Gregory Caridi

@CatholicPods @agostino_harry More common than you think!

@agostino_harry If you told me this before, I must have forgotten it. Wild.

I’m an adult maternally Jewish convert but discovered upon declaring my intent to become Catholic that I had been secretly baptized by my pious paternal grandmother as an infant, so maybe I can also switch hit here?

@BritCathAes You didn’t expect people to have strong opinions about the aesthetics?

I didn’t expect people to have such strong feelings about the interior. Much less to get journalists and lords commenting on it… What’s your opinion on this? Should it be returned to how it was before the redesign?

@atarimoe @lukei4655 I didn’t says it was a context in which it made no sense. I’m giving a possible explanation for why the students might think it doesn’t make sense but it actually does.

@GregoryCaridi @lukei4655 That’s hardly a “context in which it makes no sense”. For all I dislike +Martin for other reasons, he seems to have handled this correctly.

Here’s the difficulty. The Council of Trent decreed that one may not confess genera, one must confess species for an integral confession. What does this mean? It means you can’t merely confess “I broke the 6th Commandment 5 times” or “I committed acts of lust twice.” The species of the act done is what must be confessed. Sometimes you have to inquire to help a person make an integral confession. However, it’s extremely delicate for some sins (and not just those against the 6th Commandment). A confessor must be extremely prudent in these matters. Any inquiry should be minimal and the reason for the inquiry should be explained, and the minimal nature of the response to the inquiry should also be made very clear.

@atarimoe @lukei4655 Certainly. A simple explanation here might be that the priest was merely doing a commandment by commandment examination of conscience. And when he got to the 6th commandment, the students felt like it came out of nowhere because they didn’t realize what he was doing. Who knows.

@GregoryCaridi @lukei4655 Problem is we only have one half of the story, and the priest in question is unable to comment due to the Seal.

@theblessedsalt Sometimes deeper woods look better. Sometimes a more neutral tone (including white or grey) looks better. It just depends on the space and how well it’s done. The real millennial thing is attempting to derive a deep ideological meaning from it.

People like to trash Millennial Gray, but this is what Boomers raised us with in the 90s. Sometimes the palette just needs a total reset.

@jdflynn You were, yes.

Ok. I’ve had a backup camera for two hours. I was wrong.

@shagbark_hick You can be a bro without being rowdy or a ruffian. Which I think is actually more the issue. The cool, casually virtuous guy is where the gap is.

It's true: the men I meet at most Catholic Churches do seem to be fairly timid, measured, even nervously pious. Trad or not, it's very often the case. Nothing wrong with that at all -- but we're sorely lacking in Catholic rowdies and ruffians. We need some medieval-type mannerbund energy going on at our Churches. Bring back the post-Mass cask of ale; unbutton the top button for once and speak candidly, say your piece, linger long at the tavern, make the boys all raise their glasses when you walk in. I don't mind temperately sipping coffee and nerding out about theology in the Parish basement for thirty minutes after Mass, but at some point, we've all gotta break out of that and really let loose in the way that men ought to.

@aquinasbear @ccpecknold Well, since Chad is quoting Ratzinger, and Ratzinger said that preventive wars are unjust, it creates a different implication with the original quote. Wouldn't you agree?

And that is his and your prerogative. An argument can be made for how this is a just war. And the authority resides in the state. Now, I would respect Pope Leo much more if he simply took a stance and even had the balls to declare this war unjust. But he knows he can't and that is why he stated "some argue this war is unjust" during one of his comments.

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

@aquinasbear @ccpecknold For what it's worth, Ratzinger/Benedict (the person being quoted) was extremely anti-war, condemning "preventive war" as such, and not merely on prudential grounds.

No. Using a generic example in order to make the point is a common form of argument. I could have used any example that is categorically unjust to make the point, as his post was implying that war as such is up to prudential judgment. It's not. Some types of war are simply categorically unjust.

@aquinasbear @ccpecknold I didn't say they did. I'm identifying why Chad's post is underdescribed by giving an example.

@GregoryCaridi @ccpecknold The Trump administration and US military have not once stated that the current military action's purpose is "the elimination of civilians." Damn, for a lawyer, you are not very bright.

@BigBlobApe @hf_222222 Most people feel, though, that the faithful have an absolute right to know the lives of priests, including their (non-criminal) sins. I don't know if it's an American influence thing, or something else. But it's definitely there.

@BigBlobApe @hf_222222 In the former (let's say the man has severe depression or is struggling with some sort of alcohol addition), it unquestionably violates his privacy. In the latter, if it's early in an investigation, it would likely violate his right to due process and presumption of innocence.

There absolutely should be more transparency around these kinds of decisions, but until there is, my default assumptions would be there is a valid reason for this. Returning greater rigor to the post JPII canonisation process is, after all, probably a necessary course correction

@hf_222222 And I don’t think anyone has figured it out, in most contexts. If a priest is removed from a parish for a non-delict, how much do the faithful have the right to know? If he is removed during a preliminary investigation for a delict, how much do they have the right to know? When?

@hf_222222 Absolutely correct.

@ThomasDHowes They will.

I'm surprised Sohrab has dropped Vance so quickly. I wonder if other postliberals will follow him on this.

@DouthatNYT It’s the desire to *avoid* “politics” (which is usually the concrete) which ironically? leads to the preference for generalities.

In sum I think Leo is correct to judge the Iran War harshly but his argument is weaker when it sounds generally pacifist rather than tailored to this case. The papal preference for generalities is itself understandable (he's not a FP analyst) but the concrete is important!

An essay on the papal relationship to populism, the just-war debate over Iran, and Trump's relationship to God: nytimes.com/2026/04/14/opi…