60 Minutes to CONVERT an EVANGELICAL PASTOR to Catholicism (w/ Austin Molt)

[@macbride33]

What turned me was the humility that came from realization and frustration knowing I can't figure this out in any authoritative way. And realization from the Gospels that Christ left a church His body, on earth, with authority, to live out the faith and teach the faith! He did not leave them with pocket New Testaments and command them to hand them out.

[@macbride33]

The church precedes the New Testament and the New Testament is the church, the writings/memoirs of those first disciples were produced by those believers, which means authority only flows from persons with ultimate authority (The Father, to The Son to the apostles through the Holy Spirit) to persons with lesser or no authority. The New Testament texts were not baptized into Christ and given authority by Christ. He did that to people, apostles, men whom He discipled!

[@rhwinner]

_Nisi Ecclesia frustra._ Without the Church there is only frustration. 😊

[@rhwinner]

@@macbride33 Actually, to be perfectly accurate, The New Testament is His Blood in The Sacrament: Mt 26:27-28. Not the Christian Scriptures.

[@macbride33]

@@rhwinner contrasting New Covenant in his blood with the letters that make up the New Testament books

[@Bob_Oxnard-sp1gr]

I admire your desire for truth.

[@johnsayre2038]

"and maybe there's just nuances there that I'm unaware of". Perhaps, but that's besides the point. Can we all just give a round of applause to the humility this guest is showing to even hold out the possibility that (1) the Catholic position on a given point might be nuanced and (2) his knowledge may be incomplete. Bravo. Keep digging, keep praying. Appreciate this dialogue. I'll finish it later this week.

[@TheCordialCatholic]

Thanks for watching!

[@rbnmnt3341]

Wow, Satan was fast. How fast he was deceived is amazing.

[@joecastillo8798]

Unity and Authority is what produced the Bible in 382AD at the Council of Rome.

[@TheCordialCatholic]

Great point!

[@joecastillo8798]

@@TheCordialCatholic Much thanks for your kind response.

[@tinadavy3990]

THANK YOU. 'ONE' .

[@richardjackson7887]

Mat 24:35 Mark 13:31 Luke 21;33 Mat 5;18 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. Isa 40:8 1 Peter 1;24-25 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever. Rom 15:4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope. Act 13:46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. Act 13:47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth. Act 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed. Act 13:49 And the word of the Lord was published throughout all the region.

[@mikecastelluccio7072]

@@richardjackson7887 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book and if anyone shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the tree of life, and out of the holy city, and from these things that are written in this book. Revelation 22: 18-19

[@danielcarriere1958]

At around 40:00 Austin talks about Tertullian and his comments on apostolic succession. There is a great book on Tertullian and his relation to the Catholic Church by Steven Alspach, one of the Catholic Brothers, called "Prophets and Councils". Its a really great book that traces out the prophetic office in the church and its relation to the institutional office of the church as represented by the bishops. And I think this book addresses some of the points Austin makes. The first premise of the book is that there is a Petrine prophetic tradition that flows from Peter's visions in Joppa. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, Peter has this vision, and it moves him to baptize Cornelius, thus allowing pagans into the Church for the first time. Prophets were a part of the early church. Paul talks about the gifts of prophecy. He talks about visions received by God. He talks about speaking in tongues. Prophets had a certain amount of authority even. But the office could be abused. The Didache, for example, talks about limiting the amount of time a prophet could stay in a home to no more than three days. After that, he was to be kicked out and treated as a "Christ Monger". The Montanism that Tertullian became more and more associated with is very much in this prophetic tradition. Along side this Petrine prophetic tradition is a very conciliar tradition that takes its inspiration from Peter and the Apostle's interactions with the elders during Acts 15. This conciliar tradition has an ecclesiastical structure with the bishops as its members. Acts 15 shows a hierarchy that comes together to analyze the teachings of Peter and Paul on the matter of the gentiles and then that speaks authoritatively to settle the matter for all churches. During the time of Tertullian, the prophetic Joppan tendency within Catholicism, was butting heads with the hierarchy. They were more and more rigorous, taking much stricter stands against the possibility of post baptismal repentance, and a whole host of other matters where it found itself trending towards a more extreme and strict view of things. And the church had to reign them in, so to speak. It did this slowly over time such that by the time of Cyprian, a mere 50 years later, there is no more mention of Montanism. Tertullian and Perpetua are held in high regard by Cyprian, and the conciliar structure of the church is firmly in place. I would propose that this tension between the prophetic and institutional parts of the church remains to this day, but Acts 15 shows how the church can remain in touch with authentic promptings of the Holy Spirit as they emerge over time. Tradition and the Magisterium, have the job of authentically interpreting what the Holy Spirit has to say to each generation. The Bible is a key element of this tradition, but also how the Holy Spirit has guided the church through the centuries is also a key element.

[@Justas399]

Acts 1:21-22 makes apostolic succession impossible. James makes the decision for the church in Acts 15:19. Not Peter.

[@tinadavy3990]

YES, THANK YOU ... TRADITION, BIBLE, MAGISTERIUM ... LET'S NOT FORGET THE MAGISTERIUM ... KEY TO CATHOLICISM ... 😇

[@Justas399]

@@tinadavy3990 not from the Bible.

[@danielcarriere1958]

@@Justas399 ​ @Justas399 "Acts 1:21-22 makes apostolic succession impossible." That this particular criteria cannot be filled past the first apostles does not mean the office cannot be passed on at all. Acts 1:20 uses the Greek word for episkopēn that some translations call "office" but others call bishopric or overseer. This is the very same word for bishop. So here is an example of this office/overseer/bishoprick being passed on. And we know from scripture that the office of Bishop was passed on to others. For example, 1 Timothy talks a lot about the qualifications of a bishop in chapter 3 verse 1. And in 2 Timothy 2 says this: "1 You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2 And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable people who will also be qualified to teach others." So Paul is passing on his teachings to Timothy and orders Timothy to pass on his teachings to others who must be qualified. This is three generations of apostolic succession already! We also see from Ephesians 4:11 that the church is hierarchical. "11 So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, 12 to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13 until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ." Apostle comes first. Notice that the office of bishop is not mentioned here. That would only make sense if Paul felt in some way that the office of the Apostles and bishops were interchangeable as Acts 1 seems to imply. Certainly Paul wrote Ephesians first, and only much later did he write 1 Timothy. That would have given enough time for this transition in authority to happen.

[@Justas399]

@@danielcarriere1958 the office and qualifications of a bishop are not the same as the qualifications of an apostle. 2 Different offices, 2 different functions. "A "bishop" is a residential pastor who presides in a stable manner over the church in a city and its environs. The apostles were missionaries and founders of churches; there is no evidence, nor is it likely at all, that any one of them ever took up permanent residence in a particular church as its bishop (Catholic scholar -Sullivan F.A. From Apostles to Bishops: the development of the episcopacy in the early church. Newman Press, Mahwah (NJ), 2001, p. 14).

[@johnchung6777]

Truly you two men are bless by Jesus to believe in him and his one holy apostolic Catholic Church of Traditional Teachings and Worship for not all people will believe this but only those who do,great video keep it coming to not only Catholics but all other people amen 🙏

[@MLu-l5j]

Jesus gave the Keys to the kingdom the authority to bind and loose

[@michaeloakland4665]

Why should Protestants accept the Church's dogmatizing the cannon and not later dogmas? The NT epistles were "novelties" at the time. Zero OT "Sola Scriptura" precedent to cannonize incidental pastoral letters as "infallible Scripture" EXCEPT for the fact that the Keys of the Kingdom were in fact given to Peter. The Church's authority is rooted in Christ's authority, not the Bible. The Church's authority to lead others as She is led by the Spirit into ALL truth pre-exists the cannon. The Holy Spirit knows that His Spouse, Mary, was never touched by any man... including St Joseph. Her question to St Gabriel "How will this be since I know not man?" implies a perpetual state of "not knowing man" which extends into the future. This is consistent with Mary being the Ark of the New Covenant. Once Her sacred body was united with the Holy Spirit to conceive Jesus, her human body became more Holy than a Eucharistic chalice. You don't drink beer out of a consecrated vessel. The same womb that brought forth the Sinless Savior could never ne used to bring forth common sinners.

[@mariewillis545]

We need Apostolic Succession to maintain the valid administration of the sacraments.

[@peterzinya1]

Some popes were run out of town for being more wicked than usual, the papacy has been bought and sold, killed for, one pope was killed by the husband of a woman the pope was caught having relations with her. The papacy was vacant for 2 yrs because nobody cared. This is your valid succession?

[@rosiegirl2485]

This young man would really benefit by talking to Jimmy Akin, Trent Horn, Joe Heshmeyer, etc... He coukd call into Catholic Answers on air or I believe that they have an off air line. May God bless him and lead him to clarity! 🙏

[@StringofPearls55]

On the Journey with Matt, Ken and Kenny would be good.

[@jr9779]

Catholic Answers is good at times, but some “answers” are in error or don’t give a full answer that is solid and can be ambiguous. Beware.

[@rosiegirl2485]

@jr9779 I think that Catholic Answers has the most solid apologist out there! It's easy to throw stones behind a screen. I'm not sure if you could hold your own in real life. God bless you, my friend! ⚘️

[@bengoolie5197]

@@rosiegirl2485 I trust Heshmeyer far more than I would trust Catholic Answers.

[@valwhelan3533]

Marian dogmas were defined because of various heresies around the nature of Christ. I think further digging into the actual theology of these would be fruitful.

[@robertdeacon8541]

What heresy about the nature of Christ was the bodily assumption of Mary defined against?

[@randycarson9812]

@@robertdeacon8541 Indirectly, the Assumption of Mary, understood as her bodily assumption into heaven at the end of her earthly life, affirms her unique role as the Mother of God. It complements and supports the arguments against Christological heresies.

[@riverasamuel911]

I've noticed this too. for example the theotokos, Robert Deacon 8541 asked a great question and Randy Carson 9821 gave a great answer. they are complementary, marian dogmas are "consequences" of Christ's nature, they weren't defined for the sake of it

[@unitedwingsofliberty7899]

Amen what we believe about Christ is so reflected by what we believe of Mary the mother of God

[@unitedwingsofliberty7899]

Yes exactly what we believe of Christ is reflected in what we believe of his mother

[@jperez7893]

the catholic church is deeply historical all the way to the very upper room where it was founded in jerusalem by jesus christ

[@colinpeacock7648]

Jesus never founded the Catholic church Jesus kept the Sabbath day which was a Saturday Roman Catholics keep Sunday nor do they observe it as a Sabbath day to keep it holy not to labour etc as the commandment advises one

[@jperez7893]

@@colinpeacock7648 ok sherlock. out of curiousity, do tell me the name of the church he founded, i'm dying to know

[@johnyang1420]

@@colinpeacock7648Read Pope Peter by Heschmeyer where he proves that Jesus started the Catholic church

[@GMAAndy333]

The authority is totally needed. We see the splits that are happening right now with churches over wokeness. Thereby these churches are splitting which equals disunity.

[@Mr.Peck88]

I’m awed by Austin’s humility to do this kind of interview. I can’t wait to see part two.

[@elizabethking5523]

No, no the Marian doctrine is not “adding on” She has always been there! It has always been believed. Very nice guest and I pray he keep studying. Mary can not be set aside in ANY way. She is in scripture from Genesis to Revelation! And the beliefs about her matter very much because the truths about Mary also confirm the truth about Christ! For example, He is fully God and fully man. There were disputes about this everywhere in the early Church and Mary, being a perpetual virgin, and being Full of Grace, and being incorruptible, as the ark of the covenant was made with incorruptible wood, Solidifies how she could have carried God and Man within her womb!! She was set apart before the foundation of the world! She was made Full of Grace!! That is how she even could physically possibly carry the bread of Life, The Rod of the Priesthood and the Law within her “ fully human” body and womb!!!🙏🏻❤️ She was fully human. Set apart. Her body prepared by God the Father! ❤️🙏🏻❤️🙏🏻❤️

[@peterzinya1]

You catholic place glory on flesh. All you can think about is flesh. Mary womb, eating Jesus flesh. The CC is wacky.

[@ritamiria7942]

Really great insight

[@JALV1998]

Awesome information. God bless you.

[@AngelGonzalez-ng9ve]

I think I good way to start is just with basic Christia church History. How the Catholic church and APOSTOLIC succession has been around way before any protestant denomination. How the Church was first before the bible Canon was composed buy the Catholic church. Etc.... God bless. Love the videos. "WHERE THE BISHOP APPEARS THERE LET THE PEOPLE BE. JUST AS WHERE JESUS CHRIST IS there is THE CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH. St Ignatius of Antioch 107 AD. ⛪️ 🍞🍷📖🔑✝️🔥📿🕊📝

[@johnchung6777]

Wonderful comment May you be bless protected and guided by the Holy Trinity Amen 🙏 🐑🕊️🔥✨

[@peterzinya1]

Im under no obligation to believe anything Ignatius or any "church" fathers say. You assume everyone should believe every word they say as if it were gospel.

[@AngelGonzalez-ng9ve]

​@peterzinya1 For the Love of the Heavens and are Fallen early Christians. Just please study early Church Christian History. Its not rocket science. God bless. 🍞🍷🔑⛪️

[@peterzinya1]

@@AngelGonzalez-ng9ve You mean catholic church history as told by catholics. When i was in Rome, the tour guide took us down these stairs to a room below the street. I thought it was a movie set or something because im from hollywood. The guide said these things were used on people. I had to run outside because i was going to vomit up my lunch. I got a facefull of catholic church history.

[@AngelGonzalez-ng9ve]

@@peterzinya1 Dear Lord. As if PROTESTANTS are innocent. Just tell yourself this basic question. Who came First. The protestant or the HOLY CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH.. WHO COMPOSE THE BIBLE IN 367 AD. Who fought against the Muslim/Islam to protect Christians. Who were the early Martyrs who died for Christians. 🤔 The Catholic church... 🫶🏻🙏🏻📖🕊📿🔥🍞🍷🔑

[@johnlee6780]

Scripture and interpretation are different things. The problem is not with scripture, it is person's self interpretation of the words.

[@thesipesisrandom4534]

For me it was "I now believe as a Catholic that Mary was Assumed just like I already believe Enoch and Elijah were Assumed, and how the saints from the Old Testament who rose at the Crucifixion were Assumed. And how ALL Christians will be Assumed when we die!" I believe The New Eve was created without Original Sin JUST like the Old Eve was. And By The Holy Spirit was kept pire when the Old Eve wasn't." I remember reading Rev. 12 with new eyes and seeing how it was OBVIOUSLY Mary in that image. And then reading all the Protestants saying "tue woman" "OBVIOUSLY represented Believing Israel, The New Testament Church, and All Believers! Well my little kids said that's clearly Mary in Rev. 12. So then I was left with the fact that I used to mock the Catholic Church when they said in art and im hymns and in prayers Mary IS a unique person, but also oftentimes represents All Believers too. Well according to the Protestant Eschatology guys - she does too... Now one realizes Mary is Immaculate because The Church is immaculate (the gates of Hell will NOT prevail against the church full of humans, or against Mary-fully human)! ALL Christians will be Assumed into Heaven! All Christian women will be Queens of Heaven "reigning with Christ as co-heirs!" Protestant individuals don't know that ALL the Marian dogmas are saying what ALL us Christians will be and are! The beautiful titles we use for Mary are to be used for ALL women! We are to say that ALL older Christians are oir Mothers! So i got to the point where to stay Protestant I would have to say "All Christian women will be queens of heaven EXCEPT Mary!" "All Christian women will be Assumed into Heaven EXCEPT Mary!" "All Christian women are our mothers EXCEPT Mary!" All women should be treated as "Our Lady" EXCEPT Mary... It became Madness! Wonderful conversation guys!

[@Jerome616]

Yes, I’m loving this new trend of dialogue!🎉

[@jeannefernando4937]

Both men are to be commended for their sincerity and good will. They have true charity. As for Apostolic Succession- it occurred to me that it is primarily about the priesthood of Jesus Christ. This includes acting authoritatively in His Name. This is why Catholics accept that the Holy Eucharist can only be confected by an authentically ordained priest. It goes way beyond combatting heresies. Although there appear to be plenty of those abounding, too, the magisterium assists in resolving the big moral questions of the day - contraception, abortion, same sex marriage. This authority doesn’t expire and fulfills the role of church as the pillar and bulwark of truth. Not to mention, we Christians really must recover our unity. Thank you for a lovely and thought provoking conversation. It does take talking out loud to grapple with matters.

[@halleylujah247]

38:19 We actually did have more apostles. The authority was passed down when the apostles cast lots to decide who would replace Judas. (Acts 1:26) Then also we have Acts 6:1-6. Why did the apostles do that if they didn't need that handed down authority to do so? This was such a great conversation. I wonder if any one would be cordial enough to pull off that Title and video premise. Definitely catchy and a fun way yo have the conversation. I love this so much, and the conversation was charitable as I would expect from Keith. God bless both of you gentlemen.

[@claybody]

It's a grace of God to have your blinders removed to the truth of the Church established by Christ.

[@blindabraxas]

About 56 min in, on question of how the bishop of Rome provides that unity to gather around, that sign of unity has extended back to that moment captured in Scripture. It has borne fruit throughout history, overcoming heresy and providing clarity. We can’t just look at the current occupant and fail to see it: the Church extends through and outside of time.

[@MichaelDonlan]

This was GREAT! Honestly, I really appreciated Austin's respect & questions. It made me appreciate the Evangelical point of view more. I would love more of these. It makes me think more about my Catholic faith.

[@seangallagher9580]

This was a great discussion. I think if we could have more interactions like this, the walls between those who protest the Church and those who are in full communion with her will come down more quickly.

[@carolyncrawford244]

This was great. Thank you for the respect you both demonstrated. There is something very good about this discussion.

[@MLu-l5j]

When you have returned, strengthen my brother's, Jesus said to Peter after he told him to feed my sheep

[@bazzy8376]

You need to hook this guy up with the young Peter Kreeft: joe Heschmeuer regarding papal authority AND Mary. You did a spectacular job too!

[@johnbuenger]

I really wanted to make a snarky remark about how lucky you were to have Pope Austin on your podcast, but the Holy Spirit grabbed me by the ear and scolded me. It told me to be more charitable in my comments and thoughts. The reality is that the biggest hurdle isn’t any dogma of the church that proves anything one way or the other, it’s authority. Why are the Marian dogmas so important? Because the church says so.

[@peterzinya1]

Only catholics believe what the CC comes up with.

[@wilts43]

The way to show Peter's office is succesive (from the bible) is: (1) To point to Isaiah 22;20-22 and the replacement of the Davidic-King's Chief-Steward and see the parrallels with Matt 16 :18-19. Ie that Jesus (the eternal Davidic KIng) is appointing His Chief-Steward. And that Jesus is referring to Isaiah 22 and raising this _succesive_ role to a new level (Where his power to bind & loosen is respected even in Heaven!) (2) Point to the replacement of Judas in Acts 1:12-26. If the traitor's place must be filled how much more the leader's place? As for this "change of paradigm" (from Apostolic-Bishops to Bible-based), that Protestants need to posit occuring "vaguely sometime" in the early church; The onus must be on them to _prove this change of God's plan _*_from scripture._* Otherwise this is a self-refuting claim. There is simply NO warrant in scripture for this ending of the Apostolic-Authority-Model. Indeed Jesus promises to be with them (leading them into all truth) until the end of the world. Protestants are not held to account for this sleight-of-hand. They keep these crucial changes "fuzzy" (like the onset of puberty as Autin says). Similarly the selection & authorisation of the Bible by the Catholic Church, and the origin of "sola scriptura" is kept fuzzy.

[@joecastillo8798]

It is important to emphasize that Truth is part of the Church throughout history, thanks to our Lord's divine promise: John 16:13-14 13. But when the Spirit of truth has arrived, he will teach the whole truth to you. For he will not be speaking from himself. Instead, whatever he will hear, he will speak. And he will announce to you the things that are to come. 14. He shall glorify me. For he will receive from what is mine, and he will announce it to you.

[@clarekuehn4372]

**The word "worship" was used for Mary, because in older English, it meant "respect"; we still say "Your Worship", for a mayor.**

[@PJK7135]

Great conversation! I know this is a few weeks late but I lead music at Parish of the Holy Spirit 5PM Sunday Mass. Austin, you are invited to come worship and see what Mass is like. God bless.

[@taramccreary8997]

Succession is scriptural. You can see in acts when Peter and Paul are discussing the gentiles and they send out delegates. You can also see where they decide who was going to replace Judas. Because Jesus breathed on the apostles and gave them the authority and gave them the task to spread the good news. Not to mention Jesus gave them the authority to bind and loose.

[@opheliaadjei-awuah2671]

On Unity: Jesus prayed "that they may all be one. " "They" was the Apostles. Revelations 29 reveals the Apostles as the foundation of the Church. Hence, Jesus wanted all of us, His Church (or body of Christ) to stay as one, united in faith and doctrine. So it also made sense he established a Church before he ascended. Otherwise we would have been free to go anywhere. But because he wanted us to stay together, he gave us the Church. That's why the Bible says The Church is the bulwark of truth..or something to that effect. Who is truth itself? Enter the reformation and this unity breaks down! Yes, the Blood of Christ brings us unity but it is more than just that. Because he gave us a Church and there's been schisms, we have gone against his will.

[@alissarehmert2502]

PLEASE read Jesus and the Jewish Roots of Mary by Brant Pitre if you haven't. It will explain why Marian dogmas are essential (spoiler alert: it's because what we believe about Mary tells us what to believe about Jesus and vice versa). I, like many converts, had the EXACT issue Austin had with the dogmas. I was like, "Okay? Seems random to make people believe that." Before I was confirmed, I read the aforementioned book and it blew my mind over and over again. I went from "I don't see this at all in scripture" to "HOW DID I NOT SEE THIS BEFORE?" lol.

[@TheCordialCatholic]

Life changing, that book.

[@michaeloakland4665]

100% agree 👍. That book is on target.

[@joecastillo8798]

Regarding the Blessed Mother, the impact of the Blessed Mother's Assumption to those who witnessed it, was so important that it was transmitted constantly throughout the Church and the centuries.

[@Justas399]

no evidence for the supposed assumption of Mary. No one reported it in the 1st century, nor 2nd, nor 3rd.

[@joecastillo8798]

@@Justas399 Justy, There's plenty of evidence given by eyewitnesses as well as the fact of never finding a tomb for Christians to visit in pilgrimage; just as it's done for St. Peter, St.Paul and the rest of the Apostles, whose bodies are interred in our Catholic churches. The tradition (word of mouth and writings) confirm throughout the centuries such important event as it is the bodily Assumption of the Mother of God, created Kecharitomene by God, in order to be the vessel that will bring our Holy Savior to the world. May God bless your discernment.

[@joecastillo8798]

@@Justas399 Justy, You must know that archaeology has revealed two tombs of Mary, one in Jerusalem and one in Ephesus. The fact that Mary lived in both places explains the two tombs. But what is inexplicable apart from the Assumption is the fact that there is no body in either tomb. And there are no relics. Anyone who searches early Church history knows that Christian belief in the communion of saints and the sanctity of the body, in radical contrast to the Gnostic disdain for “the flesh”, led early Christians to seek out with the greatest fervor relics from the bodies of great saints. Cities, and, later, religious orders, would fight over the bones of great saints. This is one reason why we have relics of the apostles and so many of the greatest saints and martyrs in history. Yet never was there a single relic of Mary’s body? As revered as Mary was, this would be very strange, except for the fact of the assumption of her body. Fr. Michael O’Carroll, in his book, Theotokos: A Theological Encyclopedia of the Blessed Virgin Mary, writes: We have known for some time that there were widespread “Transitus Stories” that date from the sixth century that teach Mary’s glorious Assumption. It was the promulgation of the dogma of the Assumption by Pope Pius XII that rekindled interest in these stories of the end of Mary’s life. In 1955, Fr. A.A. Wenger published L’Assomption (p. 59). It is known Fr. Wenger found a Greek manuscript that verified what scholars had previously believed to be true. Because there were whole families of manuscripts from different areas of the world in the sixth century that told a similar story of Mary’s Assumption, there had to be previous manuscripts from which everyone received their data. Fr. Wenger discovered one of these earlier manuscripts, believed to be the source later used by John of Thessalonica in the sixth century in his teaching on the Assumption. Further to the evidence; recently discovered Syriac fragments of stories about the Assumption of Mary have been dated as early as the Third Century. And there are undoubtedly more manuscripts to be found. You must remember that when we are talking about such “Transitus stories,” we are not only talking about ancient manuscripts and fragments of manuscripts, but we are talking also about two different “families” of manuscripts written in nine languages. They All agree on Mary’s Assumption and they presuppose that the story was already widely known. May God bless your discernment.

[@joecastillo8798]

@@Justas399 Justi, Do yourself a faster favor. Just check out the references about the Assumption, on line. There you'll find enough information. I don't have to, because I'm a believer of what St. Paul says regarding the one Church founded by Jesus on Peter: 1 Timothy 3:15 15. But, if I am delayed, you should know the manner in which it is necessary to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is "The Church" of the living God, the "Pillar and the Foundation of Truth". Enough said!

[@Justas399]

@@joecastillo8798 In regards to Mary’s supposed assumption the Roman Catholic writer Eamon Duffy concedes that, ‘there is, clearly, no historical evidence whatever for it ...’ (Eamon Duffy, What Catholics Believe About Mary (London: Catholic Truth Society, 1989), p. 17). For centuries in the early Church there is complete silence regarding Mary’s end. The first mention of it is by Epiphanius in 377 A.D. and he specifically states that no one knows what actually happened to Mary. He lived near Palestine and if there were, in fact, a tradition in the Church generally believed and taught he would have affirmed it. But he clearly states that ‘her end no one knows.’ These are his words: But if some think us mistaken, let them search the Scriptures. They will not find Mary’s death; they will not find whether she died or did not die; they will not find whether she was buried or was not buried ... Scripture is absolutely silent [on the end of Mary] ... For my own part, I do not dare to speak, but I keep my own thoughts and I practice silence ... The fact is, Scripture has outstripped the human mind and left [this matter] uncertain ... Did she die, we do not know ... Either the holy Virgin died and was buried ... Or she was killed ... Or she remained alive, since nothing is impossible with God and He can do whatever He desires; for her end no-one knows.’ (Epiphanius, Panarion, Haer. 78.10-11, 23. Cited by juniper Carol, O.F.M. ed., Mariology, Vol. II (Milwaukee: Bruce, 1957), pp. 139-40). In addition to Epiphanius, there is Jerome who also lived in Palestine and does not report any tradition of an assumption. Isidore of Seville, in the seventh century, echoes Epiphanius by saying that no one has any information at all about Mary’s death. The patristic testimony is therefore non-existent on this subject. Even Roman Catholic historians readily admit this fact: In these conditions we shall not ask patristic thought-as some theologians still do today under one form or another-to transmit to us, with respect to the Assumption, a truth received as such in the beginning and faithfully communicated to subsequent ages. Such an attitude would not fit the facts...Patristic thought has not, in this instance, played the role of a sheer instrument of transmission’ (Juniper B. Carol, O.F.M., ed., Mariology, Vol. I (Milwaukee: Bruce, 1955), p. 154).

[@rhwinner]

Cordial convos like this are an important balm for the contentiousness of internet 'theologians.'

[@TheCordialCatholic]

Thanks for watching!

[@johninpa8336]

To clarify what is said at time stamp 30:43 here is a list of the 7 times the Pope has spoken 'ex cathedra' ('from the chair of Peter’) statement fulfilling the requirements for Papal infallibility: 1. Tome to Flavian, Pope Leo I, 449, on the two natures in Christ, received by the Council of Chalcedon 2. Letter of Pope Agatho, 680, on the two wills of Christ, received by the Third Council of Constantinople 3. Benedictus Deus, Pope Benedict XII, 1336, on the beatific vision of the just after death rather than only just prior to final judgment; 4. Cum occasione, Pope Innocent X, 1653, condemning five propositions of Jansen as heretical 5. Auctorem fidei, Pope Pius VI, 1794, condemning seven Jansenist propositions of the Synod of Pistoia as heretical. 6. Ineffabilis Deus, Pope Pius IX, 1854, defining the Immaculate Conception 7. Munificentissimus Deus, Pope Pius XII, 1950, defining the Assumption of Mary.

[@christinacastillon6439]

Good job Keith!!

[@shanahendricks9831]

Intellectual honest Just want the truth ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤ The foundation of true Christianity!

[@tonyl3762]

The Immaculate Conception and Assumption were defined during times of social, cultural, and political upheaval in Europe. One was during the aftermath of WW2. The other I'm not as sure of specifically, but there were revolutions going on during the 1850s too.

[@marymargarette4289]

Glory to OUR ALMIGHTY GOD IN THE HIGEHEST AND ON EARTH PEACE AMONG MEN WITH WHOM OUR GOD IS PLEASED.

[@michaelnewberg9735]

His focus is what he sees in Scripture not what is Tradition and Majesterium. The 3 legged stool

[@thomasfcrowley9738]

THE THING ABOUT APOLSTOIC SUCCESSION IT IS A PROVEN FACT THAT IT IS A UNBROKEN CHAIN OF SUCCESION ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE APOSTLES WITHOUT ANY BREAK OR SPLIT, TOM CROWLEY, CANTON, OHIO

[@peterzinya1]

The papacy has been bough and sold, killed for, given to children and was vacant for 2 yrs because nobody cared. Some popes were driven out of town for being extra wicked, more so than the usual wickedness.

[@tonyl3762]

I would love to see the citation for that Tertullian quote because it does not actually match up with what I've read from him: “Our appeal, therefore, must not be made to the Scriptures; nor must controversy be admitted on points in which victory will either be impossible, or uncertain, or not certain enough. But even if a discussion from the Scriptures should not turn out in such a way as to place both sides on a par, (yet) the natural order of things would require that this point should be first proposed, which is now the only one which we must discuss: ‘With whom lies that very faith to which the Scriptures belong. From what and through whom, and when, and to whom, has been handed down that rule, by which men become Christians?’ For wherever it shall be manifest that the true Christian rule and faith shall be, there will likewise be the true Scriptures and expositions thereof, and all the Christian traditions…. [A]ll doctrine which agrees with the apostolic churches- those moulds and original sources of the faith must be reckoned for truth, as undoubtedly containing that which the (said) churches received from the apostles, the apostles from Christ, Christ from God. Whereas all doctrine must be prejudged as false which savours of contrariety to the truth of the churches and apostles of Christ and God…. *But if there be any (heresies) which are bold enough to plant themselves in the midst of the apostolic age, that they may thereby seem to have been handed down by the apostles, because they existed in the time of the apostles, we can say: Let them produce the original records of their churches; let them unfold the roll of their bishops, running down in due succession from the beginning* in such a manner that [that first bishop of theirs ] bishop shall be able to show for his ordainer and predecessor some one of the apostles or of apostolic men,- a man, moreover, who continued steadfast with the apostles. For this is the manner in which the apostolic churches transmit their registers: as the church of Smyrna, which records that Polycarp was placed therein by John; as also the church of Rome, which makes Clement to have been ordained in like manner by Peter. In exactly the same way the other churches likewise exhibit (their several worthies), whom, as having been appointed to their episcopal places by apostles, they regard as transmitters of the apostolic seed.” (The Prescription Against Heretics, chapters 19, 21, 32; ANF, Vol. III) “Since this is the case, in order that the truth may be adjudged to belong to us, ‘as many as walk according to the rule,’ which the church has handed down from the apostles, the apostles from Christ, and Christ from God, the reason of our position is clear, when it determines that *heretics ought not to be allowed to challenge an appeal to the Scriptures, since we, without the Scriptures, prove that they have nothing to do with the Scriptures.* For as they are heretics, they cannot be true Christians, because it is not from Christ that they get that which they pursue of their own mere choice, and from the pursuit incur and admit the name of heretics. Thus, not being Christians, they have acquired no right to the Christian Scriptures; and it may be very fairly said to them, ‘Who are you? When and whence did you come? As you are none of mine, what have you to do with that which is mine?'” (The Prescription Against Heretics, chapters 37; ANF, Vol. III)

[@Sanee-n1l]

PS, can I share this?

[@tonyl3762]

@@Sanee-n1l Of course! Please do!

[@clarekuehn4372]

Bishops also are part of liturgical rites, sacramental. The full sacraments are not in Protestantism. And Marian dogmas keep people in line about what holy humanity is.

[@tonyl3762]

Of course there were many presbyters/priests/elders during New Testament times, but that was because the Apostles were ultimately in charge at that time. Later in the NT, when the Apostles are near their deaths, like in Paul's letters to Timothy and Titus, it is fairly clear that the Apostles are putting one man in charge of each local church. It's not just in the Apostolic Fathers that we see this monoepiscopate.

[@harrywaruszewski4956]

They talked about the pope is the unifier and II have a thought on that. There’s a passage that says Satan has demanded you be sifted like wheat, but I have prayed for you, Peter. You see yes Satan tears apart the church, which is why you have so many different fractions and as Christians he does all Christians, but your biggest piece of Christianity still comes from the Catholic Church because it is unified under one person the pope.

[@ric5210]

The guest kind of starts his story at around 6:15 mark

[@tonyl3762]

He made the same argument The Other Paul made about Irenaeus and apostolic succession. So I did some research, and there is clear evidence Irenaeus sees divine/supernatural charisms of indefectibility and authority given to the Church and apostolic succession, with no indication such charisms will disappear or be taken away, not merely an ordinary and natural proximity to the apostolic age: "...therefore, *the tradition* from the apostles does thus exist *in the Church,* and *is permanent* among us...." "[T]he preaching of the Church is everywhere consistent, *and continues in an even course* .... [O]ur faith, which, having been received from the Church, *we do preserve, and which always, by the Spirit of God, renewing its youth.... For this gift of God has been entrusted to the Church, as breath was to the first created man... the [means of] communion with Christ...that is, the Holy Spirit.... 'For in the Church,' it is said, 'God has set apostles, prophets, teachers,' (1 Corinthians 12:28) and all the other means through which the Spirit works;* of which all those are not partakers who do not join themselves to the Church, but defraud themselves of life through their perverse opinions and infamous behavior. For *where the Church is, there is the Spirit of God; and where the Spirit of God is, there is the Church, and every kind of grace; but the Spirit is truth.* Those, therefore, who do not partake of Him...fleeing from the faith of the Church lest they be convicted; and rejecting the Spirit, that they may not be instructed…. Alienated thus from the truth, they do deservedly wallow in all error, tossed to and fro by it, thinking differently in regard to the same things at different times, and never attaining to a well-grounded knowledge, being more anxious to be sophists of words than disciples of the truth. For they have not been founded upon the one rock, but upon the sand...." (Against Heresies, 3, 24, 1-2) “Wherefore it is incumbent to obey the presbyters who are in the Church - those who, as I have shown, possess the succession from the apostles; those who, together with the succession of the episcopate, *have received the certain gift of truth, according to the good pleasure of the Father* .... *Where, therefore, the gifts of the Lord have been placed,* there it behooves us to learn the truth, [namely,] from those who possess that succession of the Church which is from the apostles and among whom exists that which is sound and blameless in conduct, as well as that which is *unadulterated and incorrupt* in speech. For these also *preserve this faith* of ours in one God who created all things; and they increase that love [which we have] for the Son of God, who accomplished such marvellous dispensations for our sake: and they expound the Scriptures to us without danger, neither blaspheming God, nor dishonouring the patriarchs, nor despising the prophets.” (Against Heresies, 4, 26, 2, 5; Ch. 26 is entitled “THE TRUE EXPOSITION OF THE SCRIPTURES IS TO BE FOUND IN THE CHURCH ALONE“) “True knowledge is [that which consists in] the doctrine of the apostles, and *the ancient constitution of the Church throughout all the world,* and the distinctive manifestation of the body of Christ according to the successions of the bishops, by which they have handed down that Church which exists in every place, and *has come even unto us, being guarded and preserved* without any forging of Scriptures, by a very complete system of doctrine, and neither receiving addition nor [suffering] curtailment [in the truths which she believes]; and [it consists in] reading [the word of God] without falsification, and a lawful and diligent exposition in harmony with the Scriptures, both without danger and without blasphemy….” (Against Heresies, 4, 33, 8; Chapter 33 is entitled “WHOSOEVER…DILIGENTLY READS THE SCRIPTURES IN COMPANY WITH THE PRESBYTERS OF THE CHURCH, IS A TRUE SPIRITUAL DISCIPLE; AND HE WILL RIGHTLY UNDERSTAND AND INTERPRET ALL THAT THE PROPHETS HAVE DECLARED RESPECTING CHRIST AND THE LIBERTY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT”)

[@tonyl3762]

Regarding the list of infallible papal doctrines/statements, this is a red herring, as you said. You should have told him that it doesn't really matter whether any particular individual has or knows such a complete list. The point is that the Magisterium can always clarify what was infallibly declared and what was not, if it was unclear, which it often isn't, as you rightly pointed out. Certainly there has been more clarity in recent Church history on what was infallibly declared than in ancient or medieval papal history before the dogma of papal infallibility was more clearly defined.

[@mariocano2767]

Austin looks like he is a cool guy 😎

[@TheCordialCatholic]

Looks like a cool guy and he IS!

[@Kitiwake]

Is that are honest people, and you explain it correctly, they will convert to the truth of the Catholic church. Because inside every God fearing k person is the desire to be closer to Him. As close as possible.

[@joecastillo8798]

Perhaps considering the Bible is the Word of God and finding out who, with Apostolic authority, declared it, would be the first light when going through the 'faith tunnel'.

[@Davcramer]

Austin asked whether our beliefs about Papal authority are Biblically or practically based, and I would imagine that it is a combination of both. I think most Christians can accept that Jesus placed Peter as the head of the Apostles and thus at least in a loose sense as head of all the Christian church. Jesus chose the most energetic, most vocal, most decisive of all the Apostles and said, when I'm gone, you're in charge. Jesus and the Apostles would have recognized understood the concept of hierarchy. The Jews had rabbis, they had the scribes, the Pharisees, the Sadducees, but ultimately at top they had the High Priest. They also knew that they had King Herod who was answerable to Rome, and that Rome had Centurions, Legions, generals, and ultimately at top the Emperor. Why wouldn't Jesus follow the blueprint of the world around him> As a Protestant I picked up, from adults and from reading, that the Catholic Church was the Whore of Babylon and the Pope was the Anti-Christ. So it was kind of a surprise when John Paul II was elected as the new anti-communist Pope from Poland, and to hear the news media (ABC, NBC, and CBS were it), politicians to include Presidents Carter and then Reagan, and Protestant ministers praise him. That was the first thing positive I'd ever heard about the Catholic Church, and it loosened some of my prejudices. THIS Pope, at least, wasn't the Anti-Christ. When I met my future Catholic wife, she was a better Christian than I was and I liked her family. And it just felt wrong to consider them as part of the Whore of Babylon. So I dropped that idea. I stopped attending church when I was 16, but I knew by that time that there were many different Protestant denominations in my small town, and I knew that they differed in beliefs and teachings, but I had no idea who believed what and who didn't. I vaguely understood there were arguments over whether once you were saved you were always saved, or could you lose your salvation? One side said you could be saved then backslide and lose your salvation, the other said that once you're saved you couldn't lose your salvation. But what if you lived a great life as a Christian and then suddenly became a great sinner? Well there argument was that they were never saved in the first place. On the one side you could lose your salvation, while on the other you never really knew whether you were truly saved in the first place. Another argument was pre-destination. Some thought we had free will and could choose to accept or reject the salvation Christ offered us. Others believed that it was out of our hands, that God predestined some to be saved and others for damnation. And you really couldn't tell who was destined where, because from outward appearances someone like Jimmy Carter appears destined for heaven while Donald Trump appears headed elsewhere, but God might have had opposite plans for both since before they were born. Ultimately you don't know where you're going until you get there. I knew nothing about apologetics at 16 (and still don't know a lot), but it just seemed like a real mess having to decide for yourself what is true and what is not, considering the consequences of being wrong. I'm so grateful that with the Catholic Church I'm not expected to make those decisions myself, that I can trust that over a period of nearly 2,000 years there have been enough geniuses within the Catholic Church to figure it out for me. Of all the things I questioned about the Catholic Church, the very easiest to overcome was the Papacy (once I accepted that he wasn't the Anti-Christ). I was in the Army and there was a Chain of Command. Private Schmuck reported to Sergeant Joe Blow who reported to First Sergeant Top Hat who reported to Captain Two Bars who reported to Lt Colonel "the Old Man" who reported to General Two Stars who reported to Secretary of the Army I'm a Civilian who reported to Secretary of Defense I'm One Too who reported to President Jimmy Carter. And it worked out well, it really couldn't have worked out any other way. Someone has to be in charge of every large organization, otherwise the organization is uncoordinated and falls apart. The Pope makes practical sense, otherwise you have... thousands of Protestant denominations.

[@thomasfcrowley9738]

ALL MEMBERS OF EVERY CHURCH MUST PROFESS BELIEF IN THEIR CHURCHS DOCTRINE AND DOMA THE SAME AS IN JESUS'S CHURCH, TOM CROWLEY, CANTON

[@michaelnewberg9735]

In 1870 the Church declared that the Pope when he speaks Ex Cathedra is infallible. Since then only once has that happened in 1950 when he declared the Assumption of Mary.

[@TheCordialCatholic]

Thanks for the information!

[@kitstr]

When was the Immaculate Conception defined? 1854.

[@peterzinya1]

@@TheCordialCatholic According to catholic lore, the woman of Rev 12 is Mary. Please make up your minds. Was Mary assumed to heaven where she has a throne or was she chased by the devil and fled to the wilderness with the help of the earth and went into hiding? You should get your stories straight. Thanks.

[@tonyl3762]

You sure about that? Pope John Paul the Great never used language like "I declare and define by virtue of my office as universal pastor of the Church...." about any doctrine??

[@tonyl3762]

@@peterzinya1 It's not lore. It's an ancient interpretation and the most obvious literal one. There is no need to read a stupid strict chronology into Rev 12; it's quite possible for Mary to be Queen of Heaven at the end of her earthly life but somehow previously "chased by the devil and fled to the wilderness" before her Assumption. You might as well nitpick alleged chronological "inconsistencies"/"contradictions" that atheists like Ehrman throw out against the New Testament. You argue like an atheist against beliefs you just don't want to believe.

[@tonyl3762]

It was not just pagan philosophers who appealed to their prior teachers or successors for their authority; it is not appropriate to try to question or smear apostolic succession by trying to associate it with paganism (a very common Protestant charge or tactic on many doctrines). As with many Catholic doctrines, Jews did this too! The Apostles are merely continuing this tradition of God's people. We can even see this in Scripture itself when the Jewish leaders question how Jesus can speak on His own authority rather than appealing to the teaching of previous rabbis.

[@tonyl3762]

It doesn't make sense philosophically or biblically to acknowledge that Peter had a unique role and leadership and that the apostles did pass on their own leadership and teaching authority to bishops generally but then deny that Peter's specific role was passed down. That his role was passed down is also implicitly confirmed in Clement of Rome's letter and Ignatius of Antioch's letter to Romans and explicitly confirmed by Irenaeus, Hegesippus, and Tertullian who confirm that Linus, Cletus, and Clement succeeded Peter. No one is claiming the Apostles left us more Apostles, 1 to 1.

[@anthonyfowler2623]

Confession

[@paulsmallwood1484]

A PROTESTANT RESPONSE. A nice discussion. A couple of thoughts. If a Christian decides to move their denominational affiliation it should always be due to the guidance of the Holy Spirit and not just from Protestant to Roman Catholic but also if moving from one Protestant communion to another. Any decision like that should be made after seeking the guidance of the Holy Spirit. No believer needs to be “converted” to Roman Catholicism or any other denomination. That is strictly a personal decision. To suggest it is necessary is simply wrong. It is sectarian. What is absolutely essential is going from non believer to Christian which is entirely a work of the Holy Spirit. If we want to talk conversion, if we want to talk the most important conversion, the one that really matters, it is conversion to the Lord Jesus Christ. It literally is a matter of spiritual life or death. Changing from Protestant to Roman Catholic or vice versa is not a matter of spiritual life or death. It is not even close in terms of importance. The pastor is a very articulate young man. I was disappointed to learn that the congregation where he serves as one of the pastors also has female pastors and their lead or senior pastors are a husband and wife team. That is a point of concern. Obviously women are not called to serve as pastors (or priests). I will end with this. Christ has only one church. Denominations are simply different traditions within Christ’s one church. Christ’s one church is made visibly present in the world whereever local churches organized according to the mind of Christ proclaim the Gospel though Word and Sacrament. True Believers and true local churches can be found in all Christian traditions. That is the Catholic Church made visibly manifest in the world. No one Christian communion can make the claim that the Church of Christ exists solely within its institutional boundaries. That is sectarianism. Apostolic Succession is a succession of faithful adherence to the apostolic deposit and not a succession of office. Blessings.

[@johnyang1420]

Jesus started Catholic church

[@tonyl3762]

Can't believe Austin would claim the passages referencing the authority/governance of the Church had nothing to do with doctrinal matters. Paul tells Timothy and Titus to teach and correct with all authority. "Doctrine" is just a Latin-derived word for "teaching." Did the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 not deal with doctrines?? Surprised you didn't mention that specific council in Scripture (unless I missed it) as an example of the visible, institutional, authoritative Church creating/maintaining unity. The Church was divided on the issue of circumcision and the authority of Peter and the council settled the matter to restore unity to the Church.

[@jeanw9160]

Jesus said that unless you eat my body and drink my blood you have no life in you. You do not have the real presence of Jesus without the consecration of the bread and wine at the hands of a priest or bishop, who were validly ordained in the Catholic Church from a Bishop who has been ordained in Apostolic succession handed down from the Apostles. I always take Jesus at his word and don't try and twist the words of scripture to mean something completely different -- Sorry for those who don't believe because of how they were brought up in a protestant church or because their family believed differently. 😪

[@michaelstanley4873]

Ever since Moses wrote there have Always been God's Word guiding God's people! Jesus told the Pharisees to Search the Scriptures! And in Luke 24 : 25 - 32. Jesus gave the two disciples on the Emmaus road an indepth Bible study! The Word of God is the only authority we need with the help of the Holy Spirit! Still good discussion!

[@eric.loves.to.fish1]

What good is scripture if you and your pastor disagree over say, whether baptism is necessary for salvation or not? Who will you turn to for the truth?

[@terrydoan8586]

Yes, I think you did fine... but def could have been better, point him to Fr Alar / Fr Mike Schmit - and def Jimmy Akin - you def could have answered the questions better, I know the faith pretty well and i was confused what you were talking about! :D

[@Bob_Oxnard-sp1gr]

So what did Moses strike to be a conduit for water/life? A rock. What did God later tell Moses to speak to be a conduit for water/life? A rock. What dis Jesus leave us as the conduit for life? The Church, built on the Rock (Peter). How does the church do it? Well, the way Christ EXPRESSLY described in John 6. Distributing the bread of life. It’s really not that hard when you read the Bible without an agenda.

[@Sanee-n1l]

Every power comes from God. Mother Mary can answer prayers because God gave it to her after she followed Christ to the cross. If you listen to our mass/ Eucharistic celebration, it is mentioned that Mary and all the saints had earned all the merits which made them able to request favors from God. While we still strive here on earth, Mary and the saints completed their journey with flying colors thru God's grace. God who is all love and just gave special functions to His saints in heaven to help us all make it to God's kingdom. At the foot of the cross, Jesus told John that Mary is his mother then. Why will our Lord Jesus point to Mary as John's mother when St John had his own mother? Jesus must be referring to the Motherhood of Mary in Heaven. Mother Mary proved it true because she kept coming back to earth to warn us all before the major catastrophes that struck humanity, WW1, WW2, etc.

[@michaelnewberg9735]

Bishops pass on the Euchrist thru ordination of Priests. Whiout them there is no Euchrist.

[@peterzinya1]

God is helpless to come to come unto men because he needs a man in a priest costume to bring him down from heaven. He cant do it himself. God is weak.

[@tonyl3762]

Has Austin actually taken the time to read the primary source works of the Apostolic Fathers? And the other earliest Ante-Nicene fathers?? For a change as stark as from "obey your leaders" to "don't obey your leaders, obey only your interpretation of Scripture," you would think that would be VERY noticeable in early Church history (it was at the time of the Protestant Rebellion). The puberty analogy just doesn't fly. And we just don't see that paradigm shift in the early Church fathers, even and especially after the biblical canon had been settled toward the end of the 4th century. All the evidence favors a Magisterium of bishops and councils (and sufficient evidence for the papal authority, as Erick Ybarra has demonstrated). And I don't know how puberty went for Austin, but for some of us the change is very noticeable at one point in time and we can remember what happened or what we noticed at that point in time.

[@michaelnewberg9735]

While this guy is cordial he is just defending so he doesn't have to really understand the truths you are bringing up. The Holy Spirit has a lot of work to do. 😊

[@michaeloakland4665]

Without duly authorized Bishops, you have no true Eucharist. Period. Christ feeds His Church through Peter and the Bishops in communion with his successors.

[@TheCordialCatholic]

This is certainly the revelation I came to!

[@joecastillo8798]

@michaeloakland4665 Mike, Excellent comment regarding a Holy Spirit inspired Church, that constantly guides the Catholic Church to all truth and unity. John 16:13-14 13. But when the Spirit of truth has arrived, he will teach the whole truth to you. For he will not be speaking from himself. Instead, whatever he will hear, he will speak. And he will announce to you the things that are to come. 14. He shall glorify me. For he will receive from what is mine, and he will announce it to you. John 17:21-23 21. So may they all be one. Just as you, Father, are in me, and I am in you, so also may they be one in us: so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22. And the glory that you have given to me, I have given to them, so that they may be one, just as we also are one. 23. I am in them, and you are in me. So may they be perfected as one. And may the world know that you have sent me and that you have loved them, just as you have also loved me. God bless.

[@sergioracig]

Study the story of Our Lady of Pillar, which occurred while the Apostles, like James, were still alive. But it is not Dogma.

[@anthonyfowler2623]

John 6:22

[@eric.loves.to.fish1]

The authority of scripture is of limited usefulness, even dangerous, if the authority to interpret it infallibly is absent. Ultimately, it's the "a" word - authority - that divides us: who is holding the keys to the kingdom of heaven until Christ returns?

[@anthonyfowler2623]

John 15

[@suneesunee7576]

I think the guy with the cap interview you. You talk more than him

[@TheCordialCatholic]

I’m not sure you read the title of the video. 😎

[@suneesunee7576]

@@TheCordialCatholic I read but please talk less sometimes in your videos you talk too much in the beginning and the guest just stare at you like when he gonna let me speak. 🤷‍♀️

[@danvankouwenberg7234]

If you're a Sola Fide guy, don't you ABSOLUTELY NEED DOCTRINAL UNITY?!!!

[@peterzinya1]

I can understand why catholics have nothing but contempt for the bible. It frowns on making and bowing down befor graven images which is the favorite pastime of catholics.

[@vohloo9797]

Hey, nothing to do with this video, but youtube just keeps recommending me all these Protestants vs. Chatolic video. It's specifically annoying since these aren't topics I search nor care about and no matter how many times I put not interested, they still appear. Anyways just needed to vent for a bit, sorry it had to be this one.

[@kinghenry8615]

None of the New Testament writes or Jesus ever quote from the Apocrypha, not once

[@eric.loves.to.fish1]

How do you know?

[@richardjackson7887]

Lev_26:1 Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it: for I am the LORD your God. Deu_4:16 Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female, Deu_4:23 Take heed unto yourselves, lest ye forget the covenant of the LORD your God, which he made with you, and make you a graven image, or the likeness of any thing, which the LORD thy God hath forbidden thee.

[@anthonyfowler2623]

Read the catatism

[@peterzinya1]

Whats wrong with reading the bible? Catholics never recommend the bible.

[@cherylschalk9106]

I think if the Protestants would do more research on Protestantism, they would see the errors there would be just fruitful as picking apart everything single thing Catholic.

[@Nilunam]

John 21:25 says that Jesus did many things and the world would have no room to contain all the books that could be written about it. That is much of Jesus did and said are not written in the Gospels. For this reason I believe that protestantism and its 'sola scriptura' position concludes and accepts that much of Jesus' ministry on earth is forever lost to humanity whereas the Catholic Church was able to preserved much of it through its traditions and dogmas. As such the Catholic Church posesses a much fuller and more complete representation of the Christian faith.

[@TheCordialCatholic]

Great point!

[@thomasfcrowley9738]

OH !!! WHAT ARE YOU ASKING, TOM CROWLEY, I DO NOT UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION

[@anthonyfowler2623]

Get in touch with bishop Robert Barron

[@tinadavy3990]

Fr. Chad Ripperger ...all of his, only where it is actually HIS podcasts, him actually speaking ... MUCH ENLIGHTENMENT . And ALL his podcasts are FREE ! He's the GENUINE ARTICLE.

[@caseycampbell1386]

I would love to see you interview former Catholics who have LEFT the Faith to explain why they left.

[@evangelion1962]

Below the belt unrepentants.

[@orlandogarcia7043]

Make a video "how to convert a liberal in 15 minutes"

[@richardjackson7887]

Rom_6:23 For the wages of sin is death so you have to die to pay your debt! Rom_6:7 For he that is dead is freed from sin if you listened to God and not man you would know how to die!

[@danielcarriere1958]

How do you put on the death of Christ in Romans?

[@richardjackson7887]

@@danielcarriere1958 Romans 10:17 KJV So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. Proverbs 30:5-6 KJV Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. 6. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

[@danielcarriere1958]

@@richardjackson7887 What about Romans 6 that covers baptism? I'm surprised you didn't quote that since it leads to verse 7 which you did quote. "6 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. 5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6 For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with,[a] that we should no longer be slaves to sin- 7 because anyone who has died has been set free from sin."

[@richardjackson7887]

60 minutes! LOL. eternity is timeless and in hell is where you will pay those wages you have worked so hard for!

[@footspike55]

This dude does not strike me as having thought of these issues with any level of depth. Rampant cynicism.

[@tinadavy3990]

Did the guest speak much at all ?

[@miracles_metanoia]

No. The point of the video is in the title and video description... the guest is daring him to "convert" him in 60 minutes. The guest asks questions and his objections, and Keith's role is to explain

[@darewan8233]

In the question, "how many times has Rome excercised her chrism of infallibility", 6 times, 7 times, etc. ... The point is that Rome has a fallible list of infallible teachings. So it's inconsistent to critcize Prots for having a fallible list of infallible canonical books. With respect.

[@randycarson9812]

Is that a problem? If there is a question that rises to the level of needing a definitive declaration, we have a Magisterium with the authority to make one.

[@darewan8233]

@@randycarson9812 Thanks for the reply. Nope not a problem. Just saying, until Rome uses her chrism of infallibility to produce an infallible list of infallible teachings... the critique that Prots dont have an infallible list of infallible, canonical books is illegit. Respect.

[@evangelion1962]

Not. There is no error in holy mother church. But yes you prots acknowledge your fallacy.

[@randycarson9812]

@@darewan8233 On April 8, 1546, during its fourth session, the Council of Trent issued the "Decree Concerning the Canonical Scriptures," which infallibly declared the list of books that constitute the Catholic Bible. This decree confirmed the inclusion of the deuterocanonical books and reaffirmed the traditional Christian canon that had been accepted since the early centuries of the Church. So, no...apart from the Catholic Church, you have no infallible list of infallible books.

[@darewan8233]

@@randycarson9812 Thanks. Im aware that Rome infallibly declared her canon in the 16th century. Which means the church functioned for over a thous years without such an infallible list of books.Somehow the church identified which books to use in liturgies and theological treatise, missions and translation work, etc. all without an infallible canon. If the early church was able to identify the authoritative writings without such an action, is this really a criticism of Prot? Besides, the question you are replying to is, "... can you identify how many times Rome has exercised her chrism of infallibility?" If there is no official number of times this chrism has been used you are left with a ' fallible list of infallible teachings' and really have no cause to criticize Prots for having a 'fallible list of infallible books'. Respect, appreciate the interaction.

[@richardjackson7887]

Psalms 49:6-7 KJV They that trust in their wealth, and boast themselves in the multitude of their riches; 7. None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:

[@Justas399]

No office of a papacy in the NT church.

[@TheCordialCatholic]

Are you sure about that? 😎

[@Justas399]

@@TheCordialCatholic Yes. The office of a papacy (supreme bishop leader, chief shepherd of the entire church) is never mentioned as a church office in any of the offices of the church described in the New Testament. See I Corinthians 12:28-29; Ephesians 2:20-21, 3:11; I Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus 1:5-9

[@peterzinya1]

@@Justas399 Friend, you know very well the CC doesnt value the words of the bible. Yes, the CC has the core beliefs we all have, but thats where they diverge with all the extras. The CC relies on men in costumes and graven images. Anyway, Jesus has 7 churches (Rev 1-3) and none of them are in Rome.

[@jr9779]

@@peterzinya1. Sola scriptura is heresy. One needs to know history; the Bible and its prefigurement, metaphors, etc. of the Old Covenant to the New Covenant to understand it; also ancient documents and the early Church fathers’ writings. You will see the Mass, you will see the Eucharist, you will see the hierarchy of the Church with the papacy that Jesus “ordained” Peter to hand down. Obviously, Peter wouldn’t live forever and would HACE TO HAVE Apostolic succession. Please do research. It will lead you to then One, Holy, Apostolic, Catholic Church.

[@peterzinya1]

@@jr9779 Thank you for that honest invitation to your church. Im under no obligation to believe these "early church fathers". If i believed every word of these church fathers, then yes, i would have to join the CC. Because they said so. I have "researched CC history, of the popes. It would make a great movie. Murder, intrigue, Brribery, theft, sexual perversion in the highest and then indifference when the papacy was vacant for two yrs because nobody cared. Friend, if i were you i wouldnt recommend people look up CC history if i was trying to convince them the CC is gods true church. Just sayin. At this point, when i tell this to a YT commenter, they never get back with me. They take off. I believe in my 20 yr history of witnessing to catholics, not one has not away run when i tell them this. I could be wrong.....im wrong 400 times a day, but if someone did, i just dont remember it. Sex drugs and rock and roll has dulled my senses.

[@kinghenry8615]

The Catholics removed the commandment forbidding the worship of graven images

[@nanaioftwo]

“Thou shall not bear false witness.” It is not worth to damn yourself to hell for claiming unsubstantiated claim. Read the Bible and understand them. Know the Catholic teaching and what it stands for. The come back and bark this nonsense.

[@richardjackson7887]

Wow, I knew the RCC was sick but when I heard the testimony of a Nun imprisoned in a RC Monastery for scores of years I didn't know how sick you people Actually were. But of course you will deny your atrocities but you can't hide from God and he will recompense those atrocities! Hebrews 10:31 KJV It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God...

[@johnyang1420]

You are basing the entire Catholic church based on one nun?

[@richardjackson7887]

@@johnyang1420 Yes, based on Jesus the Word of God who gave us all scripture.

[@ewaldradavich7307]

Not rooted and grounded in the word

[@douglaspraskovich6178]

You talk way too much. Very irritating.

[@joecastillo8798]

@dougkaspraskovich6178 Doug, "Irritating" for the close-minded; not so for the intellectually curious. Practice patience and charity, my friend; you'll go a long way in your spiritual journey.

[@miracles_metanoia]

Usually, his videos are the guest speaking mostly, for the testimonial. This video is different - it's in the title and video description - the guest is asking questions to see if he could be evangelozed in 60 minutes. This requires the youtuber to do the majority of the talking, explaining, and hopefully helping to lead to conversion

[@peterzinya1]

@@miracles_metanoia You can talk to me for a million yrs. Ill never bow down to catholic idols, or bring my children to that pack of wolves.

[@margielamaton8517]

Give the guest time to speak more.

[@dyilandlord3518]

Scam

[@TheCordialCatholic]

Yeah?

[@Spiritof76Catholic]

Mr. Holt Jesus set up the Catholic Church which is his body and bride, sent the Holy Spirit to guide it to all truth and help the Church remember all that he taught. I’m sorry you disagree with Jesus. Jesus also promised to be with his Church to the end of the age. These are the Biblical and historical facts. At 1:06 Mr. Holt you finally get it almost right. Yes. Every Catholic Church teaching, dogma, document and belief are in fact checked against Sacred Scripture. What you refuse to believe is how the authority Jesus gave His Church, Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium have a role as Cordial Catholic explained but you summarily dismiss. And yes Mr. Holt Jesus set up a hierarchy with Peter as the lead Apostle as the early Ecumenical Council of Jerusalem shows when Peter spoke everyone was silent, Acts 15:12. So Mr. Holt it’s about Jesus and the Catholic Church not thousands of protestant denominations reading the Bible and deciding what it means with no authority to interpret Sacred Scripture. Your understanding of the Marian Dogmas is atrocious. Jesus spoke through the Holy Spirit to the Church. I as a Catholic Christian I may not understand how or why God worked through the Church to arrive at these conclusions so it’s up to me to accept what the Church teaches and accept them in humble gratitude.