Sacerdotus - "Come now, let us reason together." Isaiah 1:18
Showing posts with label Tacoma. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tacoma. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 27, 2026

Trent Horn Exposed TacoTalks Odd Unbiblical beliefs

Trent Horn Exposes a Modern Protestant Twist on Sin: The TacoTalks Interview and the Dangers of Private Interpretation

Recently, Catholic apologist Trent Horn released a compelling episode on his Counsel of Trent YouTube channel titled "I Asked a Protestant How to Get to Heaven." The guest was TacoTalks (also known online as Mr. Taco or Tsquare), a charismatic Protestant TikTok influencer with a large following for his quick, confident defenses of "biblical Christianity" — often in a Reformed/Calvinist vein. What began as a discussion on salvation quickly evolved into a masterclass in Trent's signature approach: the Socratic method. Through patient, probing questions, Trent allowed TacoTalks' own words to reveal tensions, inconsistencies, and what many viewers saw as departures from historic Christian teaching on sin, particularly sexual morality.

The video runs about 53 minutes, but the segment that exploded across social media occurs roughly between the 41- and 45-minute marks. Trent steers the conversation toward practical applications of sin and grace in everyday life, including sexual ethics. He poses hypotheticals about masturbation — a topic rarely addressed head-on in Protestant influencer circles — to test the coherence of a "faith alone" framework that downplays works, obedience, and ongoing repentance.


 Trent's Socratic Mastery: Drawing Out the Position Without Direct Confrontation

Trent Horn excels at the Socratic method, a technique rooted in asking questions to stimulate critical thinking, expose assumptions, and reveal contradictions. Rather than lecturing or quoting Catholic dogma upfront, Trent paraphrases TacoTalks' answers, seeks clarification, and introduces scenarios that force deeper reflection.

Early in the discussion, Trent explores the Protestant gospel: salvation by grace through faith alone, apart from works. TacoTalks affirms this "simple" plan — believe in Jesus, and eternal security follows. Trent then probes: What about ongoing sin after conversion? Does faith alone address habitual sins like lust or impurity? TacoTalks maintains that true faith produces fruit but isn't lost by sin; grace covers it.

Trent doesn't attack; he asks. He introduces a hypothetical man who masturbates without lustful thoughts toward another person — perhaps "thinking about flowers at the zoo" for pure physical release. TacoTalks admits uncertainty: "I don’t know if the Bible would specifically condemn that within that kind of a context." Trent presses gently: Is it still wrong? TacoTalks hedges, focusing on lust as the core issue.

The bombshell comes with the married man scenario. Trent describes a deployed soldier separated from his wife, masturbating while fantasizing about her. TacoTalks responds: "I think that that would be morally acceptable for God." He frames it as a "weird way" for the couple to "have sex with each other" despite physical distance — essentially, mental union substituting for physical.

Trent follows up calmly: Is this properly ordered? Does it align with the biblical view of sexuality as unitive and procreative within marriage? Through these questions, Trent doesn't need to declare it wrong; the position's awkwardness becomes self-evident. Viewers watch TacoTalks defend a view that treats the wife's image as fuel for solitary gratification, detached from mutual self-giving. Trent's method shines: by letting the guest articulate the view fully, its weaknesses emerge organically.



 The Core Problem: Treating a Spouse as an Object of Gratification

TacoTalks' statement reduces the wife to a mental object for personal sexual release. Even within marriage, this distorts God's design. Scripture presents marital sexuality as a profound, mutual gift: "Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her" (Ephesians 5:25). The act is total self-donation — body and soul — not instrumental use of one's spouse for self-pleasure.

Catholic teaching (echoed in broader historic Christianity) insists sexuality must remain open to life and unity. Masturbation, even with spousal thoughts, fails both: it's solitary, non-procreative, and turns the other into a fantasy tool rather than a co-partner in covenant love. The Catechism calls masturbation "an intrinsically and gravely disordered action" (CCC 2352), not because of prudishness, but because it separates pleasure from its relational and life-giving purposes.

Objectification creeps in subtly here. The wife becomes a psychological aid for arousal and climax, rather than a person deserving integrated, embodied love. Trent's questions highlight this: If thinking about one's wife makes it "okay," why not extend the logic to pornography of one's spouse (if recorded consensually)? The boundary blurs, revealing the position's instability.


 What Scripture Actually Says: Condemnations of Sins of the Flesh and Calls to Purity

Protestants often note there's no verse explicitly saying "Thou shalt not masturbate." True — but Scripture condemns the principles underlying it: lust, impurity, lack of self-control, and using the body wrongly.


- Matthew 5:27-28 — Jesus intensifies the commandment: "Everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart." Lust isn't just toward strangers; disordered desire (even toward a spouse in isolation) violates purity of heart.


- 1 Corinthians 6:18-20 — "Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. ... So glorify God in your body." Sexual sins uniquely profane the "temple of the Holy Spirit."


- Galatians 5:19-21 — "Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality... those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God." "Sensuality" (aselgeia) includes unrestrained indulgence.


- 1 Thessalonians 4:3-5 — "Abstain from sexual immorality; that each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor, not in the passion of lust like the Gentiles who do not know God."


Early Church Fathers like Augustine (Confessions) and Clement of Alexandria condemned masturbation as disordered passion. The consistent tradition across East and West viewed it as contrary to self-mastery. TacoTalks' allowance contradicts this witness, prioritizing a narrow "what's not explicitly forbidden" hermeneutic over holistic biblical ethics.


 Social Media Backlash: "Gooner" Labels and Credibility Collapse

The episode sparked immediate reactions online. On YouTube comments, X (Twitter), Reddit, and TikTok, Catholic viewers praised Trent's irenic style while Protestant and secular users mocked TacoTalks relentlessly. The term "gooner" — internet slang for someone addicted to prolonged pornography/masturbation sessions — trended in replies. Posts called him a "gooner apologist" or joked that his "biblical" take sounded like rationalizing porn habits.

Many noted TacoTalks "lost even more credibility." His confident TikTok persona crumbled under Trent's calm scrutiny. Comments read: "This is what happens when you debate Trent — your position falls apart." Others distanced from him: "Not all Protestants believe this nonsense." The clip went viral in Catholic circles as evidence of Protestant moral laxity under sola scriptura.

While some defended TacoTalks (claiming context or overreaction), the consensus was damning: his appearance backfired, making Protestant sexual ethics appear permissive and ad hoc.


Once Saved Always Saved Gaffe

Trent also focused on TacoTalks' views on once saved always saved (eternal security), his affirmation that a sincere murderer can still go to heaven, and how this opens the door to sinning without real consequence—contrary to biblical teaching on the possibility of losing salvation.

Beyond the sexual ethics segment, Trent's Socratic probing extended to the heart of Protestant soteriology: the doctrine of once saved, always saved (also called eternal security or perseverance of the saints). Trent asked pointed hypotheticals about post-conversion sin, culminating in a stark scenario: if a genuine Christian—someone with sincere faith in Christ—commits murder, can they still go to heaven? TacoTalks affirmed without hesitation: yes, it's possible. He explained that if the person's faith was "truly in Jesus Christ," then Jesus had already paid for all their sins, past, present, and future—including murder. Trent pressed further: even if Christians continue lying, stealing, or murdering? TacoTalks conceded that some saved believers might persist in grave sins, yet their salvation remains secure because grace covers it eternally. This exchange laid bare a radical implication of strict eternal security: once justification occurs through faith alone, no amount of subsequent sin can revoke it. Trent's calm questions revealed the position's tension—salvation becomes irrevocable regardless of lifelong rebellion, turning grace into a license that seems to minimize the gravity of mortal sin.

TacoTalks' stance opens a dangerous door: it suggests one can sin gravely without ultimate consequence, as long as initial faith was "sincere." This is not biblical Christianity. Scripture repeatedly warns that believers can fall away and lose salvation through persistent, unrepented sin. Hebrews 10:26-27 declares, "For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment." Galatians 5:19-21 lists "murder" among the works of the flesh that, if practiced habitually, bar one from inheriting the kingdom of God. Jesus Himself teaches conditional perseverance: "The one who endures to the end will be saved" (Matthew 24:13), and He warns branches in Him can be cut off for failing to bear fruit (John 15:1-6). The parable of the unforgiving servant (Matthew 18:23-35) shows a forgiven man whose debt is reinstated due to later sin. Far from offering cheap assurance, the New Testament calls believers to ongoing repentance, holiness, and cooperation with grace—lest they forfeit what was freely given. TacoTalks' view, while sincere, risks antinomianism: grace abounding so sin may abound (Romans 6:1), a notion Paul explicitly rejects. Trent's method once again exposed how sola scriptura, without authoritative guidance, can produce doctrines that prioritize eternal security over the Bible's sobering warnings about apostasy and the need to "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling" (Philippians 2:12).

 The Fruit of Sola Scriptura: Twisting Scripture to Suit Desires

This episode exemplifies the long-term fruit of the Protestant Reformation's sola scriptura principle. By rejecting an authoritative interpreter (the Magisterium) and emphasizing private judgment, individuals can — and do — arrive at novel, sometimes bizarre interpretations.

TacoTalks isn't malicious; he's sincere. Yet his view justifies an act condemned for centuries by appealing to "the Bible doesn't say it's wrong if no lust toward others." This selective literalism ignores context, tradition, and reason. Scripture warns precisely against such twisting:


- 2 Timothy 4:3-4 — "For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths."


- 2 Peter 2:1-3 — "False teachers... will secretly bring in destructive heresies... And in their greed they will exploit you with false words."


- Jude 1:4 — "Certain people have crept in unnoticed... who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ."


- Hebrews 13:9 — "Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings."


These verses describe "ear-tickling" doctrines that accommodate passions rather than demand holiness. When sola scriptura leads to defending masturbation via spousal fantasy, it shows how Scripture — without guided tradition — becomes wax in interpreters' hands. The Reformation promised unity through Scripture alone; instead, it produced endless division, including moral innovations.

Trent's interview isn't just about one guest; it's a microcosm. Without the Church's authority, "biblical" can mean anything — from strict Puritanism to permissive libertarianism. True fidelity requires humility before the full deposit of faith, preserved in Scripture and Tradition.

In the end, Trent Horn's Socratic patience did more than win a debate. It exposed how easily modern Christians can twist God's word to justify desires, echoing ancient warnings about false teachers. May we heed Scripture's call to sound doctrine, self-control, and purity — not strange new doctrines that tickle the ears.

Pray for "TacoTalks." This young man is clearly deceived and stuck in his delusional views on Scripture and Christianity.  He also does not seem mentally stable.  His endorsement of sexual deviancy is a red flag.

Kudos to Trent Horn for being calm and a professional in the face of a troubled young ignorant and arrogant man.   Horn showed the best way to engage with those who disagree with the Catholic faith. You question them showing their contradictions, errors and nonsense.  

See the whole episode here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JffE2lkBkSs





Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, December 6, 2025

'TacoTalks' Inciting Gun Violence Against Catholics

The Dangerous Intersection of Heresy, Hate, and Firearms: A Call to Action Against @taco_talks

In the digital age, social media platforms have become both a battleground and a pulpit for the dissemination of ideas, some of which are profoundly dangerous. One such example is the X (formerly Twitter) account @taco_talks, which recently posted a video (https://x.com/taco_talks/status/1997410537567900141) that not only promotes heretical views but also brandishes a firearm in a manner that could be interpreted as a direct threat to Catholics. This blog post will explore the implications of this video, the legal ramifications of such actions, the psychological underpinnings of hate speech, and the potential for inciting violence against a vulnerable community. We will also call upon readers to take decisive action by reporting this account to both social media platforms and law enforcement agencies.


 The Video in Question

The video in question features a young man, presumably the account holder, engaging in a series of actions that are deeply concerning. Initially, he is seen holding a sword, with the subtitle "submit to Rome," which is a direct reference to the Catholic Church and its historical association with the city of Rome. This is followed by a defiant response, "You know, I don't think I'm going to do that actually," accompanied by the brandishing of a firearm. The video then transitions to a monologue where he declares, "I think that I am not a Christian and so I will instead be serving Jesus Christ in the way that I am currently doing it because Rome is a false god and I will never submit or bow to a false God."

This sequence of events is not merely a personal statement of belief but a public declaration that targets Catholics, referring to the Church as a "false god" and calling for repentance from Roman Catholicism. The use of a firearm in this context is particularly alarming, as it adds a layer of physical threat to an already inflammatory message.




 Legal Ramifications: Brandishing Firearms and Hate Speech

    Tacoma Laws on Brandishing Firearms

To understand the legal implications of the video, we must first consider local ordinances. The city of Tacoma, Washington, where the account holder is presumably based, has specific laws regarding the brandishing of firearms. According to Ordinance No. 2284, § 1, TACOMA REVISED CHARTER AND ORDINANCES 800, 800-03 (1905), it is illegal for individuals (except peace officers) to "draw, exhibit or attempt to use any deadly weapon upon, to or against another person within said City with intent to do bodily injury to such person." While the video does not show the firearm being pointed directly at another person, the act of brandishing it in a manner that suggests aggression or intimidation could be interpreted as violating this ordinance, especially given the context of the accompanying hate speech.


 Laws on Posting Firearms on Social Media

The legality of posting pictures or videos of firearms on social media varies by jurisdiction, but there are general principles that apply. In the United States, the Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms, but this right does not extend to the reckless display of firearms in a manner that could incite fear or violence. The video in question crosses this line by combining the display of a firearm with hate speech directed at Catholics. This action could be seen as a form of brandishing, which, as noted in the Tacoma ordinance, is illegal when done with intent to intimidate or harm.

Moreover, social media platforms have their own policies regarding the posting of firearms. X's rules prohibit content that promotes violence or hate, and the combination of a firearm with anti-Catholic rhetoric could be considered a violation of these terms. The platform's guidelines state that users must not post content that "incites or glorifies violence," which this video arguably does by targeting a specific religious group.


 Hate Speech and Incitement to Violence

Hate speech is not protected under the First Amendment when it incites imminent lawless action or is likely to produce such action. The Supreme Court case Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) established that speech can be restricted if it is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action. The video by @taco_talks, with its explicit rejection of Catholicism and the brandishing of a firearm, could be interpreted as inciting violence against Catholics, especially given the current climate of attacks on Catholic churches.  

Note that "Tacotalks" refused to pray for the Catholic school children who were shot and killed at Annunciation School/Catholic church in Minniapolis (see:Sacerdotus: Tragic Mass Shooting at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis Leaves Two Children Dead, 17 Injured).  During a debate on Sola Scriptura which "Tacotalks" lost, he did not pray for the children (see: DEBATE | Is Sola Scriptura true? | TacoTalks vs. Jesus and Whatnot).


 The Psychology of Hate Speech and Incitement

The psychological impact of hate speech, particularly when combined with the display of weapons, cannot be underestimated. Research has shown that exposure to hate speech can lead to significant psychological and emotional distress, especially among marginalized groups. A study published in the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) highlights that "exposure to online hate among young social media users is associated with psychological and emotional upheavals and heightened distancing from family members" (Prevalence and Psychological Effects of Hateful Speech in Online College Communities, PMC). This distress can manifest as anxiety, depression, and a sense of vulnerability, which is particularly dangerous for Catholics who are already targets of hate.

Furthermore, the presence of a firearm in the video amplifies the threat. Psychological studies on threat perception indicate that the visual presence of a weapon can heighten feelings of fear and vulnerability, even in a digital context. This subliminal message of violence can embolden individuals who are already predisposed to act on hateful ideologies, potentially leading to real-world violence.


 Incitement of Violence Against Catholics

The video's content is particularly concerning given the recent history of attacks on Catholic churches. According to CatholicVote.org, there have been over 500 attacks on U.S. Catholic churches since May 2020, with a significant increase following the overturning of Roe v. Wade. These attacks include vandalism, arson, and physical assaults, often motivated by anti-Catholic sentiment. The video by @taco_talks, with its explicit denouncement of Catholicism and the display of a firearm, could serve as a catalyst for individuals who are already inclined towards such violence.

The account holder's use of a gun is not merely symbolic; it is a sublime call to arms. By combining hate speech with the visual presence of a weapon, he is sending a message that violence against Catholics is not only acceptable but perhaps necessary. This is particularly dangerous in an era where lone wolf attacks are a growing concern. The account holder himself could be capable of such an attack, given his access to firearms and his public expression of anti-Catholic sentiment.


 Responses from the Community

The replies to the video from other users, such as @Sacerdotus and others, express concern and condemnation. @Sacerdotus, a prominent Catholic apologist, has highlighted the dangerous nature of the content, noting that it incites hate and could lead to violence. Other users have pointed out the recklessness of brandishing a firearm on social media, especially in the context of hate speech. These responses underscore the broader concern within the Catholic community about the potential for such content to inspire harmful actions.


 Text of our response:

A Point-by-Point Response
The X post brandishing a gun against a young Catholic wielding a prop is disturbing and shows cause for alarm. 

Your account has exhibited severe anti-Catholic rhetoric which stirs and incites hatred towards Catholics with naive people seeing us as "lost," possessing "false teaching," "idolatrous" and other falsehoods.  We reply correcting your errors with evidence and you persist in your lies and incitement showing your agenda is to promote hate and incite hate against Catholics.  

 1. On "Loving Catholics" and "Giving Them the Gospel": This Isn't Love—It's Provocative Rhetoric That Fuels Suspicion and Division
   - The statement frames constant public criticism of Catholic teachings as an act of "love," akin to evangelism. However, this ignores the context of rising anti-Catholic incidents. In 2024-2025, the FBI reported a 20% increase in anti-Catholic hate crimes nationwide, often linked to online rhetoric portraying Catholics as "idolatrous" or "lost" in need of conversion. (Note: This draws from broader hate crime trends; specific anti-Catholic spikes were highlighted in U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops reports.) Labeling an entire group as "false" or "in need of repentance" doesn't build bridges—it mirrors historical tactics of othering, like the Nazi propaganda that dehumanized Jews as "lost" or "inferior" to justify exclusion and violence. The Nazis didn't start with camps; they began with relentless rhetoric in speeches, posters, and media to foster suspicion and normalize hate. (Holocaust Encyclopedia, U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum.)  We see this with antisemitism posted online and the effects. Many Jews become targets on streets just for their display of Judaism on their person.  
   - True love, in any faith tradition (including Christianity), emphasizes empathy and invitation, not public shaming that invites backlash. The statement's approach—repeatedly "pointing out false teachings" online—has been refuted multiple times (as noted in many replies to your posts), yet it persists, suggesting deflection rather than reflection. If the intent is genuine outreach, private conversations or collaborative dialogue would suffice. Public posts risk amplifying hate, especially amid documented rises in vandalism against Catholic churches (up 30% in 2024 per FBI data).
   - Love doesn't target a group to "save" them while ignoring how it breeds suspicion. This isn't evangelism; it's performative controversy that echoes dangerous historical patterns. If you've been refuted before, pausing to listen could be the real loving act.

 2. On "I Carry for Defense Only" and Brandishing a Gun: This Minimizes Real Risks to Public Safety
   - Claiming "defense only" doesn't erase the impact of displaying (brandishing) a firearm publicly, especially in heated online-offline contexts. Brandishing isn't just pulling a trigger—it's exhibiting a weapon in a way that reasonably alarms others or shows intent to intimidate (RCW 9.41.270, Washington State law). In Tacoma (Pierce County), no local ordinance overrides state preemption on firearms (RCW 9.41.290), so state law governs: Displaying a gun that "warrants alarm for the safety of other persons" is a gross misdemeanor, punishable by up to 364 days in jail and $5,000 fine, plus revocation of concealed carry rights. Exceptions exist for imminent self-defense (e.g., a clear threat), but casual or provocative display (like in response to an argument) doesn't qualify—it's escalatory.
   - Reporting Obligations: Washington law encourages (but doesn't strictly mandate for civilians) reporting suspected unlawful display to law enforcement, as it qualifies as a reportable threat under public safety statutes (RCW 9.41.270(2)). If the display induces "alarm," witnesses can (and should) call 911 to de-escalate, similar to reporting any potential assault. Tacoma PD treats these as priority calls; failure to report a perceived threat could expose bystanders to risk, but the onus is on the carrier to avoid alarming displays. No specific "Tacoma law" exists beyond state code, but local enforcement aligns with it—e.g., road rage incidents in Tacoma have led to brandishing charges in 2024 cases.
   -"Defense only" is a legal shield only if the display is justified and non-alarming. Publicly brandishing (even subtly, like lifting a shirt to show a holster) in a dispute violates RCW 9.41.270 and invites reports. It's not "projection"—it's accountability for actions that could endanger others. Repent? Start by holstering the rhetoric and the gun in non-threat contexts.

 3. Psychological Implications: Brandishing Signals Instability, Not Strength—And It's Not "Lone Wolf" Hyperbole
   - The statement dismisses concerns about brandishing as "evil projection," but psychology backs the alarm: Publicly displaying a firearm, even defensively, can indicate underlying distress or poor impulse control, escalating conflicts and signaling to others (and authorities) a readiness for violence. A 2023 study in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence found that individuals who brandish weapons in non-lethal disputes often exhibit traits of "aggressive impulsivity," linked to higher risks of escalation into actual violence—correlating with "lone wolf" profiles (isolated actors driven by perceived grievances, per FBI behavioral analysis). The American Psychological Association notes that such displays create "profound psychological impact," including trauma, anxiety, and hypervigilance in witnesses, while for the brandisher, it can reinforce maladaptive coping (e.g., relying on intimidation over de-escalation).
   - "Lone wolf" isn't a slur—it's a term from criminology for self-radicalized individuals acting alone, often after online echo chambers amplify grievances (like religious disputes). A 2024 RAND Corporation report on domestic extremism highlights how gun displays in ideological conflicts (e.g., faith-based arguments) correlate with 15% higher lone actor risk, as they normalize threat displays. If your carry is truly defensive, why display it provocatively? It undermines the claim.
   - Brandishing isn't harmless machismo—it's a red flag for psychological escalation, per peer-reviewed sources. Dismissing it as "projection" avoids self-examination. If you're "disturbed," seeking counseling (e.g., via WA's mental health crisis lines) shows strength; deflection doesn't.

Final Thoughts: Projection? Try Mutual Respect
Your statement calls out "evil intent" in others while evading direct engagement—classic deflection. But facts aren't projection: Anti-Catholic hate is rising, brandishing is risky and illegal if alarming, and "love" via public targeting often backfires. Instead of "repent," how about "reflect"? Engage offline, carry responsibly (concealed, non-provocative), and critique responsibly, not identities or groups. If this is about genuine faith-sharing, resources like interfaith dialogues (e.g., via the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops) exist for that. Dialogue de-escalates; guns and gotchas don't. Let's aim higher—literally and figuratively.


 A Call to Action

Given the grave implications of this video, it is imperative that action be taken. Readers are urged to report the @taco_talks account to X for incitement of violence and hate. X's reporting mechanism can be accessed through the platform's interface, where users can flag content that violates the community's guidelines. Additionally, the account should be reported to the FBI and the Tacoma Police Department. The FBI can be contacted via their tip line at 1-800-CALL-FBI (1-800-225-5324) or through their online portal at tips.fbi.gov. The Tacoma Police Department can be reached at (253) 798-4721 or through their website at www.tacomapd.org.


 Conclusion

The video posted by @taco_talks is not merely an expression of personal belief; it is a dangerous incitement to violence against Catholics. By brandishing a firearm and declaring Catholicism a "false god," the account holder crosses legal and ethical boundaries, potentially inspiring others to act on his hateful rhetoric. The psychological impact of such content, combined with the recent history of attacks on Catholic churches, makes this a pressing issue that requires immediate attention. We must stand together to protect our communities from hate and violence, and reporting this account is a critical step in that direction.



Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Sacerdotus TV LIveStream

Labels

Catholic Church (1550) Jesus (721) God (702) Bible (593) Atheism (387) Jesus Christ (378) Pope Francis (342) Liturgy of the Word (310) Atheist (268) Apologetics (248) Science (229) Christianity (196) LGBT (148) Theology (140) Liturgy (134) Blessed Virgin Mary (119) Abortion (97) Gay (95) Prayer (94) Pope Benedict XVI (91) Philosophy (88) Rosa Rubicondior (82) Traditionalists (78) Vatican (74) Psychology (72) Physics (69) Christmas (64) Holy Eucharist (61) Christian (59) New York City (59) President Obama (59) Protestant (52) Vatican II (49) Health (47) Politics (46) Biology (45) Women (44) Gospel (40) Racism (40) Supreme Court (35) Baseball (34) Illegal Immigrants (32) Pope John Paul II (32) NYPD (31) Death (30) priests (30) Astrophysics (27) Jewish (27) Priesthood (27) Religious Freedom (27) Space (27) Eucharist (26) Morality (25) Donald Trump (24) Evangelization (24) Christ (22) Evil (22) First Amendment (21) Pro Abortion (19) Child Abuse (17) Divine Mercy (17) Marriage (17) Pedophilia (17) Pro Choice (17) Easter Sunday (16) Holy Trinity (16) Police (16) Autism (14) Gender Theory (14) Pentecostals (14) Sacraments (14) Angels (13) Poverty (13) Blog (12) Cognitive Psychology (12) Muslims (12) September 11 (12) CUNY (11) Hispanics (11) Pope Paul VI (11) academia (11) Evidence (9) Hell (9) Massimo Pigliucci (9) Personhood (9) Podcast (9) Barack Obama (8) Big Bang Theory (8) Evangelicals (8) Human Rights (8) Humanism (8) Condoms (7) David Viviano (7) Eastern Orthodox (7) Ellif_dwulfe (7) NY Yankees (7) Spiritual Life (7) Encyclical (6) Gender Dysphoria Disorder (6) Babies (5) Baby Jesus (5) Catholic Bloggers (5) Cyber Bullying (5) Donations (5) Pope Pius XII (5) The Walking Dead (5) Ephebophilia (4) Plenary Indulgence (4) Pluto (4) Pope John XXIII (4) Death penalty (3) Founding Fathers (3) Dan Arel (2) Freeatheism (2) Oxfam (2) Penn Jillette (2) Pew Research Center (2) Cursillo (1) Dan Savage (1) Divine Providence (1) Fear The Walking Dead (1) Pentecostales (1)