[ 0 → 4] TrapCast Express [ 4 → 15] TrapCast Express, it's Monday, October 30th, 2023. [ 16 → 22] Scott Hahn is a famous convert to the Vatican II religion from Presbyterianism. [ 22 → 30] He converted back in 1986 and has long been a professor of theology at the Franciscan University of Steubenville [ 30 → 36] and, of course, a prolific author for popular books on theology and apologetics. [ 37 → 41] Although he may appear orthodox compared to Pope Francis, [ 42 → 48] he is at best a dyed-in-the-wool conservative Novus Ordo in the mold of John Paul II. [ 48 → 52] He is also a raving charismatic acumenist, [ 53 → 58] and has publicly put forward the blasphemy that the Holy Trinity is a family. [ 59 → 65] And since a family does not only have a father and a son, but also a mother, [ 65 → 73] you can probably guess which of the three divine persons is feminine, motherly, and bridal for Hahn. [ 73 → 80] And what impact that has on the teaching that the Holy Ghost is the spouse of the Blessed Virgin Mary, [ 81 → 82] well, we don't need. [ 82 → 86] To go there, because our topic now is a different one. [ 86 → 92] Hahn just appeared on the YouTube show Pints with Aquinas with Matt Fradd, [ 92 → 95] who is a Novus Ordo apologist from Australia. [ 96 → 102] The episode premiered on October 24th under the title Catholics in Exile, [ 102 → 107] and a five-minute excerpt of that was made into a separate video entitled [ 107 → 110] Christ is Head of the Church with Dr. Scott Hahn, [ 111 → 112] released on YouTube. [ 112 → 114] October 27th. [ 114 → 118] Hahn was asked to respond to a viewer's question about [ 118 → 121] how to deal with that Jesuit from Buenos Aires, [ 121 → 125] the so-called Pope Francis, Jorge Bergoglio, [ 126 → 129] considering that it is evident now that he is changing doctrine, [ 129 → 134] that he's teaching things at variance with the Catholic faith. [ 134 → 137] Let's listen to the response Hahn gives. [ 138 → 142] You know, for 2,000 years, the Catholic Church has gotten by with, [ 142 → 144] what, 265 popes. [ 144 → 147] And some, like Benedict IX, have just been rank scoundrels. [ 148 → 148] I mean, perverts. [ 149 → 150] And most of them have been good. [ 151 → 153] Some great, some holy, but only a few saints. [ 155 → 158] And we're not in a personality cult because the pope is not the head of the church. [ 158 → 160] He's the vicar of Christ, and he alone is the head. [ 161 → 161] Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. [ 161 → 163] Let's stop right here for a moment. [ 164 → 167] Scott Hahn just said, in all seriousness, [ 168 → 170] that the pope is not the head of the church, [ 171 → 172] that our, [ 172 → 179] Lord Jesus alone is the head of the church. Really now? Do they not teach the first Vatican [ 179 → 186] Council at Franciscan University in Steubenville? Only Vatican II, huh? Well, here's what Vatican I [ 186 → 196] says back in 1870, quote, if anyone then says that the blessed apostle Peter was not established by [ 196 → 203] the Lord Jesus Christ as the chief of all the apostles and the visible head of the whole [ 203 → 210] militant church, or that the same received great honor but did not receive from the same our Lord [ 210 → 217] Jesus Christ directly and immediately the primacy in true and proper jurisdiction, let him be. [ 218 → 224] Anathema, unquote. That's from the Dogmatic Constitution, Pastor Aeternus, chapter 1, [ 224 → 226] found in Denzinger, number [ 226 → 234] 1823. Let's choose another example. In chapter 3 of the same document, Vatican I quotes the [ 234 → 242] Council of Florence as follows, quote, the pontiff of Rome himself is the successor of the blessed [ 242 → 250] Peter, the chief of the apostles, and is the true vicar of Christ and head of the whole church and [ 250 → 256] faith and teacher of all Christians, unquote. That's found in [ 256 → 256] Denzinger, number 1823. Let's choose another example. In chapter 3 of the same document, Vatican I quotes the [ 256 → 268] 1826. Now, let's fast forward to 1943. Pope Pius XII writes in Mystici Corporis, his great encyclical [ 268 → 276] on the church as the mystical body of Christ, quote, since he, Christ, was all wise, he could [ 276 → 283] not leave the body of the church he had founded as a human society without a visible head. Nor [ 283 → 286] against this may one argue that the primacy of Christ as the chief of all the apostles and the [ 286 → 294] of jurisdiction established in the church gives such a mystical body two heads. For Peter, in virtue [ 294 → 301] of his primacy, is only Christ's vicar, so that there is only one chief head of this body, namely [ 301 → 308] Christ, who never ceases himself to guide the church invisible, though at the same time he rules [ 308 → 315] it visibly through him who is his representative on earth. After his glorious ascension into heaven, [ 315 → 316] this church rests, [ 316 → 323] that not on him alone, but on Peter too, its visible foundation stone. That Christ and his [ 323 → 330] vicar constitute one only head is the solemn teaching of our predecessor of immortal memory, [ 330 → 336] Boniface VIII, in the apostolic letter Unam Sanctam, and his successors have never ceased [ 336 → 345] to repeat the same. Unquote. Again, that is Pius XII, encyclical Mystici Corporis, number 40. [ 346 → 352] And honestly, I could give you endless quotes on this, but we can just stop here. The bottom line [ 352 → 361] is that the Pope is so linked with Christ that together they make up only one single head, [ 361 → 365] and that's why you sometimes hear the Pope being referred to as the head of the church [ 365 → 373] and sometimes Christ. Now, because of this intimate union of our Lord Jesus Christ with his vicar, [ 373 → 376] it is clear that we can never pit, [ 376 → 382] the Pope against Christ, nor Christ against the Pope. And of course, by that I mean the Pope in [ 382 → 389] his official acts, not the Pope as a private person who is obviously a sinner and can be [ 389 → 397] in mortal sin even, and can even go to hell, God forbid. So, Hahn is wrong to say that Christ alone [ 397 → 402] is the head of the church and the Pope is not the head of the church. And it's very important [ 402 → 405] to understand that this is not just semantics. [ 406 → 412] It's a matter of real theological difference. Because if the Pope is not the head of the visible [ 412 → 419] church on earth, then he cannot function as the head and have all members of the body under his [ 419 → 426] direction and preeminence. Otherwise, each diocese could just say to Rome, well, you know what? It's [ 426 → 431] nice you've got the Pope there and all, but that's really just a ceremonial thing and we're done with [ 431 → 436] you. We're just going to submit to Christ instead of you because he's the true head of the church. [ 436 → 445] Anyway, that's impossible in the Catholic Church. In fact, that's heresy against Vatican I. You can [ 445 → 452] find that in Denzinger number 1831 if you want to look it up. See, Christ established the papacy [ 452 → 458] and made the Pope his vicar precisely so that while he is in heaven until the second coming, [ 459 → 464] there would be a visible representative of him to govern and teach with his authority. [ 465 → 466] One who allows the Pope to be the head of the church. And that's why he's the head of the [ 466 → 472] would have the ultimate power of binding and loosing on earth and in heaven. [ 473 → 479] The whole idea, the whole point of the papacy is to be able to cling to Christ [ 479 → 487] in a way that is objective and visible and ratified by our Lord himself. It is the visible [ 487 → 494] way of knowing for sure that you are in the true church and have the true doctrine, the true [ 494 → 496] sacraments, and salutary discipline. And that's why he's the head of the church. [ 496 → 506] And so it's by being subject to the Pope that you can be sure you are subject to Christ. That is [ 506 → 513] the point. And that is why it's so important to understand that Francis is not a true Pope [ 513 → 520] and could not possibly be one. In Mystici Corporis, Pope Pius XII says, [ 520 → 520] quote, [ 521 → 526] They therefore walk in the path of dangerous error, who believe that they, [ 526 → 532] in accept Christ as the head of the church, while not adhering loyally to his vicar on earth. [ 533 → 538] They have taken away the visible head, broken the visible bonds of unity, [ 538 → 544] and left the mystical body of the Redeemer so obscured and so maimed that those who are seeking [ 544 → 552] the haven of eternal salvation can neither see it nor find it. Unquote. That's paragraph number 41. [ 553 → 556] Now, this is a very significant passage, [ 556 → 563] there. Notice two things. First, Pius XII condemns those who have taken away the visible [ 563 → 569] head. I think he's talking about Protestants there, or maybe Eastern Orthodox. But it's also [ 569 → 576] applicable to Scott Hahn, because he just said that the Pope is not the head of the church. [ 577 → 584] So Hahn is taking away the visible head, in principle, we might add, just like Protestants. [ 585 → 586] And no, [ 586 → 592] that has nothing to do with Sedevacantism. Some people will say, that's a condemnation of [ 592 → 599] Sedevacantism. No, it's not. We don't take away the Pope in principle at all. We believe in the [ 599 → 607] papacy. We believe the Pope is the visible head of the church. We believe he is the principle of [ 607 → 614] unity in the church and the true vicar of Christ who governs, teaches, and sanctifies in Christ's [ 614 → 615] stead and with his authority. [ 616 → 623] Such that what he binds and looses on earth is bound and loosed in heaven. It's just that given [ 623 → 631] the evidence, we believe we don't at present have a Pope, that no man currently fills that office. [ 632 → 639] So we're not saying that the Catholic Church has no Pope in the sense of not having the [ 639 → 646] institution of the papacy, that the church has no papal office. We're saying that Jorge [ 646 → 652] Bergoglio isn't the one who fills that office. And there hasn't been anyone to fill it [ 652 → 659] legitimately, validly, as far as we know, since the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958. [ 660 → 668] And the reason why, one of the reasons why, is evident from the second point Pius XII makes [ 668 → 675] in that quote from Mr. G. Corporees, namely that if you take away the Pope, the papacy, [ 676 → 683] and those who are seeking the haven of eternal salvation can neither see it nor find it. Meaning [ 683 → 689] that the whole point about having a visible head of the church, the point of having a Pope, [ 689 → 697] a papacy, is to be able to cling to him and follow him as the safe haven, the sure guide [ 697 → 706] to eternal salvation. Now, who in his right mind could possibly say that Jorge Bergoglio, [ 706 → 715] Pope Francis, is a sure guide to eternal salvation? And I'm not talking about his personal sins, [ 715 → 720] right? We're all sinners. I'm talking about his official magisterium, the official acts [ 720 → 727] of his supposed pontificate. Who in his right mind could say that by clinging to the magisterium [ 727 → 733] of Francis, one is assured of clinging to the doctrine of Jesus Christ? I mean, that's just [ 733 → 734] insane. [ 736 → 743] So, in a nutshell, if Francis is the Pope, then his teachings are safe to follow. If, [ 743 → 751] on the other hand, his teachings are dangerous nonsense, then he cannot be the Pope. And [ 751 → 756] notice this has nothing to do with infallibility, per se. We're not even addressing that topic. [ 757 → 763] But in order for traditional Catholic doctrine on the papacy to have any meaning, it must [ 763 → 765] be the one or the other. [ 766 → 772] He is Pope, and then you can safely follow what he teaches, or you cannot safely follow [ 772 → 775] what he teaches, and therefore he cannot be the Pope. [ 776 → 782] What you cannot do, what you cannot have, is precisely what the semi-trads, and that's [ 782 → 788] why we call them that, by the way, semi-trads, is what they keep offering you. And that is [ 788 → 794] verbally acknowledge Francis as Pope, but don't even think about following him, because [ 794 → 796] his doctrine is false. [ 796 → 804] All right, let's go back to the audio with Scott Hahn and listen to some more of what [ 804 → 810] this celebrity professor had to say on The Pints with Aquinas show with Matt Fradd. [ 810 → 815] If the Catholic Church has expanded and flourished in all kinds of places for centuries, where [ 815 → 820] they didn't even know for sure the name of the Pope, because he might have died last [ 820 → 825] year, and you haven't heard yet who the new one is, you pray for the Holy Father, you [ 825 → 826] love the Holy Father. [ 826 → 830] Father, and then you pray some more for the Holy Father. But as though you've got to keep up with [ 830 → 837] every daily release from the Vatican, I think it's unhealthy. I think it lends itself either [ 837 → 844] to a personality cult or ecclesiastical gossip and a kind of critical spirit that will invariably [ 844 → 850] lead to divisions within the church. We love Pope Francis. We don't have to read every single word [ 850 → 855] that he publishes. We want to pray for him so that he is teaching with clarity. And when he [ 855 → 860] doesn't seem to be, we want to pray for him a little bit more and try to find the good, you know. [ 860 → 868] My goodness, what a poor answer. So apparently Scott Hahn's suggestion on how to deal with [ 868 → 875] Francis is, well, don't pay so much attention to him. Pray and just focus on what he gets right. [ 876 → 880] Well, excuse me, but one could say the same thing about the Anglican Archbishop of [ 880 → 880] Cambridge. [ 880 → 887] Canterbury, right? Or the Dalai Lama. The advice Hahn just gave does absolutely nothing [ 887 → 896] to resolve the actual problem posed by the Bergolian Magisterium. Look, prayer is a good [ 896 → 902] thing, but the problem with Francis is not a lack of prayer for him. I think there is not a single [ 902 → 910] person in the world who gets more prayers every day than Francis. Close your eyes and pray, [ 910 → 917] is not a theological answer, okay? You're just asking people to please ignore the problem [ 917 → 923] and spend time doing other things. So Hahn says you don't have to keep up with everything the [ 923 → 929] Pope does or publishes every single day. All right, fine. But that's beside the point. [ 930 → 936] The problem isn't that people are paying too much attention to Francis. The problem is what [ 936 → 940] Francis is teaching and legislating in his [ 940 → 946] official magisterium, regardless of whether anybody is paying attention to it or not. [ 946 → 952] I mean, come on. And by the way, as far as papal personality cult goes, [ 953 → 957] I may not be remembering this right, but I thought that Scott Hahn and this whole [ 957 → 964] Steubenville EWTN world contributed a lot to the personality cult of John Paul II. [ 965 → 969] Okay, that just as an aside. Also, [ 969 → 976] Hahn seems to be thinking that the problem with Francis is just a lack of clarity and that if only [ 976 → 981] he were clearer, all would be well. So let's just pray for Francis to teach more clearly. [ 982 → 989] Now that too is a misrepresentation of the real problem. Sure, lack of clarity is one of the [ 989 → 996] problems, but we're way beyond that now. Let's listen to some more from Professor Hahn. [ 996 → 999] It's always the Philippians 4.8 principle. That is, [ 999 → 1003] if there's anything true, anything good, anything excellent, anything worthy of praise, [1003 → 1009] think on these things. So when Amoris Laetitia comes out, all we think about is chapter eight [1009 → 1015] and that controversial footnote. That is still problematic in my interpretive matrix, but [1015 → 1022] you read the first seven chapters, he quotes Pius XI's Casta Canubi more than John Paul ever did. [1023 → 1028] That was one of our favorite documents when we were becoming Catholic. There is so much good stuff [1028 → 1029] in Amoris Laetitia. [1029 → 1035] Amoris Laetitia, okay, there is that flashpoint. Let the experts adjudicate that over time and all [1035 → 1043] of the rest. Well, wait a minute. Isn't he supposed to be one of those experts? In any case, let me [1043 → 1050] address this argument that we should just find the good and focus on that. The reason why that [1050 → 1058] is baloney is that an essential defect ruins the whole thing. Let me illustrate that with a very [1058 → 1059] simple analogy. [1059 → 1066] When you go to buy a car and later you find out that the vehicle they sold you has a defective [1066 → 1072] engine and a transmission that only lets you get into second gear, you don't want to hear from the [1072 → 1078] dealership that, well, but it's got leather seats and a cool spoiler and look at those rims, right? [1079 → 1085] That's the problem with that, but what about the good things argument? A single heresy, [1085 → 1088] a single pernicious error in a papal document, [1089 → 1098] would cripple the papacy and prove it false. For Scott Hahn to argue that, oh, well, but there's, [1098 → 1105] you know, 77% of the encyclical is really great, that is a really, really bad argument. [1106 → 1113] You would never want to fly in an airplane that's only 77% intact. And yet, doctrine, [1113 → 1119] matters of faith, matters of salvation are much more serious than flying in an airplane, [1119 → 1128] let's remember what Pope Leo the 13th wrote in his 1896 encyclical Satis Cognitum, paragraph nine, [1128 → 1136] quote, there can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle [1136 → 1143] of doctrine. And yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, in fact, the real and simple faith [1143 → 1149] taught by our Lord and handed down by apostolic tradition, unquote. [1149 → 1157] And let's also not forget the words of Pope Clement the 13th in his encyclical in Domenico Agro, [1157 → 1163] issued in 1761. And this is from paragraph two, quote, [1179 → 1185] meaning of expressions, and confession, which usually works salvation, sometimes with a slight [1185 → 1196] change, inches toward death, unquote. And Scott Hahn says, just focus on the good stuff. [1197 → 1204] Unbelievable. Oh, and then, of course, there's Pope St. Pius the 10th in his great encyclical [1204 → 1209] against modernism, Paschendi Dominici Gregis, in paragraph, [1209 → 1216] three, he calls the modernists the most pernicious of all the adversaries of the church. [1217 → 1225] And later on in paragraph 18, he says about them, quote, in their books, one finds some things which [1225 → 1232] might well be approved by a Catholic, but on turning over the page, one is confronted by [1232 → 1238] other things which might well have been dictated by a rationalist, unquote. [1239 → 1246] Pius the 10th is warning us that the modernists don't only write heresy. There is a lot of truth [1246 → 1254] in their writings too. But that makes them all the more dangerous. St. Pius the 10th did not say, [1254 → 1259] hey, look, the modernists aren't all bad. Just focus on the good stuff. [1261 → 1265] Okay. One last clip from the Steubenville professor. [1265 → 1269] But I think we just live in terms of the news cycle and we live in terms, [1269 → 1273] of the election cycle. And we've got to break out of this kind of straightjacket and think as [1273 → 1280] Catholics, live from an eternal perspective, think in terms of the generations, and build houses, [1280 → 1286] you know, and avoid cable news, at least more than you have been. [1286 → 1287] That's good advice. [1287 → 1293] Yeah, really good advice there. Turn off the news. Just don't listen to it. Shut up and pray. [1294 → 1298] Folks, if you have to tune out the Pope in order not to become a heretic, [1298 → 1306] what does that tell you? See, that conundrum is precisely what the questioner wanted an answer to, [1306 → 1313] and Han really didn't answer anything. Sure, he said a lot, but he really failed to give [1313 → 1321] a substantial response. And you know what? There is no response, for as long as Francis is accepted [1321 → 1327] as a true Pope. The only consistent response would be, Catholicism is false. [1328 → 1328] But, [1328 → 1334] we know Catholicism is true, and therefore, it is Francis who must be false. [1335 → 1340] And, okay, it's fine to point out that just saying that Francis isn't the Pope, [1341 → 1346] or that we haven't had a Pope since Pius XII, that that by itself isn't sufficient, [1347 → 1351] okay? That it raises all kinds of other issues, etc. All right, that's fine. [1352 → 1358] But the fact still remains that Francis is not the Pope. And unless we first [1358 → 1365] acknowledge that, with all the difficulties that may entail, we will never be able to make [1365 → 1371] sense of what we're seeing coming from Rome, and we'll never arrive at the truth of the matter. [1372 → 1377] We cannot reject a clearly evident conclusion simply because we don't want to deal with the [1377 → 1385] repercussions of it. It won't work, and it's not honest. In any case, it's pretty clear now, [1385 → 1388] I think, that the Novus Ordo apologists are, at their, [1388 → 1394] wit's end, with regards to Francis. They're essentially telling you to distract yourself [1394 → 1401] with other things. Just don't look at it, right? Hey, look over here, a traditional prayer book. [1402 → 1407] Or, oh my gosh, check out this Catholic artwork. Well, that's all well and good, [1407 → 1413] but it misses the point. The point is that, whether we pay attention to it or not, [1413 → 1418] the supposed Pope is teaching all kinds of heresies and other errors, [1418 → 1426] and is leading souls to destruction. And we're not talking about private moral failings here, [1426 → 1432] like a Pope who has a mistress or who's a sodomite. We're talking about the official [1432 → 1440] magisterium, doctrine, catechism, liturgy, sacraments, canonized saints, and disciplinary [1440 → 1446] laws. And that's not something you can just wipe away with comments like, hey, hundreds of years [1446 → 1448] ago, the average Catholic didn't... [1448 → 1459] know who the Pope was, or what he was teaching. So what? The point is, you do know. You do know [1459 → 1466] the man whom you're accepting as Pope, and what his official acts are. And you cannot plead a [1466 → 1472] kind of ignorance by proxy on the grounds that peasants a thousand years ago wouldn't have known [1472 → 1475] what you, today, do know. [1476 → 1478] Please, everyone, [1478 → 1484] don't let the apostate Jesuit from Buenos Aires make you doubt the truth of the timeless [1484 → 1491] Roman Catholic religion. Not Catholicism is the fraud. Francis is. [1492 → 1498] Tradcast Express is a production of Novos Ordo Watch. Check us out at tradcast.org, [1498 → 1502] and if you like what we're doing, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution [1502 → 1506] at novosordowatch.org slash donate. [1508 → 1509] Transcription by ESO. Translation by —