Monday, April 21, 2008

Gerry Matatics Live On ISI Today

Today at 3 PM, Catholic apologist Gerry Matatics will be interviewed on Iron Sharpens Iron. Iron Sharpens Iron is a live broadcast. It can be heard live streamed here between 3 and 4 PM, eastern standard time.

Do you have a question Gerry? Call in TODAY 1-631-321-WNYG (9694) between 3 and 4 PM.



GERRY MATATICS, Founder & President of a Traditionalist Catholic apostolate known as Biblical Foundations International , and the very first ordained minister in the Presbyterian Church in America ever to convert to Roman Catholicism, who subsequently in recent years has adopted an extremely controversial position adhered to by a minority of self-professed Traditionalist Catholics called "sedevacantism", will address the theme: "IS JOSEPH RATZINGER A TRUE POPE?: A Sedevacantist Catholic's View."

Sedevacantism, a term derived from the Latin "while the seat is empty", referring to the "Chair of St. Peter" or the papal office, is a belief that although the papacy is still an office ordained by God Himself, there have been no legitimate popes for half a century, and that all those bishops alleged to have ascended to the papacy subsequent to the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958 up through the present (which would include John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II and Benedict XVI) are not only counterfeit popes, but are also counterfeit Catholics, since they have espoused modernist heresies such as maintaining ecumenical relations with Protestants and other non-Catholics, and have perpetuated other teachings and practices upheld by Vatican II which were deemed to be heretical by previous Catholic councils. Sedevacantism received a lot more media attention than is typical several years ago during the publicity surrounding the blockbuster film "The Passion of the Christ", produced and directed by Academy Award winner Mel Gibson, whose father Hutton is a sedevacantist (whether or not Mel Gibson himself could correctly be described as a sedevacantist is debatable, albeit the fact that the church he privately funded, Church of the Holy Family in Malibu, CA, appears to have sympathies with some controversial sedevacantist positions). Although our guest today, Gerry Matatics, was featured providing theological commentary on the DVD of the "Director's Cut" of "The Passion of the Christ," Gerry insists he has no close affiliation with Mel Gibson nor any connection whatsoever with Mr. Gibson's privately funded congregation.

Prior to Gerry's adoption of sedevacantism (a term he only grudgingly uses as shorthand when describing his views), he was one of the most highly sought after Catholic apologists in America, and was one of the most highly praised contemporary defenders of the Catholic Faith by his former colleagues at Catholic Answers , a well known apologetic organization within the mainstream of Catholicism. While Gerry was himself within the pale of the mainstream, he was invited to participate and engaged in frequent public, moderated debates with such noteworthy Evangelical Protestant apologists as Dr. James R. White of Alpha & Omega Ministries .

Although Gerry is still very actively traveling and speaking, it has been extremely difficult finding a capable, noteworthy apologist within the mainstream of Catholicism willing to participate in a public forum with him to debate or discuss the sedevacantist controversy. Many unsuccessful attempts were made to find such a Catholic to oppose Gerry's positions on this radio/Internet program. A more extensive biographical sketch of Gerry can be found here . Two earlier programs on "Iron Sharpens Iron" on the topic of "Sedevacantism", one with Gerry alone, and one featuring an exchange between Gerry and Evangelical Protestant apologist Dr. James R. White, can be heard on free, downloadable mp3 .

CAVEAT LECTOR: This interview is not to be mistaken as an expression of "modern ecumenism" between the Reformed Baptist host and his Traditionalist Catholic guest on this radio broadcast. The host merely believes that a critical examination of Pope Benedict XVI from a scholarly Catholic perspective is not only something that may rarely be heard or seen elsewhere in the media, but is a valuable topic for discussion in a day and age where the desire to preserve theological purity has been replaced with sentimentalism in both modern Catholicism and Evangelicalism.

12 comments:

Carrie said...

Many unsuccessful attempts were made to find such a Catholic to oppose Gerry's positions on this radio/Internet program.

That's interesting.

Perhaps some of the online Catholics who challenge Dr. White and others to a debate would be willing to take on Gerry instead?

James Swan said...

My apologies for the earlier mistake on the Pope's name...I posted what was sent to me in haste without reading it. i only had a few minutes this morning to post, and did not have time to proof it.

L P Cruz said...

I like Gerry Matatics debate Scott Hahn.

Could you make this happen?

LPC

James Swan said...

I like Gerry Matatics debate Scott Hahn. Could you make this happen?

The current batch of RC apologists seem to be scared of Gerry. Perhaps maybe one would write something, but I doubt they would actually talk to him in person. A few months back, we almost had Mr. Sungenis dialog with Gerry on ISI, but he eventually declined the invitation.

Dozie said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
dtking said...

One may ask the question, who is a Catholic? According to Catholic teaching, a Catholic is a baptized person who is in communion with the bishop of Rome. Anyone who is not in union/communion with the bishop of Rome is not Catholic, and this is rudimentary Catholicism.

Interesting point. Would you insist that this is the test for genuine "catholicity" throughout *all* of church history?

DTK

Turretinfan said...

DTK:

a) Excellent question. I was going to ask the same thing.

b) I don't necessarily think that Matatics would disagree with that particular standard, just its application.

-TurretinFan

Dozie said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
dtking said...

You wrote: I would only insist that you provide an alternative and better Catholic definition of who can be considered Catholic.

I'm not interested in what you insist of me. I only asked a question in order to discern your position, and I think you are dodging my question. I'll try this again - Would you insist that this is the test for genuine "catholicity" throughout *all* of church history? Please answer the question.

DTK

Dozie said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Turretinfan said...

DTK:

For the record, please note that I too am under no obligation to give you straight answers to your questions. Instead, it is my right to give evasive non-answers. Of course, I am leaving aside my Ephesians 4:25 duties, and my Zechariah 8:16 duties.

-TurretinFan

dtking said...

You wrote: I have no obligation to answer your question, especially one which attentive scholars ought to easily discern.

You certainly don't have to answer a thing. You may make any assertion you very well please, and presuppose any alleged scholarship your prejudice permits. In short, you don't have to act responsible with your posts, you don't have to be honest with your own claims.

The claim for Peter is not the question I asked you. But I can very well understand how a Romanist would refuse to answer my question regarding his/her own claim. Thanks for playing, "I can't be forthright." :)

DTK