
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


Want to reach out to us? Want to leave a comment or review? Want to give us a suggestion or berate Anthony? Send us a text by clicking this link!
A handful of words and a few seconds of video shouldn’t be able to shake trust—yet here we are. We unpack why a brief comment on the death penalty and a highly produced blessing moment set off a firestorm across Catholic Twitter, YouTube, and parish group chats. This isn’t a rage fest; it’s a guided tour through the history and logic behind the backlash: what the “seamless garment” originally aimed to do, how John Paul II and Benedict pushed back, and why many hear today’s language as a flattening of moral hierarchies that once felt solid.
We talk honestly about how converts often rush to defend the papacy because they ran from chaos into authority, while cradle Catholics carry long memories of terms used to launder bad politics into church talk. Then we stack sources: Catechism of Trent, Pius XII, and the ordinary universal magisterium on capital punishment, contrasted with recent phrases like “inadmissible” and the way those phrases play in headlines. The question beneath the noise is simple and serious: can teaching seem to change without convincing ordinary people that the Church was wrong for centuries?
There’s also the reality of media physics. Encyclicals move scholars; clips move the crowd. Optics aren’t superficial when images catechize faster than words. So we ask leaders to choose symbols that speak clearly of worship and charity, and we ask the rest of us to debate without slurs, to hear motives before assigning them, and to keep doctrine’s hierarchy intact while we argue. Along the way we press into liturgy and devotion—how reverence shapes behavior, why “trad vs. normie” is a false binary, and where unity can grow without pretending disagreements aren’t real.
If you value clear thinking, good faith debate, and a Church that communicates the moral law without confusion, this one’s worth your time. Listen, share it with a friend who disagrees with you, and tell us: what would rebuild your trust—clearer teaching, different optics, or both? And if this helped, subscribe, leave a review, and join the conversation.
Take advantage of Recusant Cellar's "Christ the King" sale by heading over to https://recusantcellars.com/ and using code "BASED" for 20% off at checkout!
********************************************************
Please subscribe! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKsxnv80ByFV4OGvt_kImjQ?sub_confirmation=1
https://www.avoidingbabylon.com
Merchandise: https://avoiding-babylon-shop.fourthwall.com
Locals Community: https://avoidingbabylon.locals.com
Full Premium/Locals Shows on Audio Podcast: https://www.buzzsprout.com/1987412/subscribe
RSS Feed for Podcast Apps: https://feeds.buzzsprout.com/1987412.rss
Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/AvoidingBabylon
By Avoiding Babylon Crew4.6
154154 ratings
Want to reach out to us? Want to leave a comment or review? Want to give us a suggestion or berate Anthony? Send us a text by clicking this link!
A handful of words and a few seconds of video shouldn’t be able to shake trust—yet here we are. We unpack why a brief comment on the death penalty and a highly produced blessing moment set off a firestorm across Catholic Twitter, YouTube, and parish group chats. This isn’t a rage fest; it’s a guided tour through the history and logic behind the backlash: what the “seamless garment” originally aimed to do, how John Paul II and Benedict pushed back, and why many hear today’s language as a flattening of moral hierarchies that once felt solid.
We talk honestly about how converts often rush to defend the papacy because they ran from chaos into authority, while cradle Catholics carry long memories of terms used to launder bad politics into church talk. Then we stack sources: Catechism of Trent, Pius XII, and the ordinary universal magisterium on capital punishment, contrasted with recent phrases like “inadmissible” and the way those phrases play in headlines. The question beneath the noise is simple and serious: can teaching seem to change without convincing ordinary people that the Church was wrong for centuries?
There’s also the reality of media physics. Encyclicals move scholars; clips move the crowd. Optics aren’t superficial when images catechize faster than words. So we ask leaders to choose symbols that speak clearly of worship and charity, and we ask the rest of us to debate without slurs, to hear motives before assigning them, and to keep doctrine’s hierarchy intact while we argue. Along the way we press into liturgy and devotion—how reverence shapes behavior, why “trad vs. normie” is a false binary, and where unity can grow without pretending disagreements aren’t real.
If you value clear thinking, good faith debate, and a Church that communicates the moral law without confusion, this one’s worth your time. Listen, share it with a friend who disagrees with you, and tell us: what would rebuild your trust—clearer teaching, different optics, or both? And if this helped, subscribe, leave a review, and join the conversation.
Take advantage of Recusant Cellar's "Christ the King" sale by heading over to https://recusantcellars.com/ and using code "BASED" for 20% off at checkout!
********************************************************
Please subscribe! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKsxnv80ByFV4OGvt_kImjQ?sub_confirmation=1
https://www.avoidingbabylon.com
Merchandise: https://avoiding-babylon-shop.fourthwall.com
Locals Community: https://avoidingbabylon.locals.com
Full Premium/Locals Shows on Audio Podcast: https://www.buzzsprout.com/1987412/subscribe
RSS Feed for Podcast Apps: https://feeds.buzzsprout.com/1987412.rss
Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/AvoidingBabylon

4,032 Listeners

813 Listeners

6,807 Listeners

847 Listeners

406 Listeners

2,628 Listeners

2,961 Listeners

31 Listeners

1,278 Listeners

565 Listeners

625 Listeners

450 Listeners

754 Listeners

17,118 Listeners

159 Listeners