like major
disagreements I have with trentthat I didn't bring up or I kind

(01:22:11):
of let fly over too easily.
I mean they're they'redisagreements that would have
been easily discussed.
It wasn't like it would haveended our friendship or
something.
They're not.
You know what I mean.
It's nothing like that.
It's just tim is a freakingpurist and when he sees
something he's like I don't givea crap about anything, but the
truth it's just just he's likeall choleric where I'm sanguine

(01:22:33):
choleric and I like to, I don'tknow, I like to go along, to get
along a bit.
I don't know if that wasactually brian, because he's not
.

Speaker 1 (01:22:40):
He's not replying, but yeah, I don't think that was
brian, because of some of theother responses.
No, I understand.
Yeah, I understand the the purecholeric response.
I just think that it's somewhatwise to kind of just sit back
and see what happens.
I don't think that you do thatin the sense of, hey, we don't
know anything about this guy.
I mean, obviously there aresome legitimate concerns that

(01:23:02):
can be brought forward, but Ithink, at the same time, that's
where, as my initial point says,you have to give them the
benefit of the doubt and youhave to put charity first and
say, well, let's see whathappens, you know, and
ultimately pray Because, as Isaid on my show yesterday, I
definitely did not do very wellat praying for Pope Francis, to
my shame in my certificate, andthis is something that I've

(01:23:22):
committed to every single day,making sure I at least pray a
rosary for him well, brian, ifit really is you, I sent you the
dm in your twitter.

Speaker 2 (01:23:31):
So you're saying it is me.
Well, if it is you the twitterdm, I sent it to you.
Oh, do you want me to email itto you?

Speaker 1 (01:23:42):
if this is actually brian, that's pretty cool.
Yeah, look, I I don't know.
Youtube doesn't have the checkmarks like X, does?
I kind of wish it did?
I forgot what?

Speaker 2 (01:23:53):
his email is what the hell is his email?

Speaker 1 (01:24:09):
I'm sorry guys, you got to bear with me here.
How are you guys doing in thechat?
I haven't seen some of you guysin a hot minute.
You guys all doing good, so itis me.
We will see if it's MrHoldsworth.
I like Brian.
I like Brian, I like Brian.
A lot.

Speaker 2 (01:24:30):
Yeah, I'm sorry, guys , I've got to just see what his
stupid email is.
Oh, it's okay, I got it.

Speaker 1 (01:24:37):
Yeah, I've got to figure out if this is actually
Brian.
I'm curious on how Brianscripts his videos.
Brian has this unique way oflike outlining really good
tomistic principles in verysimple ways, and as a teacher, I
always feel like I'm a horribleteacher.
I think that's just a teacherthing, and so I'm like brian,
teach me, teach me your ways.

Speaker 2 (01:24:57):
I don't know how you do this, so so, um, yeah, and
the thing is I like I reallyenjoyed the, like the whether
it's mimetic desire or not, likeI do, like how people are
laying, having this ceasefire,and it's like now you have the.

(01:25:19):
The left cats who loved Francisreally don't have any
ammunition to call us hostile,and things like that.
It's like give the.
I want to give this guy alittle bit of room.
We don't know what he's goingto do, even if you say, based on
his previous, uh, uh, pastactions, like I, I still don't.
Where am I going?
Bold?
What are you guys talking about?

(01:25:40):
Why they?

Speaker 1 (01:25:41):
I got headphones on yeah, well, I know what you're
saying.
I mean, my big thing is thatthe that the grace of the office
of St Peter is.
There are graces and charismsattached to that office and I
legitimately believe that if hecooperates with them, we might
be very surprised.
It's one of those things whereit's like.
I think about it this way.
Here's just a basic analogy StPaul, right when he was Saul,

(01:26:02):
did a lot of bad stuff, but whenthe Lord really got a hold of
him, he really used him for good.
Now, while it's not aone-for-one, perfect analogy,
the point is that when God getsa hold upon somebody, someone
could really change, and so thething is, I've seen some really
good comments that he's madeabout various issues.
I've seen some stuff that Ifind very concerning, but I'm

(01:26:22):
like, look, he's the pope, letus give him a chance.
We'll just have to see whathappens.
Oh yeah look at that brian, myfriend.
How you doing, sir?
Hey guys, good, hey, brian,this is actually you, because I,
honestly, we had a.
We had a fake jimmy aiken.
We had a father james martin inthe chat.

(01:26:44):
I was like I don't really knowif this is brian.
To be honest, I got tim.

Speaker 2 (01:26:48):
Text me like the audience you guys attract.

Speaker 5 (01:26:50):
That's, that's what you get for it.
Well, you well that's.

Speaker 2 (01:26:53):
That is actually an interesting point about our show
.
It's like, um, I do think we'rea bit of a bridge between more
normal normie, novus, ordocatholics and traditional
catholics and I think that, likea lot of guys that we enjoy
watching, do check out our showand it's because it's a

(01:27:13):
light-hearted, humorous show andstuff and I'll never like
attack somebody that comes onand stuff.
So were you finger wagging atanybody specific in your video
yesterday?
I did not see the video or wereyou just giving like a general?

Speaker 1 (01:27:25):
I didn't think you figured why.
No, I had.

Speaker 5 (01:27:26):
I hadn't watched any anybody else's reactions when I
had, when I shot.
That that was my honest justlike.
So yesterday I was with my kids, we watched the, the
announcement, up until rightbefore he blessed the crowd, and
then we had to get in the carbecause we were going to the
march for life here, uh, in my,my home province.
So we were out all day and thengot home and I just thought you

(01:27:48):
know, I have to say somethingabout this.
So I quickly shot something assoon as we got home and then I
just kind of logged off for therest of the night.
So no, it wasn't directed atanybody specifically, but that

(01:28:10):
said so I went out and did abunch of work in my yard, which
is also what I was doing, whichis why it took me so long to to
get logged on to here.
You were listening to you guys.
So so your episode with tim androb yesterday and I had
commented on.

Speaker 2 (01:28:13):
I don't know if you saw the comment, but I said it
was funny right?

Speaker 5 (01:28:15):
well, I said something like I'm one of the
copium springs eternal guys, orwhatever tim's phrase was, um,
but but that simultaneously likeI was laughing out loud in my
yard like shoveling dirt while Iwas listening to you guys,
because you know I disagree witha lot of what Tim was saying,
but Tim's a funny guy and I waslaughing at a lot of the.
You know the points you weresaying and I think that that's

(01:28:36):
what you guys do well is thatyou, you can be provocative, but
it's generally as far asanybody should be able to tell
in goodwill and earnest and it'snot meant to be malicious.
So I think that that's a goodapproach.

Speaker 2 (01:28:51):
Yeah, listen, yesterday happened.
I appreciate that.
Yesterday happened and, likedude, my heart sank.
I was like there was threenames I was listening for.
Prevost was one of them.
Like it, just it was one ofthem Because I had seen all
these things leading up to it.
So when they said his name out,I was like oh no, and this

(01:29:13):
sense of doom came over me and Iwhat I was coming on the show
to do was say I don't wantbecause I know the way I talk
can influence the peoplelistening to me and I don't want
to doom the people listening tome.
So I had normie Catholicscalling me yesterday that don't
watch the show and they're likewhat do you think of this Pope?
And I was like not good.
And I'm like and I thoughtabout it last night when it was

(01:29:34):
about I'm like I am setting thestage for people that don't
really pay attention to churchpolitics Like I do and giving
them an immediate bad impressionof a guy that they don't know
anything about.
And I thought that was wrong.
I'm like like these are justnormal Catholics that don't.
They're not like us, wherewe're like every little thing

(01:29:55):
that happens.
And I'm like now these guys aregoing to go into this
pontificate thinking, oh, thisPope is bad, he's from America,
he's from Chicago and it's likeI should not have done that it's
.
I think it is a different thingwhen we're talking like this
amongst people who can push backa little bit and things like
that, but that specific thing iswhat I really felt bad about
hmm, yeah, and if I'm beinghonest too, listening to your

(01:30:17):
guys episode, because I didn'tknow anything about him, uh,
prior like I wasn't evenfamiliar with him.

Speaker 5 (01:30:22):
I I was familiar with like a handful of American
Cardinals, but when they saidhe's American in that name, I
was like what?
There's an American Cardinal Idon't even know about.
Granted, he's kind of newish,so.
So maybe I can be forgiven forthat.
But I'm also not.
I don't follow like Tim Tim.
Listening to Tim, he's rattlingoff of all these sort of
intriguing details.
I'm like I don't know about anyof this stuff, I just don't

(01:30:44):
follow it that closely.
It's probably easier for me tojust be like, well, I'll give
him the benefit of the doubt.
But listening to your guys'episode, if I'm being honest,
yesterday, by the end of it Iwas like, oh, this does sound
bad.
Maybe this guy is as bad as aCupich or a Tobin or something

(01:31:05):
like that.
And if either those guys hadwalked out on onto the logia, I
would have been like I'm notgiving the benefit of the doubt
here, like this is a disaster,right.
And so if, if I knew enoughabout provost and and I knew bad
things about him, maybe itwould be harder for me, but from
also, you know, having takenstock of, of a lot of the things
that tim was saying, you guyswere saying yesterday, at the

(01:31:27):
end of the day, I don't like Tim.
Tim kept on saying that you knowhe's an Aristotelian and
therefore it's all about thetruth for him.
But you know, I don't think alot of the conclusions he was
drawing are necessaryconclusions from the, the
evidence that's offered to us,right, you could say, well, he's
a saint gallen guy, okay, butdoes that mean he's going to be

(01:31:48):
a bad pope?
Like?
There are other possibleinterpretations here.
He could just be a verydiplomatic personality who is
able to build bridges betweenthe extremes on that end of the
spectrum and the extremes on theother end of the spectrum.
You know, there's people likeum, like burke and sarah, who
seem really pleased with thisoutcome, right, and maybe
they're just gaslighting ormaybe they're putting up a

(01:32:10):
veneer of approval, but maybethey're being sincere and we
should give them the benefit ofthe doubt as well.
Maybe they know things aboutthis guy that he can actually
draw all of these spectrumstogether and maybe, you know, if
you're more cynical about it,you could say, well, that's
impossible, right Like there'ssuch polar opposites that that
can't be done.

Speaker 2 (01:32:30):
But what do you know?
What do you make?
What do you make of what Timwas saying about?
Like Leo the 14th is going tohave to go back and correct
these errors of Francis, likethere are actual errors in
Amoris Laetitia that need to becorrected, and like that can be
a litmus test for what?
What we can, because, look,there are some.

(01:32:53):
He can make these gestures, getrid of tradition, things like
that.
But the real thing, the tradswere upset about what.
It wasn't the 2% of us that goto the Latin mass, it was.
I mean, it wasn't because theytried to make it like it was
just the trads that had aproblem with francis, but it
wasn't.
It was all faithful catholicswere like what the hell is this
guy doing?
So what do we do about a guythat we like?

(01:33:16):
Because I still want to givethe guy room to go and and some
some time to go and take care ofthis stuff yeah, yeah, I mean,
I would.

Speaker 5 (01:33:24):
I would strongly disagree with tim on the
question of you know, there's,there's this crowd of
traditionalists who are what didhe call us?
One one, one song, um, something, one issue, voters or something
like that.
But but, and and frankly, youknow, if all I could get was the
latin latin mass and given roomto flourish, that would be

(01:33:46):
massive in my mind, given whatwe've been through.
For one specific reason,because in my own Latin mass
community we are, we areflourishing, we're breeding like
the average age at our Latinmass is probably like 13 at at
most.
There's kids everywhere.
We have socials every otherweek and the hall is filled with

(01:34:07):
like crazy kids everywhererunning around getting to know
each other, wearing three-piecesuits and bow ties, and it's
like that's dangerous to theprogressives and to the
modernists, because that'sculture.
And culture won't just raise ageneration of people committed
to the faith creedally, butculturally.

(01:34:28):
They'll have a heart for thefaith as well.
And if you allow the latin massto to proliferate and to to
distribute itself, uh, the wayit was under samorum pontificum,
you're gonna raise a generationof trads like I wanted to bring
this up culturally sound.

Speaker 2 (01:34:44):
I wanted to bring this up with tim.
I forgot to, but he he doesunderstand that because of
skateboarding it's like, yeah,like skateboarding was a culture
and I could still see thatculture is in him, you know so.

Speaker 5 (01:34:58):
So to me, that was my culture too.
Growing up, I was, I was, I wasa sponsored skateboarder
actually, as when I was like 17years old.
So wow, so I, I was.
I fully get what culture, whatpunk rock, skateboarding culture
, what subculture is all about,and that's why I I think I have
these sensitivities to culturewithin the dynamics of the
church 100 and the liturgy to me.

Speaker 2 (01:35:20):
So this is, this was like a change in my thought over
years where it took me, likereally being a Latin mass,
regular attendee, that you seethat that culture soaks into you
.
I can't even explain it, it'sjust.
It made me realize that, likethe shifts that happened in our

(01:35:41):
culture, the shifts thathappened in our culture I'm not
saying they're the sole cause ofchanging the liturgy, but they
have so much to do with itbecause when you're living that
liturgy out, it, it, it changesthe way you think, it changes
the way you see things.
Right, so my, my point, mypoint would have been where,
where he's saying, like themorals come first, my point

(01:36:06):
would be that living thatliturgy out will then lead to
the morals, right?

Speaker 5 (01:36:08):
like so, yeah, well, and doctrine is there too.
I've never heard a bad homilyat the latin mass like so, the
fraternity taking cares for ourcommunity.
And it's like every week we'regetting saint thomas, we're
getting saint francis, we'regetting, we're getting the whole
spectrum of church fathers whoare, are sound, and and and
augustine, every week thebulletin is going through, uh,
some work of augustine, and I'msitting here reading it, like

(01:36:30):
right before mass, and it's likeyou, you can't, you can't be
immersed in that atmosphere andnot have it affect you both
doctrinally, both in the mind,and and the heart.
And and I think that if youraise a generation like that, uh
, it doesn't matter how many stgallen mafia mafiosos there are,
they can't.
That's a tidal wave comingtheir way and their, their,

(01:36:52):
their clock is ticking.

Speaker 2 (01:36:53):
Yeah.
So I know Tim would say dude, Ilove the Latin mass as much as
you guys are and I'm notdisputing that he does.
My point is that even if Leodoesn't go back and correct
these errors of Francis, if hegives us the Latin mass back, it
will prepare the nextgeneration to face that battle.
When we finally do get the Pope, that's going to be the Pope of
restoration, that will gointact.

(01:37:14):
Like I think it does take a fullcultural change because you
think about what happened in thesixties and with the council,
and it was an entire generationwas just in this free fall from
the sexual revolution and allthese things and that's what led
to those liturgical changes.
And then those liturgicalchanges were the precursor to
them messing with the moralfoundation.
It's like you change, youchange the liturgy first and

(01:37:36):
then you mess with the litterand then you mess with the
morality.
And that's what they did inEngland.
Like if you go back and readEamon Duffy's book, it's like
the first thing they did waschange the liturgy and then they
start messing with the doctrineand the dogma, because the
liturgy is absolutelyfoundational to this stuff.
So I think I'm going to behappy if we get those bones

(01:37:56):
thrown to us.
I just am.
I know it's not the penultimatestandard that we're looking for
, but I'm going to be happy withthem.

Speaker 5 (01:38:04):
Of course.
Yeah, absolutely.
It would be devastating if theyactually did succeed in
implementing what it seemed likepeople like Roche and Francis
wanted in the completesuppression and dissolution of
the Latin mass, becausecommunities like mine, like my
family, would have to go back tothe Novus Ordo.
And what would we find at theNovus Ordo?

(01:38:25):
My children would would growtired of a banal beige faith
that does nothing for them andfor which there would be no peer
group for them to to reinforcetheir faith.
Right, like the community ofpeople that are mostly public
school kids wearing booty shortsat mass.
Right my my kids wearingdresses, who want to hear chant,

(01:38:45):
who want to read poetrytogether and have poetry
recitals.
Like they're not going to findtheir people there and they're
going to get lonely and isolatedand exhausted by it all.
But the fact that we are able togo to latin mass is
strengthening that generationwho's going to have to fight
tough fights, but they're goingto be way stronger than my
generation and even Nick'sgeneration.

(01:39:07):
Like, so you're Gen Z, right,nick?
Yeah, yeah, so I mean even evensome of the.
I mean I'm, I'm impressed by alot of what I'm seeing with with
people like Nick and hisgeneration.
Like they, they have certainstrengths, aptitudes of the mind
and learning that like I've hadto start reading some of this

(01:39:28):
stuff by the time I was like 20and already kind of a bit of a
lost cause because of such apoor upbringing and bad
education and um, and I thinkthat that's what's going to save
the church is just this, thisfuture generation that has the
opportunity to band together andand to get the right formation
culturally and creedally well,so all right.

Speaker 2 (01:39:45):
So somebody said um, we're like.
We're like um, it's stockholmsyndrome.
We're like abuse victims justhappy if the beatings start.
Right, we sound like.
We sound like survivors ofabuse group, just grateful if
the beatings stop.
Yes, because where else do wego?
So, like any any improvement weare like.
The past 12 years were brutal,I don't care what anybody says.

(01:40:07):
It was vicious to have constantairplane interviews where
you're called rigid andbackwardist and all these things
.
So, yes, I think those gesturesof him stopping that are going
to.
And then, if we do get theLatin, it's like Tim.
Tim is texting me like crazyright now Cause he's infuriated

(01:40:28):
by this conversation.
We'll have to get him back onanother time, but we can't do it
now, bring him back on, bringhim back on.
You want to come back on Comeback on, you get the link.
We're better off hashing thesethings out together.
Absolutely Like, like ifthere's anything I could do and

(01:40:52):
like get people to haveconversations that don't
typically talk.

Speaker 5 (01:40:57):
One thing I'll say about the Stockholm syndrome
thing, though, is like, let's,let's concede that all the way
and let's say we are asoppressed as something like
people living in like acommunist state, for example,
like we're 1960s Czechoslovakia,and we're surrounded by secret
police and any sort of toe outof line, and that the heel is

(01:41:17):
going to come down on us, right?
Well, if the oppression is badenough, what could we possibly
do?
And what's?
The reason for the oppression?
Is that we, as the mass, aredangerous to those of the few in
authority, right, so they haveto keep us down.
They have to keep our abilitiesand our wealth and our

(01:41:39):
opportunity to collaborate andto gather and to protest and all
those kinds of things.
They have to prevent that, andthey do that through threats and
violence and fear and all thatkind of stuff, right?
What if they lift the bootthough?
You could look at that and say,oh, you're grateful.
If they lift the boot, though,you could look at that and say,
oh, you're grateful that theylifted the boot.
That's just Stockholm Syndrome.

(01:42:00):
It's like, yeah, sure, but alsonow we're much more dangerous
because we aren't living inconstant fear and because we can
gather and we can conspire andwe can work together because
we're not living under theconstant threat of execution or
of our neighbor being a memberof the secret police or whatever
.
Um, so, with that boot liftedoff the Latin mass, that gives

(01:42:21):
us strength and that gives uspower that we didn't have
otherwise, and that's betterthan nothing, that's better than
where we were, that's myposition Like like.

Speaker 2 (01:42:30):
So me and Tim were talking yesterday and it's like
we were pointing out, it's like,yeah, okay, so trads are going
to get thrown these bones, andTim's point is that when that
happens, what they're doing iscoalition building and all
they're trying to do is bringmore people over to the Pope's
planer side.
So it's like they give us our,our TLM back and then, next
thing, you know, they haveanother synod and they start
pushing that boundary again thatfrancis was pushing that whole

(01:42:52):
time.
But because we got our tlm back, all of a sudden we're like oh,
you know, don't say nothingabout the pope, I don't want to
lose my latin mess, and I dothink part of that is like, that
is part of the the, the socomsyndrome sure, okay.

Speaker 5 (01:43:09):
So let's say let's say that as a tactic is
effective.
So for the current generation,that could be the resistance
generation.
So let's say that that's thethree of us and Tim as well hey,
tim, let's say that thatplacates us, that pacifies us,
so we're no longer resistant.
Frankly, I don't think thatresistance from us is going to

(01:43:32):
do anything other than justexpose us to the boot again.
I think that the cominggeneration, gen Z and, like my
kids generation, I think thatthey're the wave and it's clergy
as well.
Remember, look at like, look atthe change of the clergy and the
direction that they're headedin, like from from very, very
liberal a few decades ago tovery, very conservative now, and

(01:43:54):
I think that that trend isgoing to continue as this
generation grows up.
That's the generation that willactually be able to resist and
affect change, because it'sgoing to be a whole generation
of clergy who are going to thenbecome bishops, because there's
no Gen X bishops, frankly, whoare then going to just assume
all of these roles within theEpiscopate and one of them will
become Pope as well, and at thatpoint it's just, it's a done

(01:44:16):
deal, and we don't really haveto be the violent overthrow,
resistance or whatever we wantto be at that point before,
before you guys all uh debate itout, I've had to use the
restroom for two hours oh, goahead.

Speaker 1 (01:44:24):
Yeah, yeah, and just come I'm gonna let you three
famous people hash out theconversation.

Speaker 5 (01:44:30):
I'm just a simple theology we need a moderator in
here this is I do need to know,do I need?

Speaker 2 (01:44:39):
do I need an?
A?
A beat button for you today iswhat people are asking before I
leave just god bless all threeof you and anthony.

Speaker 1 (01:44:48):
Whenever the show is done, I give brian my number.
I'd love to like actuallyconnect and do some type of like
nerdy theology thing with you,if you'd be open to that, brian.

Speaker 5 (01:44:57):
Sure, are you leaving for the rest of the show, nick?

Speaker 3 (01:44:59):
Yeah he's going to let us.

Speaker 1 (01:45:02):
I honestly don't think I can contribute much to
the conversation.
Sounds good.
God bless you three.

Speaker 3 (01:45:10):
Don't leave on my account.

Speaker 1 (01:45:12):
No, you guys are good , go for it.
God bless you.
Man, don't leave on my account.

Speaker 2 (01:45:13):
No, you guys are good , go for it.
God bless you, bro.
So, tim, you texted me like amadman.
I'm trying to pay attention totwo things at once.
So what were you bringing up?
Because I was trying to listenand you were texting at the same
time.

Speaker 3 (01:45:27):
Oh well, I mean, I was just saying Brian, what's up
, bro?
How are you?
I didn't understand some of thecharacterizations, but I would
never say that, to be anAristotelian, you can divine the
future or something.
I simply didn't say that and Ithought Anthony would correct
that Yesterday.
We were just saying look, as ofright now I heard you, which I

(01:45:51):
appreciated.
Admit, look, I didn't followthese personalities in the
college of Cardinals as closelyas of right now.
It looks really bad.
This guy is a closecollaborator, francis Maria dog,
whatever his name is.
And uh and uh, Cardinal soupageand uh, things are looking bad,
you know, and so the what I wasconnecting was the idea that we

(01:46:15):
have to go as close as we canapproximate the evidence to
truth, like cause to effect.
That's all I was saying.
I wasn't saying that it givesme an ability to divine the
truth.

Speaker 5 (01:46:26):
No, and I think that it seems to me that a lot of the
evidence is speculative though,so that the truth or some of
the conclusions that are beingdrawn, there could be
alternative explanations to.
A lot of the evidence isspeculative, though, so that the
the the truth or some of theconclusions that are being drawn
, there could be alternativeexplanations to a lot of the
things, and we could go throughspecifics of that, but just as I
was listening to the episodeyesterday, that's where I felt I
was like, I mean, that makessense, that's a logical
conclusion, but there are Ithink that there are others as

(01:46:48):
well from that range.
If, for those of us that wantto be copers or copiums or
whatever, um, that's, that's anattractive option sure, but we
can.

Speaker 3 (01:47:01):
We can always apply relative quantities to, okay,
close, close, maria daga orsupich francis his brother says
he's going to be francis too.
It sounded in twitter's ahorrible medium for carrying on
congos.
It should be more like this forsure.
It sounded like you were sayingthat, okay, that, that, that

(01:47:24):
it's like well, 50, 50, maybe heis all of those things and
maybe somehow, coincidentally,it doesn't.
I was just saying, yeah, 99,this sounds like a francis man.
That's not.
That's not speculative.
Speculative beyond um, dealingwith the relative ratios of of
um probability.
It's just, he's definitely beenhere here and here in the past.

(01:47:47):
I'm hoping for the best, butwhen people groaned, like even
um anthony stein, who this isnot a temperament thing, he's,
he's probably phlegmatic orsomething, and he said just what
he said uh-oh when, um, acouple of these things happened
this morning, the, the new pope,uh, leo the 14th doesn't want
to get rid of tucho fernandezoriginally, it is pretty quick,

(01:48:10):
but I, I thought the same thingand, uh, and people were jumping
on his case and he's, he's veryphlegmatic and Anthony is again
, he's got a doctorate.
I'm working on a doctorate.
We're guys that have know thisstuff very well, just because

(01:48:38):
they don't like the semiinevitable prescription, it's
not inevitable, right?
It could be some otherexplanation, but it's very
improbable that this guy has not, at least to this point, been a
Francis man.
You know what I mean.

Speaker 5 (01:48:52):
Sure, well, and it depends what we mean by a
Francis man too, because hecould be trying to position
himself as everybody's man,which isn't ideal, because you
can't do that, but it's betterthan being fully committed to
one faction and hostile to theother.
And if we think of ourselves asthe other faction, I would
prefer a guy who's trying toally, or ally himself to

(01:49:14):
everybody and trying to bringeverybody together and build
bridges, than someone who's justgoing to bring the boot down.
And I think that that's apossible explanation.
I mean, he could just be one ofthose very diplomatic guys who,
behind closed doors, as someonewho what was he with the
Dicastery for Bishops orsomething like that who would
have been meeting with all thesevarious bishops, one-on-one

(01:49:35):
presumably, or or just was aclose contact to them.
He could have just been one ofthose guys who is very affable
in those scenarios, at whichpoint they think, oh yeah, he's
one of my guys um.

Speaker 3 (01:49:46):
Therefore, he acts like the holiest american bid
that that doesn't happen.
He could have been.

Speaker 2 (01:49:51):
He could have been doing that at francis's behest,
first off, and second of liketim.
We saw this with a lot of thebishops when it went and this
just reeks to me of just weakmen that are going with memetic
desire as well where underbenedict they were saying one
thing and then francis came andthey were just like dolan even
did a little bit of that, whereit was like well, francis said

(01:50:12):
he wants the culture wars to end, where Dolan before, when he
was on the Benedict, he was likea pro-life leader in the church
.
We thought he was the greatestbishop ever.
So there is even like theSupich connections we were
making.
I saw somebody pointed outtoday.
They were like there's noactual connection between him
and Supich, like he was out ofthe diocese before Supich, he

(01:50:42):
wasn't really his boss and stuff.
So like I understand like we wewe could have been making more
connections that were than wereactually there.

Speaker 3 (01:50:45):
But no, the connection is strong.
They weren't there in the sametime.
They don't share a diocese.
That doesn't work, but they're.
They're strong.
And Cupich, it is now known,was strongly in his camp.
And, by the way, the way thecuria works is Francis didn't
know who Strickland is.
Francis didn't have it out.
Francis doesn't know who mostof the bishops are, the

(01:51:06):
dicastery for bishops.
As prefect, he knows all of thebig bishops, particularly the
problem ones.
It's more like he advisedFrancis to get rid of a strict
one.
That's the way it typicallyworks.
That's how.
That's how the curia works.
That's how the dicasteries work.
But the point is really that,I'm sorry, go ahead.

Speaker 5 (01:51:27):
No, go ahead Tim.

Speaker 3 (01:51:30):
I'm just saying you guys already heard my litmus
test and I think it's a rationalone and I just that was the
only other thing I was textingyou about, anthony was I think
it's a quite defensible litmustest because we cannot permit
Arianism.
That's why we have ecumenicalcouncils.
It wasn't even a guarantee inthe Roman Catholic Church that
there was going to be anecumenical council.

(01:51:50):
We started having them becauseof Arianism and then the next
six councils are shoot-offs ofarianism, right.
So we only have councilsbecause of doctrinal air,
because of heterodoxy.
It is intolerable.
Different.
I love the latin mass too andeveryone was making me like I
didn't get how, how potent abromide it is.

(01:52:10):
It is culturally precisely aspotent as you, brian, were
saying and anthony, you weresaying like I, it's just
mischaracterizing me.
But it's not the samediscipline, beautiful culture,
building discipline in in allthe ways brian, you are adducing
, perfectly, exactly, wellexpressed.
It's is not even in.
It's not the same thing asdoctrine, doctrine, heterodoxy

(01:52:34):
explodes the church and we havethat tumor right now and it
can't go longer or we don't havethe one true faith.
It's that important.
So that's why it's the litmustest.

Speaker 5 (01:52:45):
So if we take something like Amoris Laetitia
though I mean it's symptomaticto me of everything that has
gone on in the church for like,let's say, the past 60 years and
not everything but a lot of the, the, the milestone incidents
that that provoked confusion.
Let's say where, where it wasn'tthat you know, a Pope or or

(01:53:10):
anybody representing themagistrate came out and said
something that was likedefinitively heretical.
It was here's kind of an opendoor interpretation to something
.
And maybe a bishop's conferencewill come along, like, say, in
Argentina, and come up with aninterpretation that is heretical
or heterodox, and I can justgive them a wink and a thumbs up

(01:53:33):
, which isn't a magisterialstatement of any kind.
So I avoid compromising that,but then I am still pursuing the
agenda that I want to seeenacted within the church.
I think that kind of thing goeson a lot in the church and I
think the remedy for that kindof thing like ideally, you and I
would probably say the remedyto that is like a pious the 13th

(01:53:54):
who will come in and just bringthe hammer down and say no more
of this nonsense.
But I think that that wouldjust cause a war within the
church.

Speaker 3 (01:54:02):
No, I agree with that .
I agree with younon-facetiously, 100%.
If that were what happened,brian, and I do also agree with
your characterization thatthat's what had been going on
since the close of the SecondVatican Council, that kind of
situation you described.
That's not what happened,though.
That was most of what happeneduntil September of 2016.

(01:54:23):
What happened was the Argentinebishops wrote their own dubia
while Burke et al were stillawaiting the answers and dying
in waiting for the answer totheir dubia.
We're still waiting for it.
They wrote their dubia and itwas responded to.
The same day.
They said we're going to giveadult active adulterers
communion, which can't happen.

(01:54:45):
Is this what you want?
And Francis not only respondedunambiguously, francis, on
Tuchel, francis said that iscorrect, correct.
That also said that is the onlycorrect interpretation.
But wait, there's more.
The same day he wrote thatresposta, he placed it into the
deposit of the closest thing toa living deposit of faith, the

(01:55:07):
act of apostolic ascetus.
You missed that part and thatmakes all the difference.
That is truly unique.
It is lying in our deposit offaith.
We are lying when we tellProtestants and Orthodox that
we've never had a contradictionin.
We have that until another popegets rid of it Now.
It doesn't explode the churchuntil popes habitually teach

(01:55:28):
error.
So if the next guy afterFrancis Leo XIV says wrong, then
we're still good.
If the next guy after Francismakes it a habit, we're in real
trouble.
This is not just the beautifulculture of the Latin mass versus
the ugly.
Novus Ordo.

Speaker 2 (01:55:45):
I think that's a false dichotomy you're putting
up, though, because you'resaying it's like, well, arianism
is okay, or divorce, communionfor divorce and remarriage is
okay as long as we get the TLM.
And that's not what I wassaying either.
I was saying if we did get theLatin mass, not that that's okay
, it's that you're forming thenext generation for the actual
fight when it comes up again.
Like we don't have a culture.

(01:56:07):
That is dude.
When you poll Catholics andthey're and you're talking about
mass going Catholics, about thedivorce and remarriage thing,
it's like 80%.
You put your own poll out.
You remember how skewed yourpoll was for and you have a
fricking trad audience followingyou how skewed the poll was for
divorced and remarried toreceive communion and that one
thing it was like that was oneof the highest ones that went.

(01:56:28):
So if you don't have a culturethat's willing to stand up and
go because we all know peoplethat are divorced and remarried,
like it's, it's, it's a plagueon our culture.
So if you allow the TLM, whatyou're doing is you're forming
that next culture to putpressure on their hierarchy to
then go ahead with this, becausethe hierarchy they like to be
liked you know.

(01:56:49):
So I mean that's not like.

Speaker 3 (01:56:52):
It's not a Vox Populace, we already have it.
I mean, for all of these otherissues on my poll you're right
that one was surprising,particularly for my audience,
anthony but for all these issuesthey were mostly 85, 15 or 90,
10.
You saw that that doesn'tmatter, they've been 85, 15 or
90, 10 for at least the last 10years.

(01:57:12):
The we do not have a democracy.
What's dangerous about amonarchy, which is what we
function under?
It's the best theoretical formof government, but the worst
when it goes bad.
According to Thomas andAristotle, right.
What's dangerous about it is ifthey harden their hearts like
Pharaoh and they say we're notgoing to listen on this the way

(01:57:33):
they haven't been for 10 years,over 10 years, 15 years then it
doesn't matter how many goodlatin mass catholics you get.
The latin mass catholics havealways been the faithful ones.
They've always had children of10, 10 to 15.
You know big families they'llstill.
Now there's like 10 times asmany of us, though I know, but
the point is there's a lot of usas it is, even if there's 10

(01:57:53):
times as many of us, though Iknow.
But the point is there's a lotof us as it is, even if there's
10 times as many, you know, orwhatever 1%, even if it goes to
10%, that doesn't changeDenzinger.
Denzinger and the way that theMagisterium and Holy Tradition
works is if in that time,habitual error is taught, then

(01:58:13):
we have a real problem and it'sjust it's, it's not, they're not
comparable things.
You're never going to get todoctrinal contradiction, not
doctrinal tension like some ofthe Vatican II documents
doctrinal, outright, hereticalcontradiction.
Mueller said it was practicallyformal heresy.
You're not going to get to thatjust by having more grassroots,

(01:58:37):
good Catholics.
And I also want to makeeveryone clear that the only
place my family receives thesacraments is in the Latin Mass.

Speaker 2 (01:58:47):
I wasn't accusing you of not doing that, that I, I, I
, I was.
I was pointing out like myposition on it shifted by seeing
how much my life changed bygoing to it regularly and seeing
the change in my children bygoing to it regularly and I
thought that would be a goodapproach.
Like I, like, I'm still goingto be happy with that.

(01:59:08):
I know, I know what you'resaying.
Like it's, it's.
The two can't even be comparedwhen you're talking about heresy
.

Speaker 3 (01:59:14):
My life is much better when I go to Latin masses
, to Brian's and his families,to my families and Brian's
families, to everyone knows this, but that doesn't change If you
have.

Speaker 2 (01:59:27):
I don't know how else to express it.

Speaker 3 (01:59:27):
It's like you have heresy in the AAS.
Man, that's not.
That can't be brooked, thatcan't be passively tolerated.
We have the worst crisis ever.
Arianism wasn't even in the AAS, you just had bishops teaching
it.
This is the Pope.
Put it into the deposit offaith.

(01:59:49):
Wake up.
It's a huge deal.
I'm going to go debate Jay Dyerand some Freemasonic Protestant
on Tim Pool's show on June 13thand they can literally just be
like dude Pope Francis, and youhave Pope's planers out there.
He literally put a heresy intothe AAS.
I'm like well, it's nothabitual yet what if by June

(02:00:10):
13th, this guy doubles down onthat?
It becomes habitual teaching.
Someone answer me that I'llwait.
It's really important.

Speaker 5 (02:00:19):
What is the heresy, though, tim?
I understand that what itcommunicates is heretical, but
what is the actual heresy?
The doctrinal heresy on thebooks, and again, I don't know
the whole ins and outs ofeverything that's happened since
Amor Saticia and the responseto the dubium, but, um, to me it

(02:00:39):
suggested all that he's givenso far as instruction on
discipline, rather than actualdoctrine no, because that I mean
anthony was the one saying thelatin mass is doctrine, not
discipline.

Speaker 3 (02:00:49):
No, this is actually that matthew, chapter 5, our
lord is wrong.
That Luke chapter what is it?
18, verse 16 or 16, verse 18, Iforget is wrong.
He's saying Jesus is wrong,pope Francis is it stands for
the?
I mean, you could do it inmodal logic.
I was a logic professor.
You could say that this standsfor the proposition that France,
if France, if Francis right,jesus wrong.

(02:01:12):
But when, when Jesus says ifyou divorce your wife and marry
another, it's adultery, francisis either saying that it's not
adultery or that adultery is nota mortal sin.
This is why Mueller said it.
Mueller is a cautious guy, ouroutgoing CDF.
He's saying that A equals, notA on a very, very, very basic

(02:01:34):
scriptural dogma.

Speaker 5 (02:01:36):
Yeah, yeah.
So I'm sorry, go ahead, okay.
Sorry, anthony, but to methat's what it communicates
again, because discipline cancommunicate, it can instruct,
right Like, if you allowdivorced and remarried people to
receive communion, you'resaying that you're not in mortal
sin, right?
That could just be an abuse ofthe disciplines without

(02:01:58):
necessarily saying that, rightLike?
I get that that's what maybeFrancis would have wanted, if
that's what he was communicating.
But the claim that divorced andremarried people aren't
committing adultery, that isn'texplicitly communicated on the
books that you're.

Speaker 3 (02:02:17):
What you're describing, brian, is more like
how the german sonata wayoperates.
Before francis did fiducia,they just opened up 800 churches
and this was going to befrancis's number two to uh
replace cardinal.
Uh, ladaria fairer the c.
He burned through CDFs beforehe gave us Tucho.
He tried twice to give usHeiner Wilmer, who was the

(02:02:40):
German synodal ways uh leader,and he was just Heiner was just
opening up 800 churches perweekend and saying let's bless
uh gay couples, even thoughLadaria, fair, had had said this
is not allowed.
That's just.
That's the situation, the kindof praxeological situation you
just described, brian.
Two to a T, no, but this, thatthough that it does for it to be

(02:03:04):
heterodoxy or actual heresy, hedoesn't happen, because no
heretic would ever say that,like murder is good or whatever,
or polygamy, you know,worshiping multiple gods is good
.
That's not how heretics work.
Propositionally by Francisputting his response to into the
AAS.
It is real heresy.
Like double check me to Googleit, do your, do your own work.

(02:03:28):
Don't take it from me, but I'mjust saying we have real heresy
in the AAS right now.
That's just it's.
It's not the same thing as justturning a blind eye and
allowing it.
It is the biggest problem fromhis pontificate and I've done
shows on like the hundred hugeproblems, but there are none
which to against which thisdoesn't pale in comparison.

(02:03:50):
This is head and shouldersabove the rest because it
explodes the church and ourclaims about the infallibility
of tradition.

Speaker 5 (02:04:00):
Right, so, but doesn't it just?
Isn't there an interpretationof this where you could say that
the instruction goes so far assaying that people who are in
abnormal or irregular marriagestates, or that the situation is

(02:04:21):
so complex or unclear thatthere might be scenarios in
which they could receivecommunion, and maybe that even
means like they have to go toconfession right before receive
communion and then go back.
And I know that's not tenable,obviously, because they have to
have.

Speaker 2 (02:04:37):
You can't receive absolutely.

Speaker 5 (02:04:39):
Yeah, obviously.
But like what if they're tryingto think of scenarios that are
known only to God or some BSlike that, where they say, well,
maybe in those scenarios andthey're just trying to open up
the window through ambiguity,but they still haven't said that
they're not adulterers or thatthat jesus was wrong, like
nothing like that exists on thebooks, as far as I know he

(02:05:00):
hasn't said.

Speaker 3 (02:05:01):
Quote unquote jesus is wrong, brian, but but I don't
know how much you know aboutthe history of this issue.
Maybe a lot, maybe maybe youhaven't looked at it, but
familias familiars consortio byjp2 was a breakthrough on this
in uh, whenever he published itwas that the 80s jp2 was the aas
, what you know what the actualaas stands for?

Speaker 2 (02:05:25):
what is acta?

Speaker 3 (02:05:26):
apostolic ascetus.
Okay, acta apostolic.
A set is aas is just theclosest thing we have to an
actual depositum fide.
That's sort of encoded.
But no familiaris consortio,brian, is the compromise, it's
the final word on whether or notremarried divorcees can receive

(02:05:46):
communion.
Cardinal Casper, same St Gallenmafia guy, at a synod in 1982 or
1983, this is how long theseguys are at work tried the
orthodox option which heeventually got through with
Francis in 1982 or 1983.
And JP2, thank goodness saidnope, we're not doing that.

(02:06:08):
And then he publishedFamiliaris Consortio and he said
here's the most I can do foryou and it's actually a good
compromise.
It's a good compromise.
Jp two said I already gamed itout for all of the um guys out
there that are going to use testcases that you can't even
fathom up.
That Francis did use chaptereight of Amoris.
He got it from Cardinal Casper.

(02:06:29):
What if we have remarrieddivorcees that have new kids
together and it would requiresplitting them up previous to a
familiaris consortia?
Well, jp2 said solve theproblem for you.
You can continue to livetogether, even if it's an
adulterous second union, as longas in the foro interno, the
internal forum, you'd gettogether with your priest or

(02:06:51):
bishop and you promise to livecontinently as husband and wife
and and you'd get differentbedrooms as brother and sister.
Familiaris Consortio destroyedany reasonable doubt that could
exist afterward.
It's just, that's fine If youhave a kid from the adulterous
second union, live as brotherand sister.
I think it's FamiliarisConsortio 84, if I'm not

(02:07:13):
misremembering.
It was revolutionary, it was abig deal.
It was the, the, the answerthat jp2 gave to casper in the
80s.
So there's no, there's justwhen you war game stuff out the
way gollin does, or I guess, thegood guys do countervailingly,
there's no extra hypotheticalswhich would even allow any

(02:07:36):
daylight.
It's just either heresy or not.
And again, if Francis had justgiven that response to the
Buenos Aires guys and said, okay, you have the best or only
interpretation, and he didn'tput it into the AAS, that would
still be close.
But the same day, placing thedocument into our depositum fide

(02:07:58):
has to be undone.
And I don't know.
I'm repeating myself.

Speaker 2 (02:08:03):
Wait, tim.
So a lot of people are askingthis, like what constitutes
habitually taught, right?
So if Leo goes along with thisand it's habitually taught, does
this invalidate the church'sinfallibility for you?
If so, then what?

Speaker 3 (02:08:19):
There's no magic number and so it's kind of like
Dwight Schrute counting, youknow, to stall for time, like,
is it at one, how about two, howabout three?
It's going from one to two.
Popes teaching error, whichwe've really never had since the
errors in the depositum, is areally scary step and you could

(02:08:40):
argue it's habitual.
Then I don't have the magicnumber, I don't think Denzinger
would have the magic number.
But two to three, three to four, it's becoming a vertical
asymptote.
At that point you know what Imean.
And I'm just saying take itback to.
This is all very outdated, youknow nine years old, kind of
analysis from 2016.
Take it back to yesterday I'mforgetting his name Prevost

(02:09:06):
becoming Leo the 14th.
We're just trying to use basictests for proving or disproving.
I mean not proving ordisproving, because everything
you said, brian and Anthony, isright.
We're not going to know today,but basic tells for whether or
not this is a man after Jesus'sor Peter's own heart.

(02:09:27):
And I said look, the base, thebest one, is this litmus test
and it shouldn't take two orthree years.
This is why it's the testbecause of his predecessor,
francis, makes this really clearspecific, particularly because
they were.
We already know they werefriends.
He was friends with soup pitch.
Contrary to what people aresaying, he was friends with Mary

(02:09:48):
Mary Diaga and um, it's, it's,it's, he's, he's related both
substantively and procedurallyto the litmus test.
Is what I'm saying do you thinkso?

Speaker 5 (02:10:01):
I like the example that you gave about about going
to scenarios where you'retalking to guys like jay dyer or
, or protestants, or havingthese kinds of debates, because
this is something I've felt forthe past 10 years in any attempt
to defend the fate of the faithum, the orthodox faith, right?
There's all of theseopportunities where people are
coming in and saying, well, itsounds like you're contradicting
the Pope and his openness andhis pastoral approach to the

(02:10:23):
LGBTQ or whatever the issuemight happen to be right, and I
have to sit there and be likewell, let me explain all the
nuances here, because now weneed 100 different distinctions
to actually explain what's goingon here, and that makes my job
A boring and B extremelylaborious, right, and people
don't want to tune in for that.
Sorry, I'm losing my train ofthought on this.

Speaker 3 (02:10:46):
Yeah, it happens.
I hate when it happens.
I agree with that.
When debating Protestants, whendebating.

Speaker 2 (02:10:51):
Protestants.

Speaker 5 (02:10:52):
Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, right, right, okay.
So do you think that there's aliability in having something
formally added to the deposit offaith and then removed by a
successor Like that?
And we saw this is one of mybig issues with Traditiones

(02:11:12):
Custodis is that it was like nowis the.
Are we treating the pontificatelike?
Like this overton window thatswings back and forth between
the republicans and thedemocrats?
Every time one gets electedthey undo what the other guy did
.
It's like we can't have thatkind of thing going on.
Um, in the church we have,there has to be continuity,
otherwise we're going to startto really discredit the office

(02:11:32):
and the authority of the, of thepope, and so and and how much
more so if we're actuallytalking about things that are,
are considered part of theordinary magisterium, which then
get removed.
Like that's way more severethan, like you know, tinkering
with the catechism, like we sawin recent years.
Like that, years Like that tome somewhat discredits the, the,

(02:11:53):
the authority of themagisterium.

Speaker 3 (02:11:57):
I get what you're saying, but one.
I did teach church history fornine or 10 years and if you look
at Honorius, we don't in theAnnuario, we don't even have a
clear ruling on exactly how thechurch regards Honorius.
We don't have an, an exactteaching, uh clear teaching on
what all of the other popesduring, um, now I'm losing my

(02:12:21):
arianism for those 300 yearslike a tea with lemon and honey
in it.
Yeah, yeah, we need for thefrom like 300 to 600.
What was the status of all thesemi-weak popes and all that?
There were some uh publicfacing about faces, um there and
and going back and forth.

(02:12:42):
It is.
What I'm saying is it is a lotmore like electoral politics
than people think.
I'm friend, I'm good friendswith michael moles and he said
yeah, and I was texting him whenI was on my like third show of
the day and we were texting backand forth and I'm losing my
train of thought, but I'm likehe's like, yeah, it's not.
Uh, he and others were sayingit's not like electoral politics

(02:13:02):
at all.
It's actually a lot more likeelectoral politics and it is
fine and it is baked into eventhe early church to have some
popes going back and forth.
Now that was never with outrightheresy, like a Noria, it wasn't
outright.
There's the Noria with Francis,it's my brothers in Christ.
It's outright heresy and itwould be.

(02:13:25):
I get what you're saying, brian, but it would be far better to
undo it the one time.
Then it absolutely doesn'tviolate the rule of faith on how
consistent we have to be,because it won't have been
habitually taught so we can'tjust leave it.
If I know you're not suggestingit in like a stupid flippant
way, but but that's kind of theimplication that maybe if we

(02:13:48):
just leave it no one willfurther enact it.
That's not it.
People know about AmorisLaetitia.
Jay dyer and the eos know aboutit.
I talked to them about it.
Even smart protestants now, ifyou can find one, know about it
and it's and more than that, weknow about it.
It's on our conscience.
It is a real material heresy,called out by cdf mueller

(02:14:11):
himself, and it's he, heinsinuates its base.
It's it's material that'sbasically become formal.
So sorry.

Speaker 2 (02:14:20):
It's why they submitted the dubia, because
they wanted clarifications on it.
Like the dubia were submittedspecifically for morris leticia,
which is what I'm like a littlebit hopeful that that meeting
with cardinal burke and, um, atthe time, cardinal Prevost was
about that, but we don't know.

Speaker 3 (02:14:38):
That's what I said.
Yeah, no, that's my real hopeand that's why it's a litmus
test, anthony.
It's a litmus test because ithas to be, but that's where I
was just objecting to.
I am not hopeless.
I literally I don't like myodds.
You know, like driving up tothe house and I'm pretty sure I
left the water on, I'm prettysure I'm going to see water

(02:15:00):
streaming out the front door.
But I I do have hope thatsomehow God will preserve the
church.
He has to.
But this can't be habituallytaught and Denzinger doesn't
tell us how many magic popes itis.
It's a great question, likeBrian, but Denzinger doesn't
clarify none of the popes thathe's aggregating or none of the
councils he's aggregatingclarify at what point it becomes

(02:15:23):
habitual error.
It's just really it's seriousas a heart attack.
I love the Latin mass too.
That's all I was saying.
And I'm just like when peopleyesterday were and Brian, you
were doing a little bit of itlike finger wagging I'm like,
look, we do all have differenttemperaments.
I'm not some doomer.
Someone in Anthony's audiencecalled me a doomer.
I think Leo XIV it's within therealm of possibility, it's not,

(02:15:49):
doesn't violate the rule ofnon-contradiction.
So it's possible Could be thebest Pope ever and of course,
the first thing he would dowould be to undo Amoris Laetitia
.
So I'm not a doomer, I justhave this.
I was a logic professor, aphilosophy professor and when I
taught high school I was achurch historian.
You combine those things andwhat do you get?

(02:16:11):
You get a guy who says thelitmus test is we got to pull
this out now and we needed 267,whoever it was going to be to
pull it out now.
And I'm worried that thecardinals who gave us that guy
gave it to us because they wantto preserve the heresy to
explode the church.
And they know Sarah would havetaken it out first thing.

(02:16:31):
Cardinal, sarah would havetaken it out first thing, or
Burke, you know.

Speaker 2 (02:16:34):
Yeah, I don't think he's going to be the most based
Pope ever.
I think he's going to be aninterim Pope At least it appears
that way at first and he'sgoing to be the peacemaker to a
degree.
But, like you're saying, if weput this litmus test on him,
what is the approach you thinkthe trads are going to take from
here?
And because the trads are goingto take from here, and because

(02:16:56):
you, you were like, oh,everybody's finger wagging, but
I really see it as a ceasefirefor now and I don't know.
I just don't know what the, Idon't know what the approach we
should take going forward is,because we do owe filial like
whatever filial charity to thepope for the time being.

Speaker 3 (02:17:09):
I think but that I mean I'll address this to brian.
That's not going to sound oneway like and if you you presume
that a guy like me that justcares about church history,
cares about denzinger, caresabout the law of
non-contradiction and caresabout being um, philosophically
coherent meaning not violatingthe principle of
non-contradiction I'm going tosound different than a

(02:17:32):
Holdsworth or an Abate or aTaylor Marshall or Anthony Stein
, and I think I mean I'm kind ofthe rainbow candidate, really,
really, you know COVID's aboutall the friends we made along
the way.
I think we need all the voices.
I just don't like when peoplestart saying, tim, you have to
talk this magic way and don'task me how I know the meta rule,

(02:17:52):
the rule of faith for how wehave to tweet.
I just think it's BS.
We all have different.

Speaker 2 (02:17:57):
That's a fair point, because we we brought up for how
many years we listened to.
Because I'm friends with peoplethat are on like the trend horn
side and the your side and I'vehad people go.
Tim Gordon is pulling peopleaway from the church and I've
also had people.
I've also had people saying ifit wasn't for Tim Gordon I
wouldn't be Catholic today.
But people on the other sidehear your tone and they think

(02:18:18):
you're pulling people out of thechurch.
But some people actually needto hear things put the way
you're putting them.
So I think that is a fair point.

Speaker 5 (02:18:26):
Yeah, if I can jump into that point as well.
I mean, I have my temperamentand my tone and my approach like
this is where I try to find thebalance plus, you're canadian,
which we don't blame you for,but yes, no, that there's.
There's a lot of truth to that.
Right like canadians areculturally passive, aggressive,
right like in my own context,I'm seen as like hyper choleric

(02:18:47):
and really intolerant.
Like there's people who haveunfriended me and ghosted me
because there's I can't bearound that that guy, he won't
shut up Right, whereas I go down, like to Ohio and go on Matt
Fradd's show and Matt's likeyou're not a cleric, dude,
you're phlegmatic.
I'm like, no, you don'tunderstand.
It's just, it's the differencebetween, like your revolutionary
spirit, which is baked intoyour DNA, although he's not

(02:19:09):
American, and our Canadian.
Like we became a country bysitting down for tea with the
queen and being like OK, can wehave a country now?
And she's like, sure, you know,like that's, that's kind of our
cultural heritage.
But so, with all of that said,like so a guy like Taylor
Marshall or a guy like you, timwill take, you have a different

(02:19:29):
temperament, you have adifferent tone.
You have a different tone, youhave a different approach and
while you you know that I'vedisagreed with you on on certain
things, for the most part I Ithink that you have an important
voice in the church and thething that pisses me off more
than anything is the people whowho really want to say, um, you
know, yeah, he's, he's, he'scausing conflict or division in

(02:19:53):
the church, whoever that hemight be, whether it's you, tim,
or whether it might be, whetherit's you, tim, or whether it's
me, or whether it's an AustinIvory or whoever right.
Like, yeah, we disagree, and wedisagree vehemently, but we
should be able to, we should beable to hash that out and have
serious conversations aboutserious things and do so to a
degree that you know gets ourhackles up in the process.

(02:20:14):
That's okay.
I think the complaint thatpeople always talk about, like
you know, all these Christiansand they're infighting, that's
why I'm not part of the church.
That's BS.
That's what it means to be partof a family.
Families fight.
It's the people who areindifferent towards each other,
like divorcees, who won't talkto each other.
That's when you know you've gota problem.
At least we're still talking,if we're fighting.
Right, that's a good sign.

(02:20:35):
I would say there's a lot tofight about.
Like Chesterton talks about,that right Of all the things to
fight about, the faith andreligion is worth fighting about
, so let's fight about it.

Speaker 2 (02:20:44):
That's great as far as I'm concerned, dude, if you
guys ever came to a body familyfunction like we are, freaking
out, screaming at each other andthen hugging at the end of it.
It's just the way it is.
So I'm used to that's greatsituations where people are
fighting and then they make upand then I've seen families that
are very closed off and theydon't.
They keep everything bottled inand they do end up divorced and
crap like that.

(02:21:04):
So I thought, dude, I was veryhappy that you both wanted to
come on, because clearly therewas a little disagreement there
we've been on each other's showslike I've always liked it.

Speaker 3 (02:21:14):
I mean the last, the last thing where I felt finger
wag brian was um trent horner.
His wife, dressed up as me and,you know, acted like some sort
of skater idiot.
And then I put on.
I put on headgear too andyou're like, well, that's me.
And I was like, well, I mean, Idon't have very thin skin.
Everyone, everyone probablyhere, knows that.

(02:21:34):
But we have to have onestandard for everyone.
Like, if so-and-so is going togo on and put on headgear and
make someone look like acaricaturized version of
themselves, then you're going toget it back.
I mean, girls don't get that byand large.

Speaker 2 (02:21:50):
I think the immediate perception was something to do
with Trent's heritage and itwasn't that you were literally
just goofing on his hair.
But it was different when youdid it.
I thought it was just goofy andsilly Like you did it on my
show.
It was like one of the sixparties.

Speaker 3 (02:22:07):
That's why we need a masculine voice in the church,
because guys goof around, girlschoose to get offended and once
we reclaim that, then we'llreclaim joy.
Goodness, joking things likethat.
But like I, just the one thing.
And, brian, I've always likedyou, which I told you in DM, and
I don't say that because I amso aggressive, I don't say that

(02:22:28):
to people, I don't mean it to um, I've always liked you.
I was just like again, the tonepolicing is is an element of
the post conciliar kind of girlchurch that is going to die out
and it, it, it couldn't die outfast enough because I talk like
a man, right?
Uh, other people talk, you knowI talk like a whatever.
I always forget the word forwhat you're saying.

(02:22:50):
My temperament is I'm also thenostalgic, I'm choleric,
nostalgic, whatever.
The fourth one is'm.
I'm a mixture and I'm supernice in real life probably
sanguine, choleric, sanguine.

Speaker 2 (02:23:02):
I'm sanguine, choleric, so I'm like way more
on the other side.
You're dude.
I've never seen anybody who,when they believe something,
just puts their freaking footdown and they don't give a crap,
who's offended by what theyhave to say.
They're just going to say it.

Speaker 3 (02:23:15):
Yeah, but I'm nice.
And, by the way, total aside.
This is why we need end caps,brennan and Audra Nakani's
actual Catholic Thomisticpersonality typing system,
because the four just isn'tenough.
The four temperaments, butthat's a whole different.
Aside, I just I defy anyonewho's ever come up to me at
Latin Mass and asked anythingand I've gotten some funny and

(02:23:37):
bizarre and some onerousrequests to say, oh yeah, dude,
in real life Tim's a nice guyand everyone already knows
you're a nice guy, brian, but Iand you are, but I just the tone
policing just seems like, well,it's a little bit of an
implicit claim to knowing themeta rule or the rule of faith,

(02:24:00):
if you know.
And, anthony, this is what Iwas objecting to earlier today,
that's all.
To know exactly what people.
Oh, I don't know exactly howyou should talk, uh, but I do
know how you shouldn't talk.
It's just not.
It's just not accurate.
People literally criticize mein my.
Most of my audience has beenpre-filtered, but there'll be
like you're using too big awords.

(02:24:21):
I'm like okay, here's what.
Email me.
Find out exactly to the wordhow many words are in your
vocabulary.
English has five times morewords than every, than the
second most uh, uh, verboselanguage or the biggest language
.
Find out how many words are inyour vocabulary.
Email it to me and I'll onlyuse that.
21 683, those exact words, justfor you and everyone else who's

(02:24:45):
.
There's just no one way to talk.
And once this patriarchymovement that you know I'm kind
of near the heart of takes offmore and more and more You're
seeing it a lot we're going tostop tone policing each other,
because men are all differentand we all have our special
auras and our special colors andwe don't have to just use the

(02:25:06):
language that Anthony would haveused or Tim would have used or
Brian would have used.
We're all the colors of the bowman.
That's what I'm saying.

Speaker 5 (02:25:15):
Yeah, well, I didn't think we were going to air our
dirty laundry on air.
But as far as the incident withTrent, I didn't know the other
part of that story.
I didn't know that they haddressed Well, I knew that she
was doing parody videos all thetime, but I didn't know that
that's what you were respondingto.
So, so, mea culpa, if, if,that's, if, that's the whole,

(02:25:39):
the whole context, that I wasmissing there.
And obviously, uh, twitterisn't, um, twitter isn't
conducive to having, you know,the full, full conversation that
we would need to have.
So, if this is an opportunityto to air grievances and and and
say apologies, then I'll, I'll,I'll gladly offer my apology
for that.

Speaker 3 (02:25:51):
Yeah, I'll gladly offer my apology for that.

Speaker 5 (02:25:52):
Yeah, because I do agree with you.

Speaker 3 (02:25:53):
Yeah, sorry if I cut you off sort of in the, but I
thought I said that.
You know I'm sure I was beingmaybe slightly an ass, so sorry
if I was, but it's tough becausewhen you are one of the first
responders the way I was andother members of my family,
including my wife, were to thisraging fire of feminism in the

(02:26:17):
church, which is really what theactual guys who infiltrated the
church said they wanted to doSmascula Sare Francis repeated
it, that's a Vatican II thingand make just the women kind of
run the church.
Then injustice reigns and soyou get stuff like all these
shots Like before people don'tknow this before anything with

(02:26:38):
the horns.
You know Trent and Laura.
I literally shot Trent an email.
I still have this email in mysandbox.
I shot Trent an email and I waslike hey man, I just saw Laura
and you do a ask me anythingvideo.
This is probably three yearsago.
She seems really nice.
Do you guys want to just comeon and do a couple's thing,
because it had already been liketwo or three years since.
Um, I I'd like obliterated himin that feminism debate and I

(02:27:01):
just wanted to extend a hand andhe was like no, she doesn't
like to go on or talk aboutshows she doesn't know.
And I was like, okay, it's not,it's not super nice, I'm a
vuncular that way, um, even ifI'm a dick in other ways.
But so then all of a suddensomeone sends me these videos,
like a year later, and she'smaking fun of you know how I
dress, how I talk, uh, makingfun of a deeply, deeply hurtful,

(02:27:25):
um family thing that stillhasn't been sewn up with with my
younger brother, and and thenshe goes on, matt fred, matt
fred pays my wife, steph, a nicecompliment.
You know she's like a prophetof asking your husband and laura
can't stand it and she goes.
You know she basically sayssteph needs to disobey, her
husband does.

(02:27:45):
Does she stand up to her?
I mean that that's terrible.
So, like you, you kind oftraipse it by tone, policing
there.
I'm not trying to beat a deadhorse.
You already apologized.
We're cool.

Speaker 2 (02:27:56):
I'm always cool with Brian.

Speaker 3 (02:27:57):
Yeah, there was an underlying issue, not knowing.

Speaker 2 (02:27:59):
Yeah, there was an underlying issue there and there
was like really, trent, youshould just have a conversation
like this.
You won't.

Speaker 3 (02:28:09):
And that's why I invited him, because he was a
little he was, um, a little butthurt after the double debate on
death penalty and feminism.
You know, you could see whyimmediately after you listened
to that double debate.
But I thought, okay, let it goa year or two and then reach out
.
And I literally was like yourwife seems really nice, you know
, um, it just it was.

(02:28:30):
It was a whatever I don't usewords like cute, but it was a
touching video you did togetherand you and I might get along,
especially in the context of thefour of us with our wives Then
kind of declining on that,specifically for the reason oh
well, she doesn't know you.
But then you can mock me, mybrother, my wife, some of it
more hurtful than other, and saymy wife should challenge me and

(02:28:51):
Matt's immediatelyuncomfortable, he's like whoa.
So I've reached out severaltimes and the fact of the matter
is people might not like tohear it in the audience but like
Brian holds where, it's thenice guy in real life.
I know because we do correspondsome I correspond more often
with Anthony he's a real lifenice guy.

(02:29:12):
You probably don't want togrant it to me some of you in
your audience.
He's a real life Nice guy.
You probably don't want togrant it to me Some of you in
your audience, but I'm a reallife Nice guy Like.
People meet me and they're likethanks, thank you for just.
You are what you are, what yousay you are, and um, but not
everyone's like that, so somepeople really won't talk to you
behind the scenes and um, yeah,I need to get into all that, but

(02:29:32):
but I you are fine, and I doappreciate it and I I would talk
to trent or taylor or anybodythat that kind of leaves the um,
the steaming rabble of therelationship steaming.

Speaker 2 (02:29:43):
I just I'd always prefer to reconcile like part of
this whole thing with the, withthe, with the pope.
I like I know it's weird, but Ithink so much of the tension
between brothers where there isthese weird things has to do
with us not having a father forso long.
And because you look at theguys who used to run in the
Catholic speaker circuit andlike there were people like you

(02:30:06):
would see guys that were greatfriends for years under Benedict
, they were on the Catholicspeaker circuit and then under
Francis, you just watchrelationships deteriorate and
then this person saying thewrong thing about Francis and we
can't really have conversationswith them publicly because we
can't be seen to be endorsingtheir view and you have this
whole guilt by association thingstart happening.
I think so much of what we'redealing with is we don't have a

(02:30:29):
father.
So my, when I started seeingeverybody getting behind the
Pope, part of me was like, oh,maybe we could have some
brotherly love again.
Man, I'm all for.
Even if there is tension, weall just sit down and have a
conversation.

Speaker 5 (02:30:43):
Yeah, that's penetrating.
That's very insightful, anthony.
I think that the dynamic of thefamily and the analogy of the
family is really applicable,because when the father doesn't
break up serious conflict, orwhen it escalates to the level
that the father needs to getinvolved, um, then the kids will
figure out how to do itthemselves and it's gonna be
messy and they're not going todo it.

(02:31:04):
Well, right, especially becauseat that point it's just become
a power struggle, right, andit's, it's, it's, it's not, it's
not productive, and charity iscertainly going to be sacrificed
in the midst of it.

Speaker 3 (02:31:14):
That's why salvia literally said he became
catholic.
The orthodox russian he saidwhen you, he goes.
Well.
This is when I realized Ineeded to look at catholicism.
When you don't have papa tocall brothers to the table, it
will be endless squabbling.
It's exactly what you guys justdescribed.
I think it's a perfect sort ofum why there's a head of the
family logical, read it.

Speaker 2 (02:31:36):
It's exactly what's happening yeah, yeah, dude, this
was, this was.
Uh.
This was such a freaking uniqueopportunity.
I'm so glad you both were opento coming on and just shooting
this shit with each other.
Man, this was very cool.
I know you guys have been oneach other's shows, but it was
kind of like unique in that, uh,tim was pointing out a video
brian did and then brian jumpedon and tim jumped on.

(02:31:58):
So, um, yeah, look I.
I like I said this whole thingwhen I started seeing everybody
get behind the pope.
I was kind of like a littleexcited that like, maybe things
like this might start happeningagain.
So I'm, tim, you're 100 righton the like.
These major issues have to beaddressed.
I want to give this Pope alittle time to address them.

Speaker 3 (02:32:19):
Me too.
I want to give him time too.
That's just what I was.
I was like, don'tmischaracterize me, he needs a
little time, he's not going todo it.
The first day Even I wasthinking that to Anthony Stein.
I just don't like peoplebeating him up tone, policing
him, cause we all have differentvoices and that is the mark of
men as opposed to women.
We're like, yeah, this guy usesthis colorful way to say it, or

(02:32:40):
maybe, as quicker to say it,this guy's more reticent or
quiet, or doesn't use it.
I just, I want I was I wasjoking when I said it, it
sounded sarcastic I want all thevoices.
But the point is, charity alwaysrequires justice first.
It's like concentric circles.
So there isn't.
The reason that Brian and I aregetting together is because you

(02:33:02):
know Brian's a nice guy and I'ma nice enough guy to believe in
dialogue.
Always, always, always.
Men of goodwill will dialoguedirectly with each other.
Always, always, always.
Men of badwill will avoiddialogue.
Apply that wherever you want,but, um, but I will say that
it's it's, it's a rule of faithfor human life that you get
honest parties together.
They'll always dialogue.

(02:33:22):
But what I'm saying about, uh,what's his name?
Leo, pope, pope Leo the 14th,is that um it, this stuff won't
start happening.
Where, where, where you gettrue charity without justice.
So if you do just get mimeticdesire and people sort of
kissing up or whatever I'mtrying to use G language people

(02:33:43):
kissing up and saying thepolitically correct thing now
it's trad version of politicalcorrectness and it's not just
and it is just covering for thePope, like Pope Swayners did for
for for Frank, like Lofton forPope Francis, then you're not
going to see the fruit of thattree.
The fruit of the tree will bepoisonous.
This conversation is not goingwell, is not accruable to uh, to

(02:34:06):
Leo the 14th.
Yet we can start saying thatonce he, you know, passes the
litmus test.
This is because Brian's a man ofgood faith and I'll stick up
for myself, I'll, I'll, I'lldialogue with anyone I've ever
beefed with.
Sincerely.
Thanks though, brian, andthanks Thanks, anthony.
I just, I just didn't want tobe called cause cause the trads
used to do it, Cause I wasn't umdown with me.

(02:34:27):
I didn't go to an SSPX chapel.
That also, tim doesn't reallylove the Latin mass.
I was just getting sensitivewhen I hopped off and you were
like the culture I only I drive45 to go.
That's when I got it?

Speaker 2 (02:34:40):
Yeah, I thought so.
I didn't know.
I don't know.
I know you love the Latin mass.
I don't know how often youattended and stuff.
So I was trying to relate it tolike skateboard culture for you
, because I see the residuals ofthat are still in your life,
like that's because in youryouth it kind of formed you and
so it's like I I still.
I don't want to even drag thatwhole thing up again.

Speaker 3 (02:35:01):
I wasn't trying to mischaracterize you or or say
anything about you know, Ithought it was I was trying to
make a point, yeah I was tryingto make a point about culture,
that's all yeah, no, we and I,just for full clarity sakes, uh,
yeah, my, my family, we, wereceive the sacraments only when
we go to new Orleans.
We're going to um doubleconfirmation in new Orleans at
the TLM, then we, I do, we doreceive confession um at the you

(02:35:25):
know boom or no sometimes we goto mass there, but we don't.
we don't typically receive theEucharist, although I'm.
I'm just'm just saying I'm inthat club, I am a TLM
supremacist and I love it.
And I'm not making fun of tradsfor loving it, I'm with them.
I'm just saying I get sick ofthe one-note song where they
think if we all go to the TLMthen we can abide Arianism or

(02:35:48):
Nestorianism or whatever.
This heresy at some point, godwilling, in the future will be
the condemned name of Francis'sheresy.
If Leo XIV is who we're hopinghe is, then he will condemn this
heresy and we'll be shut of it.

Speaker 2 (02:36:04):
Any closing thoughts Brian.

Speaker 5 (02:36:07):
Yeah, I'd say, the thing for me is we agree that
there are cancers or there arediseases that need diagnosis,
and I think we agree on thediagnosis.
But the solution is where Ithink a lot of us are finding
some disagreement and in my mind, I, I'm I'm trying to think of,
like the sort of the long gameopportunity that exists here,

(02:36:28):
because I don't see a lot ofshort game opportunity.
I don't see how we can, youknow, stage a protest in front
of saint Peter's or somethinglike that, where they're gonna
be like, oh okay, let's, let's,let's revise this, like I just
don't see us.
I don't think we have muchpower.
I think that the power has toactually rise to the rank of the
Episcopate, and only when thathappens are we going to see some

(02:36:50):
actual reforms here.
Because I don't think thisgeneration is going to see some
actual reforms here, because Idon't think this generation is
going to do it as as good as umthe some of the best candidates
might be and, god willing, umpope leo the 14th is one of
those candidates but if he's not, yeah, I don't see the reforms
happening.
But I do see the reformshappening if we can cultivate a
generation who will assume thoseroles.

(02:37:10):
And one of the best ways I thinkwe can we can actually have
that generation be solid is ifthey can gather in community,
and the only way that they cando that is if there's there's
latin mass communities for themto gather in.
Because, like just thinking ofmy own kids, if, if we get sent,
if we get split up and anddispersed to novus ordos, um,
the culture is going to swallowup like 75 of those kids and

(02:37:33):
there's probably a good numberof vocations religious vocations
or clerical vocations in thosenumbers that wouldn't exist
otherwise.
In my archdiocese last year, ormaybe it was the year before,
there was four vocations thatjoined the seminary.
Three of them came from ourLatin mass chaplaincy.
Those are people and again,like there's a whole missing

(02:37:55):
generation of people who will becandidates for bishops, and
it's the gen x in my archdiocese, which means that millennials
are going to assume the roles ofbecoming bishops right away
here and they're all superconservative.
And if we can continue thattrend and not just continue it
but grow that generation, then Ithink that's the solution in my
mind and so I think that it's ait's a dangerous oversight for

(02:38:15):
them to allow the latin mass tocontinue the way this 100, 100
is beautifully expressed by you.

Speaker 3 (02:38:23):
My, my whole concern is just you, never there's a,
there's um.
What does thomas say?
The relation of the finite tothe infinite is infinite, right?
Um, you know, it's like a zeroover 10 as opposed to one over
10 or something.
You never get to the doctrine,discipline, gap by just culture
in a monarchy, and so I, I justeverything as beautifully as you

(02:38:46):
expressed it, double it for meas well, about what's amazing
and sublime, about the tlmM thatseems culturally to lack with
the Novus Ordo, though it'svalid, whatever that mystery of
iniquity will turn out to be.
But what you can't get, I don'tthink, even if there are 10
times more of us, I don't thinkyou're going to get.
If, as my theory goes, thatthis is a kind of top-down Golan

(02:39:12):
mafioso culmination of thepermanent instruction of the
Alta Vendita, which is my strongbelief, that's what the Golan
group is, they're never going toallow it.
Even if it's a public outcry,even if there's 10 times 10, as
many of us in the Latin Mass,they're just always going to
ignore it quiescently.

(02:39:33):
They're just ignore itquiescently, they're just going
to quiescently, uh, ignore it,notwithstanding the outcry.
That's the danger of monarchiesand that's, that's what we have
.
So I'm just saying the mark ofthe monarch, irrespective of
what we're doing in ourbeautiful families, beautiful
latin mass culture of that, themark of the good monarch here is

(02:39:54):
he's going to be toiling to getrid of the, the heresy which
has never happened before.
It's in the act of apostolicascetus If you listen to nothing
else I said here today, peopleof avoiding Babylon, ryan,
anthony, it's.
This has never happened.
That it's it's actually kind ofdeliberately stuck into the
deposit of faith.
This happened.
This is, this is alert happened.
That it's actually kind ofdeliberately stuck into the

(02:40:14):
deposit of faith.
This is alert.
And that's all I've ever beenworked up about with the Francis
pontificate.
That can't really easily beundone just by beautiful culture
.

Speaker 5 (02:40:29):
Yeah, and again, the thing I would say is that
hopefully someone from theensuing generation will be in a
position where they can undo it.
I just don't think the currentgeneration is going to be able
to do it.

Speaker 2 (02:40:42):
Yeah, and let's honestly hope that Burke is
still like Tim.
You got something to him oncebefore, so let's see if we can
get at least something to himagain to maybe hope for.
Hope for something, because Ithink you are right about that.
That clear.
Well, like let's just.
But, like I said, we're all, weall should just give, give the

(02:41:04):
pope.
I mean, let's give him a littletime here.
So maybe this was a 30 meetingwas.

Speaker 3 (02:41:10):
I didn't know that until I think this morning that
he had been at the secret me Imean that that's my one.
I have hope.
I have hope because of that,but I I hadn't seen it as of
most of last night until maybevery early this morning, so I I
don't characterize me as nothaving hope.
I think that that april 30th,entering to the top secret
summit at burke's apartment,literally could be them having

(02:41:33):
the conversation, some iterationof the conversation that that
we just had.

Speaker 2 (02:41:37):
Yeah, yeah, Tim, you did a record 90 hours of
streaming this week man, spaceand time.

Speaker 3 (02:41:46):
yesterday it was like five hours.
I went on my friend quitefrankly show after yours, so it
was wild.
It was a wild day.
And man, what if it had beencardinal robert sarah?
That that would have beenbetter, but, but yeah, we still
got.

Speaker 2 (02:42:02):
We still got a little hopium left in this one.
But yeah, I'm saying we had alittle we had.
I had hopium for not reallysarah, I was hoping for a pizza
ball, but and do and Dolan, Iwas pro Dolan man.
You guys don't know what wemissed out on, but bro.

Speaker 3 (02:42:18):
I saw how much.
Yeah, I mean, I get the, I getthe irony.
And I saw that article thismorning.
I thought maybe you'ddisseminated it.

Speaker 2 (02:42:25):
It's saying oh, save the hilarious to push the jolly,
push the jolly, jolly fatirishman from new york as the
pope.
I'm not being serious for thoseof you on twitter, but all
right, we're gonna wrap this up,both of you guys.
Man, thank you both so much.
We did three hours of streamingtonight, so, um yeah, man if
something else comes up.

Speaker 4 (02:42:45):
I just want to say a quick apology to brian myself.
I allow my trenchant mouth toget me in trouble when I think
people are going after tim andand I think I overreacted on
that.
So I also intend an apologyyour way.

Speaker 5 (02:42:59):
Mr Holds, I don't.
I don't know what the apologyis for, Cause I didn't hear you
say something, but I'll just.

Speaker 4 (02:43:06):
I won't go looking for it.
No, no, it wasn't anything big,I think I just said something
that we were being school marmed, but that that was it All
something that we were beingschool-marmed, but that I think
that was it.

Speaker 3 (02:43:17):
You're always welcome here in the Deep South, Brian.
They'll wonder in Canadian ways.

Speaker 5 (02:43:23):
I'm grateful for the opportunity to have had the
conversation tonight.
So thanks, Anthony, you too.

Speaker 2 (02:43:27):
All right, guys, We'll see you next time.
I'll see you boys.

Speaker 3 (02:43:30):
God bless you all.

Speaker 2 (02:43:31):
Adios, you too Peace.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Softening Our Trad Hearts to Leo XIV?

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

All Episodes

Softening Our Trad Hearts to Leo XIV?

Stuff You Should Know