Is Jimmy Akin really a heretic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter terrytango
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The OP reminds me of the commercial where the guy thought if it was on the internet it had to be true, that they couldn’t put it on the internet if it wasn’t true.

I looked into this Conte fellow. He would be funny if he wasn’t also dangerous. I would give this advice to someone looking for information. Stick to Catholic apostolates. Stay away from independent “Catholics” without diocesan or Church affiliation. We are not Protestants and need to keep away from private interpretation.
 
Last edited:
I don’t know about heresies.

But doesn’t Catholic Answers have very close ties with the Archbishop of San Diego? I’ve seen loads of Imprematers on CA documents and sites. Wouldn’t that preclude heresy by definition?
 
Last edited:
😆 I didn’t mean to imply it was definitely true, I just had to be sure I wasn’t going crazy!
 
CA is an apostolate of their diocese. They legitimately (in accord with canon law) use the name Catholic.
 
That’s what I thought. So I don’t know how anyone can seriously level these charges. I could critique CA but I’ve been around for over 10 years - I like it.
 
Don’t believe everything you read online, regardless of how convincing the argument sounds.
 
I wasn’t believing it, hence why I posted here to ask about it… It was just worrying if it turned out to be true. If I just believed it I wouldn’t have asked a question, just stated: Hey guys! Turns out Jimmy Akin is a heretic cuz it says here!
 
“Don’t believe everything you read on the Internet.”
– Abraham Lincoln
 
Ron Conte on his sites often claims various apologists, theologians, etc are heretics. It is his “thing”.
There are no “gray areas” or issues that have not been settled. It is all black and white. You either adopt his viewpoint or you are a heretic and excommunicated latae sententiae

He often cherry picks from various orthodox sources to support his own ideas and can be quite convincing, but often times, looking at a document in it’s entirety can show that he has not presented “the whole”.

His theology doesn’t fit into a particular common mold—for example, he is not part of the “traditionalist” movement. He fully accepts Vatican II, defends Pope Francis etc.

He mixes orthodox Catholic teaching with his own interpretation, which is often “odd” and he is completely convinced of his correctness. He seems to believe he is a one man CDF. He is an absolute bulldog in his tenacity in clinging to his own beliefs.

He is also very, very obsessed with sexual morality and his version of “Catholic Marital Ethics” is way beyond any official doctrines of the Church. Shockingly, he has never been wed. 🧐
 
Last edited:
You say Jimmy has blind spots. I’m curious is there anyone at CA who has the least amount of blind spots? I won’t say no blind spots because as you say we are all fallible. I find them all to be highly knowledgeable and capable of clearly articulating that knowledge. My thinking is if they can’t be trusted to accurately express the faith than no layperson can. But then I’m not as knowledgeable as them or many on this forum.
 
I believe you are correct. It is called the Roman Catechism. It’s very good.
 
Dominique181 said:
Personally I find Jimmy has some blind spots.
He is a relatively recent convert from evangelical style Christianity from what I can make out.
His primary theology qualifications appear to be from the time before he converted.
This, in my reading of him over the years, tends to make for blind spots on theological themes where Catholics and Protestants have significant differences.
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree here. I have absolutely no clue who Ron Conte is but I have heard others on different Catholic sites, correct some things that Jimmy Akin has said.

I listen to Jimmy Akin sometimes on the radio, he is good, but I agree with Dominique, he does have some blind spots. There are times when listening that his explanations just aren’t quite right.

Just because someone is tied to Catholic Answers or any other Catholic website, blog or whatever, it is best to check out and be sure what they are telling you is correct. The best thing to do is study the faith from good catechisms.
 
Canvas said:
Ron Conte on his sites often claims various apologists, theologians, etc are heretics. It is his “thing”.
There are no “gray areas” or issues that have not been settled. It is all black and white. You either adopt his viewpoint or you are a heretic and excommunicated latae sententiae

He often cherry picks from various orthodox sources to support his own ideas and can be quite convincing, but often times, looking at a document in it’s entirety can show that he has not presented “the whole”.

His theology doesn’t fit into a particular common mold—for example, he is not part of the “traditionalist” movement. He fully accepts Vatican II, defends Pope Francis etc.

He mixes orthodox Catholic teaching with his own interpretation, which is often “odd” and he is completely convinced of his correctness. He seems to believe he is a one man CDF. He is an absolute bulldog in his tenacity in clinging to his own beliefs.

He is also very, very obsessed with sexual morality and his version of “Catholic Marital Ethics” is way beyond any official doctrines of the Church. Shockingly, he has never been wed. 🧐
Click to expand...
This man, Ron Conte, has no academic degree in theology at all…let alone what is needed to be a theologian of the Church / of his Particular Church

Given the reality that he has no academic degree, he holds no mandatum from a Bishop. It is always to be remembered that it is the role of the Bishop “to teach, to govern and to sanctify.” He is the supreme teacher for his diocese…a reality made visibly present to the faithful by his cathedra.

Those of us who do hold the mandatum do so as servants of the Bishops.

It is our duty, as theologians, to be at the service of the Bishops…the one whom we serve and the College as a whole…as they guard and elucidate the deposit of the faith – which is entrusted to them in virtue of being the successors of the apostles.
 
Don_Ruggero said:
This man, Ron Conte, has no academic degree in theology at all…let alone what is needed to be a theologian of the Church / of his Particular Church
Click to expand...
I had no idea who he was so on the website cited in the original post I clicked on the homepage and noticed a link to his “work as a lay theologian” and another link for his “qualifications”. Sounds like a guy with an STB/STD or other relevant degree but who is neither priest nor religious, right? At least this is what I would think if someone introduced themselves to me as a “lay theologian”. But if you click his “qualifications” page its just a long screed arguing why it is he needs no stinkin qualifications!
 
I’ve never hear of this guy, but I after reading his blog, I think it’s best to avoid him.

To answer the OP’s question: whoever this guy is, he has no authority to label Jimmy Akin (or anyone else, for that matter) a heretic.
 
terrytango said:
What do you mean ultra-conservative? I believe the Church teachings on sex inside marriage ofc, but I can’t imagine how you’d be more conservative beyond saying nobody should ever have sex at all
Click to expand...
The link that guanophore posted above gives a pretty good sense of what I’m referring to: Mr. Conte’s regular battles with CAF posters and apologists over what’s permissible within a Catholic marriage. At the risk of over-simplifying his position, I always got the sense that he presents Church teaching as “anything outside of strictly putting Tab A in Slot B is gravely sinful.”
 
1ke said:
He [the blog author] has a reputation around CAF for his out-of-the-mainstream interpretations of church teaching.

He has no imprimatur or nihil obstat. He just has a blog.
Click to expand...
He posts here, doesn’t he? Or used to?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top