Why Be Catholic and Not Just Christian?

[@littleboots9800]

Dont apologise! He is a most welcome little distraction! He is beautiful, congratulations. Such a blessing.

[@thomasfolio7931]

Raised as an observant Jew, I was confronted with the question, "Was Jesus the Messiah" when I did my undergrad studies in a Protestant College. I read the NT and decided yes. Then I was to confront which of the different Protestant denominations fit the Church I read of in the NT. The Catholic option was not present, and Eastern Orthodoxy was not even a known possibility then and there. The only exposure I had to the Catholic Faith was the anti-Catholic rhetoric and arguments my fellows told me of and gave me books to prove it was not Chrisitan. None of the Protestant sects fit the bill, and the Catholic Church would have been out had I not been raised a Jew and taught that to understand a dilemma, you have to read from both positions. I went to a local Catholic College, sat in the library there and found that what had been presented was not what the Catholic Church teaches. That Jesus was not the Messiah, but IS the Messiah. The Catholic Church fit the NT description of the Church in what it taught and did. In Protestantism, the "Lord's Supper" was a recalling of a past event. Like Jesus it was a was, not an Is. In the Mass, God made the Last Supper and Calvary and is, He made it present so I could worship not a far off God but a God who gave us a way to remain with us. The Eucharist and Mass were easy to believe as a Jew who came to know Christ Jesus. At Passover Jews are taught that if we participate in the ritual of the Passover (Seder) we cannot say that we are remembering what God did for our forefathers bringing them out of Egypt, but we must now say, I am remembering what God has done for me, brining me out of Egypt. That at the Seder, God makes present the event in a different time and place than the first Passover. This is what Jesus and the Apostles celebrated when they observed the Passover each year. Jesus chose this event in Jewish life, where God made a past event a present event that He chose to give us His flesh and blood. Unlike other festivals in Judaism there are two Passover observances each year. The Passover we all have heard of, and then one month later a second observance of Passover so if someone could not celebrate it, (Ritual Impurity such as having to bury the dead, sickness, having to travel and no place to observe the rites etc) would celebrate the Passover at that time. The Mass and the Eucharist too are so important for our souls that God has given it to the Church so we can go and be in Jesus physical presence frequently, even daily.

[@DesertPixie]

Thank you for sharing this, I found it very helpful & insightful. I have just started OCIA with my daughter and I am very interested in the perspective of Jewish converts, as I’ve only been surrounded by Protestants and Mormons my whole life. I’ve met very few practicing Catholics or people from Jewish descent.

[@cristinamz2137]

Thank you, your explanation is very helpful.

[@aarondrew4076]

@@thomasfolio7931 please look into dispensation. Praying the truth is revealed to you.

[@goodenoughgirl8102]

I am technically a “Protestant” but I also feel the same way about the past being present now…for me. Yes. For me it is most def personal like God knows my name. If what was is not relevant now then what are we even trying to do eh? It only makes sense if God is the same as He always was, past, present and future. I love your story tho. Fascinating. ❤️

[@JB-ou6fl]

As a practicing Catholic, I truly appreciate the Jewish perspective you described. May God bless you and your family!

[@ronmartinez2766]

This. This is the best of Brian I've heard, and that's a pretty high bar. My wife and I watched this on our television in the living room; she's not very familiar with Brian. But after his appeal for support at the end she looked over at me and said, "I wouldn't mind giving him $5." (that's what he was asking for). I sheepishly looked at her and told her I'd been donating $20 a month for quite a while now. She wholeheartedly approved. :) And posts like this one make it a great investment. Thank you, Brian!

[@minapipita7917]

Thanks Brian! Very good summary of the key issues. Congratulations on the new Baby! God Bless and Mary protect you and your family 🙏

[@JosePerez-is6nn]

God bless you

[@dazylulu1832]

Congratulations on your very beautiful and blessed son! May God bless you and your family abundantly 🙏🏻🕊️🙏🏻

[@tianamenezes7548]

Watching your son fall asleep to the sound of your voice is just too cute.

[@JosePerez-is6nn]

😂

[@marynayna6327]

As Bishop Robert Barron said the Catholic Church has the fullness of the Christian faith,like the attic of your grandmother nothing is thrown away and you will find what your looking for and what you need in the Catholic Church.

[@saphioso]

Yes, that’s a beautiful way of putting it!

[@ninjason57]

The eastern Orthodox claim the same thing though

[@ivanvladic3293]

​@@ninjason57 Of course, but they are all related to some national group, they are not united under the same head - they are not Catholic. The Lord wanted one united Church.

[@Hope_Boat]

The fullness of pan-synchretism you mean?

[@ivanvladic3293]

​@@Hope_Boat Educate yourself before you speak off the top of your head. Pan-syncretism was condemned by the Church long ago. Also, all other churches after reformation are just knockoffs and rebels that left unity that Christ wanted for all of us and they became "little popes and bishops" that read Bible as they wish.

[@claujff7092]

Such a content gorgeous little boy!! What a blessing to you, and you are such a blessing to him and us too, thanks for the video.

[@angelarichmond7821]

Your son is adorable! He is always welcome in your videos! I might start watch every video now to see if he makes an appearance :)

[@ccrisc100]

Beautiful baby. What a blessing!

[@gwijotube]

Congratulations on the birth of, John Albert. May God bless you, your wife and your growing family. 🙏

[@DavGre]

Very difficult timing with a pope who just said that “every religion will lead to God”. Really makes us question why be Catholic under our Pope versus Buddhist/Hindu/Protestant/etc…

[@koderamerikaner5147]

Papal infallibility only applies when speaking Ex Cathedra, plus he's not wrong; All theism is a path towards God, but the most efficient path towards God is Catholic Christianity. Building with any technique leads to a functional bridge, but only one way has the maximal efficiency to achieve it.

[@saphioso]

Well, catholicism isn’t only about the pope. Jesus founded our church, we’ve got all 7 sacraments, are in communion with the saints etc. despite of what the current pope is saying, he’s still the pope and we have to pray for him. There have been some bad popes in history and back then people still held on to the faith and we should do the same now as well and never leave Jesus or his church!

[@williampeters9838]

@@koderamerikaner5147Clearly the prophets of Baal weren’t on a path to God. Israel constantly strayed away from God through idolatry. Clearly the Aztecs were further away from God than modern atheists at least morally.

[@koderamerikaner5147]

@@saphioso They do deny his divinity, but they are still expressions of theism, are they not? The Pope never said that all religions will surely lead you to God, but diverted to an analogy that they are like languages expressing the Divine. One may use any method for drawing a blueprint, and that is what a religion is in the Pope's analogy; It is the language by which the information is conveyed, however the dogma and doctrine therein is what actually is substantial. The bridge may be incompletable with some methods, but the Pope's message in context was that we should spread the Gospel and avoid arguing vain things like our Faith being the only true Faith, because it doesn't bring anything but division. His point was to present evidence and act in discussion, don't just argue with people that you have the true faith or the best god. Languages are not inherently more efficient or greater than another, they convey information; It is how you use the language and the information that you convey, not the religion itself that is the path to God. Moreover, it's important to actually make discussion between faiths possible instead of secluding ourselves, because otherwise we make no progress. His Holiness was very careful in never stating that any Faith other than Catholicism will lead to salvation, and he diverted to an analogy about language to avoid implying so, but it seems Protestants can't help but put words in his mouth the same way they misinterpret Scripture.

[@saphioso]

@@koderamerikaner5147 ​​⁠ ​​⁠​​⁠ ​​⁠yeah papal infallibility only applies then, but you and the pope are wrong on all theism still leading to god. We are the only ones who have a trinitarian god, meaning one god in three persons, which he has revealed to us. And since other religions deny this and deny Jesus Christ as our lord and saviour, they deny the one true god, so they can’t build a bridge to begin with, since he’s the only way. We can’t compromise on this because there’s no salvation outside of him.

[@spoopy-gho5t]

What a sweet little boy. God bless you and him.

[@CatholicWorld-ri8rs]

A video of fr mike smitz with same title propelled my conversion

[@1984SheepDog]

Same! I immediately knew in my heart it was true during the video haha. And I had little interest in it before I started the video hahaha

[@januszkonczal3133]

It put a big smile on my face to see you holding your son as I was holding mine :) Born 2 months ago. Wish you the very best!

[@pauloferrarezi]

After a long period of study I've been baptized Catholic last year 28 y/old.

[@jimr4319]

Oh Brian, you more than scored a home run with this clip, you hit the ball out of the park. Thank you...also God bless your beautiful baby boy.

[@lorenzolozzigallo2589]

Fantastic piece. Smart move to take in that adorable baby, God bless you and your family!

[@StingRaeTheSingingSiren]

This is a question I asked myself as I struggled with my Protestant upbringing and what I was learning about the Catholic Faith… It is a rather popular question and as a Catholic of 8+ years now, I am glad this is being addressed by people who can back up their words with Truth.

[@celtoroma4013]

Excellent

[@matthewgaulke8094]

I think a good follow up to this would be a video on Church corruption and how to respond to that. I think many might admit Catholicism may have been the true Church but it strayed from that due to corruption. That seems to be the biggest concern I see from non Catholics.

[@vijinxshipper]

there's corruption within every denomination. It's not like it's unique to the catholics. my father was raised catholic, but he converted to protestantism because he believed that half the stuff the church was teaching him has no biblical basis; papal infallibility being a major sticking point, along with things like marian devotion and praying to saints

[@sethn1094]

If they admit that then they've given up their entire position imo. There's no way to 'transfer' the status of true church to any other communion. It's also ignorant of history seeing as once upon a time the quantitative majority of Bishops under Constantine were Arian, except St. Athanasius.

[@sparks6177]

@@vijinxshipper yeah but the degree is what’s in question, if all churches have corruption then what makes the Catholic Church the best. There’s also many people that prefer not to test gods words by praying to saints, worshipping Mary, calling priest “father”, etc. if the only problem was a few bad apples and some corruption I’m sure most Christians could swallow that, nothing is perfect, but there are quite a few things that work against the Catholic Church.

[@vijinxshipper]

@@sparks6177I would presume that a catholic would believe the catholic church is the best because it's the one true church. the corruption should be irrelevant to the legitimacy of the church, but since the church has tied its legitimacy to papal infallibility, the corruption undermines the whole edifice. how can words born of corruption be infallible? I anticipate that the catholic apologists would argue that even it's another case of God working his will through evil, that the holy spirit overpowers the corruption when needed or something to that effect. So theoretically, Satan himself could become pope and dictate theology and have it be completely valid

[@Hope_Boat]

Catholicism is a departure from orthodoxy that took place in the 11th century. Kyrie eleison ☦️

[@bobatking7985]

Beautiful baby boy!! ☺ Again thank you for todays word, and clarity!

[@tagarikamaruza8263]

God bless you and your family. May St. Joseph and Our Lady protect and strengthen you. Thank you for the Message.

[@JackieKeilthy]

God bless your beautiful little son .. oh Brian he is gorgeous. Please have him a regular guest 🥰

[@templarrain2369]

Excellent video made even better by the presence of John Albert Holdsworth. In these dark days we need, well, more Holdsworths.

[@jeffreysharp8526]

Thank you for your excellent work and congratulations on your new baby's birth. Pax

[@maryjordan4129]

What a beautiful baby!

[@shawn7587]

here before the comment fights

[@DavGre]

Except now the comment fights will either be popesplainers trying to defend “all religions lead to God” and the Protestants who think “the Catholic Church is not of God.”

[@cristiancastro1381]

Jesus Christ is Lord

[@JosePerez-is6nn]

Amen Jesus Christ is alive 🙏🙏🙏🙏 he is the son of God 🙏🙏🙏

[@vijinxshipper]

some of my comments have already been deleted. no fights allowed apparently.

[@leojmullins]

We have had bad popes before, and the Catholic Church continues on into the future with Christ's deposit of faith unchanged. It will continue no matter what Bergolio does or says.

[@nevercommentnotevenonce9334]

Amen 🙏🏻

[@peterg1978]

Wow, wonderfully explained

[@mottledbrain]

1stly, John seems to have had a good rest in his father's arms and hearing his father's voice. 2ndly, towards the end, Brian, you mention what was to me the "clincher " for becoming Catholic: I finally realized that Our Lord established ONE Church and that it is a TEACHING Church *AND* that it is a Church that teaches with AUTHORITY.

[@stevenfaludi4862]

Your channel is a Good Work.

[@bethanyann1060]

Your son is absolutely perfect.

[@JosePerez-is6nn]

Very true

[@michaellemmen]

No he’s not

[@PatriarchOfCork]

Modern Catholicism does indeed leave out a lot. Its no longer the "whole" post V2

[@SanctusPaulus1962]

Can you elabourate as to why you think that the Church no longer possesses the fullness of the faith post Vatican II?

[@Judge_Jon]

You're going to have to explain how Jesus was wrong when he said the gates of hell wouldn't prevail against it. You may not like a teaching but Jesus church is still Jesus church even if it may need course corrected.

[@SanctusPaulus1962]

@@Judge_Jon Why would I do that? I never said that Jesus was wrong when he said the gates of hell would never prevail over the Church. Because it hasn't.

[@PatriarchOfCork]

@@Judge_Jon Easy, the papacy isnt the church established by Jesus

[@jck6920]

This is a masterpiece. Thank you for your ministry 🙏🏻

[@Teamfra]

Excellent video…precious baby handoff was the cherry on top…a wee evangelizer ❤

[@catholicguy1073]

The Popes nonsensical meaningless statement about choosing the lesser of 2 evils regarding the US Presidential election but clearly not saying that abortion being allowed for 9 months is evil therefore no practicing Catholic should vote for Harris. That’s what he should have said instead of that meaningless statement. It was just really sub par. Like take a side or stay out of it. The Pope continues to be found wanting.

[@Deww-ez]

As a non-roman catholic, a lot of my criticism of the pope is that he simply just doesn't do a very good job as a pastor/priest. I get that what he says isn't the infallible teaching of the church, but surely the bishop of all bishops can do a better job than what francis does.

[@catholicguy1073]

@@Deww-ez I think his words also get twisted by the press and he’s taken out of context. And he appears to be a poor communicator when commenting off the cuff

[@carolinafine8050]

@@catholicguy1073 a poor communicator who is regularly taken out of context but decides to keep doing this for years and years and years? I think what we get is very close to what he intends.

[@Deww-ez]

@@carolinafine8050 Yes, I think it’s right for the laity to expect better from the pope, and the clergy need to be held responsible.

[@josephodoherty7864]

😢​​@@carolinafine8050The Pope can't, & we shouldn't allow, the media to silence the Pope or the Church. doesn't matter how good a communicator (any) Pope is when the media misreport and twist everything said.

[@michaelcummings8744]

🙏Thanks!

[@reinedire7872]

I always have to shake my head when someone tells me Catholics aren't Christians. I wonder which one of the thousands of varieties of Protestantism they believe is the one true version of Christianity? Then I always presume they believe it's the particular version they follow. I also wonder which church they think originally chose which writings to include in, or exclude from, the Bible, not to mention why certain things needed to be edited over a thousand years after those writings were chosen. Don't get me wrong, I prefer our Protestant brothers and sisters to the secularists, but they sure do seem to have a negative view of us despite that the fact that we were the OG.

[@JosePerez-is6nn]

Pray against the demons keeping protestants and all men from full communion in the Catholic Church

[@Daughter_of_the_MostHigh]

The problem is you see Catholicism and Protestant (any one who is not Catholic) this is already a problem! the Term Christian was created as a derogatory terms towards the followers of Christ! We the believers are the Church, not a building or organization, not a denomination the Children of GOD are the Church. Its not about denominations, The Bible is final authority, if a book contradicts the rest of the Bible it is not included because GOD doesn’t contradict Himself! Our Identity is Christ not Catholic or Protestant, or Orthodox or Non-Denominational, or Baptist, or any of the others! this type of mindset divides and is rooted in pride and I would question if the person who thinks this way is actually saved!

[@Daughter_of_the_MostHigh]

@@JosePerez-is6nnRead you comment, does that truly make sense to you? the disciples of Christ were not Catholic they were Jews! the Congregations they formed were not catholic, they were the Church/ Body of Christ (Born again Believers). we are saved though Christ alone and His sacrifice for our sin! catholicism has nothing to do with that, it is a denomination created by men, are all catholic saved? No! are there Some Catholics who are true believers and saved? Absolutely! if you think your salvation is though the Catholic Church then my dear you are not saved!

[@Sammo212]

I mean, I also hear the same thing from MANY Catholics, so...its not just one or the other when it comes to casting stones.

[@neonnnn110]

Raised non-denominational, feeling more drawn to the tradition of old, but still grappling with problems. Can someone help me?

[@jlouis4407]

I would advise going through RCIA it’s the program to enter the Church and starts in October and goes through Easter you will learn about the faith and can stop at any point.

[@bluecomb5376]

Ah, this was excellent. I hope this video touches thousands of hearts.

[@ozoz2931]

I'm a Christian, The church IS Catholic.

[@nevercommentnotevenonce9334]

Semantics, you might as well be jewish

[@ksanto9797]

Thank you for your beautiful witness to faith, marriage, family and fatherhood.

[@GrettaHG]

Congratulations on your beautiful new baby ❤

[@Johnmccoyart]

Wonderful explanation! Thank you

[@newtexan1]

I’m Catholic. We are the ORIGINAL.

[@Bateluer]

Not really. If you want to play that game, then Greek(Eastern) Orthodox is the 'original'. The Bishop of Rome just usurped the power as Christianity in the east was slowly conquered by Islam conquests.

[@HerrFitztastic]

@@Bateluer Correct.

[@BensWorkshop]

@@Bateluer Explain why the Church at Corinth wrote to Rome to get help with splits in their church rather than the Apostle John.

[@Hope_Boat]

Amen ☦️

[@Bateluer]

@@BensWorkshop Because Rome had the wealth and resources, obviously.

[@Mikey-jb3nd]

Congratulations. The baby is soooo darling.

[@phil2d2]

The Church is “Catholic” because of Her mission and deposit of truth; Her members are “Christians” because they are spiritually and organically member’s of Jesus’ Body.

[@murzua5]

Such a cute baby!

[@esprit-critique]

Merci!

[@stephanieluke9388]

Wow, great video and great timing too with Pope Francis' recent remarks. I'm definitely sharing this one.

[@Rajukumar-en2nv]

"All religions are paths to God" ~Pope Francis

[@drjanitor3747]

“Pope”

[@JaneBowe]

"Nope" Francis...

[@francescoaccomando7781]

I have been watching video about the faith for over a year now, and I didn't know much if anything about protestantism. I'm a Catholic from Italy, we are nearly all Catholics, and very very few Protestants church are around in small numbers. All I have learned from Protestant's video is a strong anti-catholic sentiment. Many pastors when they preach attack the catholic church, yet they barely say a thing about other protestant denominations with very liberal, and clearly false teachings, neither they mention the orthodox which is closer to catholics than protestant in their doctrine and theology. I never heard once a priest in my church ever spoke about protestants. All I have learned from protestants is they rather focus with anti-catholics rethorics than bring their own protestant congregation to unity with other denominations.

[@HerrFitztastic]

The problem many have is how to be a Christian while being Roman Catholic. On issues of justification by faith and the Roman doctrine of the blessed Mary as intercessor, I cannot see how you can claim to be both a disciple of Christ's Gospel and a servant of the Roman bishop. We are justified by faith in Christ and not works. It is God the Father who elects our faith, Christ who from love for the Father died and rose for us, and the Holy Ghost that indwells and guides us. God saved me, and I did nothing to contribute to it except by creating the death which God saved me from. I therefore have nothing to boast of, no merit to claim - the glory is God's alone. I am convinced that this is what the Word of God says, but a Roman Catholic cannot say this on justification without anathema from his church. In the past, when the Roman church was stronger, it would kill Christians for even saying this. But those days are forever over. Amen.

[@pcola4594]

Um no…. lol, the Catholic Church teaches that justification is unmerited and a gift from God. I mean come on, you are parroting bad apologetics lines from the 90’s when people didn’t have google and couldn’t readily look up the catechism to see what the Catholic Church holds to. Try harder friend.

[@poetmaggie1]

Congratulations on the new one, looks like your voice sooths him.

[@kaylemoine1571]

A little red-headed boy. What a beauty.

[@09bamasky]

I love the appearance of that beautiful baby boy! Enjoy EVERY MINUTE! It goes by so quickly. (My boys are 16, 15, and 14, and we were blessed with a girl 6 years ago.) I reverted in 2023, after almost 25 years away from the one, holy Church. Thank you for these videos! They are always interesting and helpful.

[@albertfuertes2794]

Easy answer: All the “Christian” churches are man made except the Catholic one.

[@sparks6177]

The Christian religion was made by god, the church (whichever that might be) is what was blessed by god. Not exactly sure where the biblical foundation is for the Catholic Church being the one and only. I also think that the one true church could change at anytime, especially in an era where the pope (the acknowledged authority for the church) is someone who will bless same sex marriage through a technicality and claim any religions leads to god. At that point not only would you question “why Catholicism?” but you would also question “why Christianity?”. It’s a hard pill to swallow for most that see the Catholic Church as breaking/changing so many fundamental rules then justifying it with biblical legalese (op! there’s yet another breaking from gods words)

[@joan8862]

@@sparks6177 Why would God allow the One, True Church to change at anytime? That would lead to nothing but chaos and confusion as people tried to find which new "church" was the "right" one. God is not a god of chaos and confusion.

[@Hope_Boat]

Catholicism was invented in the 11th century.

[@sparks6177]

@@joan8862 because humans are capable of free will. The Catholic Church is run top down, if the pope started implementing blasphemous ideology into the church would you still be following god if you practiced what the pope said? Probably not, and I think that a drastic deviation from gods words and teaching would invalidate any churches claims of being the one true church. I think of it like this, god has chosen his church, and that church will always be gods choice, but in linear time to humans that church is ever changing and isn’t set in stone. I also tend to question any Catholic because they often will defend the pope even while he decrees openly anti Christian rules. And there is always some way to twist yourself into pretzels to justify why it might be ok to do whatever that thing might be, but eventually those slight changes to doctrine looked at over a few centuries starts to look like huge changes in trajectory and all the sudden the one or two inconsistencies that could be easily explained start painting a very bad picture. I could be wrong, it’s actually likely that I am, but the difference is I’m willing to admit I don’t know how it all works while most Catholics will live and die by the poorly supported foundation of what they believe to be true because a man in a funny hat said so. Meanwhile Jesus, the true leader of the church is ignored and his words are turned into scholarly debate where we humans figure out how we can recreate our pagan roots with a more tasteful history slapped over top. I forgot to mention that we already have a one true “church” that being the Bible and Jesus, where any 2 or 3 men gather the church is there. Just labeling some institution as “The Catholic Church” doesn’t make it so, and the idea that it’s like that reminds me of the Pharisees and honestly the Catholic Church as a whole seems ideologically related to them aswell.

[@joan8862]

@@sparks6177 No. We stay united to the pope but reject anything that he says that is contrary to 2000 years of Church Teaching. So far, the pope has not declared, ex cathedra, anything contrary to this teaching. He says and apparently believes things that are contrary, but he is not infallible in these things. These are his opinions. He is not the first bad pope the Church has had. So, no, God would not say that his Church- with the Fullness of the Faith- has now become some church other than the Holy Catholic Church, and then expect His faithful to search for and hope they find the right one. You are over complicating matters. And no, the church is not simply where 2 or 3 are gathered in Jesus' name, because elsewhere there are 2 or 3 gathered in His Name who do not believe what the other 2 or 3 gathered believe. No thank you. I will never, with God's grace, leave the Church He founded and that is the Catholic Church and those rites that are united under the pope, Christ's vicar on earth, regardless of how contrary a particular pope's ideas and opinions are from the Teaching of that Church.

[@tessmac3512]

Congratulations on your new baby, John Albert.

[@Trabunkle]

You can clearly see what Brian says in Churches! Go to several Catholic Churches and you will hear the same things! Go to several Christian Churches and you will notice certain differences! Also, there's this thing called "Church Hopping", that is a common practice among Christians! God Bless!

[@PatriciaMcGloin-f8y]

Well said. Congratulations on the birth of your beautiful baby.

[@mattschneider78]

Brian, in light of the Pope's recent comments I think it's fair to ask you...why be Christian?

[@cubenerf]

what's the alternative?

[@vijinxshipper]

@@cubenerf there's a thing called a search engine

[@mattschneider78]

@@cubenerf According to the bishop of Rome, Sikhism, Buddhism,;Judaism, or Islam.

[@bambbambboyguy123]

@@mattschneider78yes this pope says questionable things and many conservative Catholics like me disagree with them. That doesn’t disprove the church

[@PatrickSteil]

The Christian Faith is a thing. Not subject to any man’s teaching. The Pope does not have the authority or power to change its teaching. We can trust in Jesus’ establishment and authority over the Church.

[@Frst2nxt]

Very well said

[@windsongshf]

Omgosh what a cute baby!

[@Bateluer]

6 minutes in and he shows how the Roman church deviated from Christianity. 'Where ever a bishop is, there is the Catholic Church' is quite the distortion from Christs gospel in Matthew 18:20; "For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.”" This single instance showcases a major issues with the Roman Church . . . all the extra 'tradition' they've added onto the Gospel. Matthew 15:3 is a direct warning against exactly this; "And He answered and said to them, “Why do you yourselves also break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?" And thats before you open the can of worms that is the Roman Catholic Church's ingrained idol worship.

[@pcola4594]

lol…. You have to be kidding me. The visible church friend. How can someone know they are in the true church? Because it is led by a bishop, who has had hands laid upon by a bishop with the authority to instill new bishops. My goodness friend. Tell me, where does your Bible come from? Who first held up what you say is the Bible and said this and only this is the Bible? I’ll wait…

[@Bateluer]

@@pcola4594 The Bible didn't come from the Roman Catholic Church. With little exception, the entire concept of the 'bishop' along with the associated power structure, were created by the Roman church. Necessary to build a church, maybe, but its also part of the 'tradition' that Roman Catholics hold above the Bible and Scriptures.

[@TurtleSquirrles]

I love how when you’re holding little John and are talking about John’s teachings he’s just like “Daaaad don’t tell them I wrote that” 😂

[@dennismaykowski5201]

Thank God for the Converts!😃

[@jck6920]

Absolutely. 🎉

[@leighsphillips3625]

You're welcome. Confirmed in1972.🎉❤

[@jcpg9592]

Good question, why be Catholic when the Pope doesn’t even think you need to be Catholic!

[@michaelbarry6589]

He is not a good Pope, unfortunately. :(

[@jcpg9592]

You’re right, an utter failure in advancing the faith!

[@MikePasqqsaPekiM]

Amen, brother.

[@brettlovett6011]

I would gladly join back together with the RCC if they would: drop the name Roman Catholic (or at least drop the name Roman, restore the equal power to the bishops of the areas of the world (as was the original arrangement), stop claiming the Roman bishop is the one head over all the church, and stop with the weird teachings that are not grounded firmly in Jesus and the apostles' teachings found in the Scriptures. Also cut out all the unnecessary anathemas please - only teach what can be demonstrated to be directly from Jesus and the apostles.

[@nessahamm]

May the Lord bless and protect you and keep you in His peace!

[@ARM1NIUS]

According to the pope, you can be any religion because they all lead to god 🤷‍♂️

[@briankenome]

Which is heresy

[@koderamerikaner5147]

And he never actually said that at all, but you people keep regurgitating this ignorantly and arrogantly instead of actually reading the transcript of his speech.

[@briankenome]

@@koderamerikaner5147 keep popesplaining! We are all wrong and you're the only one who heard it and translated it correctly! Keep trying to square a circle, an Olympic medal awaits you for your effort.

[@koderamerikaner5147]

@@briankenome There's quite literally a transcript.

[@pcola4594]

@@koderamerikaner5147 All religions are paths to reach God," said Pope Francis. "They are-to make a comparison-like different languages, different dialects, to get there. But God is God for everyone." Pope Francis said: “There is only one God, and each of us has a language to reach God. Some are Sikh, some Muslim, Hindu, Christian. And they are all paths to God.” From the Vatican Website.

[@szklanyy]

That statement is so beautifully put in words. Well well done..thanks be to the Holy Trinity, Alleluja, Salve Regina for this blessing that this video is!!❤

[@markcreemore4915]

I'm still struggling with the question of "Why be Christian", never mind why be Catholic. And it's a struggle I'm losing.

[@williampeters9838]

Praying for you! Ask God for faith and He will provide it. It may not be when or how you want it but He does hear your prayers!

[@catholicguy1073]

What part are you having trouble with? For me I needed to see if there was evidence outside the Bible that backs up the Bible. So I went down the historical route. From there once I was satisfied I went to the reliability of the Scriptures and so forth. I converted from being Agnostic for many years.

[@koderamerikaner5147]

Look at Testify and InspiringPhilosophy videos. Might help.

[@markcreemore4915]

@@catholicguy1073 The starting point was in my 20s when it struck me that transubstantiation and communion was a horrible cannibalistic ritual. The realization so freaked me out that I couldn't take it again. I just thought of hideous Aztec sacrifices. But that was just a small thread that, as I pulled it, unravelled everything. We understand now that there was no Adam and Eve. If no Adam and Eve, them no Fall, and if no Fall no Atonement is necessary. The physical resurrection of Christ seemed highly improbable, and his ascension even more so, because what did he ascend to? Is heaven some planet or asteroid or mothership? This makes zero sense to me. A physical body ascending to a physical heaven? These are just a few of the things that are getting between me and the faith.

[@catholicguy1073]

@@markcreemore4915 what makes you think it’s cannibalism ? To cannibalize someone means you take flesh off their physical body. In the Eucharist God presents himself to us under the forms of bread and wine. That it becomes his body and his flesh. Meaning the accidents remain and the substance of the bread and wine change as Jesus said at the last supper when he identified his body as the bread and the wine as his blood. You do not understand the doctrine. Nor what Jesus taught at the last supper Lastly yes it’s not normal to just rise form the dead. And Jesus didn’t just rise he was Resurrected not resuscitated like Lazarus was who had a normal life after and died. Jesus after the Resurrection had a celestial body he could move through physical objects seemingly appear at different locations and then by his own will ascended to heaven. Heaven is not some planet or mother ship. It’s more akin to a different dimension. And yes to believe in Jesus resurrection is to then believe in the supernatural. However that’s the wrong starting point to think about God I had my own journey. First step was for me to figure out if it was reasonable if a God exists and therefore IS the cause of the Universe or are we all here by accident, just some random thing that happened of which numerous random things in a very specific order had to have happened for not just life but intelligent life to occur? The atheist position I found to be laughable and absurd once I looked into it more. Just not mathematically possible. From there came agnosticism where I couldn’t confidently say God does not exist. A good book would be to read “An introduction to the Philosophy of Religion.” Also read up on the Big Bang, and Thomas Aquinas’s arguments for the existence of God. Another one is “The God Hypothesis”. Those books will keep you occupied for a minute I appreciate you responding

[@cantrait7311]

Enjoyed your video Thanks

[@Barbarostriesan]

Catholics: *Recites 'Our Father' in church every weekend, Rosary Beads and Hail Mary's* Jesus (Literally one paragraph before teaching it): "But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him" (Matthew 6:6-8). It's simple, Just be a follower of Christ

[@dyzmadamachus9842]

So according to you Christians mustn't pray together?? How makes that ANY sense? You're mistaken in your interpretation of that passage.

[@charliej600]

Cool misinterpretation you’ve got there. See if you can find any source from the first 500 years of the Church that supports it.

[@Llyrin]

A Monsignor once said to me that we are the original Christian faith and, therefore, THE Christian faith. All others branched off of us. And, finally, he said, we wrote the Book (the New Testament). I’ve always looked at that as being pretty accurate.

[@enovos3138]

"Catholics aren't Christian" started out as a meme, I still can't believe people took it seriously

[@vijinxshipper]

If non-Catholics didn't take it seriously, they would be Catholic

[@frankmcgowan9457]

It may have _become_ a meme but I have heard the phrase "Christians and Catholics", clearly separating the two, since the 1970s.

[@enovos3138]

@frankmcgowan9457 I know, but all of the older folks I know considered it to be nothing more than banter.

[@luckyhands64]

@@frankmcgowan9457I think this is just an American phenomenon due to various Catholic persecutions/bias in our history. Most ofher places don’t make the error

[@katcoombes1312]

You’re right, he is a distraction; the most beautiful little distraction there ever was! 😍 congratulations on the birth of your beautiful baby boy, and awesome video!

[@Richard-e5m]

If one is a Christian, there is no need to be Roman Catholic.

[@FrankRios2b]

One is not truly Christian unless Catholic because you have not partaken in the Body of Christ. Our Lord said heAmen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you". who does not eat

[@Richard-e5m]

@@FrankRios2b Your claim is true, so far as it goes. You are simply quoting something that you think supports your view, but it does not. The claim that the Eucharist/communion, is somehow more than just symbolic is utterly silly. Christ was holding the elements, and they were till bread and wine. There is no warrant to hold that somehow they were his actual body and actual blood while he was there alive with the elements in his hands. Frankly, you don't understand what Christ was saying, and neither does anyone else making the same claim you are.

[@TheBlueBaron]

Did you actually listen to the video before you typed that?

[@Richard-e5m]

@@TheBlueBaron Perhaps you should unleash your mind before posting.

[@nancysfood268]

I​@@Richard-e5mit's not just the symbolic I have experience miracle in my life holy eucharist is very powerful and it's truly the body of Christ

[@maxdepasquale2351]

I love the fact that Brian does not despise other denominations, although he correctly states that they "miss" something. I think this is important. For example, I would never say to an Orthodox brother "you are not a Christian".

[@Hope_Boat]

Orthodox here. No you called us Schismatics and heretics and persecuted us. Lord have mercy ☦️

[@maxdepasquale2351]

@@Hope_Boat Please, a couple of points for your consideration. - Rome declared schismatic/heretic Constantinople, Constantinople did the same to Rome. - Before, more or less, the Enlightenment, Religion was not seen as private matter, but a public, communal one. Historically, the people were supposed to follow their ruler's religion, and deviation was seen as dangerous. Thus it is appropriate to be agnostic on the subject when it comes to the past, and try instead to understand how historical events developed, without accusations that can cloud the research. There have been, and there are even as we speak, cases in which religion is used to harm the neighbors. But this "excuse" has always been present since time immemorial, it is hardly a Christian invention. And it is not Christian - nowhere in the Gospel Jesus commands to kill your enemy. Quite the opposite.

[@nevercommentnotevenonce9334]

I wouldn't say it to an orthobro... My courtesy stops there

[@kennynoNope]

Catholic Church dogmatically teaches you worship the same god of Muslims. Allah said Jesus isn’t god isn’t the son of god and Jesus didn’t die on cross and that there is no greater sin than to believe Jesus is god. They reject the biblical account of Abraham so don’t use that silly excuses either. Saying the name of Abraham and having a different referent means they have a different god. How do their worship the true god and also reject him at the same time. This is a false religion and illogical. Allah also said he isn’t a father

[@dyzmadamachus9842]

“This sacred council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. . . . Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.” Please read Lumen Gentium first if you want to accuse the Church of teaching relativism or unitarianism. It's the same document that talks about the relationship of Christians to Muslims.

[@kennynoNope]

@@dyzmadamachus9842 that’s called a contradiction silly Vatican 2 sheep.

[@kennynoNope]

@@dyzmadamachus9842 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."330 “With us they adore the one god” that would be a contradiction. How are they in the plan of salvation but also don’t believe in the catholic faith. How do they adore the one god but also reject the one god. Please I’m challenging you to answer this without committing a logical fallacy.

[@dyzmadamachus9842]

@@kennynoNope Can jews adore the one true God but reject Christ and His bride the church? Of course the muslim perspective on God is much different from the jewish or christian knowledge of God. But Muslims "profess" (sic!) to hold to the same faith as Jews and Christians. And of course God has a plan for muslims, doesn't He? He wants them to acknowlegde Christ as the Son of God, repent and be saved. So what's your question again?

[@kennynoNope]

@@dyzmadamachus9842 you ignored my question on purpose. It says they “profess to hold the faith of Abraham” BUT they do “adore the one god” it does not say profess to adore the one god you just twisted the text. Jews dont worship god read John 8 Jesus told them who they worship. My question is how do they “with us adore the one god” at the same time by choice reject him. Make a logical statement I challenge you.

[@sherrinelson1976]

Excellent!

[@BriscoJr.]

Saint Ignatius wrote in Greek. Believing that Catholicism is the true Church because they have bishops and he advocated for bishops (which is just one English translation of the Greek "episkopos") makes no sense. The word can also be translated as "elder," which most Protestant churches have without using the specific title of bishop. If you're going to cling to that translation of episkopos, you could as effectively argue that the Church is found wherever there's a chess set. I don't think Ignatius would ever consciously argue that the whole of the Christian faith is a matter of church hierarchy. And arguing that the Bible is a coequal authority to earthly bodies because the Bible doesn't refer to itself as such is ridiculous--I don't like to be rude but can't think of a better word. Scripture has a proven track record nearing two thousand years, and nearly every collection of men has obvious examples of egregious error, sometimes hilarious and sometimes horrific. Let's not equate the councils and synods that canonized Scripture with, for example, the Medici papacies or even the current holder of that title.

[@RossArlenTieken]

It's not matter of translation of languages, but the passing down of authority to transmit the full gospel to the faithful. For 1500 years, everyone interpreted scripture through this lens. Then one or two people decided that which was founded by Christ was inadequate, but their revelation was perfect. That actually makes sense to you?

[@BriscoJr.]

@RossArlenTieken It makes more sense than believing, for example, the doctrine of indulgences because of a commitment to the belief that the Medici popes were the inheritors of the Apostles' (and Christ's) authority. Catholicism defends its authority by the Scriprures, but then modern Catholics seem to argue that the Scriptures were somehow chosen by the Catholic church as a proof of its own holiness. Paul outlines the qualifications for apostleship several times in his letters, and the canonizing councils had clear parameters for Scriptuure that pointed specifically to the first Apostles, not some centuries-long chain of authority based on a controversial assumption that Jesus Christ declared Peter to be the singular head disciple--a claim that's never again referenced or indicated in what we now call the New Testament.

[@BriscoJr.]

@RossArlenTieken It should go without saying that it was obviously more than one or two people that disagreed with the church establishment during the Reformation. Even if that weren't the case, to play the numbers game would be to side with the priests of Baal over Elijah. It could have been one lone voice that spoke out, and he still could have been right. I don't agree with Luther's 95 Theses, as an obvious example, because of the charisma or charm of Luther personally, but because his objections to current practices were valid. I think we can agree that the apparatus around the Catholic church, at least, had become corrupt, as many of the Pharisaical practices of Jesus' day had corrupted Judaism.

[@pcola4594]

What is the Bible? According to whom?

[@justawanderingranger2234]

I love long episodes!

[@radekszafran1896]

debate James White on this maybe?

[@carolynkimberly4021]

Who's James White?

[@MarkelBeverley]

@@carolynkimberly4021 a Calvinist twit who believes in determinism and several other Protestant falsehoods.

[@tc9459]

No one should give White any attention, he’s a fool.

[@SquattRakk]

Voice of Reason recently debated him on Sola Scriptura and it did not go well for James.

[@cristiancastro1381]

James Brown probably makes more sense on the matter tbh

[@frankcorredine2475]

Thanks!

[@villefere6968]

Because its the Church created by Jesus, stupid question.

[@RealMichael2055]

I am not a Catholic because the following is that church is more important than Bible, which I take is the word of God. I am just Christian, no denomination. My faith is in Jesus Christ our Lord, who was crucified for our sins and who was risen from the dead. I believe Mary, mother of God, is important, but doesn’t need our worship and same with the other saints. I find that when the power is given to the churches instead of the word of God, atrocities tend to happen, such as Indigenous residential schools, some cult like churches (my friend has told me about, thankfully he has still found Jesus) and others throughout history.

[@Chance_Rice]

What the pope just said begs to differ💀

[@koderamerikaner5147]

@@Chance_Rice No, unless you only read news headlines instead of the actual thing the Pope said.

[@Chance_Rice]

@koderamerikaner5147 So he didn't say all religions are can lead you to God, if not what did he say, also I listened to that he was saying so enlighten me oh interpreter of the Pope!

[@RealMach15]

@@Chance_RiceThe pope can say bad things. That doesn’t disprove Catholicism. Plus he wasn’t speaking infallibly so nobody has to listen to him. Last time a pope spoke infallibly was in 1950.

[@Chance_Rice]

@RealMach15 classic response

[@koderamerikaner5147]

@@Chance_Rice He quite literally didn't; nowhere in his address did he say that. Did you ever read the publicly available transcript on the Vatican site? He said that they are "like different languages that express the divine", which is to say that "religions are like languages that try to express ways to approach God", the analogy meaning that they convey information. He carefully avoided ever making a concrete statement or implication that all faiths are true or lead to truth, but non-Catholics nevertheless misinterpreted it that way. A language is neither inferior, superior, nor less efficient than another, but the substance conveyed by the language does not necessarily imply it is true. In all languages, I may make a statement and convey information about the world, but it does not mean that the information conveyed is true nor false. He further said that there is one God, and his grander point was in the context of interfaith discussions, that we should have constructive criticism of other faiths and be open to debate rather than rejecting debate and insisting our Faith is true without evidentiality and proper methodology. This aligns with what we know: De Fide, one must intellectually believe in God and His Church, His ways, not just by heathenistic thoughtlessness which make the Faith vain.

[@LayDownAndRot]

The timing is... something.

[@RocketsharK7]

The Roman Catholic Chuch did not descide which book were scripture. The letters of the new testmanet were all accepted as scripture nearly immediately. The collection of the current cannon may not have been compiled but all the books of what we now call the cannon were scripture nearly IMMEDIATELY. and were written by the authors knowing they would be in most cases. The contested books have always been contested, in other words, NOT scripture even though SOME accepted them. The old testament has nearly the same story, just centuries prior. Just because YOU coudlnt find where the bible came from doesnt mean that the largest group claiming they put it together is the authority that made the scriptures. Also, choosing the Catholic Church is still YOU making yourself the authority on what is true Christianity, because YOU chose to pur your trust in that denomination, and since that denominiation says to trust them AND scriptures (The inspired word of God) your now placing your trust in something other than Christ. If Christ is the Bride-groom and the Church is the Bride, you're part of the Bride and you are trusting YOURSELF to lead you to heaven. “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." - John 14:6

[@kyrman6038]

Jesus didnt just inspire scriptures though, He literally founded a church and gave authority to do all sorts of things in His name to that church, and the succession records of that church are historically as solid as they come.

[@RocketsharK7]

@kyrman6038 the bible is the solid rock I'm looking for ( and you should be looking for). Christ is the head of the church. Christ is God. The word is God. Christ is the word. Trusting in an institution claiming to be equally authoritive to God is not trusting in Christ, The way the truth and the life. The bible warns to watch out for the traditions of men, how can a new convert figure out between the traditions of men and the traditions of Christ? The answer is Christ, the Word, the Bible. I'll tell you I have struggled to come to this because I just wanted a trustworthy source to ask my deep theological questions. But they always give a nugget of truth, then lead me away from scriptures, and the catholic church is a master in this craft, but fortunately Christ through his word has shown me that trusting an institution of men which has changed its doctrines for 1000s of years is not trusting in Christ's sacrifice for my salvation.

[@kyrman6038]

@@RocketsharK7 Thanks for the response. Let's have a discussion. It's not correct to say that the Catholics dont value the bible, all of their theology comes from a combination of Bible and ancient traditions. The problem with taking the word of the bible outside of those traditions and institution is that it can never be authoritatively interpreted. The actual words that are contained within the bible no one disagrees on. We have the original documents in greek and the translations are as accurate as they come, so the words themselves are not under question. It's the interpretation people disagree on. If you take a passage like "no one is good not even one" as said in Romans. Some sects detached from the Holy Tradition have interpreted this as meaning everyone having a sinful nature, or that righteousness is impossible for man, which obviously contradicts Imago Dei. Or you get sects of people who think that when Jesus says forgive your brother not 7, but 70 times 7 times that He literally means you only have to forgive your brother 490 times and then after that you are good to stop forgiving. They are correct in saying that the scripture literally says that, but it's obviously not what its pointing to. And these people sincerely beleive they have the Holy Spirit guiding their interpretation. So if we get lots of conflicting interpretations with everyone believing they have the Holy Spirit guiding their own interpretation then we can show that at least some (if not most) people are wrong in their beleif that they have the Holy Spirit guiding their interpretation. The only solution to this dilemma is to look to those we know for sure have the Holy Spirit. So we know that Christ gave authority Spirit to the Apostles to bind and loose as they judge fit on earth. And to Peter he promised the gates of Hell would not prevail against the church. The history shows that the apostles elevated their own disciples to the same level as them through ordination, and they in turn did the same to theirs all the way to present day. So we have a clear line of succession that shows how the authority that God gave to the Aposltes remains with us. We also have the same history for the line of Peter. So if the gates of hell will not prevail against the Rock and he makes a judgement on the interpretation of scripture, how can it lead people to Hell? If this is not the case then Christ's gift of authority to the apostles and promise to Peter was not valid or there was some permanent break in the line of ordination and succession.

[@RocketsharK7]

@@kyrman6038 The same problem comes into nearly everything listed here, and that is you as the individual are giving the RCC that authority. 1) Peter was not given authority over the apostles. He was given authority, WITH the apostles as he asked THEM "who do you say that I am?" Peter just was first to answer, and good for him otherwise we may have John-peter instead of Simon-peter and that just doesnt roll of the tongue as well. And the "rock" in Mathew 16 is the revelation from the father of The Christ. This point is argued all the way back through the early church writers if you wish to look to them. 2) The literal vs. symbolic arguement goes both ways, RCC says verses like "this is my body, this is my blood" is literal when the verse says in the next sentence "do this in rememberance of me", but then will take "7x70" as literal. This is where we in fact need the Holy spirit in many cases. 3) As many as have come and gone and believed they were going to Nirvana because they followed a buddhist religion, or some other non-christian religion many just the same will think they are following Christianity when they are in fact NOT as many will say "lord lord" and he will respond with "i never knew you." So again we come to how do we know we are following the Spirit? When the spirit speaks to you, you have to look in the Bible and determine it, if you come to the conclusion that the bible says what the RCC is saying then YOU are giving that authority to the RCC. If I come to the conclusion that the RCC is NOT aligning with the scripture then the search goes on. While I have many questions like "what are the keys to the kingdom" and "what kind of things are bound and loosed in heaven?" (note both bound and loose are IN heaven, so this is not talking about sins) and I am currently searching for what he meant by "My Church". It is clear that the RCC is NOT teaching the bible. I am going to follow Christ, and Christ is not at the RCC, they directly counter many scriptures in MOST of their dogma, they add to the scripture and I cannot in full faith follow extrabiblical dogmas.

[@kyrman6038]

@@RocketsharK7 okay let's respond. Point 1. Peter was generally regarded as having over the other apostles by the apostles themselves and by pretty much everyone Point 2. The literal vs symbolic argument. I wasn't saying that the Bible should never be taken literally, I was saying that the judgement about when to take it literally and when to view it as rhetoric or hyperbole or symbolism is not clear in the absence of tradition or authority. If you take these things away, anyone can come up with their own weird interpretation of what scripture means and they do just that. Point 3. I agree that many will think they are following the true Christianity and will find that they are not. This is part of what motivates conversations like these. Does RCC contradict the bible? No, not at all, it has studied the bible more than any other organisation in history, held large and long councils which facilitated debates concerning important parts of doctrine, and long before me and you ever picked a bible. It's a good rule of thumb that if a person ever thinks the RCC is contradicting the scriptures in proclaiming a doctrine then they have probably failed to interpret the scriptures well enough or misunderstood the doctrine being proclaimed. And this is the accusation I levy at most protestants I meet. They often bring up interpretative fallacies that were settled over a thousand years ago as if they are fresh objections. Here are some common interpretative mistakes I see protestants making (definitely not exhaustive): 1.Deciding on an interpretation and then trying to find scriptures to justify it. 2.Failure to read scripture in context 3.Failure to read scripture in light of other scriptures 4.Failure to consider the human (ie non divine) element of the authors of scriptures and of the people being written about. 5. Plucking scriptural passages from all over and then presenting them as if they are all in the same context. 6. Taking a rule that was intended for a specific point in time as if it is a universal rule. 7.failure to apply derivative logic to scriptures or to take derivative logic seriously 8. Appealing to absence fallacy, ie if something is not there it is not encouraged or recommended 9. Beleiving that everything said in the bible is morally universal 10.failure to critique their own interpretations after they have been made, ie leaning too heavily on one's own understanding. 11. Reading the scriptures as if it is written in legalise. 12. Dismissing the beliefs of scriptural authorities, especially the early church fathers. 13.failure to reconcile seeming contradictions between different scriptures 14. Beleiving no interpretation to be superior to their own personal interpretation 15. A lack of beleif that scriptures can be authoritatively interpreted (ie God gave us scriptures but no earthly authority to know what they really mean) 16. Taking parts of scripture literally when they are better interpreted as symbol or rhetoric 17. Taking parts of the scripture as symbol or rhetoric when they were meant to be literal. 18. Taking words or phrases that mean something within the spiritual tradition as if they have their contemporary meaning. It just goes on. Its not possible to avoid all of these interpretation problems without a massive group effort with lots of people debating over the meaning of these and someone with bestowed authority from God to make a pronounced judgment in light of all the evidence presented. This is what the councils of the RCC have done and this is why we can rely on their interpretations over the interpretation of someone who happens to own a bible and believes he has the fullness of the Holy spirit with him when he reads it. You will find that every serious scriptural objection you have to an RCC doctrine there was some in depth debate about it at some point over the last 2000 years and it was resolved after all the evidence was weighed. Protestant churches will often lie and teach that RCC doesnt value scripture but RCC values it so much that places great seriousness on correct interpretation and the means by which we can be sure of correct interpretation over incorrect ones. There is no way to get over this problem of authority in protestantism and the fruit of that is countless protestant sects each beleiving each other to be wrong on with no solid basis to decide who is actually wrong since they all point to the words of same book.

[@jublli2690]

Minute 11:42 where in the Bible....🤯 Thanks for this post.

[@danocinneide1885]

There are no denominations in Christianity Brian...only people who say there is...but absolutely no evidence in Scripture, Tradition or the Magisterium for the idea of denominations - actually the opposite..see all Acts 15, Acts 16.4, Luke 22.31...as examples

[@catholicguy1073]

In the real world there many Christian’s who have different theologies and thus different churches outside the Catholic Church and are in fact called denominations. You’re making a circular argument. There’s thousands of Protestant branches of Christianity and they continue to split with one another.

[@tolkienlewis6887]

What a beautiful little boy! Congratulations 🎊

[@Fivepointlove]

“Why are you catholic instead of Christian like i am”😂

[@danocinneide1885]

All Christians are members of the Church by baptism...and that Church is Catholic, ie Jews and Gentiles validly baptised..see Acts 15 and Acts 16.4 as examples...

[@JosePerez-is6nn]

😂😂😂😂🙏

[@MG-dl9ib]

Best argument I've heard for the catholic church by far! But one logical fallacy you made is that according to Paul and Peter, the apostles, they never claimed authority but by which was handed to them by Christ. They said all authority is from God alone. And therefore we should be willing to call out hypocrisies of the church when the church goes against the will of God. As Jesus did in his time on earth. No human or man made construct is infallible and that is according to Jesus and the apostles you're referencing. Great conversation bruda keep up the good work!

[@janker1676]

Ooo bad timing with the pope just disregarding the sacrifice of Jesus by saying all religion leads to God

[@saphioso]

Yeah, well despite of what the current pope is saying (which goes against church teaching and he can’t change that), he’s still the pope and we have to pray for him. There have been some bad popes in history and christians still held on to the faith back then and we should do the same now and never leave Jesus nor the church he founded!

[@janker1676]

@@saphioso We are the church who believe in the Savior Jesus who was sent by God to give us grace not any Pope or man.

[@koderamerikaner5147]

Did he say that literally? He said they are like languages trying to express God. Languages can be more or less efficient in conveying information, but the superiority is not intrinsic therein; It is the use of the language, not the language itself, that is superior. No one is barred from God, and He has left a way back to Him regardless. Sure, we may only achieve salvation through the Lord Christ, but His point is that we should have interfaith dialogue and discuss with others, sharing the Gospel, instead of secluding ourselves by openly proclaiming our Faith true and refusing to converse with outsiders or disbelievers. Therefore, it is not the religions themselves he had proclaimed that leads to God, but that every religion acts as a language to convey the Divine ("There is only one God, and religions are like languages that try to express ways to approach God."), so we should have discussion with non-believers and present to them the essence and evidence of our Faith instead of arguing the vain superiority of our religion.

[@janker1676]

@@koderamerikaner5147 would have been nice if he had said what you said instead but he didn't.

[@exerciserelax8719]

It was poorly phrased IMO but fundamentally the same message as the catechism, which says that all religions reflect a search for God. He did say there is only one God!

[@faithforce123]

Mary, the pope, praying to saints. Confessing my sins to a man. All reasons I could never be Catholic.

[@talew9]

He stands iike Jesus

[@clivejames5058]

Then you are not living out your faith the way the early Christians did. Those who knew Christ, his apostles and their immediate successors.

[@faithforce123]

@@clivejames5058 I see absolutely nowhere in scripture where the early church confessed their sins to a man. It clearly states that only through Christ can sins be forgiven and that He is the only mediator between God and man.

[@clivejames5058]

@@faithforce123 As a Catholic of course you can repent direct to God but for more serious sins, when you confess these to a priest, it is indeed Christ who forgives you (it's not the man). The priests authority to be able to do this comes from James 5:14-15 and Matthew 16:18-19 as well as John 20:23.

[@faithforce123]

@@clivejames5058 I get it. You're convinced of your faith, as I am of mine. Evangelicals and Catholics share many values, but we are far apart in our interpretation of scripture.

[@kianoghuz1033]

Why? All religions lead to God, and besides that they are just different languages of the same path. That is what the supreme pontiff says. I will trust the unity of the catholic church, Peter, like cyprian says. So shall I follow Pope Francis.

[@NicholasJude-d3z]

you have to look at everything the church has said rather then looking at one confusing comment. That comment in it self isnt a magisterial document either.

[@kianoghuz1033]

@@NicholasJude-d3z Like Nostra Aetate and Lumen Gentium ? Like the 5th ecumenical council confirming conciliarity. Like veneration of schismatic saints vs Florence? Like the explicit condemnation of Heresy to Vigilius vs Vatican I. Like Pope St Gregory's letters to Eulogius vs Pope Gregory VII dictatus Papae. Or like again Vatican I vs Chieti document. Extraordinary magisterium vs Ordinary contemporary magisterium???? whoo boy

[@kianoghuz1033]

@@NicholasJude-d3z or how about when the Pope tried to make a first ecumenical council in Rome in Later in 649 but it wasn't an ecumenical council only until Constantinople

[@koderamerikaner5147]

Misrepresentation of the Pope's actual address, the former not being what he said.