Who's Right About the 12 Apostles: Protestants or Catholics?

Consider supporting this ministry: patreon.com/HistoriaEcclesias...
In this Questions in Church History episode, we take a look at Sacred Scripture and the Church Fathers to determine if the ancient Christian (Catholic and Orthodox) or Evangelical notion of the Apostolic ministry better aligns with the Holy Bible and historical record.

[@hectoribanez5954]

This is good information to defend our Catholic faith…..thank you for taking the time and effort to make this video.

[@wallamboklahong9125]

God bless you, for bring us the Truth of Christ' Church, thank you.

[@Runsfrombears]

I’m really loving your videos. Very useful!!

[@user-hu4gr1bo5g]

🕯🕊🍀🔔🔔🔔 Very Well Done !!! The Lord be with you... (& with your spirit...)

[@CatholicK5357]

Great information, and good subtle joke with the bonus question. I had no idea that the married Priests in the Eastern Catholic and schismatic sects were continent. I am part of the Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter, which is a North American jurisdiction of former Anglican communities that came into full communion with Rome while retaining much of their tradition in a unique form of the Roman rite. They allow married former Anglican "clergy" to come in and be ordained as Catholic Priests, but only accept celibate Priests if they are coming in from seminarian. I am now curious if they require continence. I hope so, since that seems to be the ancient requirement, but I am worried that there might be a rupture there based on their potential misunderstanding of history.

[@historiaecclesiastica]

To my knowledge, no married priests today practice marital continence. A married clergy certainly creates a tension between the two vocations - I suppose the Church today emphasizes the importance of the conjugal act while the Church fathers emphasized the importance of continence to emphasize the role of the priest as Christ the bridegroom.

[@alhilford2345]

Excellent! Lots of good information here. Thank you.

[@MB-zn9vg]

47:27 I think it was plural originally. In many languages, for example in Italian, my mother tongue, “Heaven” and “Heavens” are translated into “Cielo” and “Cieli”, literally the Sky, the Skies (I’m not mentioning Paradiso here because I’m referring to Scripture translation). In fact we translate “The Kingdom of Heaven” as “Il Regno dei Cieli”. Probably a reference to the various levels. This is just my theory as I haven’t checked the original writings of the Fathers

[@andreaboghi5820]

First of all, thank you for this, you do a great job and you should be praised. However, I have found your argument on celibacy not convincing and not consistent with scripture and tradition. In the Latin version of the Bible in 1 Tim 3 when they speak about bishops the term used is "uxor". Uxor is wife, not sister. I checked the Greek text and says "γυναικὸς" which is wife, not sister. This is consistent with the later text when he talks about the children of the bishop. A bishop cannot have children if he doesn't have a wife. In tradition we have 2 sources, the Apostolic Constitutions and the 85 Canons of the 12 Apostles. There are instructions for presbyters and bishops with wives and for their children. This is also consistent with the history of the church. A famous case is Marcion, who was a bishop and son of a Bishop. One of the controversy in the schism of 1054 was the celibacy of the clergy, practiced in the Easter Churches and therefore of Apostolic traditions. Today, Easter Catholic who are married can be ordained as priests. What we can say for sure is that both celibates and not priests and bishops were always present in the church. You cite the church canons: which ones? Certainly not the 85 Canons they do not match what you show here. The reason why celibacy was becoming a requirement is that mass started to be offered every day. The priest was asked to abstain from the conjugal act 3 days before offering mass, hence Ambrose statement. Since mass started to be offered everyday, it became impossible for a priest to be married. In conclusion I have one consideration: we shouldn't try to force our current view of things on the past. The Church has made changes through history to respond to the challenges of the time. Peter has 2 keys, one to bind and one to loose, it is fine, the Church can do this we shouldn't be scandalized, but also not denying it.

[@historiaecclesiastica]

Definitely early traditions support the idea that many apostles were married before their callings and may have had children before their calling, but the tradition would also hold that the apostles practiced abstinence after being ordained. Early Church canons also suggest that in the event that a married man was ordained to the clerical state, he was to practice continence with his spouse and live as a brother/sister with her: Synod of Elvira (c. 305) (Canon 33): "It is decided that marriage be altogether prohibited to bishops, priests, and deacons, or to all clerics placed in the ministry, and that they keep away from their wives and not beget children; whoever does this shall be deprived of the honor of the clerical office." Council of Carthage (390) (Canon 3): "It is fitting that the holy bishops and priests of God as well as the Levites, i.e. those who are in the service of the divine sacraments, observe perfect continence, so that they may obtain in all simplicity what they are asking from God; what the Apostles taught and what antiquity itself observed, let us also endeavor to keep.... It pleases us all that bishop, priest and deacon, guardians of purity, abstain from conjugal intercourse with their wives, so that those who serve at the altar may keep a perfect chastity." Thus, bishops/priests may have had children, but for this to have been licit, they would have been conceived before ordination. My understanding is that these ideals/canons were widely abused, partially explaining why the Latin Rite forbid married clerics altogether, to protect the dignity of holy orders. Marcion, by the way, was a gnostic heresiarch, and Tertullian's "Against Marcion" says that his father was a gnostic as well. That's neither here nor there considering the point that you're making that it wasn't abnormal for early bishops to have wives and children - according to early church evidence, however, they were supposed to be sexually continent after ordination.

[@haengbukhaeyo]

Original is always be original...after 2000+ years still going stronger. there's a lot of photo copying now of man made denominations.

[@maverickkajy6427]

Do you know Aubrey in your class she is my cousin

[@aleksandarstavric2226]

Papism as the Oldest Protestantism by the Blessed Fr. Justin (Popovich) What are, on the other hand, the fruits of the God-Man society [the Church]?-Saints, Martyrs, and Confessors. That is its goal, that is its meaning and design, that is the proof of its indestructible strength. Not books and libraries, systems and cities-all things that are here today and gone tomorrow. The various pseudo-Christian humanisms fill the world with books, while Orthodoxy fills it with the hallowed. In the European West, Christianity has gradually transformed into humanism. For a long time and arduously, the God-Man diminished, and has been changed, narrowed, and finally reduced to a man: to the infallible man in Rome and the equally "infallible" man in London and Berlin. Thus did papism come into being, taking everything from Christ, along with Protestantism, which asks the least from Christ, and often nothing. Both in papism and in Protestantism, man has been put in the place of the God-Man, both as the highest value and as the highest criterion. A painful and sad correction of the God-Man's work and teaching has been accomplished. Steadily and stubbornly papism has tried to substitute the God-Man with man, until in the dogma about the infallibility of the pope-a man, the God-Man was once and for all replaced with ephemeral, "infallible" man; because with this dogma, the pope was decisively and clearly declared as something higher than not only man, but the holy Apostles, the holy Fathers, and the holy Ecumenical councils. With this kind of a departure from the God-Man, from the ecumenical Church as the God-Man organism, papism surpassed Luther, the founder of Protestantism. Thus, the first radical protest in the name of humanism against the God-Man Christ, and his God-Man organism-the Church-should be looked for in papism, not in Lutheranism. Papism is actually the first and the oldest Protestantism. We should not do this ourselves. Papism indeed is the most radical Protestantism, because it has transferred the foundation of Christianity from the eternal God-Man to ephemeral man. And it has proclaimed this as the paramount dogma, which means: the paramount value, the paramount measure of all beings and things in the world. And the Protestants merely accepted this dogma in its essence, and worked it out in terrifying magnitude and detail. Essentially, Protestantism is nothing other than a generally applied papism. For in Protestantism, the fundamental principle of papism is brought to life by each man individually. After the example of the infallible man in Rome, each Protestant is a cloned infallible man, because he pretends to personal infallibility in matters of faith. It can be said: Protestantism is a vulgarized papism, only stripped of mystery (i.e., sacramentality), authority and power. Through the reduction of Christianity, with all its eternal God-Man qualities, to man, Western Christianity has been turned into humanism. This may seem paradoxical, but it is true in its irresistible and unerasable historical reality. Because Western Christianity is, in its essence, the most decisive humanism; and because it has proclaimed man as infallible, and has turned the God-Man religion into a humanist religion. And that this is so is shown by the fact that the God-Man has been driven to the heavens, while his place on earth has been filled with his replacement, Vicarius Christi-the pope. What a tragic piece of illogic: to establish a replacement for the everywhere-present God and the Lord Christ! But this piece of illogic has been incarnated in Western Christianity: the Church has been transformed into a state, the pope has become a ruler, bishops have been proclaimed princes, priests have become leaders of clerical parties, the faithful have been proclaimed papal subjects. The Gospel has been replaced with the Vatican’s compilation of canon law; Evangelical ethic and methods of love have been replaced with casuistry, Jesuitry and the "holy" Inquisition. What does all this mean? With the systematic removal and destruction of everything that does not bow to the pope, even with forced conversions to the papal faith, and the burning of sinners for the glory of the meek and the mild Lord Jesus!

[@thegospelpreacher108]

1 Corinthians 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ. Peter was not the rock Jesus said. Even Peter said: "1 Peter 2:8 And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed."

[@alhilford2345]

Jesus said, "...YOU are Cephas..." He did not say, "....I am Cephas..."

[@hesicast]

Peter means little rock. Christ is the Rock.

[@MB-zn9vg]

Uff again with this “argument”

[@hesicast]

@@MB-zn9vg It's not an argument. It's the Truth.

[@t.d6379]

​@MB-zn9vg these Prots have no critical thinking, they're just full of hate and cannot understand the bible can be interpreted in so many ways that's why there are 20,000 Prot churches.

[@MasterKeyMagic]

read it in Aramaic

[@bengoolie5197]

that's ur story and ur stikin toit!@@hesicast

[@aleksandarstavric2226]

Orthodox are right - 'cause Orthodox are first and authentic catholics . Also , Orthodox Church real name is One Holly Catholic and Apostolic Church. Roman patriarchal see was one of the patriarchal sees of Orthodox Church but Rome end it up excommunicated and the rest is a history .....

[@historiaecclesiastica]

I would encourage you to watch the video.

[@tradertrader8838]

Orthodoxy is a fake.

[@DjFobse95]

In Matthew 28:19-20, Jesus commands his apostles to make disciples of all nations. The Roman Catholic Church were the ones to make good on that promise while the Orthodox have little to no influence outside of Eastern Europe. Constantinople fell to the Muslims on Pentecost for a reason

[@VMAri-in5cl]

This guy is very obnoxious and off putting