History of the Papacy in 12 Minutes

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

Share like mad!

[@andresgalindo7682]

☦❤‍🔥

[@lupinthe4th400]

Will do ☦

[@ChukwuemekaMalachy-wz4uu]

Are you Orthodox Christian

[@untoages]

This video was really well produced. Great audio, beautiful animations, informative and concise content. Thank you for making this!

[@adrianwhyatt1425]

Best concise video I have ever seen on the topic. 11 out of 10!

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

TY, please share big time!

[@Marvin-v8n]

I was once a Roman Catholic. The psychological trials I faced trying to get out of that sect were indescribably bizarre. Lots of negativity. But I had found Orthodoxy, I had found actual Christian life and practice and I knew that I wanted to follow Christ. The first day I started, in practice, was when I built up the courage to visit an Orthodox church. Blessedly, I knew that first time that this was the truth. I had a head start on mourning my Roman delusions; I was thankfully literate enough to recognize that the soft men in Rome were ludicrously out to lunch, though it took a long time to accept it in my heart. God desires all to be a Christian, and there is one Christianity.

[@ryrocks9487]

Glory to God!

[@beyond0077]

Have you seen this video on the Papacy? I highly recommend it! kzbin.info9qv0ZlMbT7Q?si=yEDmKXCpEp7Lp15C

[@_aurelius]

Seita é tua falsa Igreja cismática.

[@aeternusromanus]

Wonderful comment God bless

[@Downey-2000]

Drama queen 😂

[@ferazonyteologia]

Great video Craig Truglia, I’m leaving Rome and I’m gotta admit you influence my decision along with the Orthobros

[@henryvdl3692]

I recommend reading Michael Lofton and Erick Ybarra before leaving Rome. Please reconsider 🙏

[@ferazonyteologia]

@@henryvdl3692 Lofton is one of the promoter why I started inquiring again about EO. Not impressed by Ybarra’s book

[@ReplyToMeIfUrRetarded]

⁠​⁠@@henryvdl3692No, get out loftonite

[@OrthodoxInquiry]

@@henryvdl3692 lmao

[@OrthodoxEthos]

@@henryvdl3692 That would not help, I think.

[@ICONFESSONEBAPTISM]

St. Gregory the Dialogist, Pope (Archbishop of Rome) (6th Century): "Certainly, Peter, the first of the Apostles, himself a member of the Holy and universal Church, Paul, Andrew, John - what were they but heads of particular communities. And yet, all were member under one Head (Christ)... Now I confidently say that whosoever calls himself, or desires to call himself, Universal Priest, is in his elation is the precursor of Antichrist, because he proudly puts himself above all others."

[@thomasshunuk3070]

Interesting. I just ordered your book. I might be asking to be a catechumen within the next few weeks or months if this info checks out.

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

Lots of citations for you to follow up on :)

[@bobjenkins3rd]

I’ve also heard His Broken Body by Fr Laurent Cleenewerck is very balanced and charitable. Faith of Our Fathers by Eamon Duffy, a Catholic, admits quite a lot too.

[@TruthBeTold7]

Very good Craig. I came here a minute before this aired, just to see what you were up to, and I wasn't expecting this. I didn't know about your book until now. The Lord works in mysterious ways. Now I will share your book with my Roman Catholic associates.

[@brotherjakob4729]

High quality content. God bless.

[@andresgalindo7682]

i born in a Catholic country where the only different option was to become protestant or atheist, i wish i would found the ORTHODOXY bedore, thanks God reading history books i found the Orthodoxy the real Church of Christ ☦

[@michaelwachira8484]

Satan wants you in the orthodox church that's why

[@ChukwuemekaMalachy-wz4uu]

Welcome you're blessed, Greek Orthodox church! The true christ church.

[@andresgalindo7682]

@ChukwuemekaMalachy-wz4uu Thanks you brother 🙏🏻☦️

[@lukejfunnies]

Enjoyed this. Can you give us a source for the Pope Martin quote around the 7:33 mark, stating he cannot ordain in Jerusalem? Perhaps a picture if it’s from an unobtainable/expensive academic book?

[@thomasshunuk3070]

Truglia provides a citation in his book.

[@Journey_of_Abundance]

Same narrator as the Harmony channel. Nice.

[@Boreal_AltNaturalist]

Yeah the narrator on this vid is the guy behind harmony. Which is great!

[@davidevans3227]

too american

[@traditionallenses]

excited for another truglia video that will receive zero response from RCs

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

This would require responding to a book length of material which this condenses...

[@AisElliott]

​@@OrthodoxChristianTheologydon't worry they'll find something diggin in the Quote mines ⛏️⚒️⛏️

[@GuitarTunings33]

No responses show

[@NavelOrangeGazer]

@@AisElliott Gotta pour one out for all the child laborers kept working their fingers to the bone in papal quote mines worldwide.

[@AmillennialMillenial]

Don’t underestimate Reason and Theology; I’m sure he could put out a 7.5 hour rebuttal to this.

[@Peter-en6bc]

Craig can you do a video of the Novus Ordo Mass, how it’s a break from tradition (within Roman Catholicism) and the collapse of Roman Catholic devotion and fasting life. I’m a convert to Orthodoxy from Roman Catholicism and I’m always very surprised how little it’s talked about from the Orthodox side. I think it would speak to normie Catholics

[@DANtheMANofSIPA]

I agree. There is a lot of evangelism that can be done with Roman Catholics, especially with the Western Rite liturgies of St Gregory The Great and St Tikhon. Many Catholics want the TLM which Francis is restricting, we can give them that in Orthodoxy

[@bman5257]

I don’t think that’s fair to say that Catholic devotion is in collapse. There are a lot of nominal Catholics, but there are also a lot of nominal Orthodox too.

[@ofaoilleachain]

I just got your book, and only just found out after the video that you are the author! I will be starting to read it today. I'm a cradle Roman Catholic who has been inquiring into Orthodoxy since April this year; I'm thankful for these videos that help me to understand why what I grew up in(even if only on a cultural level and lacking in theology) to be wrong. May God bless you. ☦

[@tony1685]

why not follow the Bible and go on the LORD's day? oh, btw - that's the 7th day Sabbath still. It begins at sundown this evening.

[@ofaoilleachain]

@@tony1685 I do follow the Bible, it's what made me seek Christs Church, which is the Orthodox church.

[@tony1685]

@@ofaoilleachain God's church upholds His Truth - 1 Tim 3:15 His Truth = His Law / Ten Commandments ~ Psalm 119:142, 151 His Law includes Exodus 20:8-11 if you read Genesis through Revelation, there is absolutely ZERO reason to believe the 1st day (sunday) is the LORD's day. all in the NT still kept Holy the 7th day Sabbath. Daniel 7 prophesied a nasty entity would tamper with this Commandment. the papacy freely ADMITS and openly teaches that they change the Holy day to sunday. Christians partake in full submersion baptism to commemorate His death, burial and resurrection - Col 2:12, Rom 6:3-4, 1 Pt 3:21 if your church doesn't teach, preach, keep the Sabbath - it's proving that it: 1 - doesn't know God - 1 John 2:3 2 - doesn't love Jesus - John 14:15 3 - doesn't walk in Truth - 1 John 2:4 4 - won't be in Heaven - Matt 19:17, Rev 22:14 the LORD's day begins at sunset this evening. *Happy Sabbath!!!* i pray church tomorrow morning is a blessing!

[@anthonyally4390]

​@fionn5602 glad you honor the Word of God and the One Holy Spirit guided Body of Christ ☦️🕊🛐

[@tony1685]

@@ofaoilleachain my apologies, youtube didn't show i had a reply. who could it be Christ's church if they didn't keep today, the 7th day Sabbath, the LORD's day Holy? doesn't orthodox bow to the papacy by pretending that tomorrow, sunday, is the LORD's day - even though Scripture proves the contrary?

[@3master791]

Wow Craig, great video

[@igorlopes7589]

0:48 A slight correction, the Exarch of Ephesus didn't have authority over the other two Exarchs (of Thrace and Cappadocia). And the Jerusalem Bishopric was under the Primacy of Antioch until way after Nicea. Rome, Antioch and Alexandria are all considered Petrine sees 1:35 Jerusalem had no independent or even autonomous Jurisdiction between the fall of Jerusalem and the Pentarchy. I stand corrected if you prove otherwise. 3:08 The Synods to define the day of Pascha were called by Pope St Victor II in his controversy with Ephesus. He almost excomunicated the Asian Church over this (showing the Bishops of Rome felt entitled to that at that age), but was convinced by St Irenaeus that he should prefer to maintain the peace at the Church and respect the autonomy and customs of Ephesus. 4:09 The baptism of the Novatians had correct form, thus St Cyprian was wrong in his dispute against St Stephen about the baptism of the Novatians. 4:44 Of course, if the election of the Pope is dubious the way to clear it out is through the consensus of the Church. I see no issue here. It does not imply the Roman Bishop derives his Primacy from the consent of his brother Bishops, just that their consensus is able to clear doubts about his election. 6:13 The African Church wanted to preserve her autonomy as existing according to the Canons, more than fair

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

There are errors here and no citations. My book proves otherwise. As for yhe pre nicene pentarchy, i deal with this in footnotes.

[@igorlopes7589]

@@OrthodoxChristianTheology 1- Was Ephesus ever under the Roman Patriarchate? Not even the Thracian Exarch was under the Roman Patriarchate afaik. 2- Were the Exarchs of Thrace and Cappadocia were under Ephesus or not? 3- Do you deny Rome, Alexandria and Antioch are Petrine Sees? 4- Do you deny Pope St Victor II felt entitled to excommunicate Ephesus? 5- Do you deny the baptism of the novatians had valid form (aka in the name of the Trinity)? 6- Do you deny Rome never changed her position about the baptism of the Novatians (which was the controversy between Saints Stephen and Cyprian)?

[@samdonny]

@@igorlopes7589 I'm a Prot, discerning. I'd love to hear the answers to these questions!

[@sinfulyetsaved]

Romans will follow and defend the Papacy even if the devil himself sat on that seat. I never realized how cultish Roman Catholics are.

[@gumbyshrimp2606]

The devil himself *does* sit on that seat

[@dewd9327]

well one of their saints said this exact thing so you're not wrong

[@rogerjohnson2562]

Cultish? I AGREE! Christianity is a cult developed from Judaism by Vespasian. Islam is a cult based on Christianity.

[@PomazeBog1389]

Roman Catholic seething has commenced.

[@samdonny]

Charity left the chat

[@mariorizkallah5383]

@@samdonnyI think charity left a long time ago when latins decided to do trolling

[@oscarnektarios]

Great video!

[@iliya3110]

This is a really good segment. Thanks. Quick clarifying question - Coming from an RC background the following statement sounds fairly Roman Catholic. What did you mean by this exactly (in the description)? "...[follow the] Bishop of Rome from its humble beginnings through the institution of Christ Himself". An RC would read this and basically say "Yes, the papacy is a divinely instituted office. Agreed. You lose".

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

The episcopate begins with Peter. Every bishop's succession begins with him--including Rome. But tbe intro is honestly just not being that technical. Please share!

[@iliya3110]

@@OrthodoxChristianTheology Ah okay - That makes sense. St Cyprian of Carthage mentions this. St Peter is a type of the bishop in general; whereas, in Catholicism, Peter = the Pope of Rome alone (for all practical purposes). Gotcha - Thanks for clarifying. Maybe I'm still trying to shake my own inherent "Peter syndrome" I picked up from my RC days. Lord have mercy

[@infernalstan886]

@youtube why do you start this video at 9:29? Are you trying to mess with creators' watch times? Thats a bit sus!

[@yourneighbour3309]

thank you for this video. im striving towards the truth of Eastern Orthodoxy. Thank You!! ☦️💙

[@MarcusBarnabassisSystersSonne]

Orthodoxy is not just eastern ☦️

[@yourneighbour3309]

​@@MarcusBarnabassisSystersSonneoriental orthodoxy is Wrong! God Has 2 Natures!! Love☦️💙

[@yourneighbour3309]

​@@MarcusBarnabassisSystersSonnekzbin.info/www/bejne/ZmqWYpyAfK5kj6ssi=Uc1fjYDjV2HgcdQ5

[@samdonny]

@@MarcusBarnabassisSystersSonne Hi! Prot here (discerning). Just wondering - isn't the conventional name for Orthodoxy "Eastern Orthodoxy" though? Or does that only refer to the eastern parts of Orthodoxy? Thanks. And so do you refrain from calling Catholics "Roman Catholics" or "Latins" etc. on the same principle, since their church goes outside of Rome and has Eastern Catholicism too? Thank you!

[@dave438-jw3]

Originally the Pope of Rome was the Orthodox Patriarch of the West. After the coronation of Carolus Magnus 12-25-800 the Orthodox Pope of Rome became the Catholic Pope, and no Orthodox Pope of Rome was elected to replace the heterodox one. An Orthodox Pope of Alexandria was re-elected at Chalcedon, after the Coptic Pope was declared heterodox. Pope is the Greek nickname for father, like Pop in English; in Greek the O is long (omega) so the silent E is added to indicate that; every Presbyter in Greece is called Pope, as every Presbyter in English speaking countries is called Father.

[@thelonelysponge5029]

Not true, I asked the eastern fathers and they all told me to listen to Vatican 1 and 2

[@johnnyd2383]

@@thelonelysponge5029 You are one lousy joker...

[@dewd9327]

@@thelonelysponge5029 weird because I asked the pre-schism western church and they pointed me east

[@theignorantcatholic]

Nice assertions. Worth investigating.

[@EdgarPacheco-]

Do you think I could use your video, translate it into Spanish, and publish it for my audience? I would give you the respective credit and include a link to your channel in the description.

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

Go ahead

[@EdgarPacheco-]

tNKS! @@OrthodoxChristianTheology

[@gsnow2526]

​@@EdgarPacheco- how do you reconcile this video with your reformed view?

[@kingofarkansas4853]

Papacy has fallen Trillions must convert.

[@Secretwarlord]

the west has fallen

[@ixisinvestigator6009]

deconvert from jesus christ ! false god

[@PLLL4L]

​@@ixisinvestigator6009Islam is gay tho ngl

[@ixisinvestigator6009]

@@PLLL4L who said i was a muslim? if i was i would say jesus is a prophet because da book say so not that jesus is a false god. but go pray the god that die on the cross because his dieing wash your sin (ret*rded concept)

[@PLLL4L]

@@ixisinvestigator6009 sounds Muslim to me

[@sackettsnodgrass9260]

Even though I began my journey in 2010, and decided to become Catholic in 2022, I still feel very conflicted about the papacy. Especially in light of how complicated it was during the first millennium.

[@ryrocks9487]

I hope even the seething Papists arrive.

[@dewd9327]

they are here, coping in all their infidel glory

[@ryrocks9487]

@@dewd9327Yay

[@samdonny]

@@dewd9327 You talk this way about everyone who disagrees with you?

[@samdonny]

Charity has left the chat 😂

[@samdonny]

​@@onewhocomesdown Which heresy? and what exactly is the standard for heresy?

[@Bekele_Moustapha]

Very informative

[@davidevans3227]

what did you learn? 🙂

[@djfan08]

Just ordered my copy of the new book!

[@Ronnock]

what book?

[@Ronnock]

wait, nevermind.

[@andreastheo2019]

@@Ronnockhis new book

[@Sotsky]

Has anyone seen my 🔑s?

[@dewd9327]

Yeah, I think I left them under that huge pile of forgeries - I mean AUTHENTIC PATRISTIC LETTERS

[@ryrocks9487]

@@dewd9327XD

[@Imitatinghim]

certainly not in orthodoxy. for some reason the Orthodox church hasnt been able to bind or lose any doctrine or moral truth for its faithful since the schism... I wonder why

[@DeAngeloJohnson-ee9bt]

​@@Imitatinghimbro what

[@bobbobb4804]

The keys given to the apostles which the Orthodox are the successors to?

[@brandoking412]

great video

[@ngliscsaxon6128]

Do you have any info on the part the Pope played towards the Norman Conquest of England? William the conquerer I believe got the 'go ahead' from the Pope at the time to conquer England from the True King of England, Harold Godwinson

[@adrianwhyatt594]

Peter and Paul are recorded in the Greek Synaxarion as preaching in Cornhill in the City of Londinium, now known as London, from where they were called to go to Rome to meet with their martyrdom. That is why it has a St. Paul´s cathedral and Westminster Abbey is considered dedicated to St. Peter. So, London also forms part of the see of Peter (and Paul). They were also involved in the founding of the see of Antioch,. Rome was the third and final part of this see, and in this sense junior, though as the capital of the Empire, senior.

[@mikemacdavy8086]

That is completely false. The Synaxarion does not say that Peter or Paul ever went to Britain. Preposterous!

[@adrianwhyatt594]

The Greek Orthodox Synaxarion says exactly what I told you. I've been reminded of this in a number of sermons given by Reader Vladimir Moss of St. Michael's Orthodox Church, Guildford, near London, Surrey, England. Dr. Moss is a theologian and church historian and the author of hundreds of books and articles on these subjects free to download from the internet. These include a multi volumed history of the world from a True Orthodox Christian viewpoint and also many articles on saints and on Orthodox history, as well as the book "The Fall of Orthodox England", inter alia". I suggest you contact him for further details if you remain unconvinced. You only subscribe to the Bible Illustrated KZbin channel on the KZbin channel profile you have made your profile from. You might want to subscribe to some of these. I will not be replying to any further attempts by you to deny or contradict what I've told you, or to question it further.

[@INoticeTooMuch1]

You sure it wasn’t Lugdunum? Which is modern day Lyon, France.

[@TheItalianCalifornian-fp3fn]

The Papacy hasn't "fallen." It may be in schism from you Orthodox, but it still exists and is as influential as ever. I hope we reunite one day and even as a Catholic, I don't mind the Orthodox view of the Bishop of Rome as "First Among Equals."

[@johnnyd2383]

But we mind your heresies and without refutation of those and comeback to the sound Orthodox faith, no re-unification is possible. None of the reasons Rome fell from the sound Orthodox faith have been removed yet. Sadly.

[@RonaldPRocky]

This video is not about the history of Papacy showing how it developed or functioned but just a series of cherry picked events that cause one to question the Papacy. It doesn't explain why or how the Pope and other Patriarchs got a rank of seniority and also ignores what this authority of the Pope and other Patriacrchs meant if it was not to depose others or teach authoritatively etc. It also misses out various other instances which cause one to believe in the Papacy too.

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

You may not be used to the Papacy contxtualized within first millenium ecclesiology.

[@Marcus-sk2xf]

Craig, which definition of “consent” is used when referring to Acts 15? I ask because when I look up the word “consent”, it means both, “giving permission to”, or “yielding to the power of”, someone else. So in Acts 15, did the Council “give permission to” someone or did they “yield to the power of” someone?

[@truggles120]

It's funny you had an image of St Irenaeus, because in Against Heresies, book 3, chapter 3, paragraph two, he says that EVERY church must be united with the Roman church.

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

Read the whole passage, friend.

[@MaximusOrthodox]

So True

[@dest3953]

I like ur voice. Keep at it mate

[@MarcusBarnabassisSystersSonne]

Met Hilarion Alfeyev's Orthodox Christianity Vol.I has some very salient and straightforward, and revealing, history about papal primacy (as espoused directly from the mouths of preeminent saints like Maximus and other) and the struggle between east and west both politically and otherwise.

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

St Maximus IMHO did float a sort of Papal Supremacy, which is covered in the book. Even more than St Pope Martin who I argue honestly did not do so at all.

[@captainmarvel76927]

Unfortunately there is an omission of key western and eastern church history which is disappointing. Ask Moscow today if they see Constantinople as a higher position of honor. Constantinople came late as a recognized see, and has never been able to have a successful council since it's recognized 8th Council. The largest irony is the fall of Constantinople to the Turks on The Feast Of Pentecost 1453, and for nearly 200 years the Patriarch of Constantinople was appointed by the Sultan.

[@caseycardenas1668]

What is this comment even getting at?

[@captainmarvel76927]

@@caseycardenas1668 it's exposing fraud.

[@caseycardenas1668]

@@captainmarvel76927 It just sounds like b tier apologetics and polemics with no substance, which is why I asked. So again, what's the point of the OP?

[@captainmarvel76927]

@@caseycardenas1668 ur getting in this late, we have no need to engage further.

[@caseycardenas1668]

@@captainmarvel76927 It's just that you made a statement and it lacked any substance. Have fun liking your own comments, twink.

[@CunnyCream]

Question craig is peter more sagnificant than the other bishops? If yes then how you refute the Catholic argument of supremacy

[@ethanwright9757]

The next book should be the Catechism of Catholic Craig (CCC)

[@Ma1q444]

Christianity was in Africa before Europe

[@benjamingallows]

And yet it’s still a shit-hole to this day. Says a lot about the people of Africa doesn’t it?

[@Ma1q444]

@@benjamingallows weirdo

[@benjamingallows]

@@Ma1q444 You don’t know how awful the black race is? Have you been brainwashed by jews or something?

[@davidevans3227]

Israel is practically in north africa

[@GGME7777]

"Pope" was first give to the head of the church of Alexandria in 188AD and was later adopted by the church of Rome by the end of the 3rd century. Thus we 2 who carry that title today

[@AlexAntohe]

What a legend, thank you for this!

[@RonaldSeese-sx4ow]

I can’t wait!

[@mattschneider78]

Catholic Craig is going to totally dismantle this.

[@joshua_wherley]

Please respond to this comment when he does, I would be interested in seeing that.

[@bond3161]

What is your standard of consensus? If at least one does not consent, is there concensus? Nicean council was about 300 attendees but 2 votes against?

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

Historically, consensus has been approximately 70-80 percent (Ephesus was convinced of its ecumenicity when one Patriarchate didn't sign, for example). Think of it as a "super majority." In the USA, that's 67 out of 100 Senators.

[@TheTransfiguredLife]

Love this!! ☦️🔥🔥

[@truthseeker37747]

Craig, I bought your book and chapter one cites 1 Clement 1,47 and Shepherd 2.4.8 and 3.9.7, but I don’t know what they say. Help please.

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

Try putting them in google

[@truthseeker37747]

@@OrthodoxChristianTheology I did, but neither google nor ChatGPT is giving me the accurate verses. Different translations verse the passages differently. Please help.

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

@@truthseeker37747 Never use chatgpt for research! it makes up fake answers. www.newadvent.org/fathers/0201.htm www.newadvent.org/fathers/1010.htm

[@truthseeker37747]

@@OrthodoxChristianTheology Thank you so much. 🙏

[@truthseeker37747]

@@OrthodoxChristianTheology Brother, I have one more question. Where did you get your phd or education in orthodoxy? I want to learn as well.

[@LiveYourLifeWithJoy]

But how did the whole structure started? How did some "random" people got to be bishops with so much power?

[@NavelOrangeGazer]

But... Have your considered this? Matthew 16 Muh Keys Bottom Text

[@markroth6232]

No, Craig continue to ignore all the witness of scripture in favor of the primacy of Peter. Eastern Orthodox can’t win a debate on the papacy against a Catholic by using the Bible… so they continue to ignore the word of God and prefer to focus on history of men’s…

[@ryrocks9487]

@@markroth6232We can’t use the Fathers? Oh wait that’s right. As none of them thought the keys were given exclusively to Peter until Latins after the schism. Funny how that works.

[@dewd9327]

@@ryrocks9487 Literally, Papal Prots will quote scriptures at us just like their prot spawn do

[@henrik_worst_of_sinners]

​​@@markroth6232Papal supremacy has no basis in scripture. It comes from forged documents such as the Pseudo-Symmacian forgeries, Donations of Constantine and the Pseudo Isadorian decretals. There is nothing in scripture which binds the legacy from Peter to Rome only. Peter is a type that is a literary device for the high preist. You RCs do a category error when it comes to the priestly order. The bishops do not actually represent the Apostels. The Apostels are represented by the priest in each diocese. The Bishop represents Christ. Read the Gospels and you will clearly see how Christ acts as a bishop when the Apostels baptise people, just like the ordinary priests do today. Only after Pentecost do the Apostels fully work as Bishops, i.e. as Christ. All bishops are Peter. You have made a category above the bishop that doesn't exist.

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

Clearly you have not read the book, which argues that Peter has primacy and is the origin of the episcopacy.@@markroth6232

[@finrodfelagund8668]

5:58 Georgia was in Antiochian jurisdiction though.

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

Sort of. They were evangelized by Antioch, but their hagiographies cites repeated battles against Eastern Rome as reason for their autuocephaly. So, I'm not sure precisely how that settles out.

[@finrodfelagund8668]

I knew it as a settled fact, idk.

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

I just ran into a Georgian hagiography that specified Antochian jurisdiction. Sorry for the mistake!

[@traditionallenses]

☦️☦️☦️

[@Test_Card_Tom]

Why no picture of Pope John Paul I in the last sequence of popes?

[@JudithMatta]

You forgot the incredible St Andrew. This changes the pattern...

[@MrNTF-vi2qc]

Okay but what about Peter Dimond's view on it?

[@chiefamongsinners16]

Did he respond to it?

[@MrNTF-vi2qc]

No. try to get it to him@@chiefamongsinners16

[@j897xce]

I get they could all bind and loose, but only Peter got keys. Isaiah 22 shows the same key exchange given to Eliakim. Keys are the kingship!

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

@@j897xce lateran 1215 says all bishops have keys

[@petros-petra]

​@@OrthodoxChristianTheology Did the Orthodox church ever use these keys to proclaim binding dogmas after the Great Schism or did it stop at Nicea II?

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

@@petros-petra kzbin.info/www/bejne/joGwpHqLoLmYeZY

[@9and7]

Is this from which Orthodox Church? Ukrainian, Russian, Russian-Ukrainian, Ukrainian-Russian, etc...?

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

Doesn't matter. It's a collab between Russian and Ukrainian technically.

[@KillingMyApathy777]

Wait…does this guy also run harmony?

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

@@KillingMyApathy777 he is the narrator

[@KillingMyApathy777]

@@OrthodoxChristianTheology Craig truglia narrates harmony?

[@jupiterinaries6150]

Were all bishops originally equal by divine right as to their authority? Did Jesus establish a visible Church with a visible head?

[@AisElliott]

Other than Peter essentially the era's and region's politics that determined succession and chain of command. For us modern people, a lot of us exposed to Christianity through the spirit of Protestantism, such irrational and unofficial means is utterly dissatifying but it is the truth. Pretty much the west Mediterranean is going to see things different from the east Mediterranean, than the Ethiopians, West Asians, inevitably the Europeans, etc.

[@moldyapple1789]

nice now no one needs the book!

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

If details mean nothing I suppose...

[@robharrell-xd2pi]

Your first postulate that “the early church was episcopal” is unsupported by the actual scriptures and at least a good century of time. It took this turn, but why suppose the fledgling ecclesiastical hierarchy was salubrious?

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

The Scriptures are in fact episcopal.

[@jeffrygagnon5506]

Various spellings of "katholick" (Grk.) or "universalis" (Latin) -- both mean the same in English: "universal, all-inclusive, encompassing the world". "Universalis" is, in fact the adjective used by Roman Emperor Constantine to impose the religion formulated at his order, by delegates to his Council at Nicaea (AD 325-27). He wanted UNITY among all these violently disagreeing "Christian" churches. Commanded "delegates" were the leaders of any church or significantly large group in the Empire which called itself "Christian". Most of the doctrinal arguement, which had actually caused some of the churches to go to war with each other, was over "Was Christ God?" and "Who was God? Was He One, Two, or Three Divine Persons?" From "The CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA", 1913 ed., article "The History of Christian Thought", Vol.1, p.258): "Constantine called the council to put an end to this troublesome disunity. As to the outcome of the council, he cared not himself, but on the advice of a Spanish advisor, a priest, the emperor called for an 'East-West Synod' at the council to settle it. Most had no opinion. Of the minority who stayed behind to vote, the '3 in 1' idea carried by a slim margin." Quite obviously then, the Roman Catholic Church was NEVER God's "church" (eclessia - "those called out"). And every other "Catholic" denomination, along with Rome's protesting "sister-churches", are just as man-made and pagan. The "immortal soul". Going to Heaven at death. An ever-burning "Hell" where souls may be tortured in fire forever, and ever, and ever, and ever, etc. Praying to people that are dead. Weekly Sabbath changed to Sunday. The Roman Christmas/Saturnalia. The Greek celebration of Easter ("Eastre" or "Oestre" was the ancient Greek goddess of fertility). These are just a few of the absolutely non-Biblical traditions that most churches calling themselves some form of "Christian" still believe and promote to this day. All of them come directly from The Roman Catholic Church - none of them from the Bible.

[@cameroncampbell7706]

On that the there's no "other way in which the truth can be made manifest when there are discussions concerning the faith." This is about making the truth more manifest, which is true. A decision by all made the truth more manifest. Yet a decision by only one can made the truth manifest too, tho in a lesser way. Which is why before that sentence we have the council saying: "For although the grace of the Holy Spirit abounded in each one of the Apostles, so that no one of them needed the counsel of another in the execution of his work, yet they were not willing to define on the question then raised touching the circumcision of the Gentiles, until being gathered together they had confirmed their own several sayings by the testimony of the divine Scriptures." So actually each of the apostles had no need for another's counsel (the pope doesn't need other). But they gathered together and counseled with another (Acts15) to made the truth more manifes the pope can go against the concil is manifested in Chalcedon when Leo quashed the agreed-by-all canon 28.

[@nickcalibey6178]

Hey Cameron, This reading of the 8th session seems similar to Ybarra's in his article on the subject. I don't think it works, though. Let me start by citing the passage (all these citations are from Price's translation): "(3) It happened that Vigilius was staying in this imperial city and ought to have taken part in everything that was mooted concerning these Three chapters, and had often condemned them both orally and in writing; afterwards he also agreed in writing to attend the council and discuss these Three chapters together with us, so that we might all produce in common a decree corresponding to the orthodox faith. So our most pious emperor, in accordance with what had been resolved among us, urged both Vigilius and ourselves to meet together, since it is appropriate for priests to impose a common solution on common problems. Accordingly, we necessarily besought his reverence to fulfil his written promises, saying that it was not right that the cause of stumbling arising from these Three chapters should increase and thereby unsettle the church of God. But when, although often invited both by us all and in addition by the most glorious officials sent to him by the most pious emperor, he postponed heeding these requests and admonitions and attending, we recalled to his memory the great example of the apostles and the traditions of the fathers. For even though individual apostles abounded with the grace of the Holy Spirit so that they did not need the advice of others over what had to be transacted, yet they had no wish to decide in any other way the question that was mooted, whether the Gentiles ought to be circumcised, before they met together and each of them confirmed his statements from the testimonies of the divine scriptures. Accordingly it was in common that they all pronounced judgement on the matter, writing to the Gentiles and stating in a declaration that 'when we all assembled together it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to impose no other burden on you except these necessary things, that you abstain from what has been offered to idols, from blood, from what has been strangled, and from fornication.'" (110-111) I don't see the passage talking about degrees of making truth manifest, in fact I don't think that's the thrust at all. Obviously truth can manifest in a variety of ways, whether that's in a council, a bishop, a monk, or a layperson. St. Maximus manifested truth standing up to the Monothelites. Laypeople who denounced Nestorius stood for the truth. But *none* of those could bind the whole Church in a dogmatic decree, which is exactly what the Apostles did in Acts 15. The Fathers of the 5th council cite it for this reason: even though the Apostles did not need to consult one another in their day-to-day affairs, they met in council when making binding decrees against heresy. This is why the passage is full of conciliar language. "Vigilius...ought to have taken part in everything [i.e. the council]." The Fathers urged him to attend so that "we might all produce in common a decree...since it is appropriate for priests [bishops] to impose a common solution on common problems." The Apostles "in common...pronounced judgment" since "they had no wish to decide in any other way the question that was mooted...before they met together." What the passage doesn't say is that the Apostles could have made binding decisions on their own but chose not to because they thought it would be more appropriate to do so in common. It says they refused to make pronouncement before meeting in council. This is even more evident in the following two paragraphs in the same session. Emphases are mine: "(4) The holy fathers also who convened at various times in the holy four councils **followed ancient precedent and decreed in common** on heresies and problems that had arisen, since it is certain that it is **through join examination,** when there is expounded what needs to be discussed on both sides, that the light of truth dispels the darkness of lies. "(5) **For neither is it permissible in the case of the faith for anyone to anticipate the judgement of the church in her totality, since each person needs the help of his neighbour,** as Solomon says in Proverbs, 'A brother who provides help to his brother will be raised up like a fortified city, and is strong like a kingdom with foundations,' and again he says in Ecclesiastes, 'Two are better than one, and they have a good reward for their labour, because if one falls his comrade will raise him up; and woe to that single man when he falls and there is no second man to raise him up,' [I omit the rest since it is just more Scriptural passages]." (111) The Fathers see the other 4 councils, as well as the current one, as following the same pattern as the Apostles -- councils must be convened to decree on matters of faith in a binding matter. They even go so far as to reject the idea that any one person can "anticipate the judgement of the church in her totality," which seems a far cry from Gasser's *Relatio* concerning *ex cathera* statements! We see something similar at the start of the 7th session when the quaestor Constantine relates the back and forth about Vigilius delivering the *Constitutum* to the emperor: "Those of us who were bishops replied to him, 'If, in accordance with what was resolved in the correspondence between ourselves, your beatitude and the most holy patriarchs and most religious bishops, you order a meeting and a discussion of the Three Chapters, **and [intend] to issue with all of us a decree in accordance with the orthodox faith, as the holy apostles, the holy fathers, and the four councils did when a common question arose, we recognize you as our head and father and primate.**''' (76-77) Again, the way to make decrees in the face of heresy is to do so in council, just as the Apostles did, just as the Fathers did, just as the Ecumenical Councils did. But even if we were to grant your reading, and that we're talking about degrees of manifestation and that the language could perhaps allow for other extraordinary forms of proclaiming dogma, it still doesn't work. The Fathers depose Vigilius and strike his name from the diptychs precisely because he went back on his condemnation of the Three chapters and *did not attend the council*. But, if Vatican I is correct, then Vigilius doesn't need to attend a council since he can make an *ex cathedra* statement. Indeed, he even wrote his own decree in the *Constitutum*, which was a direct attack on the proceedings of the council! So he's being condemned for something that he's fully within his right to do, especially since he didn't summon the council (St. Justinian did), and was even dragged across the whole Empire against his will to attend it.

[@cameroncampbell7706]

@@nickcalibey6178 thank you very much for clearing this up, I want to convert to Orthodoxy but Catholicism is still a hurdle I have yet to fully leap across.

[@user-7lf7w]

How do you explain this sort of letters? Maximus the confessor, Opuscula theologica et polemica, Migne, Patr. Graec. vol. 90 "The extremities of the earth, and everyone in every part of it who purely and rightly confesses the Lord Look directly towards the Most Holy Roman Church and her confession and faith, as to a sun of unfailing light awaiting from her the brilliant radiance of the sacred dogmas of our Fathers, According to that which the inspired and holy Councils have stainlessly and piously decreed. For, from the descent of the Incarnate Word amongst us, all the churches in every part of the world have held the greatest Church alone to be their base and foundation Seeing that, according to the promise of Christ Our Savior, the gates of hell will never prevail against her, That she has the keys of the orthodox confession and right faith in Him, that she opens the true and exclusive religion to such men as approach with piety, and she shuts up and locks every heretical mouth which speaks against the Most High."

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

Ir is covered in my book, though some scholars think they can potentially be forgeries.

[@walterlahaye2128]

The early church was “the church of Christ.”

[@tony1685]

and they (His church) have forever kept all Ten Commandments ~ including Ex 20:8-11, the 7th day Sabbath. according to Scripture, of course.

[@walterlahaye2128]

@@tony1685 , Oh no they didn’t! Because there was a change in the priesthood, there had to be a change in the law also. (HEBREWS 7:12) The New Testament is a better covenant, enacted upon better promises (HEBREWS 8:6). Christ took the Old Testament law out of the way, nailing it to the cross (COLOSSIANS 2:14).

[@tony1685]

@@walterlahaye2128 please try to grasp the context of that passage, friend. it's dealing with the priesthood no longer being Levitical - Jesus wasn't a Levite. God law can never change - see Psalm 111:7-8 and/or Jesus' Words in Luke 16:17 and Colossians was speaking of Moses law - written in ordinances n statutes. again not about God's law.

[@walterlahaye2128]

@@tony1685 , Please grasp that we’re NOT under that Mosaic Law today. The law of Moses could not take away sin. As we read of course , in (HEBREWS 10:4)

[@walterlahaye2128]

@@tony1685 , There’s only one way to be saved friend, which is the “Apostles Doctrine.” It is also called “the church of Christ.” “Nominal Christianity.” God did not create denominations, and denominations are not going to heaven!

[@kingofnpcs2547]

You stated a librarian called Anastasius wrote "forgeries" that somehow changed the whole concept of papal authority yet you didn't show any evidence to your claim or any proof of these alleged "forgeries" whatsoever

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

Good afternoon, friend. Please read the book for citations and evidence.

[@sirius4518]

Add that they're currently worshipping the devil, as they did for a long time. All glory to Christ!!!

[@GuitarTunings33]

Cool!

[@ChristIsKingPhilosophy]

Great video, however the comment about science is erroneous. The scientific method does not confirm a theory, it only proves its plausibility.

[@LuciusClevelandensis]

Your assertion that "councils operated according to a UNANIMOUS as opposed to a majority vote" goes way too far even to sustain the EO view. The Arians were not on board at Nicaea, and the Judaizers dissented from the apostolic majority at Jerusalem. Anyway, if unanimity were the requirement, then papal approval WOULD be required since the pope's dissent would give the council a less than unanimous tally.

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

@@LuciusClevelandensis read commonitoriun on consensus. It means a super majority.

[@damiandziedzic23]

It's a history from an orthodox perspective, not from an only facts and data perspective.

[@marcokite]

same thing

[@Theoretically-ko6lr]

Glory to God ❤

[@LarrySanger]

Isn’t some of this (esp. the first 1-3 minutes) rather…speculative? And what is this business about “popes” in the 3rd c.? There were none.

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

this is a summary of a book with documented claims

[@jan6981]

18 And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” 20 Then he strictly ordered his disciples to tell no one that he was the Messiah. Matthew 16:18-20

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

Every bishop is a successor of st peter

[@johnnyd2383]

St. Peter established Patriarchate of Antioch in the year 34 AD, prior to establishing church in Rome. Yet... Patriarchate of Antioch never claimed stupidities Rome so dearly cherish until our times... Papal claims are just as laughable as 1000 years ago.

[@socialsmigs1626]

Sancta Maria ora pro nobis

[@rogerjohnson2562]

This isnt history, its theology...

[@rickcampanella4254]

I go by scripture only

[@clocksteed]

Both the Bible and the Church traditions are compiled by the Church which is guided by the Holy Spirit.

[@rickcampanella4254]

@@clocksteed What is the "church ",?

[@rickcampanella4254]

@@clocksteed Traditions make void the word of God. Good Lord people everyday arguing over what it says and doesn't say and I have to say that it wasn't a book that saved me it was Jesus Himself.

[@clocksteed]

@@rickcampanella4254I agree that Jesus Christ will save us, that’s why we have sacraments like the Eucharist, Confession, and etc. And that is what the Orthodox Church teaches. There is only One Church or Christ’s Body or Faith when Jesus told to Peter that he would build his Church in a singular sense. 2 Thessalonians 2:15 states that Saint Paul told us to keep the traditions as it considered essential as the Bible which is similar to John 14:15 to keep Jesus’s commandments, Jesus is doing the Father’s will or the Divine will and Jesus is God when he said I AM. Please understand and learn more about the History and the Theology of Christ teachings. God bless ☦️.

[@HunnysPlaylists]

St Peter.

[@CanadianStreetPreachers]

“Rome was occupied by byzantium” u mean the Romans reclaimed Rome..

[@jordandegraw1459]

Justinian the great and Belisarius

[@leopistis3560]

The narrator sounds like a computer text to voice

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

He;s a real human being

[@leopistis3560]

Cyborg

[@CybermanKing]

@@OrthodoxChristianTheology and a real hero?

[@holycrossgleam777]

I have my doupts about that the early church was episcopal I think it wasnt until today

[@johnnyd2383]

Read your Bible. They are called "overseer" like in 1 Timothy 3, 1 for example.

[@holycrossgleam777]

@@johnnyd2383 Why are you dubing for? The term bible is false It is said on west The right term is Holy Scripture Old Tastement New Tastement My english are bad I know But im from Greece So I know better As of the overseer ill check it

[@holycrossgleam777]

@@johnnyd2383 The Center of our Church is Christ itself not the bishops If the bishops fall to heresy we have to obey the Apostolic Rules

[@johnnyd2383]

@@holycrossgleam777 Word Bible is in fact Greek word.

[@holycrossgleam777]

@@johnnyd2383 Μάθε ελληνικήν γραμματεία πρώτα και μετά μίλα Η λέξη βίβλος είναι φραγκική επινόηση Αγία Γραφή λέγεται Και άμα θες να είσαι σωστός να τιμάς την γλώσσα του Ευαγγελίου που είναι στα ελληνικά Έτσι αδελφέ μου Μπράβο ☦️

[@yakotako717]

WHAT? Where did you get information that "Franks were against Byzantium"? Where and how?!

[@princekermit0]

It was the franks that pushed the Filioque addition to the Nicene-Constantinople creed.

[@thieph]

​@@princekermit0and then they pretend to be the real romans, when in reality Eastern Roman Empire was directly descendent of Roman Empire

[@thieph]

It is basic hisorical knowledge for highscool, nothing conspirative😂

[@mihaidaescu129]

So, Balkans was under the autorithy of Pope of Rome???

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

Yes

[@uncreatedlogos]

Man. This is a bit too ... Idk chronological? ... I don't know what it exactly means that two patriarchies are in communion... ??? I mean, after the church schism 1054 people didn't consider each other real Christians anymore. But that isn't the case here, is it? No excommunicating here. So what exactly means to be in communion?

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

This may help: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qGiWmquLeqiqftU

[@johnsix.51-69]

Jude 11. You fell for Korah's rebellion. Numbers 16:3 is what you and protestants say to the bishop of Rome.

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

Actually, that's what the RCs sadly did to the rest of the Church during the Crusades. They set parallel altars.

[@johnsix.51-69]

@@OrthodoxChristianTheology 🙂

[@ryrocks9487]

@@OrthodoxChristianTheologyOof. You nailed him.

[@ixisinvestigator6009]

wanna know why your jesus has an eye different to other? contact me instead of worshiping this god named jesus

[@johnsix.51-69]

@@ixisinvestigator6009 I know the answer, but please enlighten me lol.

[@willleonhardt3827]

Proff n early churxh being curupted

[@jackvogel9777]

Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I shall build my church. ^Jesus Please note that there is no appeal beyond Jesus. Well, you could take it to his dad, I guess, but I don’t think you’re gonna get very far.

[@ReplyToMeIfUrRetarded]

This could apply to the Orthodox Church as well. terrible overused papistling argument.

[@michaelwachira8484]

@@ReplyToMeIfUrRetarded yet the early church fathers like iraneus, tertulian, cyprian of carthage approved the papacy. Why do y'all Satanistx protestants, freemasons like to attack the one holy Catholic and apostolic church? Satan could literally care less about your schismatics church that's why God punished y'all to the Muslims while he saved us for them especially at the battle of lepanto. So are you going to party with your Satanist brothers and sisters now?

[@johnnyd2383]

1 Cor 3,11 For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

[@EkklesiaOrthodoxia]

1. St. Augustine: So, Augustine didn't really see Peter as the "rock" here. Instead, he thought the "rock" actually refers to Christ Himself. For Augustine, Peter's confession of faith - recognizing Jesus as the Son of God - is what this whole thing is built on. And, in a way, Peter represents all Christians, standing in for the community of believers. So, the real foundation of the Church is Christ, not Peter personally. 2. St. John Chrysostom: Now, Chrysostom does emphasize Peter’s role, sure, but he focuses more on Peter's confession of faith. When Peter declares that Jesus is the Christ, that’s what Chrysostom sees as the key. For him, this confession, this recognition of who Jesus really is, is the solid foundation of the Church, not Peter as an individual person. 3. St. Cyprian of Carthage: Cyprian has a bit of a different angle. He sees Peter as a symbol of unity within the Church. But he’s careful to say that Peter doesn’t have some kind of special authority above the other apostles. They all share equal authority in governing the Church. Cyprian thinks Jesus is using Peter to highlight unity, not to suggest that Peter is the boss of the other apostles or something. Ecclesiastical Unity: You’ve also got people like St. Cyril of Alexandria and St. Gregory the Great taking a bit more of a broad, ecclesial view. They see the "rock" not as just Peter or even just his faith, but as the entire group of apostles, with Peter as the first among them. It’s not that Peter stands alone in authority. It’s more that Peter is representing this shared, collective apostolic authority. They kind of stress that the unity of the Church starts with this shared foundation, with Peter being a symbol of it, but not a solitary figure with supreme authority. Like Cyprian said, "Surely the rest of the Apostles were also what Peter was, having an equal share in office and power. But the beginning proceeds from unity, to show that the Church of Christ is one."

[@anima-scribentis]

Can you not find anywhere a human voice to tell this serious story ? I can not listen this video due to Ai voice

[@AisElliott]

It's actually a human voice. I was surprised too.

[@AStepOfGrace]

J

[@FOHguy]

Why were gods invented? #1. For the benefit of the priesthood #2. For the benefit of the rulers #3. But most of all, for the benefit of the priesthood

[@AisElliott]

If God isn't real one should be invented to keep people from going crazy. Generation Godless isn't doing well.

[@bridgefin]

There were no "defaults" to the primacy of Peter. Only Peter received the keys to the kingdom, a clear sign of authority. Only those elected to be his successor receives that authority. Stop making up stories to support your agenda.

[@johnnyd2383]

St. Peter established Patriarchate of Antioch in the year 34 AD, prior to establishing church in Rome. Yet... Patriarchate of Antioch never claimed stupidities Rome so dearly cherish until our times... Papal claims are just as laughable as 1000 years ago.

[@bridgefin]

@@johnnyd2383 The church was established by Christ and began at Pentecost. Peter has the keys. Jesus told Peter that whatever he bound on earth was bound in Heaven and that he personally have the keys of authority. Maybe you should follow Jesus and not the rebels.

[@johnnyd2383]

@@bridgefin "But you say, Matthew 16, 18 the Church was founded upon Peter: although elsewhere the same is attributed to all the Apostles, and they all receive the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the strength of the Church depends upon them all alike..." (Against Jovinianus - Jerome, Book I)... See how heretic Jovinianus thought Church being founded on Peter and St. Jerome corrected him. So the Latin church is heretical.

[@bridgefin]

@@johnnyd2383 You: "But you say, Matthew 16, 18 the Church was founded upon Peter: although elsewhere the same is attributed to all the Apostles, Jesus: And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, Me: Jesus said he build the church upon Cephas. You: and they all receive the keys of the kingdom of heaven, Jesus: I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Me: The "you" is the second person SINGULAR. Sorry, only Peter has the keys. You: See how heretic Jovinianus thought Church being founded on Peter and St. Jerome corrected him. Me: ??

[@johnnyd2383]

@@bridgefin Read one verse before Matt 16, 18 and you will find upon Whom the Church was founded. Also, read the following: (1 Cor 3,11) For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. ... Pope is heretic and you are brainwashed.

[@sparshsingh7777]

Turn it off

[@RafaeoNobre1]

I cant really tell if this voice ia IA or human...

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

Its real, the editing makes it have an AI vibe though

[@RafaeoNobre1]

@@OrthodoxChristianTheology I just made a comment on your other.page death to the world. Your work is absolutely fantastic and is providing me lots of insights. I have been an atheist my whole life and your channel has been a light in my life.

[@fantasypvpvideos]

Olá, @@RafaeoNobre1. Recomendo mais alguns canais se não os conhece ainda: Orthodox Kyle, Ubu Petris, Wisdom of the Elders, Living Orthodox, Spiridon Bailey, Patristix. Que seu coração seja transformado pela graça de Deus.

[@TCM1231]

Hold to Peter. schism.

[@michaelwachira8484]

Yet the early church fathers like cyprian of carthage, tertullian, iraneus of lyons etc approved of it. That's why God and the blessed virgin Mary saved us from Muslims and not y'all with your schism I. 1054

[@Super-chad]

The presentation itself provides a stunning historical context of the history of papal authority however; the said presentation is _fraught_ with inaccuracies and inconsistent storylines, as the author makes no citations from the Church Fathers who have consistently backed the doctrine that communion with Rome has been the tenet of ecclesiastical conciliarism. Furthermore, the opinion that Rome's failed challenge to reclaim lost territory in Ephesus isn't even backed by a source. This doesn't even address the _undisputed challenge_ that the Church in Corinth didn't even question Clement's claim of authority toward jurisdiction when he ordered their Church to obey his Epistle. Why didn't they cite being under the jurisdiction of John who was still alive at that time? Not a cinch of data was even expressed about Victor's threat to excommunicate the East in 135 regarding the date of celebrating Easter, when the Eastern churches cited receiving the date of the Tradition from John instead of attempting to return the excommunication. All these proofs highlighting papal authority within the Early Church dashed under the carpet while the so-called 'See of Constantinople' wasn't even invented yet, much less recognized by Church Fathers until the latter 280s. And, of course, what's a great way of proving Orthodox doctrine without mentioning the historic occasions where the Eastern churches fell into the Arian heresy, and had to consult the good-old Roman Catholic Church for assistance in straightening their doctrine, less their entire line of bishops continued to teach questionable literature on the nature of Christ

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

One is supposed to follow up on all those details which are addressed in the book referenced in the end.

[@Splendiferous-qh6rr]

Time for you to study "The Rise and Fall of the Papacy" by Craig Truglia! Read also "Vicars of Christ: The Dark Side of the Papacy".