Help Me Understand Catholicism // Cordial Catholic x Gospel Simplicity

[@GospelSimplicity]

If you all enjoyed this conversation, be sure to subscribe to The Cordial Catholic wherever you get your podcasts! You can do so here: podcast.thecordialcatholic.com

[@BrianGondo]

I can't believe Austin is 21, he's more mature than me and I'm twice his age. You such a blessing Austin

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks! All glory to God for any wisdom or maturity he's given me

[@D.N..]

It was a pleasure to listen to this conversation!!! Very respectful , no screaming yelling, cutting each other off, no name calling!!

[@GospelSimplicity]

So glad that you enjoyed it!

[@HeavnzMiHome]

Don’t you wish politicians could do that? :)

[@JamesMartinelli-jr9mh]

@@HeavnzMiHome Statesmen - our fore-fathers were not politicians. George Washington warned us about political parties. Who obeyed? Solely the statesmen of the Confederate States of America. Deo vindice!

[@HeavnzMiHome]

@@JamesMartinelli-jr9mh Thanks for the Latin bit: Deo Vindice!! Don’t we all need God’s special protection in these times!!

[@mosesking2923]

Wow, a KZbin video with two people with actual microphones where I can hear them CLEARLY. Music to my ears. Great video, and I love your enthusiasm.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Glad the quality was good for you! Thank you so much

[@quayscenes]

On the re-presentation of the Mass. I sometimes think "re-presentation" is a misleading word. I like to think of it as a "re-entry" into the "once-for-all" event of Calvary. We think of God as "existing" (does God exist or is he existence itself) outside of time in the "eternal now". The Lamb is "slain from the foundation of the world". How we enter into this "cosmic" reality plays out differently throughout salvation history. There is the first sacrifice required at the fall, the sacrifice of Able, and then eventually the great sacrifice of Passover . The Lord's Supper is the ultimate entry into this great reality. I remember this first clicking for me when I read Richard John Neuhaus' wonderful little book Death on a Friday Afternoon. So when it comes to the Mass, I like to think of it as there being really just "one Mass". Each time we go to Mass we enter into the sum total of Salvation history, the Alpha and the Omega, with the great sacrifice of Christ at the very center. And so the entire communion of saints is present at each Mass. As for the real presence of Christ in the eucharist, without rehearsing all the many ways of explaing it, I would perhaps offer this one insight that for me is worth meditating on. "The anti-type (fulfillment) is always greater than the type". And so the flesh and blood and cups of wine of the ancient Passover is far surpassed in the Eucharist. For the Catholic, the Eucharist is not merely a symbol, but a cosmic entry into the great Christ event, eating and drinking the flesh and blood of the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" in the very scandalous sense that Jesus presents it in John 6. Can we believe it? "Lord, where else shall we go?" We will achieve full Christian unity when we finally come to unity in the Eucharist.

[@GospelSimplicity]

This was really eloquently put. Thanks for taking the time to watch and leave this thoughtful comment. God bless!

[@HeavnzMiHome]

It’s always difficult to describe the mysteries of God. I’m just happy that He has given us such revelation of His love.

[@DrSheri.teaches]

Wow! Great explanation - thank you!

[@immaculateheart1267]

Well done. Great discussion. Now this is what true dialogue should look like. I come across so many unfriendly protestants on my Catholic social accounts. I will send them to your channel. Hope they will come here.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks for your support!

[@bridgefin]

Austin, if all ever you do is to clarify the differences between Catholicism and Protestantism you will have done a great service. It is so refreshing to listen to someone open to truth and not simply agenda driven. Please keep your integrity and keep asking the tough questions. If you don't know of it already, your talks with Catholics reminds me very much of a similar dialogue between a priest and a pastor friend which was put to video several years ago. Callen "Common Ground" it is a friendly discussion where the pastor simply wants to understand Catholicism better. So much light shines forth when this is done with charity. Bravo!

[@GospelSimplicity]

I haven't watched that. I'll have to check it out! Thanks!

[@justinfuller8481]

Lets go baby. Cordial Catholic and Gospel Simplicity. Im liking the new avatar GS

[@GospelSimplicity]

It was such a fun collaboration. I was so grateful to be on the show, and I hope you enjoy it! Thanks! I was really happy with how the new logo turned out. The designer did a wonderful job bringing it to life!

[@TheCordialCatholic]

Wait, which one of us is he calling baby?! 🤓

[@justinfuller8481]

The Cordial Catholic 👀👀

[@Jake_Fowler]

Austin, a couple resources come to mind that might be helpful. One I’ve read, the other I haven’t, but have heard good things about. 1) Topics on Tradition by Fr Chad Ripperger - the first chapter is about the Tradition itself, and is pretty thorough. Like a good Thomist, Fr R makes many distinctions. 2) Apologia for Tradition by Roberto de Mattei. This is more of a defense of tradition but would certainly contain insights helpful for an understanding of what it is in itself. These might be worth your time.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks for the recommendations!

[@tomgjokaj3716]

I am a Roman Catholic because I truly am convinced that the Lord Jesus wanted to give The world his bride the church Matthew 16:18 having said this I truly appreciate your style and the dialogue you have the world has enough lunacy stupidity and tearing each other down God bless you brother Continue the good work you’re doing 🙏🏻🙏🏻

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks for your encouragement and sharing a bit of why you're Catholic. God bless!

[@AndrewRAMontgomery]

I'm not Catholic because I believe the Catholic Church sadly divorced Christ through their false teaching. Please look into it and ask honestly if you can trust it and on what basis?

[@tomgjokaj3716]

@@AndrewRAMontgomery Do you believe the Bible and Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior

[@AndrewRAMontgomery]

@@tomgjokaj3716 yes and I believe as it says Ephesians 2:1 we are dead in our sins. Does a dead person do anything but depend on the grace of Jesus to bring him to life? No my friend. He can't work his way there he needs saved (Romans 10:9) and must be born again (John 3:3) by a miracle or some supernatural force not by the will of man (1 Peter 1:23). The church fathers have consistently disagreed on every major point and the church has been building a wall of doctrine based on other new doctrine for millenia. Maryology for example has evolved so much entirely based on ideas born out of previous Maryology. Then men of the church have proven themselves corrupt (in most cases just like every other sinful man, in others some Pope's and leaders were more like Hitler but not all) You cant trust anything but God and his word. So step back and ask yourself this question, if I was an early Christian and read God's word would I honestly end up with the doctrines held by the Catholic Church or would it look alot more simple and God centred?

[@AndrewRAMontgomery]

@@tomgjokaj3716 I cannot see your reply, something must have happened it but I did see the start of it in my notifications and it seems to be addressing the issue of a lack of Bible availability. Honestly that is no issue to me. See your trying to equate the apostles with later Pope's. The apostles were put in place by God to write the gospels and spread it so every early believer had access to the best source next to Jesus. They had the Bibles authors like so they don't need the text but they also had and spread the gospels and letters in the first century. So they had primary sources, yes they had to access it through the church but God protected his word and to this day we have all these early independent Gospels etc. Furthermore the fact that the churches were independently run kept them accountable in teaching and accuracy. We can see repeatedly in the Bible that no leader or man can be trusted all the way back to Babel when God spread the people because they couldn't be trusted under one world Kingdom. The church is the same, we see all of these issues only arising after the Roman empire seized it as its own. The authoritarian dictatorship left the church without any account for its actions or teaching, violently crushing any decent. We then see currupt leaders and strange doctrine being introduced. I look back past that to the source material. Why not church fathers? Well they were only men like myself. Not apostles and at best secondary sources (in very few cases). For example I'm 30. Would you trust the accuracy of my knowledge on WW1? It's only just over 100 years ago like. What if I said my great great uncle fought in it and so did my wife's? Well maybe I could be a secondary source if I had have spoken to them but you still wouldn't have considered me as 100% perfect in my knowledge. I would have added my own opinions and false memories. You would have wanted to speak to my great great uncle (the apostles) or better a military or political leader over the war (Jesus). Well if we have the proven recorded words of those people so why trust someone like me and in the same vein the earliest church fathers. Then Catholics count people up to 600 years later as Church fathers, seriously?! So I can accurately tell you the opinions of something that happened during the fall of constantinople which happened 600 years ago? Come on. The Catholic church ensured the readings of the Bible were in Latin and retained an unaccountable leadership and as a result prevented anyone at all from holding them in anyway accountable for teaching. It's now so far down the line we can't even tell what is actually accurate tradition and what isn't. All we can be sure is God preserved traditions in the letters of the new testament and therefore I say trust the primary source and follow it. Why follow anything else when we have all that God preserved in completion

[@mcspankey4810]

“They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that you should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion [of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved. But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.” -St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch - cc 110 ad.

[@GospelSimplicity]

I was just reading this the other day.

[@zenbum2654]

I've been reading a collection of the Apostolic Fathers and just today started the section on Ignatius. Do you know which letter that quote is from? Thanks.

[@mcspankey4810]

Gregory Hinton letter to the Smyrnans I believe ?

[@GospelSimplicity]

McSpankey yes, chapter 7

[@zenbum2654]

@@GospelSimplicity @McSpankey Ok, found it. Looks like it actually starts at the end of verse 6:2. Thanks to both of you.

[@spraffman]

A key thing to note when it comes to the pope defining something is that it is generally seen as a last resort. The pope's "job" is not to define new dogmas from wherever, but to clarify the faith, as Vatican I's Pastor Aeternus teaches: "For the holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles." Pastor Aeternus 4.6

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks for sharing this!

[@kevindory8869]

The Marian dogmas were new ….

[@kevindory8869]

So was the dogma of infallibility

[@spraffman]

@@kevindory8869 No, the doctrines were ancient and can be found throughout the writings of the Church fathers. By declaring them dogmas, the pope was not defining something new but settling any potential disputes of the doctrine once and for all. This is similar to the council of nicaea settling the doctrine of the divinity of Christ once and for all. The council fathers were not declaring a new doctrine, but confirming a preexisting one to settle any disputes on the matter.

[@kevindory8869]

@@spraffman when was the doctrine of infallibility pronounced ? 1870 The early church did not have the Roman Catholic preoccupation and worship (yes it is worship ) of Mary

[@justinfuller8481]

Talk to Trent Horn or Matt Fradd. They're some of the greatest and most charitable minds in Catholicism today.

[@GospelSimplicity]

I would love to

[@zenbum2654]

@@GospelSimplicity While you're at it, do an interview with Bishop Barron. :)

[@GospelSimplicity]

@@zenbum2654 haha, as if the rest of these people aren't out of my league, that's a BIG stretch, but man would that be fun

[@diode21]

I'll add Scott Hahn to the mix of great persons to be on your show kzbin.info/www/bejne/iHWQZHaAlNNsnKc

[@fc2977]

@@zenbum2654 Why, do you think we need to hear that confusing modern twist on that old heresy where we can have a reasonable hope that Hell is empty?

[@amandah8178]

Not to sound crass, but every uncircumcised male convert to Christianity is grateful for the doctrine of the infallibility of the Pope. St Peter spoke Ex Cathedra in stating that new Christians did not need to be circumcised. That was the first of just a few instances of the Pope using his full authority to clarify and define the deposit of faith given to us by Christ. Jesus is always the source.

[@GospelSimplicity]

You know, that's a fair point

[@OrthobroAustin]

Acts 15 isn't supporting papal infallibility on any level. Has God chosen Peter as the mouth through which the nations will hear the gospel? Certainly! This is even ultimately fulfilled through the chair of Peter, which is the Bishopric. And there is no true Bishopric which is not the same chair of Peter (I say this to dispel the claim that somehow Rome alone is the chair of Peter). But now aside from this, the apparent "infallibility" at the council of Jerusalem you reference is discredited when we recognize that the rest of the Presbyters and Apostles were *pressed by the Holy Spirit* to consent to Peter's statement regarding faith, grace and circumcision because the text shows that Peter only *restated* and *applied* to the situation what everyone in the council already knew of and believed. So this is not a witness of Papal infallibility, but rather the infallibility of the holy spirit and the necessity of obedience to it in a catholic council. It is written here in Acts: "Having assembled with one accord...It has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to *us* to impose no greater burden on you than what is necessary..." Notice that we don't have written: "It has seemed good to Peter and to us", but instead, "It has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us.." *Peter is included in the "us", not counted as an authority greater than it.*

[@saintejeannedarc9460]

No, not correct at all. It was Paul that had to first confront Peter about circumcision, and remind him we are saved by faith in Christ, not any works of the law, as Peter was not willing to stand up to the circumcision crowd. Galatians 2:11-21 is extremely detailed about this confrontation. It really leaves no doubt.

[@saintejeannedarc9460]

@@GospelSimplicity I'm very surprised you agreed w/ that. That was Paul, who had to tune up Peter on the circumcision matter: Galatians 2:11-21

[@OrthobroAustin]

@@saintejeannedarc9460 Paul did reproach Peter when he withdrew from fellowship with the gentile Christians, but this is after the event mentioned in Acts where Peter says it isn’t necessary to be circumcised. The issue in Galatians was that the Jewish Christians were withdrawing fellowship from the gentile Christians because in jewish piety it was improper to share a table/fellowship with gentiles especially because it was unclear what may be clean or unclean on the table and the Galatians passage seems to suggest that, before the Jews from James came, Peter ate unclean food with the gentiles like a gentile. So Paul was calling him out on his hypocrisy.

[@fsnicolas]

Very interesting. So many different topics discussed. Take note that the first Council of the Apostles (the Council of Jerusalem) is found in the Book of Acts when they decided whether gentiles are supposed to observe Jewish kosher laws. And after they decided against it, apart from the eating of meat sacrificed to idols and blood, they actually sent out messengers to communicate this decision to the other communities of believers. So the following councils followed in this tradition deciding on key matters of faith for the church. Love these discussions. Keep up the good work! God bless!

[@DrSheri.teaches]

I love everything about this! Thank you for an in-depth, respectful conversation between the two nicest people on social media. I can’t believe it took me so long to find this. It’s a jewel. God bless you both!

[@GospelSimplicity]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@Cmilk24]

I think it is necessary to clarify that you can perfectly disagree with some Catholic teachings without being out of the Church as long as they are not dogmas. In fact, there is a stablished "ranking" of teachings which more or less shows what one can disagree about and not enter in a heresy. Breaking in the habit has a video about it: kzbin.info/www/bejne/omipeICbqNmXbbc What is more, you can even doubt about faith dogmas, but when you proclaim the faith with your community, the common faith "compensates" your "lack" of faith. This is far more complicated to explain than this, but I think Albert was too radical about "disagreement" in the Church and when one is "in" or "out"

[@GospelSimplicity]

I actually watched that the other day! He produces great stuff. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this

[@saintejeannedarc9460]

Catholics are Christians after all. Most of the protestant denominations have a similar system. We generally call them fundamentals of faith. The language may vary a bit from church to church, but I trust most would understand my saying that, and it would most likely line up fairly well w/ your orders of dogma. The essentials would be saved by Jesus Christ through faith, the atonement, accepting Christ for yourself at age of accountability, etc. Catholics sure do talk funny ;), but the more I slog through the different language, we are largely on the same page. The problem w/ too many protestants, is they aren't willing to take the time to try and understand their Catholic brethren to find this out. They tend to go off half cocked, w/ this big straw man of what they think Catholicism is, then they wack the crap out of it.

[@HeavnzMiHome]

@@saintejeannedarc9460 I enjoyed your take on “Catholics sure do talk funny “. I was Protestant for 48 years. It took awhile for me to get used to many new traditions and expressions of faith. Nothing contradicted holy scripture or the received dogma, but it certainly looked and sounded somewhat different. I feel totally at home in the Church now, but I often have to act as “interpreter” to non-Catholic friends.

[@saintejeannedarc9460]

@@HeavnzMiHome Thanks. I'm nowhere near at the level of interpreter, lol.

[@HeavnzMiHome]

@@saintejeannedarc9460 lol by the grace of God, I try to give an answer to a specific question. I try to keep answers under a few sentences. If they want to know more, they can ask.

[@marianneswingle4050]

I highly recommend Scott Hahn’s book “The Lambs Supper” for a really clear and simple (and also humorous) explanation of the mass and sacrifice. I’d also recommend Rome Sweet Home by Scott Hahn too-it’s one of my Protestant friends favorite books as he’s learning more about Catholicism too!

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks! I've read the latter

[@emiblux98]

Hi Austin! Im following you from Argentina! All your conversations are great! Im so happy I learnt english as a girl just for the amazing resources available on ylutube alone this days! You dont always find them in spanish... I wanted to recommend Brant Pitre to you though Im pretty sure you already know him, just in case... He is great and has many books and videos... God bless!

[@Sar-eu3hm]

Regarding the TLM, he explained it fairly well, the divide. However, there is a very big thing he overlooked, the NO was only meant to supplement the “old mass” (Extraordinary Form / High Mass). In all likelihood, the NO should have replaced the Low Mass. Sadly, within 5 years after V2 ended, the rubric codified was rarely celebrated (must retain Latin, chants, and facing the alter). Instead, Bishops forced the NO to only be performed and the acceptance (at a local level) of the vernacular forced the Vatican to accept the vernacular, globally (Latin Rite). It wasn’t until Pope Benedict’s term that it had to be declared the TLM could still be performed. Brian Holdsworth put it well (his most recent video). The NO was forced on the laity without their consent or real knowledge. One Sunday, the TLM was celebrated, and the next, the NO was celebrated. And, as you noticed, are very different liturgical rubrics and masses. Additionally, as Keith mentioned earlier in the video about the Pew research, the passing down and teaching of Catholic teachings has severely decreased in the post-V2 Church. Top this with the free fall decline of weekly attendance, it’s clear the NO mass has things needing to be corrected. It was basically never practiced as instructed by V2. IMO, this is the first place needing to start. Fix the NO, and then the Church can work of fixing the TLM vs NO divide. (Note, scholars way smarter than I can give detailed reasoning why the V2 documents are problematic in some cases and would argue why they need to be addressed and clarified by the Church, at some point)

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks for sharing all of this! It was really helpful to read. I've really enjoyed some of Brian Holdsworth's content. perhaps I'll try to get him on the channel some time. Thanks again for the background!

[@amandah8178]

I enjoyed getting to view the early premiere of this on your Patreon! Great conversation!

[@GospelSimplicity]

Glad you enjoyed it! Keith was wonderful, wasn’t he? Thanks for your generosity and support of this channel! You are so greatly appreciated

[@jgil1966]

Hey Austin, good morning! Good conversation... Jesus is not bound to save by the sacraments alone and he can and will and does operate outside of them... i love separated brethen, i honestly could not see my walk without the music of Hillsong or Bethel music and quoting Bishop Barron i believe orthodox christians or protestants may exercise God's gifts even better than Catholics in some aspects... like your channel is to me an example of depth but also humility and an authentic need for truth. God bless you and do not ever feel forced by our comments to convert or anything, do know that Christ wants all his children to partake in Him and join him, it's a really weird thing to say, but Jesus does suffer still for His bride as the true man He is... i guess that what i'm saying is that joining the Church and being participant in communion is definitely not something like, magical that will solve your problems and shoot you into the third heaven, but insteaad, it is uniting to the body and soul of Jesus, both his love and joy, his pains, his silence, disappointments, his friendships, his agony, his love for his Mother and the saints and the sinners of the world... he really is human too just like us as much as the True Second Person of the Holy Trinity He is. I believe the eucharist and eucharistic adoration will draw you more deeply into His heart that you might know each other more deeply... this is my testimony i can give you from my last week... May God bless you and draw you to Him more and more!

[@GospelSimplicity]

Jonathan, it's always a pleasure reading your comments. Thank you for your support of this channel and myself. I truly appreciate that. I love the humility of that Bishop Barron quote. I really enjoy his work, and as I was listening to him yesterday on Capturing Christianity, he said something along those very lines. I appreciate your encouragement about conversion, as well as the beautiful way you speak of Jesus. God bless you!

[@jgil1966]

Gospel Simplicity God bless you too! My intention is just to be as frank as i can with literally no ulterior motives here.

[@solovief]

As I was becoming Catholic I also used a three legged stool as a tool. In my case it went like this. Whenever I was discerning how Catholic something was I'd recognize that in some way you could find Jesus, Mary and Peter present in some way. It became a sort of litmus test that accompanied me throughout my early discernment. If I was confronted by some new information I would run it by those three legs. If all three were present the stool remained standing. An example would be discerning between various Christian groups. Most all of them had a Jesus leg. But in many cases there were no legs for Mary or Peter, or if there were they would be might have been unequal lengths or they might have been malformed. In any case the one with all three legs stood. The others might have sat at odd angles or simply fallen down to the floor.

[@duals-growthofculture2085]

Glad to see that you did this dialogue! After some of our messages, I was actually thinking that since you seemed to lean more on the Catholic understanding of Faith and came back to your channel to ask you if you wanted to do something like this. Keep on seeking, brother Love & Light

[@GospelSimplicity]

It was a great time! God bless

[@Stormlight1234]

Such a fantastic conversation! Kudos to both of you. Austin, I remain impressed at the quality of questions you are asking. You seem like you are quickly able to identify the key issues and questions surrounding the true differences between the Catholic and other Christian schools of thought. Please, keep seeking after truth above all else. As hard as it is for all of us, don't let any prejudices stop you from fully investigating a question and following the truth wherever it may lead you. If you are at all interested, here is a link to my newly published long-form blog posts on my recent conversion to Catholicism from confessional Lutheranism. www.follyofthecross.com/category/catholicism/fullness-of-the-truth/ I have previously pointed you to some other resources on the crux of the issue over justification with imputed vs. infused righteousness. These blog posts of mine go into detail on this too and other issues surrounding sola fide. I also look at sola scriputra and the authority of Church as the other key areas that I investigated before being convinced of the claims of the Catholic Church. God bless you on your journey after truth!

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks Chris! It was a great time getting to be on his show. Thanks for the encouragement! I'm trying my best to hunt down the central issues. There's a lot to wade through, but I really appreciate you validating that I'm beginning to put my finger on some of them. Thanks for the link! I'd love to check out your work. These sound wonderful. God bless!

[@jacksonhstudios4421]

Gospel Simplicity, I love your channel! You're always very humble and kind. I have a suggestion for a great Catholic Christian KZbin channel for you to help you better understand Catholicism: it's called Breaking In the Habit. Love your channel, keep it up!

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thank you so much for your kind words. I really appreciate that. I love Fr. Casey’s channel! I find his content incredibly accessible and informative. Thanks for spreading the word about it!

[@jacksonhstudios4421]

I do too.

[@trevorhanlin4247]

@@GospelSimplicity this is a second to the motion to talk to Father Casey, he would probably enjoy the discussion as well!

[@GospelSimplicity]

Trevor Hanlin that would be great!

[@duals-growthofculture2085]

Also P.S. please inform him on history that the Church was most definitely Trinitarian far before the Arians sprang up and we had the Council of Nicaea to condemn that heresy. Even in the first ecumenical council where they met to make concise wording to put the heresy which was causing great evil Arianism to rest, they went out of their way to add Holy Spirit into the Creed just to show the Church was already Trinitarian even though the language was chosen to show who the second person of the Trinity the Son is. If you strip the divinity of Jesus, you are stripping Him of the power of salvation and that is why the Council focused on that. The belief that Father, Son, Holy Spirit are God can be seen in the early Fathers of the Church far before the Council of Nicaea.

[@GospelSimplicity]

I don't think either of us would disagree with that statement

[@duals-growthofculture2085]

@@GospelSimplicity He had mentioned in the video that most of the Church was arian and trinitarianism wasn't set. That isn't so. Trinitarianism had been declared from Jesus down through all the Church fathers to the Council.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Duals I think he was making a historical point, with good merit, that between the councils of Nicaea and Constantinople, Arianism was pervasive in the church. This we get the term, “Athanasius contra mundum” because while he was defending Nicene Orthodoxy, he was in a minority position, to the point he was exiled multiple times for this. However, Orthodoxy eventually was restated at Constantinople

[@duals-growthofculture2085]

@@GospelSimplicity That's not historical. They were pervasive and causing problems. Arianism was not in the majority, they were a heresy group which was much smaller than the Church. That's the part he said the other way around which simply isn't true. The reason they had Athanasius exiled is because some of them were close to the emperor and he blamed the trouble on him. The position of the Church at that time was and had been Trinitarian.

[@lukaszluk4598]

Catholic Apostolic Church is Mystical body of Christ (a mystical union of all Christians into a spiritual body with Jesus Christ - on this world, in purgatory and in heaven).

[@GospelSimplicity]

I would agree with the mystical Union

[@lukaszluk4598]

@@GospelSimplicity Catholic Apostolic Church belive, that in some way, a mystical union of all Christians into a spiritual body with Jesus Christ is the way for salvation, for non roman catholic(even if the non catholic dont know about that - "Outside this house, that is outside the church(mystical body of Christ), no one is saved" Origen and Cyprian III-century. )

[@tessa7413]

I'm really looking forward to this!!!

[@GospelSimplicity]

I'm so glad to hear that! It was an absolute joy getting to be on Keith's show. I think you'll enjoy it!

[@tabandken8562]

I hate when I'm told the Catholic Church isn't Holy because of the sins of Popes and priests. The Church isn't Holy because of the people in it, it's Holy because it's head is Jesus and overseen by the Holy Spirit. And when the Pope is called "Holy Father", it's not HIM who is Holy, it's his OFFICE that is Holy.

[@sillybearss]

100th like! Can't wait for you to celebrate 5K subs! (Ps, I think it's going to be before the end of this year!)

[@GospelSimplicity]

Veronica Angelin I love the way you think! Thanks so much for your support. God bless!

[@jgil1966]

Hey Austin, have you ever gotten into the Deuterocanonicals? i think you could read them and make a video about what you thought of them.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Not extensively, but I've thought the same thing!

[@TheCordialCatholic]

@@GospelSimplicity Here's a great way that my friend, Gary Michuta, puts it: If Sola Scriptura is the sole rule of faith for Protestants isn't it important to make sure you've got the Scriptura part right? :D

[@GospelSimplicity]

@@TheCordialCatholic you know, that's a rather fair point. I was just watching his debate with James White the other day. I'll say, as a Protestant looking into all of this (as I'm sure you can relate) it seems there's no shortage of topics to hunt down, research, and form an opinion on. Luckily, I read theology books for fun, but even then, I find myself having to just live into my tradition (gasp! Bad word for Protestants) on some things for a bit before I can put much thought to them.

[@kurtwhiteley481]

Judith is such a good book 😅 I wish it were in the Protestant Bible as well

[@JamesMartinelli-jr9mh]

The Book of Sirach helped me alot. Much wisdom.

[@immaculateheart1267]

Your new logo looks great! It kind of reminds me of a St Benedict medal or similar sacramental.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks! I was going for something classic and ecclesial looking. Glad you like it!

[@leeenk6932]

Im not sure if you will see this comment. And I apologize that its lengthy. As one who has considered this whole concept of a sacrifice of the mass, this is what I have found in my own study. First off the word Eucharist means Thanksgiving, and the early church fathers used it. But what did they actually mean when calling it a Eucharistic sacrifice? In the earlier fathers im not aware of them calling it a propitatory sacrifice, but instead that idea seemed to develop later on, atleast from my study. In Lutheranism the book of Concord does not necessarily deny a Eucharistic sacrifice. But Lutherans would see it more of the entirety of the divine service/mass as a whole. The whole service is about offering up prayers, praise, and Thanksgiving to God with the Lords Supper, so the whole service is a Eucharistic sacrifice of Thanksgiving, see Hebrews 13:10-16, 1 Peter 2:4-5. 1 Corinthians 11:23-26, says, For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.”In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes. NKJV Also see Matthew 26:17-30, Mark 14:12-26, Luke 22:7-23, and 1 Corinthians 10:16-17. The Lords supper is also known as the Eucharist by some. But what is it exactly? Is it a symbol? Is it just a memorial meal? And how often should it be practiced? Is it important or is it insignificant? The Lords supper should be understood as scripture tells us and as the text reads. The Lords supper/Eucharist is not just a symbol or just a memorial meal. It is the real and true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ in, with, and under the bread and wine. Simply put Christ's real and true body and blood are present in the meal. So when we eat the bread we are eating the body of Christ, and when we drink the cup we are drinking the blood of Christ, why? Because He said so. He took bread and said this IS My body and He took the cup and said this IS My blood, He did not say this symbolizes My body, and this symbolizes blood. It is important because we are commanded to practice it, and it should be done as often as possible. In the Lords supper we have fellowship with one another and with Christ in Thanksgiving and praise and we receive forgiveness of sins. John 6 can be read in light of this as well but it is not typically used as a proof text for the Lords supper in Lutheranism, and the context of John should be read to understand the spiritual aspect of surrender to Christ. Therefore John 6 should be understood in light of its own context. Is the Lords supper a propitatory sacrifice for sin? No, because Christ suffered and died once for all, He cannot be resacrificed over and over. see Hebrews 9:23-28, 10:11-18, 1 Peter 3:18, and Romans 6:9-10, 1 Corinthians 5:7. The Lords supper is the fulfillment of the passover feast of the Old testament when God delivered Israel out of Egypt, see Exdous 12. Can the Lords supper be understood as a sacrifice? Yes, as a spiritual sacrifice of Thanksgiving and praise which is what the word eucharist means, see Hebrews 13:10-16, 1 Peter 2:4-10, Malachi 1:10-11. We do it in remembrance for what Christ already did, just like the passover meal. The sacrifice of the passover that God commanded Israel to observe after their deliverance out of Egypt was not a representation and a continual deliverance over and over from Egypt, but a memorial sacrifice for what God already did prior, and was observed with Thanksgiving in remembrance of God's one time act of rescuing Israel out of bondage. A representation of God delivering Israel would have been fruitless as they were already out of Pharoah's grip, and in the promise land. We observe the Lords supper for what Christ already accomplished once and for all on the cross in His finished work. And it is a remembrance of Him as He has commanded us. See John 19:28-30. St Ignatius of Antioch 110 AD Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ, which have come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God...They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh that suffered for our sins and that the Father, in His goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes. Justin Martyr 151 AD We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing that is for the remission of sins and for regeneration (has received baptism) and is thereby living as Christ enjoined. For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food that has been made into the Eucharist by the eucharistic prayer set down by Him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus. Justin Martyr 155 AD Hence God speaks by the mouth of Malachi, one of the twelve minor prophets, as I said before, about the sacrifices at that time presented by you: " I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord; and I will not accept your sacrifices at your hands: for, from the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same, My Name has been glorifed among the gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to My Name, and, a pure offering: for My Name is great among the gentiles, says the Lord: but you profane it." So He then speaks of those gentiles, namely us, who in every place offer sacrifices to Him, that is, the bread of the Eucharist/Thanksgiving, and also the cup of the Eucharist/Thanksgiving.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Mark Anderson wow, thanks for such a thoughtful comment! I really appreciate all the time and effort that went into this. As I research the Eucharist, I can see a lot of the strength of the Lutheran position. I’m far from decided on the matter, but I appreciate you sharing all of this. God bless!

[@leeenk6932]

@@GospelSimplicity you to sir, God bless

[@beautifulspirit7420]

I would just wonder how you both would read the Hebrew scriptures which foreshadow Christ and the Church? Abraham was willing to literally sacrifice (kill) his son Isaac. Issac carried wood up to the top of the hill in obedience to his Father. As a mother who has grown four children and given birth to three (one miscarriage with a child in heaven) I find Protestantism so symbolic all the time to explain away very real, flesh and blood people and events. Jesus was fully human as well as fully divine. His death was any agonizing torture. What more of a sacrifice do you want? For people who have and still do physically suffer and are enslaved and tortured we need a REAL Body of Christ will arms and legs to rescue us and help us in our suffering on earth. We are EMBODIED, our body, mind and spirit are ONE. As Catholics we believe in BODILY resurrection, we will receive our actual bodies but in a resurrected state. Why were so many of the disciples willing to go to their deaths as martyrs (along with so many of the early Popes, Bishops and lay Christians) if this is not all REAL and encompasses REAL suffering and then Jesus becoming REALLY and TRULY present in the Eucharist with us? Otherwise you get a Christianity that can't explain why we are willing to literally die as martyrs for Christ as He died. It's not redeeming all of us, including the messy, materialism of our existence. I'm sorry maybe I didn't read the theology closely but when I was an atheist so many Protestant denominations seemed very "neat, tidy, middle-class" while I saw the Catholics willing to go into the darkest places and also give up their entire lives for Christ as priests, brothers, sisters who were consecrated. It was so radical. Also the crowds of people that literally swarm big feasts, liturgies and go on sacrificial pilgrimages, seems more biblical. I find Catholics willing to go anywhere to have the True Eucharist. The battle field, an old hut, a back room, wherever the Mass can be said Catholics will go. They also get up early to pray and fast, I just found the ancient Churches living with the people in every circumstance. When I was an atheist Catholics came with me to a nightclub and then got up early the next morning to go to Mass. The spirituality was so different, there was no part of life where the church would not go. I remember when there was the Tsunami at least a decade ago on the day after Christmas. A journalist was there talking about the aid agencies who were coordinating with Catholics because the Church was already there. There is no disaster where the Church won't be. I don't know, I don't know enough theology but I don't want a Christ without His sacrifice and the blood and gore. Because my life has had a lot of loss, pain and blood and gore. A suburban Christ just seems offensive and totally unappealing to me. I feel the Western Protestant Churches make Christ unthreatening and not frightening and weird. Of course encountering the living God will be full of peace, love and holiness but also majesty and scariness. I noticed as an atheist that it was only the Catholic church used in horror movies and mocked in media and movies. Non of the other Churches are a threat because evil takes the Church seriously. Evil only wants to destroy and mock the true Church. I guess I mean I understand why the Church seems weird from outside because it won't make sense in our world. I actually had someone approach me in college because she knew I was a Catholic and was having frightening encounters with evil and didn't know what to do and I was able to bring Jesus into her situation to give her peace. I also have had two women approach me in private who had abortions and wanted peace and believed they would only feel forgiven in the Catholic Church through the power of the Sacrament of Reconciliation. They didn't even understand it but knew they would only find peace there as they could not forgive themselves and knew that the Church says very clearly that abortion is murder. This is a very hard teaching in our modern world, and yet they wanted that teaching! Because no where else was willing to say their pain was real.

[@leeenk6932]

@@beautifulspirit7420 my time is short, i will try to answer as much as i can in the moment. First off I am so sorry for what you had to go though. God bless you for seeking the Lord and turning to Him. I would encourage you to go back if you have the time and re read my comment again, and look up any scripturual references in it. I ultimately agree with most of what you said. Most protestants as far as I know agree that Abraham's attempted sacrifice of Isaac was a clear foreshadowing of Christ's sacrifice. And that indeed Christ's suffering and death, shed blood, and bodily resurrection was 100 % literal and NOT symbolic. Christians will indeed be bodily resurrected at Christ literal second coming, and will be glorifed in real spiritual bodies. Im Lutheran and Lutherans probably agree more with Catholicism on many things than most other protestant groups. Lutherans don't deny the literal presence in the Eucharist, but see it a little differently than Catholics. For since Catholics are encouraged to worship the Eucharist there is a genuine fear of Idolatry to protestants because idolatry is the one sin in the bible that is mentioned the most and is the most serious of all, and the one that brings the wrath of God quicker than any other sin.They fear that if Christ is not truley present as Catholics say, then Catholics would be worshipping a piece of bread.

[@leeenk6932]

@@beautifulspirit7420 i also agree the catholic church does seem to be mocked more than most. I believe mainly because it is the largest and most influential denomination in the world. Do you know which bible translation is the most vehemently defended or attacked? Its the kjv bible. The Kjv has been the most widely used and accepted of all. It has been used to convert more people. And the kjv is not a catholic translation, but a protestant one. Usually when people in the English world think of THE bible, they usually think Kjv. And the kjv is usually what most translations seem to be based in one way or another off of. But that in no way means it is the one true bible. It is I believe an accurate and beautiful translation, but not the only one we can use. I realize these comments most likely will not change your mind about your faith. Keep trusting Jesus Christ Who is TRUELY and FULLY God, and TRUELY and FULLY man. God bless

[@megatherium100]

31:00 we as Catholics don't worship Mary and the Saints, we venerate them, important distinction.

[@rhwinner]

'O my God, I firmly believe that you are one God in three divine persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I believe that your divine Son became man and died for our sins, and that he will come to judge the living and the dead. I believe these and all the truths which the holy catholic Church teaches, because in revealing them you can neither deceive nor be deceived.' -Act of Faith

[@albertm4683]

Great video Austin. I just watched Capturing Christianity latest video with Bishop Barron and I think that would be a video you would like especially the Q & A section (questions about papacy). Keep up the good work.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks! I actually was watching live!

[@johnlee6780]

What is the biblical definition of worship? It is performing sacrifice. Check all the references of Hebrew and Jewish worship and even non-Christian religions. Protestants loss the sense of the need of sacrifice/worship (thanks to the man - Luther). They equate prayer(making request) to worship. EWTN's David Anders (former Protestant) of "Call to Communion" show for his explanation of what happens in the Mass.

[@GospelSimplicity]

I would say yes and no. It seems that the NT redefined sacrifice in some sense. For instance, in Romans 12:1 when Paul says "present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God, for this is your true and proper worship" I think he's connecting worship and sacrifice, but not in the sense that we have to be killed. Interestingly some in the Reformed tradition would also refer to the table where communion takes place as an altar, but not because its a sacrificial mass in which Jesus is sacrificed, but rather because we come to the altar and offer our lives as a sacrifice

[@johnlee6780]

@@GospelSimplicity I would agree there. The NT doesn't remove the need of sacrifices as you have pointed out. Don't you find it strange that Protestants often equate prayer to worship, which may be why they often have trouble with the intercession of the saints (people in heaven). Since lots of Protestants falsely believe that sacrifices aren't needed, because Jesus did it all and we need to do nothing short of just believe that fact. Yes, prayers are a part of worship, but the primary act of any true worship is the act of sacrifice. Isn't it strange that many Protestant churches say "altar" when they have is just a pulpit?

[@leeenk6932]

@@johnlee6780 If i may, here is what the bible says concerning sacrifices. I may capitalize some words, to highlight the main points im getting at. Jeremiah 7:21-23 Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: “Add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices, and eat the flesh. For in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to your fathers or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. BUT THIS COMMAND I GAVE THEM: ‘OBEY MY VOICE, and I will be your God, and you shall be my people. AND WALK IN ALL THE WAY THAT I COMMANDED YOU, that it may be well with you.’ ESV Seems that God was more concerned with Israel obeyIng His commandments over sacrificial offerings. 1 Samuel 15:22 And Samuel said, "Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to OBEY IS BETTER THAN SACRIFICE, and to listen than the fat of rams. ESV Psalm 50:7-15, 23 Hear, O my people, and I will speak; O Israel, I will testify against you. I am God, your God. Not for your sacrifices do I rebuke you; your burnt offerings are continually before me. I will not accept a bull from your house or goats from your folds. For every beast of the forest is mine, the cattle on a thousand hills. I know all the birds of the hills, and all that moves in the field is mine. “If I were hungry, I would not tell you, for the world and its fullness are mine. Do I eat the flesh of bulls or drink the blood of goats? OFFER TO GOD A SACRIFICE OF THANKSGIVING, and perform your vows to the Most High, and call upon me in the day of trouble; I will deliver you, and you shall glorify me.” ....The one who OFFERS THANKSGIVING AS HIS SACRIFICE GLORIFIES ME; to one who orders his way rightly I will show the salvation of God!” ESV What can we really offer to God? All things already are His. God is more concerned with people offering Thanksgiving and praise to Him, and ordering their lives rightly in His sight, paying their vows, and calling upon Him in prayer. Hebrews 10:1-18 For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect. FOR THEN WOULD THEY NOT HAVE CEASED TO BE OFFERED? For the worshipers, once Purified, would have had no more consciousness of sins. BUT IN THOSE SACRIFICES THERE IS A REMINDER OF SINS EVERY YEAR. For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins. Therefore, when He came into the world, He said: “Sacrifice and offering You did not desire, But a body You have prepared for Me. In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You had no pleasure. Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come- In the volume of the book it is written of Me- To do Your will, O God.’ ” Previously saying, “Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the law), then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God.” He takes away the first that He may establish the second. By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all And every priest stands ministering daily and offering REPEATEDLY the SAME SACRIFICES, WHICH CAN NEVER TAKE AWAY SINS. But this Man, after He had offered ONE sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. For by ONE offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified. But the Holy Spirit also witnesses to us; for after He had said before, “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them,” then He adds, “Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.” NOW WHERE THERE IS REMISSION OF THESE, THERE IS NO LONGER AN OFFERING FOR SIN NKJV. The whole book of Hebrews is contrasting the new covenant with the old, and showing how the old is vastly inferior to the new. How so? Well, the old covenant sacrifices, which were offered by divine law, God took no real pleasure in, and the people were never made perfect by them. The writer explains that if they did perfect, then they would have ceased to be offered, as the worshipers would have had no more consciousness of sin. But those sacrifices gave reminder of sin every year. The priests had to repeatedly offer these sacrifices over and over, but Christ only suffered once, therefore showing the vast superiority of the new covenant. It makes real no sense for the new covenant to basically be the same in terms of this, as the book of Hebrews is showing the futility of repeated sacrifices. In Catholicism theres and even greater conciousness of sin, as the mass for many is offered weekly, and for the extreme devout, daily. So there is a reminder of sins daily for some, and weekly for others, opposed to once a year for the Jews. The writer concludes, "where there is remission of these, there is no more offering for sin." Implying sacrifices have ceased. The new testament does call us to Spiritual sacrifices of Thanksgiving and praise, good works. And prayer is our incense to God, see Hebrews 13:10-16, 1 Peter 2:4-5, and Revelation 5:8. And since only sacrifices can be offered to God since it is worship, then Christians offer themselves in faith and good works to God. And since prayers are equated with incense, we therefore burn it only to God. God bless

[@trevorhanlin4247]

I for one think that the holy spirit guided the "why" behind the Catholics coming on board and John being part of the plan from the beginning. Love your video's Austin!

[@GospelSimplicity]

What do you mean by Catholics coming on board? Glad you're enjoying the videos! Thanks for all of your support.

[@trevorhanlin4247]

@@GospelSimplicity on board as In spreading the news about your channel and sticking around for a bit. It's one thing to see a video about a protestant going to a Bible study or mass, it is another to have them like everything including the bible studies that you have. I liked james and I am following along with John, plan on staying for whatever book is next!

[@Ciscvs]

It wasn't Polycarp it was Ignatius of Antioch who said that. It is in his Epistle to the Smyrniotes 8, 2. He's my favorite Church Father.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks

[@MarcelBal15]

Hey, a fellow Canadian. Awesome

[@robertgorton3856]

Found this discussion well done and that it was well done and no heated disagreement which is extremely refreshing. Also I agree with that the Catholic Church is big enough to allow for disagreement on certain matters.And what has been going on with the Latin Mass and the English Mass battle there is a very simple solution attend which ever mass style that suits the individual. Because ever since Vatican 2 the Latin Mass has still been celebrated in various places. The Catholic Church again is big enough to have both styles of worship and both are valid masses.My Mom sung a song that said "You go to your church and I'll go to mine but, let's walk along together." Jesus is the same Lord at the Latin Mass as he is at the English Mass as Jesus is the same Lord in the Catholic Church as he is in the Protestant Church we all have the same very Lord even with difference in some teachings and beliefs. Both Catholics and Protestants go to heaven. In Heaven there will be no separation of people by religious titles.In Heaven there may be Latin chant but there can also be heard " What A Friend We Have In Jesus" that Catholics here on earth will be invited to join in singing.Because everyone in Heaven has all had the same faithful friend ( Jesus) through the good and bad times on earth.He is the same Lord of us all.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Robert Gorton glad you enjoyed it! This was really well said. I like your point about the same Lord at Latin Mass and English Mass and even Protestant services. Thanks for sharing your perspective!

[@robertgorton3856]

@@GospelSimplicity Thanks for your reply message back. Deeply appreciated it. The song my Mom sang I referred to in my earlier message can be heard on KZbin "Lulu Belle & Scotty " You Go To Your Church And I'll Go To Mine". This song message sings of the unity that be among all Christian faith. Latin Mass Catholics go to their church Us English Mass Catholics go to our Church and Protestants to their churches but we can all walk on the journey of faith together we all have the same Lord.

[@GospelSimplicity]

It’s my pleasure! Thanks for letting me know about the song!

[@Motomack1042]

If in eternity everything that has happened, is happening and will happen is going on all at the same time, then the Christ passion, death and resurrection is going right now. At Mass we enter into eternity and are at Calvary, at the foot of the cross. As in the Passover the Jews do not celebrate a new Passover every year, but the same Passover, in the new covenant Jesus is the Lamb who is sacrificed for the forgiveness of our sins, the Passover meal of the old covenant is made new in the Eucharistic banquet. Why do I believe, because our Lord told us " This IS My body which will be given up for you, this IS My blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant which has been shed for you, and the many for the forgiveness of sins do this in remembrance of Me". Remembrance is a bad translation of the word anamnesis, which we understand to mean, what we do now will be mad present in the future. Jews taught that all sacrifices will pass except the Todah, which is the sacrifice of thanksgiving or Eucharist. Scott Hahn elaborates on this in his book The Lambs Supper, then of course John Chapter 6 pretty much says it all. Enjoy these conversation, I to believe in the unity of the Church, for Our Lord prayed "Father I pray that they will all be one, as I am in you and you are in Me", that is a unity and oneness of faith and belief. First Catholic and Orthodox have to get over their 1000 year temper tantrum, which is happening, I hope I live to seen the day when the Church breaths with both lungs again. Pax Domini Sit Semper Vobiscum!

[@GospelSimplicity]

"Their 1000 year temper tantrum" hahaha, that one really made me laugh. Seeing Catholics and Orthodox unite would be wonderful for the church. Thanks for providing your thoughts on this! Your discussion of time was really interesting

[@rhwinner]

Is bread and wine becoming the Lamb any 'crazier' than the Lamb becoming Man..??

[@zenbum2654]

Thanks for another great video, Austin. I was a little disappointed that Albert kind of hogged the mic and didn't let you talk more. :) Regarding the issue of Authority, do you accept the authority of the Ecumenical Councils? Most Christians -- including Eastern Orthodox and most Protestant -- accept the first seven councils, up to the 8th century. Unfortunately, as you well know, the EO don't accept any more than that due to the schism with the RC in the 11th century. But RCs recognize a total of 21 Ecumenical Councils, the last being of course Vatican 2 in the 1960s. If every Christian can interpret the Scriptures for him- or herself, guided solely by the Holy Spirit, then why do we now have over 30,000 denominations arguing over their interpretations? Was this the will of Christ when he prayed that we would be One (John 17:22f)? Does it not make more sense that God has continued over the centuries to inspire a single sacred magesterium to authoritatively declare issues of doctrine? God bless you.

[@GospelSimplicity]

I get that, but I'll say, with it being my first time on a podcast, it was kind of nice not having to talk too much! However, I just filmed two collabs today and I talked plenty, so stay tuned! My current answer is that I'd have to be a bit more familiar with all that they teach (I know most of the highlights for the early ones). Insofar as they align with Scripture, I'd say a tentative yes, but that's a pretty strong qualifier

[@PaulDo22]

Congratulations, Austin. Through the twin virtues of humility and prudence, you have come to understand the basis for all of Christendom. Either the Church has Authority directly from Christ which it passes down through the ages under the guidance of the Holy Spirit or it doesn't. You can't be a little bit pregnant on this question. Either the Holy Spirit is found in the Magisterium, or it is not. If it's not you must reject the Catholic Church as false in it's entirety. However, if it's true then all other teachings fall into place. Please hold fast to this humility for dear life, because it is like the set of spiritual glasses that will provide the clarity to see these foundational theological truths.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks for the encouragement! The only thing I would disagree with is that if the magisterium isn't divinely inspired in full, then all it teaches is false. That doesn't seem to follow. Fallible people/organizations make true statement all the time

[@PaulDo22]

@@GospelSimplicity Yes, naturally I agree with your drawing that distinction that sometimes those who are wrong can teach some truth. As they say, even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut and that very well could be the Magisterium within this context. However, that's not the context because the Magisterium makes extraordinary claims that it is Divinely Inspired and that the Pope is the literal Vicar of Christ on Earth. Either that's blasphemy or it's true. Don't let catholics, like myself, out of this conundrum. There's no need for false charity for such extraordinary and potentially false claims about Christianity. In that respect I understand those who despise the Church because they know that the Catholic Church is either a massive, diabolical fraud or it is in fact the Bride of Christ, who is ”Mater et Magistra”, Mother & Teacher.

[@Kitiwake]

Catholicism isn't "wild and weird". If you think that you have a long way to go.

[@GospelSimplicity]

That wasn't meant to be derogatory, merely stating that parts of it are unusual to those who aren't accustomed to it

[@joan-maryarboly6474]

May God bless you always.

[@GospelSimplicity]

May God bless you too!

[@Ciscvs]

The disciples of the apostle John are the first to call Mary the new Eve, they know it, again, by tradition.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks

[@Ciscvs]

Great dialogue, loved it.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Francisco Carmona thanks! Glad you enjoyed it!

[@ElKabong61]

Austin, I really enjoy your videos. I hope you've discovered Taylor Marshall's channel.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks! I have

[@joecastillo8798]

Catholic TRADITION can perhaps be described or explained as observed Apostolic "modus vivendi" and "modus orandi", inspired by the Holy Spirit, which was imitated and passed on as Catholic way of life by immediate Christians who propagated it to other communities from year to year to the present. In contrast, there's definitely a way of life, different from Apostolic Tradition, generated from Protestant diverse bible interpretations in varied communities since the "Reformation" that have been transformed in traditions. God bless.

[@flamingswordapologetics]

I understand the call for unity if it can be found. After all, we don't want to be against a brother/sister. There is so much though we need to work through. For example, what are we do to with papal edicts, bulls, laws (maybe the same thing), which declare the Protestants as outside the church or what are we to do with indulgences (paying money to earn heaven), which some Catholic Apologist still try to defend? I love your heart, your willingness to reach out, learn, and bring these types of informational videos, but if you want to get to the bottom of it, you will need to dig all the way down and see if true unity is possible based on the extreme differences in some of these areas. Haven't finished the video, halfway, so this may be premature lol...

[@GospelSimplicity]

The road to unity is certainly a long one. I by no means disagree. I agree that there's a lot to get to the bottom of. I also think there's value in trying to get at the core of it, and as far as I can tell, that seems to be authority claims. Specifically, was Peter the first pope? Then, what was his authority if he was pope? Followed by, has that authority been passed down? If these questions are properly answered with normal Catholic teaching, then it seems everything else would have to fall in place. For instance, if the pope is really infallible, then his definitive statements go. However, if any of the above things are not properly answered with normal Catholic teaching, then it all seems to crumble. For sake of time and efficiency, I'm trying to focus my personal research here.

[@flamingswordapologetics]

@@GospelSimplicity Understood, but you would also have to include the Eastern Orthodox, as there was the great schism-so who really is following the line back to the Apostles? Many argue, it was THEM who are the true church. Then you'd have also consider that it was James, not Peter, who seemed to be heading up the church. One verse about Peter that is highly disputed as to what was meant, is not enough to form a complete doctrine. Any finally, we should always hold the direct Apostles and their revelation given to a higher standard, so that anyone - pope or preacher, if they teach contrary to what Paul and the others laid out, we are to reject it. Remember, its scripture that tells us that even if an angel from heaven teaches another gospel, we are to reject it. It also tells us that satan comes as an angel of light and last, the Bereans who searched the scriptures to see if what the Apostles were telling them is true, were to do so and reject anything false. To me, all of the above is enough to walk slowly, be open, but also be careful and wise. Love your heart, but truth must always be weighed properly even if our feelings wish things were different.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Flaming Sword Apologetics I agree overall, but I think even those questions would be included in the above. For instance, if the doctrine of the papacy is true in all the above ways, then the Orthodox would be wrong. Now, if it’s not true, then the Orthodox would become a question of their own. As a Protestant, I’d agree again about the role of revelation. However, once more, even that would fall under the categories above. If all the above questions were true, then it would cover the Council of Trent and two source theory. So, while I agree there are so many issues, because of the centrality of the issue of authority, that seems to be the place to go.

[@chavecar1]

there is a priest his name is father Luis Toro and he is also a theologian and he loves to talk to other protestants and have dialog about the true church of Jesus and he had turn thousands of people from mormons protestants and other none catholic people to become catholics, he was sent to do this by Pope Francis becaouse of his accomplishment converting even other theologian from other churches to become catholics because he explains so good not just on his words but with the bible, his webside is in spanish and he is trying to do it in english sometime soon escueladebiblia.com if you speak spanish search him on youtube he is amazing and so humble, you should try to get this priest he is so amazing

[@GospelSimplicity]

My Spanish is a little rusty, but this could be an interesting way to get back into it

[@matta5498]

Can the Church declare something as infallible in error? It is my understanding that the Holy Spirit would not allow that. A good example of this (I'm going from memory so the facts may be approximates): Back in the time of the Arianist heresies (4th? century), there was a bishop that believed Arias' views (Arias being excommunicated at this time) when the pope died. Supporters of Arias gave this bishop something like 300 pounds of gold to grease his election to pope. That bishop won election and had every reason to lift the excommunication of Arias and proclaim the Arian heresies as dogma. Instead he went 180 degrees about face and declared Arias a heretic. Some will point to this as an example of the Holy Spirit as protecting the Church. Anyone that knows this story better than I, please correct me.

[@viettruong1357]

The ads are killing me

[@GospelSimplicity]

I've gotta eat somehow :). I'll look into the mid-roll ads and see if there's anything I can do.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Viet Truong so KZbin places the mid rolls automatically, and usually my videos are short so there’s just one. I had NO idea how many they were putting in for this. Thanks for bringing this up!

[@cubenerf]

@@GospelSimplicity I don't mind the ads. Great video, interesting conversation.

[@amandah8178]

Gospel Simplicity - please keep the ads! It’s a way that we can support and thank you for great content. Making money (in an upright way) is a sign that you’ve done a ‘good’ for another.

[@physiocrat7143]

You might like to invite Fr Josiah Trenham some time.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Maybe one day! I've only seen a little bit of his stuff, but I think that would be a fun conversation.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Natalie Rosamund I just reached out to his office! If anyone knows of a better way to get in touch, feel free to let me know. Glad to have a fellow traveler!

[@HeavnzMiHome]

Good talk. Little t tradition can change. Big T Tradition cannot change. It is the handed down teaching from the apostles always believed by the universal

[@HeavnzMiHome]

Universal church

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks

[@myronmercado]

Austin invite Lizzie to your show!!

[@GospelSimplicity]

I’m not sure she’ll say yes, but I’m open to it!

[@neilmcquillan7073]

In an animal sacrifice, the animal is slaughtered (sacrificed) and later offered. Jesus offered himself at the last supper and was later crucified. At Mass we offer Christ present in the Eucharist, even though he was "slaughtered" (crucified.) years ago, because his sacrifice counts for all ages, from the first man until the last. God sees Christ on the Cross always, just as he sees his Resurrection in his eternal now. God is mystery and therefore the mass in which his son is offered is also a mystery! It is a temporal participation in the eternal celestial Banquet. Also, the incarnation happened in one moment when the Virgin gave her fiat, but it is an ongoing mystery. Christ continues to come to us and be with us and in us as a continual mystery.

[@ceciliahernandez9517]

When the question arose about "what can the church get wrong" its not really what can it get wrong per se its that what Catholicism holds as dogma then that is what we have to believe which is not everything uttered by the bishops or pope. They can have their opinion and its not binding. I certainly don't agree with everything the pope says. I have heard priests preach things that I don't agree with but just because they are priests doesn't mean every single thing they say we have to agree with. It is very rare when a pope exercises the authority of the chair of Peter to speak in a binding manner. For example as a Catholic one can believe in the literal interpretation of the creation story or one can believe in evolution. Science and faith do not contradict each other. There are lots of things that us humans can not fully understand since our knowledge is finite and because of our fallen nature we are sinful creatures which adds to our issues. Bishops and priests are human finite creatures which can be wrong.

[@flamingswordapologetics]

The problem however, that may or may not be true now, but many of these "rules" or whatever by past popes are still binding, they just seem to be not enforced. Barely 500 years ago, you could be put to death for placing scripture over the church. This is what is being left out of these conversations, though I haven't watched this video yet, so maybe they talked about it. Not trying to start a fight, just pushing back a little on why Protestants like myself and Catholics, have a long way to go, but I am certainly open to the discussion.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks for sharing this perspective, Cecilia!

[@crobeastness]

i think vatican 2 is valid obviously. if you are catholic you believe it is. i think most traditional Catholics, myself included think that there are bishops and whatnot that have abused some of the things that came out of vatican 2. like some of the songs the novus ordus came up with in the 70s is just laughably embarrassing. i think there is far more reverence in the Latin mass and vatican 2, while it is valid detracts people from coming into the church imo.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks for sharing these thoughts!

[@adolfinv.gundin9136]

I am not comfortable with the concept ‘simplicity’ in the religious context. The moment a religion becomes simple it ceases to be divine.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

[@fernandoyunes5910]

On regards to the mass as a sacrifice, it would help you to understand that issue the talks of Scott Hahn about "The fourth cup". He has a book with that title too. There are different versions on KZbin. Here is one: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rGLccqmoi9SMsNE. I really enjoy your videos. God bless you. F from Argentina

[@rhwinner]

I can't believe I watched the whole thing...

[@GospelSimplicity]

Impressive!

[@JamesMartinelli-jr9mh]

'Strangeness' ? Look at the universe! Our faith is as vast as the Most Holy Trinity.

[@AndrewRAMontgomery]

American Catholics are so different than the ones in Ireland. I've maybe met one or two Catholics I'd say lives out their faith in any form seriously. I suppose their is over 200 denominations of Catholics, and Americans are so heavily influenced by evangelicals (looks like the reformation did happen in the catholic church there lol). But like he didn't mention that the eucharist was how they obtain grace peacemeal. It's trying to make it sound more reasonable, like come on protestants don't just think nah that's weird, they hear earning grace then look at the Bible and say we'll Paul says if you earn it it's not grace. All very sad and it actually depresses me when I hear of people who experienced the truth turning to Catholicism, more than anything I think of my kids and panic. I would feel like I failed them totally. So so sad. Also Catholics are not persecuted in America just because they are called false Christians by protestants. That's just pandering to the modern liberals. Try coming here and experience fake Catholics and fake protestants attacking real ones with violence for their faith or social identity (more often).

[@GospelSimplicity]

I'm so sorry to hear about the situation in Ireland, Andie. I appreciate you sharing your thoughts on this. God bless

[@AndrewRAMontgomery]

@@GospelSimplicity in fairness things have changed alot since I was a child here but like I say it was never really about religion here. Anyway I know it was probably a little agresive sounding as your very good at being nice and I'm sorry if it sounded harsh but all the comments seemed to dance around the gospel dangers of Catholicism and I hate to see people getting sucked in. God bless

[@trevorhanlin4247]

Late to the party, who would down vote this video?

[@GospelSimplicity]

Haha, there’s always some. More importantly though, there has been a lot of great support. I try not to swear that

[@trevorhanlin4247]

haters going to hate I guess

[@bmorrison379]

Oof I wish my discussions were this nice

[@GospelSimplicity]

It’s possible!

[@bmorrison379]

Gospel Simplicity omg you replied!!! Dude yaws. I have a question about Protestants through. How do you know if they are the type actually want to listen to you or if they think that you are their “project” and want to convert you cause like I have had way too many peoples coming up to me with questions that like sound kinda mean but then also sound like they are interested like what do I do my man like is there a way to tell?

[@yohanakago582]

What's the twitter handle

[@GospelSimplicity]

@GSPLsimplicity

[@yohanakago582]

Thanks, great conversation, keep up the good, I laughed when you said you have become the Catholic channel. There is always a fascination whenever a protestant talks about Catholic things in a non confrontational way

[@goatphilososphy]

Exorcism as a story Interesting stuff However it mightened translate well

[@GospelSimplicity]

I'm a little lost

[@grahamcrackerlvr4578]

Nice guy, Cordial Catholic. But he needs to get to the point! More substance please my good liege!

[@GospelSimplicity]

Keith’s a great guy. I think this format was a little outside his comfort zone, but I think he did great all things considered. I do appreciate the feedback though!

[@RhyfelwrOlaf]

1798 Christ is king 🐺

[@GospelSimplicity]

Rhyfelwr. Olaf Christ is most certainly king

[@RhyfelwrOlaf]

@@GospelSimplicity do you know what happened in 1798 🐺...🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿

[@GospelSimplicity]

Rhyfelwr. Olaf no idea

[@RhyfelwrOlaf]

@@GospelSimplicity find out why the Irish flag is a tricolour,..🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿

[@RhyfelwrOlaf]

@@GospelSimplicity well did you find out??

[@richardbenitez7803]

It ridiculous to expect catholics to explain and prove their faith. Catholics are not baptized and confirmed for this purpose. Their life as catholics is to accept christ in their heart and live Christ’s life both in accepting his suffering for yourself and for others at the same time. In this way you are a disciple of Christ.

[@GospelSimplicity]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. However, while people might not need to “prove” their faith, I think believers should strive to be able to articulate their faith. As 1 Peter 3:15 where it says “always be prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you fo a reason for the hope that is in you”

[@richardbenitez7803]

Gospel Simplicity - I did look this ref up since I do not believe peter would mean one must be knowledgeable about scriptures .. “be ready at all times to answer for it” to me means you should uphold your faith in Christ by example and declaration but not by knowledge of scriptures

[@richardbenitez7803]

Gospel Simplicity - huh .. laughing .. because after I read your response... I went to read mid morning liturgy of the hours .. the scripture reading showed 1 Peter 1: 13-14... what a coincidence .. close to your reference

[@leeenk6932]

@@richardbenitez7803 As i am not trying to be insulting or condescending I do say Mr Richard Benitez, i do beleve you should have a knowledge of the scriptures, especially since Catholics claim it belongs to them. So it should be unacceptable, by these lofty claims for a protestant to know it better then a catholic. Since Catholics boldly claim to hold the true faith, therefore have an obligation to preach to the unlearned heretics. Therefore I do believe Catholics need to prove and give a good defense of the faith, as there is such a lofty claim of it being infallible. Take care sir.