Matt Fradd: "No, I don't need to get into a sewer and play with sh!t to know what it's like." Excuse me, king, you dropped this: 👑 Absolute legend. 👏🏼

Oh Matt, you share so much truth here. We do not need to taste poison in order to know it will kill us. Stay pure. How needed is your voice. God bless you!

"The baby's brain is put into the body of its dead mother." Yeah, I don't need that story in my life. Happy to miss that one.

Mr. Fradd, I'm not a follower, but I just want to say that was REALLY well done. 1. Calling out the priest's suggestion as shameful. 2. Doing it to his face, not behind his back. 3. Listening to him give terrible advice and answering it as terrible advice, but in such a way that he felt he could continue talking. I gained a real respect for you as an interviewer here. That was amazing. It was also very interesting to see that bad advice come out plainly and in a very public setting. I'm encouraged by the comments I'm seeing, too.

Love the line, "I don't have to play in s**t to know what it's like." Amen!

That priest’s advice is DEADLY.

Let us pray for this priest and all priests that they would grow in wisdom and holiness! St. Joseph and St. John Vianney please pray for all priests. 🙏🖤

6:59 Matt was absolutely right about the p3dophilic themes in Poor Things.

"Who gives a sh**, find the philosophical themes in other works" The interview was OVER at that point 🤣

God bless you, Matt, for holding the line against consumption of pornography

that was the evilist movie I ever saw. I wish I had walked out sooner. It was disgusting.

This was genuinely disturbing. Watching depraved movies DECREASES your ability to engage people in a beneficial way. God demands holiness, not 'effectiveness'. Bringing about a certain effect is the work of the Holy Spirit. Trying to strategize for evangelical impact by engaging in sinful activities won't work. Can you have an interesting conversation after watching a sickening film? I guess so. But in the work of evangelization, you're just building on sand.

I cannot believe this priest is condoning a sin like viewing pornography. The “just close your eyes” line is what pressured me into watching very inappropriate movies as a teen. It desensitized me to a lot worse things down the line. Thank you for shutting down his “philosophy”, Matt.

I'm usually not a moralist but damn, just listening to the plot of the movie made me sick. A priest should condemn this satanic stuff (mutilation of children, etc.) instead of "hey, there are interesting themes". Like Matt said, who cares, we don't need to come into contact with such aberrations to discuss philosophy

As a returning Catholic I would LOVE list of approved movies! I would use it as a guide to what I should/should not watch. 🤷‍♀

Something is very off when a priest is explicitly aware of a movie with pornographic content, chooses to watch it, and then recommends someone else to watch it.

There’s no way Matt Fradd is going to watch this film. I get the sense that he is very sensitive to anything that might “trigger” him. Ah yep, Matt isn’t even interested in seeing it. Honestly I’m embarrassed for the priest that he recommended this movie.

I CANNOT believe this priest is recommending to someone who has struggle with pornography to watch a movie like that. We need to pray for this priest cause I cannot believe what he is saying. 😢

If there are places where priest cannot go to, wearing a roman collar, he most probably shouldn't go there. If you can't go into a cinema with a collar, showing the movie you want to watch, you shouln't watch it.

This is a great job on Matt’s part in pushing back. Granted, the larger question is still good and the fact Matt brought it down a couple notches and gave an avenue for his guest to push back was fantastic! Well done Matt, truly! :)

Just like there are things you shouldn’t eat, there are many things you should not allow your eyes/ears to consume. Bad food compromises our health, and bad entertainment compromises our conscience.

One look at the IMDB Parents Guide from Poor Things and you will be scarred. No one should be watching this horrific film, let alone a priest of Christ.

This idea “I’m a priest ogling Emma Stone simulate sex for 2hrs” as research is plainly insane First of all, Poor Things is not some piece of media that’s singularly guiding hearts and minds; secondly how bout you just don’t? In what universe is watching what he himself describes as “soft core prawn” anywhere NEAR SIMILAR to Paul being aware of pagan shrines and reading non-Christian poetry???

A priest doesn't subject their bodies to "cultural research" so why would you subject your mind to that? There's a difference between knowing about something and partaking in something. He didn't read a review or summary of Poor Things. He watched it. He participated in it by viewing it. I understand why Matt is so confused to hear him talk so nonchalantly about doing that. There is a line between art that has nudity and pornography masquerading as art. If you're describing something as softcore, that's probably a good signal you should turn off the tv or walk out of the theater. Everybody please pray for our priests. They are vulnerable. I hope Fr. Damian Ference learns from this negative reaction but I wish it wasn't such a public lesson.

I think you're in the right here, Matt. Also props for calling out how, at least in the US, sexual content is more readily condemned than over-the-top violence, when neither is acceptable.

I see where Father is coming from, but I also think it's completely unnecessary to engage directly with the culture to understand it. While St Paul did cultural research, I highly doubt he walked into those shrines to pray with people to another God. He knew of the existence of them and what was occurring at/within them, but wasn't participating in it. While Father can know what's happening in these films and in the culture, it's imprudent to partake in any of it and to recommend it to anyone else.

To encourage someone to watch that movie is outright wrong and I'd say demonic. That is probably the worst movie I've ever seen. I left the theater feeling dirty for having seen it. And the more I thought about it, the more I realized how twisted and evil the movie really is.

Respect to Mr. Fradd. Makes me rethink some of my viewing.

Sex in movies is worse than violence. Violence can be a sin, but sexual sin is categorized differently. Not only are you sinning against God, but you're also sinning against your own body.

Props to being a lot more fair and respectful than I would have been in this situation. Props also for standing firm and bringing truth to bear.

Umm. The priest watching that movie is shocking. "Cultural research". Sure.

There used to be a Church list of unacceptable movies. C movies were condemned.

Oof bruh the movie on the banner!!! I tried to watch it on a plane... Absolutely disgusting. I can't believe Emma Stone was okay with all of that. Absolutely gruesome. It should be banned. There is simply no need to watch. I couldn't even get 1/4 through the film. It all started with the man calling himself god. Ew. End of rant lol.

Fr Damian is honestly one of the best priests I've ever met. He's a very good and holy man. I've never seen this movie and can't comment on this video, but I don't know anyone who is doing more for the kingdom of God than Fr Damian. I'm sorry this clip isn't representing that well. It seems to take away from the larger point of the interview.

The difference between violent movies and pornographic movies is that the violence is fake the porn is real. If someone stabs someone in a movie, they are not really stabbing them in real life. If two people are naked on top of each other in a movie, that is actually two people naked on top of each other.

While I am onboard with pretty much all of the comments I have read raising different concerns about this topic, I want to highlight something connected but distinct. I think the discussion around "we are ok with violence but not with explicit material in American film" can often get a bit side-tracked and fall into some fallacies. Overall, the comparison is somewhat apples to oranges on two counts. The first is that witnessing violence and witnessing intimacy does not have the same effect on people. We are naturally hardwired to desire physical intimacy, and so p-graphy hijacks a natural good desire and perverts it. For a vast majority of people, seeing p-graphy can and does tempt one to lust. Violence on the other hand is neither a natural nor good desire, and witnessing it does not cause the viewer to want to imitate or act out similar actions (with the exception of perhaps the rare few who have preceding issues). The brain wiring is just completely different. The Lord of the Rings is in many respects an extremely violent film. I would be hard pressed to argue that it in any way is a near occasion to sin. On the second count, one can depict violence in ways that do not actually require committing acts of violence, through the use of techniques in CG and SFX. One cannot depict p-graphic scenes without the scenes themselves becoming the evil object itself. What I mean by this is that even if you were to use something like animation, prostetics or the like, the end result is still an explicit and p-graphic scene. However, one can fake committing a murder, and the final film does not itself become a murder. Violence is an act between individuals, and a viewer does not intrinsically participate in the sin simply by seeing a depiction of it. P-graphy on the other hand is a sin between medium and viewer, and the viewer and creator of p-graphy sin in the very act of displaying and viewing the explicit material. (I am of course over-generalizing by grouping near-ocassion and sin itself together here, but my point stands) That all said, the argument about violence/p-graphy in film it is often brought up to justify explicit material rather than condemn violent material, so I do appreciate Matt calling out the John Wick films here (which I agree go too far into glorifying violence). The issue I see with the Wick films is not that they depict violence, but that they indulge in and glorify the act as something to be enjoyed and thought well of. Other films (say Hacksaw Ridge) depict great violence as a way of deeply condemning it. They are not the same thing. P-graphy is intrinsically evil and can never be justified in film (though this is not to say that nudity is, just as was pointed out with the greek sculpture, the argument remains where the line is between the two however). The depiction of violence is not in itself evil, and I feel can be used for both good and evil ends.

In an infrequent move for me lately, I’m with Matt’s precautions here - what the hell is this priest saying?

Yes, bring The Index back! I survived the 60's just fine...

This was a shockingly bad take by Fr. Damian. Like wow, just shockingly bad.

If you want to see a film that extols Christian values, Bonhoeffer, produced by Angel Films, hits the theaters in November. The trailer looks great. As someone who's researched Bonhoeffer's life, and am greatly inspired by him, I can’t wait. Ordinarily, I avoid the movies, but Angel Films is providing great content.

I'm shocked that a priest would ever go see this movie! Yes, we need to pray for him. I have no desire to see anything like this.

I read the parental guide on the IMDB Website. If they say there is nudity, sexuality and language we do not see it.

I think what the Father was saying was that a viewing would allow Matt to create a stronger argument for why the movie is evil and sick, which would benefit his audience. He is a religious man after all, and I choose to interpret what he’s say g more positively.

The banning of movies or media by the Church (i.e., other than on Church property) is not the answer. Censoring lawful thought or expression more often turns out to be unproductive and/or even dangerous. That doesn't mean that the Church shouldn't make positive or negative recommendations and offer guidance. You risk moral authority when you try to control people's conduct rather than defeat bad ideas with better ones.

She is an actress, not an actor.

Weird how much he really wanted you to watch that, I would have asked him how many times he's seen it.

I've never seen this movie, but it definitely has pedophilia themes. It's questioning what makes a person, the brain or the body? And they make pedophilia "okay" because the body part of the person is an adult.

As soon as he described the beginning of the film i was like "no". Just admit you like watching odd movies, you're not doing research, you can easily just read the plot online. Movies like that mess with my head for days.

Thesis: the faster we stop giving clout to this abomination of a film and star producing master pieces of our own, the better. Do you agree?

I was happy to see Fradd push back against the priest.

I don't think we can really compare modern cultural reference with what Paul did in this section of acts. The poet Paul quotes from is a creten and greek religious figure called Epimenides and he was the same person who setup the altar to the quote "unknown God" which Paul pointed out. The two were directly connected and Paul was not so subtly inferring Epimenides worshipped the Jewish God YHWH. The same God he was speaking about. Epimenides story is a weird kind of "type of Christ". His story was he went into a cave and emerged out of it 50 years later as a mystic/prophet with divine wisdom and was called on to save the city of Athens which was enduring a severe plague that was decimating the city. He did so by performing acts of atonement and setting up altars across the city where he sacrificed sheep. (very much like the Jewish tabernacle system). The altar he pointed out was one of these and Paul was trying to get the locals to see they already had some reference for and understanding of the sacrifical system and the atonement work of Christ in their own historical, religious and poetic works. This wasn't a random cultural reference - it was basically saying you already have an understanding of atonement in your own religious history. Christ is a much much greater version of that. (Credit to Scott Hahn bible studies for this info)

I thank you, Matt, for your position on this topic. Fight Club is a movie I would not watch too because of the same reasons. Of course, neither this monstrosity of a film. I shall only remind my friends on the comment section to respect Fr. Damain, as a priest should be respected.

Definitely disturbed by this priest recommending a movie with such inappropriateness in it... Matt, I loved your response and courage to call him out on this! Spot on!

Thank you Matt for beeing a person of a great morals. This priest and us all can learn from you!

Shame on this priest. The fact that a lay person has to direct a priest, on what is common sense to most Catholics, regarding putting oneself in a near occasion of sin is crazy. Massive kudos to Matt Fradd for calling this out and keeping a Catholic sense.

The movie is very disturbing. I didn’t do much research prior so wasn’t expecting to see what I saw. I couldn’t get over the theme of sexualising someone that might be mature on the outside but has a mind of a 2 year old (that’s when the sex stuff starts) and everyone seems to be fine with it? Made me so very sad and disgusted, I just couldn’t ignore it and follow the plot without the ick. To me the bits when the character is obviously matured aren’t as bad as the beginning when she’s still mentally a child. So very sick.

Exactly! Enough of excusing the evil. How the priest tries to condemn the host, just because he has no perverse interests, UNLIKE him. It is exactly this t

This is the creepiest interview with a priest Matt has had... You don't need to murder people to help murderers.. Absolute king line: "Don't need to get into a sewer" Sex and violence are not equivalent.

This would make for a great debate of some sort.

Wow, I can't believe Matt has to explain so much to this priest. God help this priest, he needs someone to guide him away from so much evil he's willimgly choosing to allow into his life.

I watched this wretched movie not knowing what it was. Covered my ears and closed my eyes for the disgusting parts. Made me feel like a prudish child, but was definitely worth it. The movie, sometimes inadvertently, does expose many of the problems with modernity and a purely materialist worldview though.

Check out Catechism of the Catholic Church 2354. Of note, it is not strictly pornography based off of intention (ie, intent to arouse vs intent to portray something about the story or the characters), but due to the evil moral object itself of portraying such acts to be viewed by others. Watching that movie is probably a pretty terrible idea. Not to mention the nature of the themes and the scenes themselves in it make it frankly disgusting.

That final line...felt that. I was also deeply hurt by it so I don't like movies that show that type of stuff, and if you think about it, if you take a the sexual scene out of the movie most of the time you realize that they are not even needed because they bring nothing to the actual story so why make them?

The difference between explicit sexual content and explicit violence is that violence is not intrinsically evil and can be justified, where as, from a Christian perspective, the martial act is always a private act that should not be open to voyeurism.

Great conversation. Thanks.

Top 2023 movies that I saw instead. 1. Sound of Freedom 9/10- I think a good example of art is Sound of Freedom which brought attention to there being more slavery now than ever in the history of humanity helping uncovering the over 150 billion dollar business where 300,000 children under 18 years old are sucked into it yearly. "God's children are not for sale." 2. Nefarious- 7/10 My favorite horror movie of the 21st century (My all time favorite might be Wait Until Dark). Good film on spiritual warfare imo (I preferred it to the Exorcist), but had a cheesy segment that, unfortunately, brought it down. Regardless, Sean Patrick Flanery's performance was fantastic! 3. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3- 7/10 The first Disney related thing I saw this decade, and favorite since Inside Out, thinking it was well crafted, despite maybe not giving enough character development to characters besides Rocket Racoon, and, relative to a looney tunes-esque sci-fi action fantasy, I appreciated how much it showed a value for life, and "There are the hands that made us, and then there are the hands that guide the hands," is still my second favorite quote in recent movies after Sound of Freedom's "God's children are not for sale."

Even secular non religious people who are children of sex abuse are saying NOT to watch this because it’s about taking advantage of an innocent child sexually

Yeah, like why go to the depths of hell to be with people who watch it, instead of lifting them up?

Matt is providing an excellent challenge to Fr. We don't have to see something to know it's evil is there. We know when something is dangerous to our soul. Father is dabbling in danger more than he realizes.

I agree with you 100% on this one, Matt.

Matt Fradd, I totally agree with you. Why in the world would a priest even go and be seen in a theater and be seen watching a film such as this? His explanation that there is some good in it just doesn't cut it. We need our priests to be in the world, not of the world. If he were my priest, just might have to rethink him being my spiritual leader. It's like M&Ms...before you know it you've eaten the whole bag, porn and murder and all the other stuff is the same, a little and before you know it, you've fallen into the pit.

"I dont want to spend my money or my time on it, id rather just condemn it." #likeasir #thankyou❤

I don't like movies that include violence or porn (including exploitation through nudity). They are used to shock...cheap and easy ways to grab attention. I prefer writers and directors who are skilled ... they can move a story forward through nuance and interesting plots.

I think this priest has the wrong idea.

Amazing they’re giving Oscars for that crap. I heard about that movie but had no idea that’s what it was about.

This was incredible. Thank you so much for this. Moral theologians say you can never simulate sins against the 1st and 6th commandments. In order to simulate breaking them, you still end breaking those commandments. Thank you for holding people to a higher standard and expecting more from people.

The ending is so true... some people because of their past sins are more sensitive to certain temptations .... but then again... we still shouldn't be watching things that go against God and the Catholic church... because we dont' need it.... we are addicted to it though....

That film was recommended to me on Hulu. I watched the first five minutes and turned it off and gave it the (not interested) rating on Hulu. It was disturbing and horrifying. This man has to seek counsel asap because 1) how did he sit through that 2) why would he recommend that to ANYONE 3) there were pedo themes in that movie and it’s disgusting and must be removed from society completely. The movie devalued human life and encouraged evil. Nobody should watch that ever.

Yes, the index of forbidden books should have a movie counterpart

In my point of view, it is important to be able to see to be able to argue properly and correctly. Because if you come from a place that I do not need to see it to know its bad (although true and revered) sounds like coming from a place of “looking down” on people instead of communicating compassion to those who watched and did not even know committed sin. Id go the kinder path because that’s how you get them to listen and experience Jesus. Instead of being in a higher place than them.

Matt, I totally agree with you. Thanks for being so honest and upfront.

Good for you Matt!!!! Ick

God Bless you Matt for standing strong. Let’s pray for this priest to stay away from all impure content as our priests should be holy and blameless “That you may be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world” - Ephesians 2:15

This reminds me of Bishop Barron recommending Mrs. Davis. Tried watching it and couldn't stand the blatant blasphemy. I suppose some people can look past it, but others can't.

Actually think this priest has some good points, but really needs to draw the line at movies with porn. People get to choose, but the porn is evil.

Wow....just wow.....Matt, thank you for giving push back on intentionally observing "softcore pron" at the recommendation of a Priest. Let's pray for Fr. Damian

Good for you, Matt. The issue with only meeting people where they're at is that, without calling them to greatness, you end up sitting in a moral cesspool with them.

Phillipians 4:4-9 is a good "filter" to use when deciding on what we watch.

Great job Matt for being very clear on this topic! Thank you!

I can't understand this priest's reasoning on watching that movie, let alone encouraging it, especially the "cultural research" point he made. By that logic, you should have watched the movie, known how incredibly horrible it is, and then condemn it entirely, telling everyone NOT to watch it full stop. Or better yet, just read the synopsis of the movie on a website and you'll find everything you need to know without subjecting yourself to sin. I honestly think this priest tried hard to find any justification for seeing the film. As St. Therese of Lisieux said: "The nearer one gets to God, the simpler one becomes." For literally any activity, you can just ask yourself "Would Jesus and Mary like to be next to me while I'm watching/listening/doing/ this etc?" If no, then it's not good, it's that simple. As soon as you start complicating things and bringing in the justifications/excuses, that's when the problems start and you get stuff like this, priests watching pornography on a movie theater for "cultural research". Cmon dude!

I don’t know who said it, but, “Priests don’t become pedophiles. Pedophiles become Priests.”

Knowingly watching a violent or pornographic movie and calling it research makes about as much sense as eating food you know you’re allergic to.

I think we have to slowly judge those who speak on podcasts. some of their arguments aren’t well thought out and they are just having a conversation. i totally agree with Matt, but maybe this priest didn’t think it out. he probably changed his stance now! that’s the product of conversations like these

This priest is giving off odd vibes, i agree with matt. Dont promote evil..period

I think Father needs to take example from you, Matt Fradd. I think he needs to curtail his own list of movies that are acceptable to him.

I was talking with Jesus and I complained about a song that I wasn't going to listen to again because it was against my faith in Christ and Jesus said to me you never miss out on anything good when you avoid Such music

I don’t think watching John Wick is sinful. Am I wrong?

Good job, Matt! Your argument is sound. The principle of the integral good has been totally forgotten.

I picked up the poor things book at a thrift store because it looked weird and interesting and just let it sit in a box for years. I saw the movie trailer and got flashed a frick scene Does anyone know if the book is as perverted as the movie?

Satanic film.