I'm seeing a few comments that imply a serious misunderstanding in what I'm saying in the video, so I'd like to clarify. I'm not saying that homosexual activity was considered good or _normal_ in the ancient world. I'm saying that it wasn't uncommon. This isn't the same as saying that it was celebrated or that it was prolific or that the ancient world was _super gay, y'all_ . It's like saying that swearing or drunkenness (an analogy I use in the video) wasn't uncommon. They appear within social life and when discussed, as they are in Plato's symposium, it's done almost playfully and without shock or revulsion among it's hearers. This certainly stands in contrast to a place like Victorian England. The point is, that though such activity may be present and certain people would partake, they would never consider it an innate orientation or an identity. Another good example of this fact is the many stories you will find about sexual behaviour among boys (with each other) at boarding schools during the Edwardian era. C.S. Lewis talks about it as if it was an expected part of initiation. But those same boys would go on to marry and have children. This was no more evidence of a determined orientation than getting drunk on occasion is to being an alcoholic. Claiming that because such events are part of one's experience means that it defines their identity is entirely modern and in opposition to every other place and time. Lastly, I'm in no way suggesting that men with such temptations or tendencies should become priests - they shouldn't. The thesis of the video is that forming one's identity based on one's temptations is dehumanizing which is why, for those priests that do suffer with this temptation (while that's a big problem), it doesn't make sense to think of them or identify them as "gay priests" the way the secular world does. It's more accurate to think of them as imposters *if* they were screened for this problem and hid it in order to advance into the priesthood. Unfortunately, not all were screened or discouraged, in which case, it wouldn't be fair to accuse them of being imposters.

The thought of Socrates baiting someone who was enfatuated with him into a long philosophical conversation and the other man being super frustrated that he can't get anything but conversation from him is so funny to me 😂 Socrates was philosophy-zoning people.

I knew personally a priest who left the priesthood, partly due to the prevalence of this. Half of the local “priestly class” was ghey. There was a very active “social life.” He was a very good priest. But the “social pressure” was horrible. And ten years after leaving, he’s married. The priesthood is becoming a way to meet others of the same inclination. We need to pray for our priests.

“Virtues are formed in man by his doing the actions,” - Aristotle “We are what we repeatedly do… therefore excellence is not an act, but a habit.” - Will Durant

As a person who struggles with her eating habits, the "closeted glutton" hits hard. Once you train yourself to crave unhealthy foods and use the physical hit they give you to deal with your emotions, it's the unlearning of that which is the true crux of the problem. Even when you lose a lot of weight, deep inside you still feel the same - you still "identify" as fat. And truly, those temptations don't go away. But you absolutely do train your body out of bad habits eventually; you start craving healthier things, and you start appreciating how much better overall you feel when you keep making better choices. You should never identify yourself with sinful actions, the consequences of your sin, or the label the devil wants to use to cover up the fact that you're God's beloved child. Everything gets easier with practice. Both virtue and vice do. So be careful what you practice.

The best priest I've ever had was "gay" as in he used to partake in homosexual activities and experiences same-sex attraction. Once he became catholic he gave that up and now he helps other same-sex attracted catholics to overcome temptation and find their vocation. Every priest is capable of sexual sin, just cause their gay doesn't necessarily make that more prevalent. I'm obviously not supportive of same-sex intimacy, but I don't think we can entirely discount people's ability to be holy just because they have temptations. This is why we need to be careful how we use our language. Saying "gay priests are bad" is incredibly confusing, what we should be saying is "Priests taking part in homosexual activities is bad".

While I agree the concept of sexual orientation is modern, there is an association between the number of priests who engage in homosexual behavior and sexual abuse.

I would suggest watching metatron's video on this. He is a historian of classical antiquity. He puts the idea of Greek and Roman sexuality in the proper light. He also touches on the fact that it was not universally accepted and there were many rules to such an arrangement.

I knew he was wrong when he said a respectable politican.

That's so true. A priest who enters into the priesthood with an intention to break his vows of chastity is not a "gay priest." He is a fraud. And if they keep their vows of chastity, it seems rather odd to identify as "gay." Satan wants us to identify with our sin, so that we will remain trapped in our sins. "Sexual identity" is just that, a lie from the devil and we shouldn't be paying lipservice to it. I do wish, though, that people who are struggling with homosexual attraction and want to grow in virtue had more of a space to do that in the church and experience councilling and healing. Similar to those who are trying to overcome porn addiction.

Hey Brian, I think this is such a pivotal question: do people with SSA refer to themselves as "gay" even just as a verbal shorthand? I think you're correct in that this is a bad approach, as it is awfully finalising. Same with the term "homosexual." It doesn't capture the reality of the person's identity, as a person's experience isn't their identity. Frankly, even the term SSA I think is a little off, as it implies that there is no ordered attraction, or perception of good or beauty in members of same sex. That is where the term 'disordered' comes into play. As far as priests identifying as "gay," it seems a little off. Why would you share that with someone except in deeply personal settings? I understand and agree that deep-seeded homosexual tendencies is problematic for seminarians and priests. I have known priests who were sexually attracted to members of the same-sex who had incredible formation as well as good intervention during seminary prep and also were just incredibly virtuous human beings. While you could kinda tell, these priests would never wear the term "gay" or anything similar. While this is certainly the exception, not the rule, we need to be very careful how we speak when we talk about banning certain temptations or struggles from the seminary, since it just isn't a one-size fits all. I really do believe as long as the formation in seminaries is top-notch (something we should be striving for anyway), a person who is sexually attracted to members of the same sex but lives a life of chastity should be allowed to enter and discern in seminary, provided they are transparent with the reality of their cross. Pardon me if this seems somewhat off-topic, but perhaps it might be food for thought: one thing that makes a healthy discernment of celibacy is to understand that one could marry, one could find happiness in marriage and family life, but still understand and embrace the sacrifice and cross of celibacy. I can't speak for all people who struggle with SSA, but I know for myself the desire (when I peel the interior onion, lol) to be a masculine man, (or at least, what in my head seems masculine) married to a women and complimenting her femininity and having children never leaves, even though I am rarely attracted to women. Frankly, I don't wish the world would change for me, who has SSA, but I feel cheated that I didn't have ordered attractions growing up to foster, but that's a wound the Lord is dealing with, haha. All that is to say, I think when Seminarians who experience SSA eventually come to a place of healing where they fully recognise marriage and family as a good that they could receive and be happy with, then they are on the same footing to have a healthy discernment of the Priesthood. Anything less than that and I would be concerned. All I will finish with is that I hope all this confusion does not result in backlash against Catholics who struggle with SSA. I have experienced it, and I know others who have as well. I don't want special treatment, but I ask that people recognise that this is a battle that every person who struggles with it has to figure out how to win without ANY guidance whatsoever for the most part. People can make it easier and harder, and often, both intentionally and unintentionally, they choose the latter. Thank you for reading my TED talk. God bless.

Our whole current worldview, particularly with regards to sexuality, has been seriously distorted by the virtually universal use (and expectation of use) of contraception.

I’ve always felt that admitting someone to seminary who struggles with homosexual tendencies wouldn’t be such a scandal if we lived in a society that doesn’t encourage anyone with that proclivity to define themselves by their ability to stick their body parts in places they don’t belong. I’d even go so far as to say that certain major scandals would never have happened if the sexual revolution never occurred.

You've changed my mind on what the word "gay" should mean. Thanks for the insight!

CCC 2358: "The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a TRIAL. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition."

"Leather apron club" has a good video on ancient views on homosexuality.

Gay or not a priest is bound by the vow of chastity under pain of grevious sin.

I really enjoy your content! I have seen other videos or content where people claim in the Biblical era, they didn't have "modern homosexual relationships". I have always suspected there was no real difference. People often think we are so different in human nature from people a couple thousand years ago.

Benedict was holding the chain of the anchor preventing titanic from sinking. Now it's all going down lightning fast. Lord Jesus have Mercy on us, sinners.

This is a very good discussion of a difficult topic. Modern thought is crazy at times - "Your authentic self" is not the self who strives to be its best, and improve, the theory is that it is only your worst flesh-driven self. From there it is just a small step to what you described. Do Roman Catholic clergy have something like the Oratory of the Good Shepherd (OGS), a dispersed religious community in the Anglican Communion? It might be a good idea to have something like it. Members are bound together by a common rule and discipline, which requires consecrated celibacy. They are strengthened by prayer and fellowship; they meet regularly in chapter and retreat, and report to one another on their keeping of the rule.

I’ve always been confused by the identity theory of sexuality as well. Orthodox monk Fr. Seraphim Rose struggled with this passion for example.

This is a fascinating, great nuance on this topic.

Brian, thank you for putting into audible words what has been at work in the back of my own mind. The past 100 years, interested parties have been working to normalize certain behavior. We are at a point where we are told our carnal desires define us to our core. (Why this is being done is a conversation for another time.) It seems that some individuals have so involved themselves in this concept, to question it is to evoke a belligerent response from them. What comes to us through the "grapevine" regarding certain cliques within the community of priests indicates there are individuals who would regard the priesthood as a career path for the proclivity they pursue, disregarding any vows of obedience or chastity in serving God as a priest. The same holds true for all religious communities. What seems to be overlooked (and vilified by such proponents) is that there are those of every proclivity who take seriously the vows they make to serving God as opposed to following the dictates of usurpers of such service. The zeitgeist of the current age would have us believe everything is centered on the selfish expression of power, personal and political, and that there is neither "right" nor "wrong" in doing so (with exception of opposing this view). My most common pray is for all to be open to the providence of God, knowing that there are many who prefer the council of the whisper campaign from the Deceiver. I have heard the idea that the amount of art pieces from the ancient world depicting certain acts between "consenting adults" as proof of the open acceptance of such acts during that time. Have also come across historical information that runs counter this idea. The preservation of such art works that have been found is likely due to being stored for more private purposes as opposed to public display.

Although this reasoning is appealing on the surface, it would condemn women who innocently and trustingly marry someone deceptive who is basically not attracted to her, which is cruel.

Brilliant perspective, Brian. You have a good point, one worth considering...it's just hard to imagine our Church openly accepting "gay", and with so much at stake in the world (above and beyond someone's sexual proclivity) that many, including myself, jump to needle-pegged conclusions before the discussion begins. We're just very polarized, as a populous. Deep breaths should prevail, and your message is nothing if not a call for a "deep breath". It's not the issue one thinks it is if we rise above it to find solutions. People are, indeed, much more than their appetites.

Can you imagine being introduced to someone as a heterosexual?

I think there is a difference between a priest simply being gay and a priest being actively involved in a gay seksual relationship. If the priest has committed to be celibate, unmarried, and true to the teachings of scripture then it doesn't really seem to matter what his sexuality is.

By this logic there is no such thing as a heterosexual priest.

It's a mistake to take a deep-seated, permanent, abnormal desire or inclination and pretend it has nothing to do with your identity. No, it shouldn't dominate your identity, but simple acknowledgement of it need not rise to that. Since this particular action is extremely common in our time, a shorthand label for the people who experience the desire for it is inevitable. If we use it with clarity, it need not be problematic. In fact, if you want to minister to these people, you need to understand that this is part of their lives. Many will have experienced shame as they came to understand this part of themselves. Many will have experienced insult or injury from others who discover it about them. They all experience a desire that they can never legitimately fulfill. It is foolish to ignore this or pretend it doesn't matter.

I always thought how dehumanizing it must be for these people to constantly feel the need to identify themselves by their sexual preference for example an adulterer , alcoholic drug addict or gossiper doesn’t identify themselves by their sinful preferences and if they did, how sad and dehumanizing that would be. All people are made in the image and likeness of God and we all fall short of the Glory of God.

Brian, thank you so much for this take. I happen to be a man on the road towards a priestly vocation who also happens to have the SSA struggle. I thank God for my faithful family, especially my good father, as well as other good men in my life as role models and have, by God’s grace, never acted out on these desires with others. Your explanation and take are very important and need to be heard- you put clear language to how I view masculinity, integration, and vocation. God bless you.

Excellent analysis! Have you ever listened to the KZfaqr 'Metatron'? He has done some good work analyzing and contextualizing sexuality in the ancient world.

Oh dear...oh dear....oh dear! Denial is NOT a river in Egypt as they say.🙄

Worse still is when they find examples in the animal kingdom and use those animal behaviors to justify their behavior and desires. That too is dehumanizing. Animals also commit murder, infanticide, cannibalism, and incest. There are countless videos of aped throwing their poop at things, and even drinking their own pee. Essentially there examples of every imaginable behavior within nature, but that should not ever become the basis for human ethics or morality. Finally theres thd twisting and distortion if what live is and is not, primarily through the awful tautology "love is love" which erases all dustinction between all loves while injecting dex and sensuality into all forms of it. It opens the door to pedophilia, dendrophilia, bestiality, incrst and everything else.

Priests who are even tempted or inclined or especially if they flat out desire homosexual activities is serious. All the men who were abused by priests when they were children would agree. It is because they are in a position of power. They are in a position of trust. That is a dangerous combination when you add in a perverted "craving". Sadly, that appeitite gets filfilled on the innocent and weak. Horrible. An abomination actually.

Excellent points.The ways of the world is the substitute identity with merit/actions. Appetite is not destiny.

Make a video about your thoughts on why there are so many priests with same sex attraction

what's up with the vest?

This sounds awfully like a Motte Bailey fallacy. "a chaste priest who occasionally partakes..." is about as oxymoronic a statement as can be stated. An "in the closet glutton", while having comparable internal "paths" from committing to resistance and then succumbing to temptation in sin, has very different ramifications from other types of sin. If you steal from a man, you make restitution, but if you commit adultery, you are put to death (OT Law). While they may not be an eternal label, earthly labels may definitely be appropriate. We should always strive to keep our commitments, but not all violations are wholly equal. A priest who serially violates his commitment of chastity, and compounds it with homosexuality, is definitely not "a committed priest". This is a very bizarre take, imo. Maybe you're trying to be more subtle than it comes off, but this comes off as super wonky argumentation.

When you offer a guy a life style that includes frequent theatrical rituals, fancy luxurious clothes, full sanction for wearing dresses, a socially acceptable reason to avoid marriage, and a males-only domestic community, what do you expect to attract? I'm Catholic, by the way. And I love the Mass. But I've also known priests who say that the seminaries are hotbeds of homosexuality.

"in the closet glutton" great line - stealing.

I agree with you 100%. The only issue is someone could say if homosexuality is an activity not an identity, then you can just as well say heterosexuality is an activity too. I don't consider myself heterosexual for engaging in said acts, I consider myself "a heterosexual" because that's my proclivity.

Good Words, Brian. I love your effort to avoid splitting hairs, and stereotypes! And the boldness with which you called some frauds! Hopefully folks will dig down deep as think some of this through. BTW, while what you described about morality in the Greco Roman world is sadly very true. So much, it shocks me. It was not common among the Jews. Which I find interesting. Especially in light of their worship of the Canaanite gods.

Brian you're normally spot-on, but I'm going to definitely disagree with you on this one. What we have in these modern times is definitely an identity marked by a core inclination and a repetitive propensity to sin in a very specific way. And people given to these things have no slightest business near the priesthood.

Common sense: Following the publication of The Book of Gomorrah, Pope Leo praised Damian’s sentiments in a starkly graphic letter which reads in part: “For how may one be a cleric … if he does not fear to be soiled either by his own hands or those of another, fondling his own male parts or those of another, or fornicating with contemptible irrationality either between the thighs or in the rear?”

Greeks famously engaged in homosexual activity, in europe homosexual activity is referred to as 'going Greek'. This was not considered by other europeans as you imply as in anyway 'normal' The Romans did not condone and prohibited this kind of activity, they were however keen on crucifixion. Just because something was done in the past does not make it permissible in the present

But if he suppose not to implement his sexuality with woman or man how you can know he is homosexual?

Being accepting and welcoming of sin has never been a good thing in any culture at anytime. It’s always a slippery slope that leads to destruction.

Love 😌🥰 Though it would have been cool to get your harmonica in the mix. 🙏

James Martin is super gay.

These are interesting insights that I’ve never heard packaged like this. I now recognize the pigeon-holing that the modern world embraces. I also wonder how many same sex attracted people are brainwashed into believing they must live every moment that way to be “ authentic “.

I love your channel Brian! You’re a great man! Keep doing this work for the restoration of the Kingship of Christ! I will pray my Rosaries for you and your family!

we suck.

suggestion - turn on your superthanks to make it easy to leave a tip

The damage done by priests with that objectively disordered inclination makes perfect sense, which is why those who have that objectively disordered inclination should not be allowed in seminaries. Hopefully, men like James Martin, SJ will repent and get the help they need instead of spreading false hope to vulnerable unbelievers. Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition are very clear.

Well there are indeed priests that identify themselves as gay. But yes, identities are a form of social constructs, I think in the context of sexuality they developed as a counter reaction to the pathologizing of certain sexual or gender orientation based on cultural values shaped by a Christian society. Celebrating pride parades then meant embracing an identity that’s viewed defective in the eyes of the general public. This recently happens with the neurodivergent movement too. A label is something that creates bonds and relation to other individuals in a collective, as me and you share a collective in the identity of being Catholic despite probably having vastly different opinions on various issues. So taking on an identity in light of discrimination can give a sense of belonging and togetherness helpful to overcome hate and rejection. Also being gay has two different connotations: one that’s an echo of the former pathologization of sexual and gender orientation and one of identity itself and when referring to „gay priests“ the former is often meant. The queer community offers a wide variety of different identities one can choose to claim or not (e.g. bi, pan, just queer etc.) despite being called „gay“ by the general public. The question in the exclusion of „gay seminarians“ is then: what’s this „deep seated homosexual tendencies“? Obviously a pathologization, unable to communicate a clear line what’s „deep seated“ and what’s not. Anyway, I would support not calling anyone gay that doesn’t identifies as gay, this certainly includes priests as well.

It's kinda sad you probably needed to lead with some disclaimers otherwise they'd start thinking the algorithm was broke.

In the ancient pagan world tje mindset was that good and bad behaviour was all part of the human nature, therefore somewhat understandable and tolerable. Christianity came and made it explicit that we would no longer tolerate bad behaviour, it would be imoral and we dont want imorality.

Permit me to suggest Leather Apron Club who has completed in-depth research into claims that sodomy was de rigueur in Greco-Roman society. In hoc signo vinces +.

I have so admired Brian's podcast for a long time and this is the first time I have found myself disagreeing with him. The gluttony analogy is way off, also. And a man with same swx attraction can legitimately be termed a homosexual. Well, there's too much to discuss in a comment but it is a very big problem, I don't care what the Roman's did, it was disordered then and still is. Yes, we love the sinner and yes, men with same sex attraction do not sin until they act on it, but the attraction itself is disordered. Please don't be an apologist for allowing men with SSA into the seminary.

Yes - around 70% in Catholic church!

It was a thing when I was a kid back in the 1960s and 1970s. Today I think it is not as much of a thing. Some priests I knew were so feminine.

7:40 Every man thay has received the holy orders is a real priest, even if he has no faith and is in mortal sin. Is it healthy to have them like this? Of course not. But the sacraments we may get through them are real still and this great good is fruitful for the Church in spite of everything else.

I agree with you .. does anyone ever read the Holy Christian Bible ??

Gay people don't need the Pope's approval. We could create an online seminary open to all. All the baptized share in the priesthood of Christ. This is Church doctrine.

I think it might be good for you (and everyone really) to watch Leather Apron Club's videos about homosexuality in Greece and Rome.

n general, are these types capable of providing the faithful proper fatherly guidance? Also consider the modern day leftist ideologies associated with disordered passions, as well as the effect that can have on young boys who want to serve or are considering their vocations.

Your description of attitudes to homosexual activity in the ancient world are absolutely echoed in the modern world…to some extent. American politicians visiting African countries and lecturing Africans about “gay pride” are clearly greeted with blank stares or some anger. Because most Africans are believing Christians who simply see homosexual activity as a mucky “sin”… that you shouldn’t commit and if you do, ask for gods forgiveness. The idea that the state under American “guidance” should simply cancel the sin and celebrate it instead with parades and queer flags and the invention of a new type of human for whom the sin IS their “identity” helps Africans to see the US as the centre of degeneracy in the world. Are they wrong in that view?

Priests are celebrate so having such a question is stupid.

"Gay" is a political identifier; "homosexual" is a technical one. Priests who struggle with same-sex attraction SSA are not "gay" in the political sense...unless they are frauds as you point out. Good video! Any priest who does not intend to be celibate (whatever his sexual attractions are) is not a serious priest.

It is not an ontological category of being. People practice sodomy, and enter into a homosexual lifestyle. As St Paul astutely notes: “Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, Nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God. And such some of you were; but you are washed, but you are sanctified, but you are justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Spirit of our God.”

Is your love and desire for your wife just an appetite, Brian? Could you transfer those same feelings to a man if you had to? If not, that is the reason why gay people largely no longer have "beards" and are simply in relationships w/those to whom they are attracted. Not that difficult to understand.

It's just the barf factor. I'm sick of the entire conversation.

This video was pretty weird. I think I get what your saying but i dont think it came across well.

Brian, you’re wrong about this. Homosexuality was not common in ancient times like you put it. This is off base.

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

??

So ancients wouldn’t have considered themselves gay? It’s almost like ideas and knowledge change and develop over time. Try explaining germs to the ancient peoples lol

This is a no brainer. The devil,satan will always tempt,always,always. To fall into the temptation is to fill another seat in HELL!! The LOVE of the lord is what my soul yearns for most. NOT sinful temptation.

🕊️Ten reasons why matrimony itself proves that homosexuality is in fact a sin: 1. What did our Father say in reference to matrimony? * ”Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they become one flesh.” Genesis 2:24 2. Did Jesus reaffirm our Father’s view on matrimony? * ”He answered, “Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one’?” Matthew 19:4-5 3. Did the Holy Spirit who spoke through the Apostles reaffirm our Father’ & Jesus’ view on matrimony? * “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” Ephesians 5:31 4. Is Jesus’ example of love separate from an individual’s immorality? * ”And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God. But immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is fitting among saints.” Ephesians 5:2-3 5. Do the works of the flesh pertain to immorality? * “Now the works of the flesh are plain: immorality, impurity, licentiousness,” Galatians 5:19 6. How does immorality pertain to sex specifically? * “For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from immorality; that each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor, not in the passion of lust like heathens who do not know God;” 1 Thessalonians 4:3-5 7. Why should we avoid immorality? * ”Shun immorality. Every other sin which a man commits is outside the body; but the immoral man sins against his own body.” 1 Corinthians 6:18 8. Under what condition is immorality permitted? * ”But because of the temptation to immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.” 1 Corinthians 7:2 9. Is immorality outside of matrimony idolatry? * ”Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry.” Colossians 3:5 10. Were we warned about certain people who would gain admission to our Father’s church and pervert the grace of our Father into licentiousness? * “Beloved, being very eager to write to you of our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. For admission has been secretly gained by some who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly persons who pervert the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ. Now I desire to remind you, though you were once for all fully informed, that he who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. And the angels that did not keep their own position but left their proper dwelling have been kept by him in eternal chains in the deepest darkness until the judgment of the great day; just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise acted immorally and indulged in unnatural lust, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire. Yet in like manner these men in their dreamings defile the flesh, reject authority, and revile the glorious ones.” Jude 1:3-8 In conclusion to homosexuality, not only can we conclude that our Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit who spoke through the Apostles clarify matrimony between heterosexuals but further stated that immorality was only permitted through heterosexual matrimony. If immorality is only acceptable between heterosexuals then by default, immorality & matrimony between homosexuals is not only sinful but contradicts our Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit who spoke through the Apostles. Even though we know more now about sexual orientations, who will dare claim our Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit who spoke through the Apostles knew less if they know past, present and future?

I know gay priests brother's most are in the closet however outside their religious roll THEIR are a lot more gay priests brother's than you know

🌹🌹🌹🙏🏻✝️

The ancient Romans were not particularly nice people. Unwanted babies were just taken out to a remote location and left to die. No Christian should look to the ancient Greeks or Romans as examples of how to live a Godly life in Christ Jesus. We should look to the Jews - not perfect, of course - King David was an adulterer and a murderer, however, he did listen when he was rebuked by the Prophet for his sin and he did repent. Someone summarised the ancient Romans “so clever, so cultivated - but what brutes”.

Pope Benedict seemed to mellow out as he approached 90 but Pope Francis is the opposite

My wife thinks I identify as a chocolate chip cookie.

Lost me on this one

They are demons.

Muh greeks and romans were gay. Stop it man. There have been people trying to fight that narrative and just flippantly calling attention to that stereotype is ridiculous.

Pope Francis recognizes that gay priest exists. Wow you think you are more Holy than the Pope

lol, Is the a reflection of ones own behavior? Epic mind $%^&ing is what that was... 😂🤣😂

I agree that our modern day society has the tendency to put labels on people based on only a small set of characteristics. Indeed, people may eventually view themselves according to these labels. However, I think that people who identify themselves as being homosexual are perfectly capable of knowing that they feel that way. In your video you talk only about sexual desires, and leave love out of the picture. It may be easy to ignore that part if you only talk about the Greek symposia, but more recent history shows us that people who are homosexual are incredibly determined to express their love. The desire to be able to marry is an example of this, and I am proud that my country, the Netherlands, was the first country to legalize same-sex marriage. Perhaps the Bible states that such love is not possible, but then I would say, look, listen, and love. Even though I actually find your story quite objectionable, I do think you convey it respectfully.

You desperately need to reevaluate your understanding of the Greek and Roman world and their acceptance of homosexuality. It was neither respected nor common, which may be hard to believe after years of neohistorians touting that it was based on very few documents. Recently Leather Apron Club dissects the evidence of such in both cultures and it would probably do you good to wipe some of your misconceptions clean on the subject. It’s not all wrong what you say but much of your foundations sit on falsehoods. This is only a critique of the first portion of the video, not the last.

Why not repeat the Pope’s words? He’s your spiritual leader, no? And wouldn’t your audience benefit from hearing those words and evaluating their merit?

This short video is what my dad would call a barnburner!!! In other words, you’ve shone the light of truth on a deceptive use of language (labels to identify for appetites) rather than our actual substance. We need to stop calling people gay!!! God didn’t create that category. Homosexual choices or inclinations are a subject that needs to be treated honestly. You have done that.

Correct, they enjoy kids.

I stopped listening at the 1:30 when he talked about Ancient Greece homosexual-pederasty (man-boy sex) as a good time in history.

You are correct. Saying someone 'IS gay' is a misnomer. Homosexuality is not something you are, it is something you do. And whereas 'temptation is not a sin', desiring any immoral sexual pleasure in your heart, like adultery, means you have sinned.

I have a lot of appreciation for you, Brian, but this idea that you have that the ancients were just hanging out between philosphy and gay orgies is completely wrong. Plato and the rest were at the very top of the social pyramid, just like our elites now. Do you honestly think that peasents, farmers and ranchers were just chilling with some wine and sodomy? I mean, come on. The elites back then were just as twisted as the ones we have now, but at least back then they managed to make good art, philosophy and all manner of interesting concepts. The elites we have now are sterile, narcissitic and demonic. Please reconsider your stance. Using history to promote moral relativism is not a good path. It is certainly not a Catholic path. I mean, Henry the VIII is not representative of the average farmer from 16th century Britain, is he? Were British farmers of the 16th century polygamous drunkards who went around chopping their wive's heads off? Do reconsider, Brian.

Lowest of the low. How low can our Church go? Thank GOD for the Holy Bible : our Sanctuary, our Refuge. When even holy people lose their heads, the Teachings of the Lord are Rock-Solid. Read and re-read your 4 Gospels if you want food for thought, children of Yeshua. Our Father, Commander Supreme Jesus the Messiah be Exalted and Praised. AMEN.

For a straight man, you sure make an awful lot of videos about gays