why it is the Orthodox who are in schism

[@dr.mofongo9001]

I’m a cradle Catholic who became Protestant, and now revisiting Catholicism after learning about the early church. This topic has been of great interest to me, so I appreciate you posting this.

[@lulabella9249]

I will pray for your return Home 🙏the rosary 📿 will guide you back 🙏

[@Journey_of_Abundance]

Be sure to check out Orthodox responses to these arguments before making up your mind. Ubi Petrus, Jay Dyer, Seraphim Hamilton, Fr Josiah Trenham and David Erhan are all great Orthodox resources.

[@navinfernandes747]

Come back quickly friend.. nothing like being part of "the church"- the catholic church..

[@N1IA-4]

@@Journey_of_Abundance Personally, I have watched hours of their argumentation from EO and am not convinced. They are mostly sophist and intellectual in nature. The Catholic Church is responsible for great human florrishing in the West, with hospitals, monasteries, schools, charities...the list goes on and on. With all due respect......what have Orthodox done to promote the common good? They are in schism, just as the Protestants are. Don't you think it odd that they have hated of the Pope in common? The True Church will be obvious to those who truly want to know the truth.

[@Journey_of_Abundance]

@@N1IA-4 The Orthodox has traditionally remained more eastward geologically than Roman Catholics, but that is changing. You are not going to see the positive effects of Orthodoxy as much because of your lack of physical proximity to them. One great example of where the Orthodox did promote the common good in the West is the evangelizing to and baptizing of native Alaska. Contrast the way the Orthodox evangelized the natives in Alaska with how the Roman Catholic conquistadors brutalized the east coast natives into submission (just as their protestant counterparts did). I would argue that because Orthodoxy has objectively preserved the apostolic tradition better than papists, Orthodox dominant countries have less secularism going on that is tearing apart the moral fabric of western society as we speak. That is more good than any school or hospital. Are you really unaware of Orthodox monasteries? Mount Athos is the most grand and holy monastic society in the world. There have been temporary severances all throughout church history, so not sure why you think this is a valid point. From our perspective, we see no actual unity between, say, clown mass novus ordo and SSPX. True unity lies in unity of dogma, not one man. That doesn't make us hate the pope either. We just understand he is a bishop in error leading many different churches that have little in common with each other and somehow still calling it "one" and "catholic." We understand the first millennium church that we are the continuity of had a conciliar bishopric, even if they recognized primacy in the pope. Primacy did not mean supremacy nor indefectibility. Even Peter was in error many times and was not above correction. The Roman Catholics are responsible for the biggest, most destructive schism of all, which was the protestant reformation. Why has there never been a protestant schism from the Orthodox Church? It's because we are the original church and our teachings are so dogmatized and universal, that it does not allow for such heresies like those found in protestantism to foment. Protestantism is a logical flow from Roman Catholicism. They have more in common with each other theologically than we do with either of them.

[@Augnatius]

This answered so many questions I had about Eastern Orthodoxy and Catholicism. I had a hunch that the chair of St. Peter and all under it was the church of Christ but this helped put my difficulties to rest. Please pray for me, a former atheist considering conversion

[@dawncresci2724]

Praying

[@tumutegyereizeben2276]

Never too late, as long as you're doing the right thing! Go forward listen to the voice of God deep within.

[@davidestate]

God Bless for the Holy Ghost spoke to you and you listened.

[@LiamLoves]

You're going to make it.

[@Augnatius]

@@LiamLoves I made it brother, doing RCIA in October, God bless you

[@stevenwall1964]

This is one of my new favorite channels. The messages are succinct and to the point. One of the reasons I converted to Catholicism is that the church was obviously Catholic for 1,000 years. The claims made by the Orthodox seemed to be claims in retrospect. Also, as soon as the Orthodox went into schism then what happened to Orthodoxy's unity? The Orthodox could then not agree among themselves and began to split into factions with contradicting beliefs. The true Church of Christ used the example of Acts 15 of holding Councils to define doctrine when there was any disagreement. This is how the church remained unified. Christ said his church would be unified. And holding Councils in Acts 15 and then Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus, Chalcedon and so on kept the church unified. Once the Orthodox went into schism, they claimed to be the original true church but then they almost immediately started to split into factions that disagreed with each other and they cannot hold councils because they cannot agree on who has the ultimate authority. And now there are 17 different Orthodox branches. If the Catholic Church is not the original church then which of the 17 Orthodox branches is the one?

[@PokerMonkey]

"To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant", Cardinal Newman.

[@YourBoyJohnny94]

Reading the Church fathers made me Protestant, Cardinal Newman was wrong.

[@michaelbarry1664]

@YourBoyJohnny94 Yeah I’m gonna go with the saint on this one. No more prot nonsense, please.

[@YourBoyJohnny94]

@@michaelbarry1664 Papism is literally nonsense, using forgeries like the Donation of Constantine and developing non bibblical practices that the church fathers didn’t practiced.

[@cinta3805]

@@YourBoyJohnny94 so you went to the 40,000 confuse prots? The devil is the master of confusion. Truly 1 bible = 40,000+ prot churches of diffirent founders, teachings and beliefs is not the work of the Holy Spirit.

[@YourBoyJohnny94]

@@cinta3805 Even within your Roman institution there’s division, it’s laughable you throw that number around but as long as one of those “40k denominations” are faithful to the word of God and don’t commit idolatry or systematically abuse children or even start communist revolutions like the Jesuits are known to do in Latin America then I’m good where I’m at.

[@robertcarter2882]

When Our Lord returns we shall all find out who is In Schism. The Devil has loved the separation of East and West. The worst event in the history of the Church.

[@LWNightmareSheriff]

I think the Protestant "reformation" was worse

[@Bruno97118]

​@@LWNightmareSheriffagree

[@notyourtypicalcomment2399]

The idolatry in the Catholic Church is crazy

[@Bruno97118]

@@notyourtypicalcomment2399 I don't see no catholic worshiping their Saints

[@notyourtypicalcomment2399]

@@Bruno97118 forgive me, i thought they bowed down and pray to the saints.

[@pmull6784]

I appreciate a slow, sober view of Catholicism. As someone who was raised by a nervous neurotic, it's personally comforting that the Catholic Church decides things at the rate grass grows and paint dries. I think we will eventually fully embrace (I want to use the word absorb, but that sounds creepy) the eastern Church and become one Church. It might take a while, but we have a while, don't we?

[@pemcortes9467]

Yes, we definitely have a while. Buts souls have only a moment.

[@IsraelCountryCube]

I peay lol that Catholic church absorbs Orthodoxy and protestants in Jesus name force us as knxe church and not decision devision amen! Absorbed time! Abaorbing tumeee

[@ao-111]

On what grounds? The Eastern churches and their parishioners have no interest in that and think that your church is in error and needs to rejoin them. Obviously.

[@observer8477]

we never know if we have a while,at any time our Lord can come back...so no we dont have a while,its one church the Christs Holy church and we should have fix this problem...im orthodox from greece but i believe that we have to fix this issue cause satan likes this devide and conquer...

[@Damjans97]

I am an Orthodox. When I go to confession, my sin is not forgiven by the Priest. The priest gave me advice on what I should do and how to pray that God would forgive me for my sin. The Priest also prays to God to forgive my sin. The Priest can not delete my sin. Only God has the power to do so.

[@Error._.404]

Yeah same here in the Catholic Church I think he just explained it improperly but yes it is only God who forgives sin

[@ivicaautivelic793]

Truly, I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven" (Mt 18:18).

[@alexpanagiotis4706]

Well, I am orthodox too and our Holy Mother Church has the power from GOD to forgive sins. IT IS THROUGH CHRIST THAT THE CHURCH HAS SUCH POWER.

[@emmanuelogbu8851]

What about John 20:23

[@stevenwall1964]

Look at Scripture; Jesus said "whoever sins you forgive are forgiven, and whosever sins you retain are retained." Of course it is all through the power of the Holy Spirit, but guided by the Holy Spirit the priest has to make a judgment.

[@elcaponeholyemperorofnj1169]

Speaking of which, there are schisms from the ortho church that came back to the Catholic Church. Most notably the Byzantine Rite & the Coptic Rite & so on. Pretty much any schism that exists, the Catholic Church has a rite that it came from

[@Journey_of_Abundance]

It goes both ways. St Alexis brought many uniate Roman Catholics in America back to the Orthodox Church

[@Journey_of_Abundance]

@@rangefinderz5135 My point was that it doesn't prove anything one way or another if it goes both ways. The doctrinal differences are major, actually. I could see how Roman Catholics would think so on the surface, but our worldview is far different than yours. In fact, you share more with protestants than you do with us. The Orthodox would be all for unification, actually, just not on the pope's terms. We do not see true unity in the pope's ring. We see true unity in conciliarity and oneness of dogma.

[@Journey_of_Abundance]

@@rangefinderz5135 They recognized primacy, but there was no "submission." The church was conciliar. Your church looks nothing like the first thousand years of Christianity, and now your services are barely distinguishable from protestantism and your schismatic bishop wants to eliminate any semblance of traditional worship you had, yet you still want us to believe we are supposed to unite around this one man. The lack of self awareness when you say our patriarchs dont want to lose power, yet the pope would never humble himself to a conciliar episcopate, is indicative of your projection.

[@Journey_of_Abundance]

@@rangefinderz5135 you say all this while ignoring the point from our perspective, which is that we do not find unity in one man, but in dogma and conciliarity. Somehow with our "flawed system" (from your perspective), we have preserved the traditions better than you. And no, it isn't just your current guy. It's been a history of one guy's that has made your church constantly evolve. The whole "nationalist" churches thing is played out and intentionally obtuse. We all have the same liturgy and the same chalice. How many different rites do you have all doing different things?

[@Journey_of_Abundance]

@@rangefinderz5135 I have no problem with being unified. We want all to come into the fold of the church. But you cannot join the church without repentance. We see ourselves as the true church as much as you do. When we see the Roman papal system, we see a hodge podge of sects (made up of sincere people no doubt) in various degrees of error all "uniting" around one man and calling it one and Catholic. That's not what One and Catholic mean to us. Just like a catechumen must renounce their former beliefs that are irreconcilable with church dogma, the papists would also have to renounce and repent of their errors, lest the bleed into the church.

[@N1IA-4]

Looking forward to watching this. I agree with the premise you are giving. It also seems that EO has a "spirit of Protestantism" if I may use a coloquialism, in that they reject the Pope and take the negative position against Rome, the same as Protestants. It usually is a pretty good indicator that the most hated Church on earth could very well be the true one. Scripture tells us that the world will hate the true Church. I'm a Bible college graduate and former Pastor, and am a Lutheran, on my way to converting to RC. It is simply undeniable, and remaining in any of these other groups is tantamount to "kicking against the pricks."

[@fortunefair]

I heard from a personal revelation of a French priest recently with this wording, that "The Church will bleed from all of Her wounds." It indicates a very difficult time ahead, based on the fact that the Church, as the Bride of Christ, will have to suffer a Passion like Jesus.

[@bernardauberson7218]

Les Églises orientales n’ont rien de commun avec les Églises protestantes pleines d’hérésies.

[@countryboyred]

When 1 leaves the other 4, who is really a Protestant?

[@Nieve_perdida]

From what I'm seeing people hate the Evangelicals far more than the Catholics...

[@alexchristopher221]

In establishing a universal (catholic) family of faith during his active ministry, Jesus begins to redefine Israel in the figure of Mother Zion with his mother Mary kept in mind (Mt 12:47; Mk 3:32; cf. Jn 19:26-27): "Behold your mother." The nation shall no longer be defined by national boundaries or birthright, but by faith, as the New Zion or Church shall extend beyond its borders and receive the Gentiles into God’s family kingdom. The autocephalous ecclesial structures of the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox churches are essentially national churches that fail to square with Christ's vision of His Church. Autocephaly is the status of a hierarchical Christian church whose head bishop (Patriarch) does not report to any higher-ranking bishop., viz. the Vicar of Christ (Bishop of Rome). Thus, it is the Orthodox and Oriental churches that are in schism.

[@hxrx9670]

Neither by Christ or any apostle the title of "vicar of Christ" was used. The sole term is heretic since it states the absence of Christ and the need for a replacement on Earth. "I will be with you until the end of the days". For Orthodoxy, just like it was for all Church Fathers, Christ is always present, no need for a "vicar".

[@nikopawlowic6557]

Our Eastern Orthodox brothers are very much like us Catholics, and I have yet to find an orthodox priest that would refuse a Catholic the teachings of God. We do have our differences, however we are very much the same. I look at it from a perspective of two brothers, yes we share a Father and Mother, but we just have differences of perspective and organization, but never faith nor love for one another.

[@kwazooplayingguardsman5615]

evil forces are moving, mayhaps it is time for estranged brothers to reconcile their differences.

[@cruznature7545]

I've spoken to a few Orthodox they refuse to reunification because they believe Catholics are heretics, I'm afraid that's what's being taught in their Church’s and it's going to very difficult for uniting back together. Catholics are willing but Orthodox are not.

[@HubertofLiege]

An Orthodox priest will refuse communion to a catholic

[@Hope_Boat]

We are not alike. We didn't modify our creed, our liturgy and we didn't innovated our dogmas. This was recognized in 1995 when John-Paul II requested the publication of this clarification : The Catholic Church acknowledges the conciliar, ecumenical, normative and irrevocable value, as expression of the one common faith of the Church and of all Christians, of the Symbol professed in Greek at Constantinople in 381 by the Second Ecumenical Council. No profession of faith peculiar to a particular liturgical tradition can contradict this expression of the faith taught and professed by the undivided Church.

[@nikopawlowic6557]

@Hope_Boat you might be right about that, but didn't Saint Peter and Saint Paul have their own disagreements about whom should receive the gospel? Who was wrong then? And while I do acknowledge that your doctrine is by far better than what the catholic church has been doing recently, it makes me no less a believer in Jesus and a fellow Christian. I pray that you can find in your heart to not hold any hatred for me because I have none for you.

[@irenemccann7032]

I’m glad I was born Into a Roman Catholic family, I love my faith and know it’s the true church that Jesus left in the hands of Peter.

[@lacatusuionut4387]

The False prophet Bergoglio(or Pope Francis) is controlled by satan. Please read the Seal Of The Living God messages given to the last prophet Maria Divine Mercy by The Holy Trinity and The Holy Mary between 2010 - 2015. The last true Pope was Benedict XIV. The Second Coming of Jesus Christ will be in our generation!

[@seekingtruth5637]

Roman Catholism has crumbled big time start from the head papacy

[@irenemccann7032]

@@seekingtruth5637 dream on ,we’ve survived since Jesus left his church in the hands of Peter and we will carry on regardless of all the other man made religions .

[@seekingtruth5637]

@irenemccann7032 look at the state of your church and popes its crumbled

[@seekingtruth5637]

@irenemccann7032 let's start with 1986 Assisi and veneration of a false gospel the Quran

[@vigilantchristian6314]

Ok so, Rome innovated and changed tradition but the Eastern Orthodox are called schismatics

[@billyjackson2605]

Did you watch the video?

[@christophersalinas2722]

filioque is true bro

[@athanasiusofalexandria4304]

@@christophersalinas2722I am Orthodox, and I love this channel and have no desire to argue the complexities of the Filioque here. But I will just say it’s more complex than that one sentence.

[@christophersalinas2722]

@@athanasiusofalexandria4304 It’s either true or not. Like Jesus is either God or not. Or Christianity is the true religion or not.

[@athanasiusofalexandria4304]

@@christophersalinas2722 I agree with that statement (depending on what “it” is) and what language you are speaking of. But I also reaffirm my last statement.

[@beatlecristian]

So the Eastern Orthodox had no problem with the Papacy until they decided they did? It makes no sense.

[@LorenzoMasterConnector]

Because there is no other real reasons to leave.

[@shobudski6776]

It makes no sense because that isn’t what happened. 😂

[@DylanGames1000]

@@shobudski6776It is.

[@dovikien1758]

because we didnt see a papacy we saw first among equals the position gave to rome

[@EricAlHarb]

That’s not our position. We agree that the bishop of Rome has a primacy. But we define the primacy as being first amongst equal bishops.

[@demidvfedorov]

Orthodox here. I watch your content and that of other Catholics with respect. The schism is, and will not be reconciled. Could anyone suggest otherwise under the current direction of the papacy (not just Francis)? We all know what, and who, is coming, likely within our lifetimes. This is no time for in-fighting among Christians. I can say that the Orthodox have not deviated one iota from the true faith.

[@alvaradoac21]

But when you limit the Holy Spirit from proceeding from the Son, are you not committing blasphemy against the Spirit or the Son?

[@cruznature7545]

Actually they have changed, but you're right, this is no time to in fight amongst each other. We need to stand together against the evil force that I believe already walks this earth.

[@billyjackson2605]

Submit to Rome

[@christophersalinas2722]

filioque is true bro

[@alexpanagiotis4706]

​@@alvaradoac21THE Holy Fathers say ONLY THE FATHER IS A CAUSE. HE IS THE SOURCE. THE HOLY SPIRIT IS NOT A POWER OR ENERGY - HE IS A PERSON

[@casey00X]

Now I want to know more about the Orthodox Church because I didn’t understand any of that. If their Eucharist is valid, then how are they in schism? Beautiful churches, by the way. Thanks for the video.

[@GamerDragoniteCross]

St. Ignatius - Where the bishop is, there is the Catholic Church. So yes I also wonder this same thing. Lord have mercy.

[@universalflamethrower6342]

Read into Fatima

[@miracles_metanoia]

Their eucharist is valid because of apostolic succession. Their divine liturgy is identical to eastern catholicism, as well as sacraments.

[@arturobm1073]

They are in schism because they declare they are not part of the Catholic Church, even though the Catholic Church has accepted Orthodox sacraments and saints. It's the Orthodox deep pride and regionalism what keep them away from the Catholic Church.

[@Hope_Boat]

Orthodox here. What happened in the 11th century according to the French Cardinal and theologian Yves Congar (Dient in 1995) : "A Christian of the Fourth or Fifth Century would have felt less bewildered by the forms of piety current in the Eleventh Century than would his counterpart of the Eleventh Century in the forms of the Twelfth. The great break occurred in the transition period from the one to the other century. This change took place only in the West where, sometime between the end of the Eleventh and the end of the Twelfth Century, everything was somehow transformed. THIS PROFOUND ALTERATION OF VIEW DID NOT TAKE PLACE IN THE EAST where, in some respects, Christian matters are still today what they were then and what they were in the West before the end of the Eleventh Century." Why? Because the chair of Rome fall in the hands of the Germans by 1014. And the germans wanted a schism between Rome and the east because they had "inherited" the Western Roman empire with the help of the forged Donation of Constantine. The second ever German pope, count Bruno von Egisheim-Dagsburg, alias Leo IX, claimed the imperial insignia for himself and constituted an imperial Roman Pontifical state, (Pontifex Maximus is the religious title of the Roman emperors) along with a Roman Senate (assembly of Cardinals) wearing the imperial scarlet and purple, ans a State Chancellor, the infamous Humbert de Moyenmoutiers who provoked the schism of 1054. Leo IX kickstarted the Gregorian Reformation that turned the Church of Rome into a personal religion of the Roman Pontiff, culminating with the proclamation fo the dogma of salvation by submission to the Roman Pontiff in 1304 (Unam Sanctam). A rebirth of the personal cult of the Roman Emperor. Babylon.

[@me-ds2il]

*"ERROR"* After the Holy Roman emperor Charlemagne was crowned emperor by the Pope, the emperor declared the Pope of Rome to have primacy over all the others. Therefore Charlemagne really exalted the Papacy after which the Roman church grew by leaps & bounds. Therefore the speaker saying that the Church of Rome is the true church bc it has no political affiliation is in: *"ERROR"*

[@JaimeAlvarez-r9u]

so Charlemagne being born is bad got it.

[@me-ds2il]

I didn't say Charlemagne being born was bad did I? Take it any way you like. But the fact is that the Catholic church, east & west has had political affiliations & vice versa for may hundreds of years. All the way back to Constantine. To pretend like only the Eastern Orthodox only have been is either ignorance or lying And learn to read properly

[@franciscoflamenco]

Even if that objection is granted, surely you've noticed that the Catholic church has no ties to any third political entity now, while the Patriarch of Moscow, spiritual leader of the majority of Orthodox, is ok doing something as horrible as blessing weapons meant to kill fellow Christians in Ukraine.

[@dr.j5642]

Wow this was a great video. Learned a few things I hadn’t heard about. Grateful for this channel. To God be the praise, glory, and joy. Amen

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

This video is so unintentionally conceptually bad I don't know how to communicate it without being dishonest but also being charitable. The videos chief and most obvious error is that it simple presumes upon papal supremacy from the get go. It does not discuss the fact that for over 100 years before 1204 the Roman Catholics were creating parallel jurisdictions in the West and east. This is definitionally schismatic...sort of a big detail to overlook. Finally anyone who appeals to Florence and Lyons is simply not aware of facts. Nicea 2 defines that an Ecumenical council has the reception of all the synods. Simply all the synods did not accept Lyons or Florence. St mark of Ephesus for example was one of the synods legates. This video literally contains nothing the least bit relevant to the question...not because I impute bad motives to the creator but because of ignorance. My apologies for being frank.

[@me-ds2il]

No, no. Please, be frank and be bold about it

[@me-ds2il]

Please be frank and be bold about it

[@franciscoflamenco]

How does it presuppose Papal supremacy?

[@t.d6379]

Orthodox cope as usual, this is basically what you guys do on your channels all year long. Year after year.

[@t.d6379]

With that said, we are Catholic - truly! You Orthodox are simply and clearly not catholic. A simple look over the Orthodox Church and how it operates in the world today is all you need to do to witness the fact the Orthodox call themselves Catholic whilst obviously not being catholic.

[@user-vj9qz3br6l]

I have a question. Has the Orthodox Church modernized and washed down, protestantized in their liturgy like the Roman Catholic Church has? Just curious.

[@ΚυριάκοςΜαρκάκης-ρ1ε]

No, it's the most traditional on that sense

[@user-vj9qz3br6l]

@@ΚυριάκοςΜαρκάκης-ρ1ε Ok, thanks

[@porteno2260]

​@@user-vj9qz3br6l orthodoxy's 4 eastern patriarchates are now mu slim cities. Istanbul, Cairo, Jerusalem, and Antioch. All fell within 4 centuries after 1054. Di vine just ice. Current Istanbul population: 15.46 million people. There are only 600 families that are greek orthodox out of that population of 15.46 million. A representation of 0.01%. Di vine just ice. There are 220 million eastern sch is matics worldwide and they're divided into 17 separate churches that h ate each other. The Russian church represents 50% of that total population of different orthodox churches worldwide. The russian church's leader ki rill is putin's b itch. 1.3 billion Catholics and growing. Di vine just ice. C ry h arder. Your s la vic t ears t ast e delicious.

[@mallorysplace303]

How’s it going now that Greek Orthodox Church just legalized and condoned gay marriage lol

[@thomas5585]

Most, except for ROCOR.

[@hetiseennacht]

As someone born and raised Catholic, i would recommend reading “Two Paths: Orthodoxy and Catholicism” by Michael Whelton (also born and raised Catholic).

[@lulabella9249]

Your channel is a perfect example of how one should speak with clarity and charity🙂praise God for your seamless ability to lay out the truths of the beautiful Catholic faith to the laity 🙏

[@coltonblaskey6824]

12:39 You realize the 2nd Ecumenical Council was presided over by a bishop that was not in communion with Rome?

[@minnihd6470]

who?

[@Scarvaldi]

Apart from your false premise, do you realize that the First Council of Constantinople was originally a regional council that was only later recognized as an Ecumenical Council at the Council of Chalcedon?

[@Straitsfan]

It might be better to say that the catholic church are those individual churches in communion with Rome. There are the Eastern Catholic churches, for example.

[@jtgamer-nintendo-xbox]

I think it’s the other way around dude because the other side has the Jerusalem. Church was the very first church after Christ.

[@andys3035]

If the Nicene Creed was settled by Ecumenical Councils, how can one guy over throw that decision?

[@alexpanagiotis4706]

HOW CAN ONE PATRIARCH BE AGAINST 4 OTHER APOSTOLIC THRONES? ESPECIALLY AGAINST THE MOTHER OF ALL CHURCHES = JERUSALEM

[@stephenpisanojr.774]

It’s eastern churches reuniting with Rome, not western churches reuniting with Constantinople and Moscow, proving that the Catholic Church is the One True Church.

[@RapidCycling07]

Exactly Stephen! Great point! That’s how we have most of our Eastern Catholic Churches (Eastern Rites). I haven’t heard of parts of Western Catholicism leaving Catholicism to have a reunion with the “Orthodox” Churches and thus becoming the Western “Orthodox” half of the so-called Eastern “Orthodox” Church. Sadly, pride and Satanic propaganda keep many who don’t desire the Truth enough to fully see the Truth that the Catholic Church is the One True Church of God, outside of which there is no salvation. We Catholics need to pray/sacrifice for their conversion to Catholicism. Viva Cristo Rey! ☦️

[@Athanasiustube]

Weak Argument.

[@alhilford2345]

True. The Catholic Church is the one true Church.

[@seekingtruth5637]

​@alhilford2345 I agree tge Holy Catholic Church is the one true faith but not Romsn catholism

[@Talktothehand.253]

Get real people. The first christian church was built in jerusalem. It was in the east that christianity was first founded. I come from the eastern orthodox church which was indeed before the catholic church. The schism is indeed because we will not bow down to the pope. The pope have been corrupted morally, ethically, sexual deviants. Not bowing down to those goats! 😡

[@ChromiumCastle]

Well done. I was looking forward to a vid like this

[@reverendjusticelevens9003]

I was Greek Orthodox for a little bit, but the big thinks that converted me to Catholicism was Purgatory and the Pope, which are clearly seen in scripture, but Orthodoxy denies.

[@hxrx9670]

Keep studying, purgatory was invented in the middle ages, papolatry in Rome started after the Franks took the western church and replaced their bishops according to their political agenda. Orthodoxy keeps the same faith after 2000 plus years, while Rome has pachamama and lgbt propaganda.

[@alhilford2345]

​@@hxrx9670 : You have been misinformed.

[@hxrx9670]

@@alhilford2345 explain how Rome went from filoque, indulgencies, imploding in reformation, Vatican 2, and now Pachamama and Agenda 2030, while Orthodoxy keeps the same faith from 2000 and plus years despite muslim invasion and communist overtake. I hear you.

[@vitorleal9254]

​@@hxrx9670purgatory is and was a jewish doctrine

[@hxrx9670]

@@vitorleal9254 Yes.

[@apo.7898]

You should check when Germanic barbarians (who used forged documents as arguments) started becoming popes of Rome and wonder what happened there.

[@cruznature7545]

How about the times when Islam started selling the patriarch position to the highest bidder. Both religions have their dark history

[@hxplxss1835]

@@cruznature7545 Yet Orthodoxy doesn't make the claims of our patriarchs that Rome does. Not comparable.

[@Hope_Boat]

@@cruznature7545 "A Christian of the Fourth or Fifth Century would have felt less bewildered by the forms of piety current in the Eleventh Century than would his counterpart of the Eleventh Century in the forms of the Twelfth. The great break occurred in the transition period from the one to the other century. This change took place only in the West where, sometime between the end of the Eleventh and the end of the Twelfth Century, everything was somehow transformed. THIS PROFOUND ALTERATION OF VIEW DID NOT TAKE PLACE IN THE EAST where, in some respects, Christian matters are still today what they were then and what they were in the West before the end of the Eleventh Century." -After Nine Hundred Years by Cardinal Yves Congar (1904-1995) French Dominican Theologian

[@AnthonyAnthony-tk4ye]

The protestant Deformation was a total disaster, and not just for the Church, but for the world in general.

[@locksmith9498]

I am (at present) an Eastern Orthodox. My wife is a hard-core Baptist but she still says, has always said, that the Eastern Orthodox were the first Protestants and that the Roman Church is the first church. For many years I refused stubbornly to even contemplate this but...as time goes on and the honeymoon is over (I converted in 2017) I see that the Eastern Orthodox has a deep serious issue and that is a lack of control. They basically have no control because their so-called governing principle does in fact not work at all. They can talk about it eloquently but the principle does not work in practice. Just look at the failure of the Pan-Orthodox council of 2016, with several churches not turning up. They had planned that council for 55 years. 55 years! Future councils will be even more difficult to organize given the schism between Constantinople (whose Patriarch is almost living in house arrest) and the Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia (who leads more than half of the world's Eastern Orthodox christians). This council was hardly a lesson of humility for the world to behold. Secondly, the Eastern Orthodox IS ethnic. It IS de facto nation-based regardless over how much ink is used to argue otherwise. Many Orthodox priests in the US seem unaware of or unwilling to admit to this. My country Sweden was never Orthodox, not in the present sense of that word. We have a few saints from before the Great Schism which zealous converts uses as proof of....well I am not too sure of what proof that really is...and they point to some Vikings who were supposedly Orthodox back in the day....1000 years ago. Not that it matters very much now mind you, looking down onto old graves from the 800s doesn't do much to enhance the spiritual life of me and my family. What we do need is services in the local language, Swedish, but there are only a few around. Most services are in Arabic, Greek, Finnish, Church Slavonic, Bulgarian, Romanian. I do not know any of those languages and I have no intention to start learning them in order to understand what is said, prayed and sung. Some do not even use Swedish for their service schedule. It is not too much much to ask for I feel, for me and my 11 year old daughter to be able to understand what is said in the services since the liturgy is so very rich. How is my daughter supposed to grow in the faith if she can hardly understand what is said? The people who go to Orthodox Church in my land all know Swedish, they have to, they go to schools here, they work and live here for goodness sake. Even if we somehow had a Swedish Orthodox Church it would still have to be canonically connected to an another Orthodox Church. And then there is the calendar issue. My parish uses the Old Julian calendar whereas our neighbor (the Greek Metropolitan) uses the New. It's not new of course since it's hundreds of years old. Thus we have two churches on the same street sharing the same faith which can't celebrate the Nativity of Christ on the same date. Some refer to the Old Julian Calendar as 'the calendar of the Fathers' which of course is complete pseudo-pious nonsense. Basically, if the service schedule at the door reads liturgy on Dec 25 then that liturgy celebrates events ascribed to Dec 12. If you go there on Jan 7, after the New Year, well then one will celebrate the Nativity because for them it is Dec 25. They certainly have no problem using the Gregorian calendar for the service schedule to inform people when a service is held. There was only one calendar before used in the church and the Fathers lived under a time when it was used. And that's it. A calendar is all about astronomy and mathematics, about the length of the solar year, it's not about faith. It's not about any Church Father. The Julian calendar is astronomically incorrect whereas the Gregorian is much more precise. The Eastern Orthodox Church has in reality no means to agree on or solve such a straightforward issue. They could agree to use the Revised Julian instead but then again, it would have to be adressed in a Great Council. The problem is known, even Bede in the 800s wrote about it. They planned to include the calendar issue in the 2016 council but it was not adressed I think. We had such a Great Council but it wasn't great, they bungled it. Mount Athos celebrates the Nativity of Christ on a different date than does Greece (Mount Athos is in Greece). Finland celebrates Pascha on a different date than the rest of Orthodoxy. Why not go 'full-Julian' and launch the fireworks in January (to the utter dismay of neighbors already fast asleep)? (They dare not do that because the Police will show up) And why don't our parish have the same bishop as the Greeks if he is under the Ecumenical Patriarchate? No our bishop is residing in New York in the Bulgarian Patriarchate there. Our bishop is not even living on the same continent as us. Why?! Because Constantinople dissolved the Russian Paris Exarchate. It's just a completely insane jurisdictional chaos in the diaspora. My people will however not listen to my complaints, they do get awfully defensive like a hedgehog if I adress the problems. My family has to drive 350 km to and from to go to a church service which we can hardly understand much of (Swedish services are only once a month). And I am not even complaining about any theological issue. Look at the broken communion between Constantinople and Moscow and the Russian Patriarch blessing fratricide and his priests blessing weapons. About Constantinople anyway, look at it now. It's not a seat of power, the Patriarch is experiencing extreme difficulties in a now Muslim land. The days of the Byzantine Empire are long gone. And who can excommunicate Patriarch Kirill? The man can thus build a church dedicated to the Russian Armed Forces, authorise frescoes of the Soviet Emblem and communist Red Army Soldiers while talking about Holy Rus. It was the Kremlin under that Soviet Emblem who tried to destroy the Russian Orthodox Church, not the West! There has been reports of the Russian church stopping their own priests from serving if they are opposed to the war. A war which is waged against Ukraine, a brother nation which has many Orthodox people. No, I say, we are the schismatics, not Rome. I am planning to convert, learning to pray the Rosary now. Pray for me brethren. Good video, kind regards!

[@Hysterically_Accurate]

Welcome home, brother. May the rift in our churches heal, and may the Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church become One again.

[@wenshan9101]

Here's a conversation with an Orthodox priest. When asked if he considered the Orthodox East the continuing Catholic Church, he replied, "Yes, of course!" When asked if he would then call himself a Catholic, he offered silence and a wry smile instead. Personally, to be Christian is to be Catholic. For over 1000 years, there was no controversy, in spite of all the human failings. Those kept outside were considered 'brethen' no less. Separated in communion but never completely severed. Rome has never failed to invite the Eastern Patriarchs to most major events in the life of the Church. But when JPII wanted to make Apostolic visits to some Orthodox countries, he was at best treated with suspicion. One such visits even demanded a public apology from him. And yes, he agreed. Because at the heart of the matter, he recognised the pair of lungs keeping the faith alive. The universal Catholic Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, is one in Him. I welcome you back with great joy. But that is only because you have accepted the Church for what she is, the 'spotless Bride of Christ', in spite of her human failings. Otherwise, you will never feel family and home. Godbless!

[@wms72]

The Byzantine Catholic Church has the beautiful Divine Liturgy in the vernacular

[@physiocrat7143]

The Catholic Church in Sweden has been a war zone for decades. Things looked up when Benedict was Pope. Basically it is Lutheran plus the Pope. If you don't mind improperly dressed laypeople giving communion and Lutheran and Wesleyan hymns clumsily set to Swedish, you might find it acceptable.

[@AndrewPont-w1j]

This is an excellent comment and some of the issues you mentioned here are why I can't commit to converting to the EO. I have strong dissatisfaction with the direction of the Catholic Church, but EO doesn't make sense and I find that philosophy is used in apologetics rather than scripture.

[@Johnathan909309]

Thanks for making more orthodox videos brother! I have recently left protestantism and have been attending an orthodox church but I sense that they are very anti-west in nature but half my family's Catholic and I have respect for the Western tradition not the modernism going on in the Catholic church but the real Catholic Church so thank you for giving me more western side of the stance because not many people do a good job sadly on KZbin

[@franciscoguzman1065]

@Johnathan Price there’s no such thing as modernism. I hate that word. The church is still being guided by the Holy Spirit. Not all Catholics accept abortion etc whatever issues. Catholics need to learn how to defend their faith against other man made religions.

[@hxrx9670]

Yes, we should stick to our western mentality of democracy, progress, liberalism, lgbt rights, tolerance, globalism and climate change awareness that make the core of our faith, just like Pope Francis says God wants. 🙏

[@Johnathan909309]

@@hxrx9670 that's clearly not what I'm talking about brother those all fall under modernism within the Catholic Church

[@costakeith9048]

@@Johnathan909309 You can draw a straight line from scholasticism to the enlightenment, passing right through the reformation. These are the fruits of the western tradition, this is what you get when you replace the teachings of the Cappadocian fathers, which are the bedrock of Orthodoxy, with Aristotle. We're only anti-western insofar as we seek to avoid the errors of the west and the destruction they have wrought. I don't know of any Orthodox who do not think it is tragic that the west has fallen, but when they worship pagan goddesses and place idols upon their altars, I don't know how you could say they have not.

[@DanielFernandez-jv7jx]

For those coming into the Catholic Church from a Protestant background, having to make this decision between the EOC and RC church is the most painful, and I mean, tears in my eyes painful. It is difficult for those born to Catholicism to appreciate how tragic this split really was and still is. Protestantism can be seen as foolish in fairly short order if you study a little church history, but there is much of beauty, wisdom and truth in the EOC.

[@lorenzocardenas5071]

I lost a relationship with my wonderful girlfriend over it. :(

[@DanielFernandez-jv7jx]

@@lorenzocardenas5071 I am truly sorry to hear that my brother. May the Lord comfort you heart.

[@lorenzocardenas5071]

@ May the good lord have mercy upon all of us!!! Thank you brother ❤️

[@Joleyn-Joy]

lmao, virtually no mention of the filioque and papal forgeries through its history.

[@cruznature7545]

Eastern Orthodox are no white doves either.

[@USDebtCrisis]

That's because they are cheap excuses that EO laypeople throw out because they don't understand that the issue is political and not theological

[@michaelblair5566]

I was born Protestant, and Baptized Protestant in 1982. In 1987 I went through RCIA and became Catholic which I still am today. I am so glad that I am Catholic. Indeed, at age 51 I still serve Mass. Adult servers are very common these days. So I served my Pastor, Monigmor John J. Yonk (whom I believe to be a Saint) from 1987 to 1991, and our current Pastor, Father Wayne Morris asked me to serve Mass again in 2022. Since November 2023 I've been the regular server for all vigil Masses in the Ironton Parish.

[@AlexanderTate.]

How is Rome the true church when it came after Antioch and Jerusalem church? How is Rome the true church when they are the ones who added to the creed and drew a circle around themselves? All the evidence shows Rome broke away. Thats why Rome is not in communion with the other churches.

[@essafats5728]

So which orthodox is the true church? They cant agree on contraception, divorce, re-baptismal. Is it Russia, who declared war on Ukraine; and the Patriarch of Russia wont even say Jack squat to their prime minister. Yep, the Orthodox are still state/national/regional churches.

[@porteno7025]

orthodoxy's 4 eastern patriarchates are now mu slim cities. Istanbul, Cairo, Jerusalem, and Antioch. All fell within 4 centuries after 1054. Di vine just ice. Current Istanbul population: 15.46 million people. There are only 600 families that are greek orthodox out of that population of 15.46 million. A representation of 0.01%. Di vine just ice. There are 220 million eastern sch is matics worldwide and they're divided into 17 separate churches that h ate each other. The Russian church represents 50% of that total population of different orthodox churches worldwide. The russian church's leader ki rill is putin's b itch. 1.3 billion Catholics and growing. Di vine just ice. C ry h arder. Your s la vic t ears t ast e delicious.

[@harrisonphillips8365]

The EOC also doesn’t have the original creed

[@AlexanderTate.]

@@harrisonphillips8365 if it wasn’t for the Eastern Orthodox churches, then how would you know there is a different creed?

[@harrisonphillips8365]

@@AlexanderTate. the original creed isn’t from eastern “orthodoxy” it’s from the council of Nicaea, the original had no mention of the Holy Spirit in it. (The creed was created when the east was in union with Rome) so no the creed isn’t eastern “orthodox”

[@collectiveconsciousness5314]

3:52 The Copts & other Orientals actually separated based on their refusal to accept the council of Chalcedon which was before the main disputes about the papacy.

[@ablarod948]

It cannot be that a single bishop even the Bishop of Rome has authority to overrule a church council, the canons of which are fruit of discernment and the work of the Holy Spirit. The Pope has no authority to unilaterally overrule an entire council (two in fact) and insert the filioque which I might add multiple popes also rejected until nearly the 10th century. If so, why bother with a council at all? Why not just call all of the other bishops in the world an ad hoc advisory council to the Bishop of Rome who may or may not consider their recommendations at his discretion? How's that working out with Pope Francis and adherence to apostolic tradition?

[@jlouis4407]

Council canons have to be approved by the Pope, always have

[@ablarod948]

@@jlouis4407 Yes, that's true, also for each of the Orthodox patriarchs, I believe. But that's a different situation; one of whether the pope accepts initially the canons for the church. What can not happen is that once those canons are accepted, a future pope rejects them, as was done with the filioque. In as much as we have to accept the inerrancy of scripture, we have to accept the working of the Holy Spirit in a legitimate church council. If this is true, then the latter pope's action are against the Holy Spirit. That can't be right.

[@joekey8464]

First off, you have to gather all bishops in the world to convene an Ecumenical Council, without leadership, that would be hard to do. EOC has been stuck in time in 787AD, the last EC they accepted, since then they been unable to gather all their bishops for an EC. Synods are just local councils. They'd be unable to fix their schism with each other or even to keep up with the passage of time. This shows the need for a leader in any human endeavor, even a two man job needs one man to lead.

[@AgapeJiuJitsu-nz4vj]

Thank you for information very well put together

[@007leet]

Proud Byzantine here 😊

[@wms72]

Your video is excellent and much needed, but please use the correct dating: A.D. is capitalized before the numerical date. A.D. is Latin for ANNO DOMINI, "in the year of Our Lord." (Latin only had what we call capital letters.)

[@isidorgrogoritul2164]

What about Holy Inquisition? Is it fron Christ or Satan?

[@erolsaucedo4243]

The most gigachad Catholic channel on KZbin.

[@joefranks4235]

And now here in 2023, we have a Pope who does not clarify anything (other than it seems, defend sodomy) nor defend perennial church teaching and discipline. We now have many (not all) German bishops ready to once again break away from the true Roman Church.

[@skylarferguson5028]

Western Rome fell in the 400s, Constantinople had been the imperial city for sometime by then, the true Roman church is that of the orthodox as true romans stayed an empire until the middle of the 1400s. The holy Roman empire was Frankish barbarians who took control of rome and the papacy and resented the true imperial romans of the east

[@samuelalves5498]

@@skylarferguson5028 Of the East, not the Western

[@trevwilliams2138]

This is another great example of the GREAT WORK of I Miss Christendom”. This is arguably the most disappointing aspect of the breakup of Christianity.

[@johnsix.51-69]

Jude 11 proves that there is authority over the church. Protestants and the Orthodox say the same thing to Peter that Korah said to Moses in Numbers 16:3.

[@LorenzoMasterConnector]

The problem I have with the east which I love soo much the actual church members refuse to hear any pints that are counter to what they listen to. When they get cornered they get upset and blame the other for getting upset lol it’s like if you’re stuff stands it stands or it doesn’t don’t get upset when you get cornered lol

[@losrevolucionarios8858]

Onward to 5k subscribers!

[@imisschristendom5293]

Alright!!

[@ChumX100]

I'm no expert, but I heard that the orthodox don't consider a counsel to be valid/ecumenical only on the basis of authority or assistance. That would make the church susceptible to legalistic tactics. A counsel is considered valid/ecumenical if on top of all the "external" requirements, it proves to be widely accepted by the whole body of the Church, the faithful (clergy and laity), the saints, over time. This signals the "interior" or "spiritual" validity of the counsel. This means that validity of counsels is not immediate, it can be a (very) slow process, but is a safer and more conservative approach.

[@jebbush2527]

Another fact you could’ve used: Humbert’s excommunication was invalid. The pope had died, so Humbert didn’t even have the authority to act on behalf of Rome. Both Humbert and Celularius were aware of this, yet Celularius retaliated with his own bull anyway (when he should’ve ignored it since Humbert’s wasn’t worth anything). So, technically, the excommunication was one sided.

[@imisschristendom5293]

Yea, I thought about that

[@dp34576]

Source on Humbert/Celularius knowing that +Leo had died?

[@seekingtruth5637]

Benedict XVI, Principles of Catholic Theology, 1982, p. 381: "If it is desirable to offer a diagnosis of the text [of the Vatican II document, Gaudium et Spes] as a whole, we might say that (in conjunction with the texts on religious liberty and world religions) it is a revision of the Syllabus of Pius IX, a kind of counter syllabus… As a result, the one-sidedness of the position adopted by the Church under Pius IX and Pius X in response to the situation created by the new phase of history inaugurated by the French Revolution, was, to a large extent, corrected..."[69] So which version of papalism are you suppose to follow the Vatican 2 version or before Vatican which even is different from the papalist church just after the schism, this constant changing church calling eastern Orthodox schematics and I agree we are schematic but not in the way you say, because we can't have union with a heretical church in anyway. But we are with Christ, and his church. Do cart wheels all you want a bunch of gymnastics truth is the truth and you are attacking Christ's church and you will one day have to hold an account for your actions

[@joannafurtak5143]

What is more important: truth or unity?

[@charlesiragui2473]

This is an interesting argument that essentially accepts the Orthodox position that only ecumenical councils can establish articles of faith. What were these councils in the 13th and 15th Centuries? Weren't they essentially political in nature? The East had been asking for military help from the West to defend against Turkish Muslim incursions from the time of the 1st Crusade, in the waning years of the 11th Century, and yet the Eastern Empire became ever weaker (in part due to the treacherous 4th Crusade). Yes, these councils were called to decide theological questions, settle doctrinal differences, but they were obviously held under duress, these were "agreements" that the weak conceded to the strong. None of the "Seven Holy Ecumenical Councils" had that quality. Also, it is untrue that ecumenical (all church) councils were never overturned. At the Council of Hieria in 754, the Church endorsed an iconoclast position and declared image worship to be blasphemy. This was overturn at the Council of Nicaea in 787. In 449, Theodosius II summoned a council at Ephesus, where Eutyches was exonerated and returned to his monastery. This council was later overturned by the Council of Chalcedon in 451 and labeled "Latrocinium" ("Robber Council"). Were the differences between the East and West significant even as late as the 15th Century, when crusades were still being organized to defend Christendom? I don't think so.

[@filiusvivam4315]

I love your videos. Thank you for taking the time.

[@Іосиф-п2п]

This is an extremely simplistic presentation. For example, he states that the Patriarch of Constantinople was celebrating an Easter Vigil on the day that Cardinal Humbert served the bull of excommunication. Easter Vigil in July? The excommunication occurred on 16 July 1054 -- hardly a date for "Easter" (actually, for Pascha).

[@Nepoznat811]

How did the Orthodox Church split? Are you serious? The Patriarch of Rome split from the Orthodox Church.

[@jlouis4407]

There was no church called the Orthodox Church

[@nitrianskehosamospravnehok4397]

⁠@@jlouis4407That’s because the Orthodox Church means the correct teaching. So yes there was. You’re just too blind to see the fact that schism only exists due to the Orthodox disagreement with Rome

[@thieph]

​@@jlouis4407do you even know the meaning of the words?

[@franciscoflamenco]

Why are you asking a question in the comments of a video that was specifically made to answer that question? If you have a problem with the answer you should begin by explaining that problem, not resetting the conversation by ignoring the answer.

[@Nepoznat811]

@@franciscoflamenco I have problem with lies

[@siena4ever751]

Excellent presentation. Thank you.

[@haraldisdead]

We're about to have another split if these American conservatives don't stop rejecting the authority of the Pope over stupid politics.

[@TheMacDonald22]

As an American conservative this is facts. People don't realize that the personal politics of the pope are irrelevant and fallible, so these same people become schismatics just like the orthos.

[@BryanKirch]

Excellent job on this topic

[@JWM5791]

The Orthodox Church is not the one in schism.

[@watchmanonthewall2151]

The Council of Florence ended in 1449, and Constantinople fell in May of 1453 after a 53 day siege. There was plenty of time for the EO to implement the agreements of the Council. Their failure to do so falls squarely on their shoulders. Fear of retaliation by the population in the east likely played a significant role in the clergy not following through with the councils agreements.

[@navsquid32]

My video would be much shorter. It goes something like this: Was Peter the bishop of Rome, or the bishop of vague eastern-ness?

[@Car1Sagan]

The only problem now is, do we have a pope? The guy who says "Call me Jorge" is hardly Catholic, let alone pope.

[@theresaboldt5797]

There are about 22 different Catholic rites comprising of the Byzantine rites, Coptics, Chaldeans, Maronites, Ruthian etc. These rites are Catholic, but many broke from Rome and called themselves Orthodox. There are Eastern rite Catholic churches. Any Catholic can attend these services, go to Confession and take Communion. One doesn't have to go to an Orthodox church to experience the Eastern rite.

[@jphansen5504]

This is great stuff. One area for clarification that would improve your argument: Can you establish a motive for the sultan to put pressure on the East to revoke Florence and Lyons? My best guess-going solely off this video-is that it might establish a precedent for eventually getting the East to revoke Nicaea II in order to impose iconoclast policy on the East, as well as to isolate the East from the politically powerful West. But your video drops off at this point.

[@BB-kt5eb]

If all baptized Christians are in the Church in the spiritual sense, then that would mean even Protestants are in the Church in the spiritual sense.

[@imisschristendom5293]

If they are baptized properly, their baptism is Catholic. Not baptist, methodist, etc.

[@ginomaietta2702]

by properly you mean after repenting of your sin and believing Christ is our savior like in the new testament over and over? or insignificant sprinkling of an infant who doesn't know what's going on? @@imisschristendom5293

[@vladgor4099]

@@imisschristendom5293 Whats important? To be baptized in the name of the Father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Or in Roman Catholicism?

[@SergeantD96]

Awesome video dude, good job!

[@BombadilsBoots]

Imagine looking at the fruits of the Roman church since schism and believing this... Nothing against the laity, I know many Catholics that love Christ, but the fruits of the church are rotten

[@franciscoguzman1065]

@Leatherfoot Seeker learn about the history of the church 🤡 and not the lies made about the church made up by Protestants who are heretics John 15:18. Also the orthodox are indeed in schism because when Constantine came he got involved with church affairs and made his own church in the east Constantinople which had no apostolic succession. The east slowly starting to separate themselves from the chair of Peter. Learn your history and don’t make up stuff .

[@mariorizkallah5383]

@@franciscoguzman1065 Wow how can someone be as wrong as you are

[@alhilford2345]

And just how would YOU describe the "..fruits of the 'Roman' church..."? The past two thousand years of history, but take your time... ( I'm guessing that by ROMAN you are referring to the Catholic Church, Latin Rite ?)

[@achilles4242]

Nothing says rotten Catholic fruit like hundreds of thousands of schools, hospitals, charities, food pantries, hospices, etc. all across the world. Give me a break. We surely would not contest or call rotten these things when the Orthodox do them. Why then when Catholics do them? Is it because they do it on a much larger scale all over the world?

[@AlexanderTheFarmer]

The ones leaving the Catholic Church because of some clown masses are just damning themselves to hell, the True Church of the Lord God itself is not the problem, the people are the problem. The devil doesn't rest, he keeps trying to drag souls to hell and he is doing one hell of a job at it unfortunately.

[@isidorgrogoritul2164]

What about the same sex aprovall from the Pope?

[@jperez7893]

where Peter is, there is the Church. it is sufficient to believe in the words and promises of Jesus Christ to Peter when He gave Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven and promised him that hell will never overcome the church and that Jesus will be forever with the church until the end of time. so if you fail to believe this, then everything you believe becomes a lie. I would rather become an atheist than believe in a lie or a liar.

[@Nieve_perdida]

Peter is dead

[@jperez7893]

@@Nieve_perdida of course he is. Long long time ago. That’s why he has successors to his office. Didn’t moses have successors to lead the Israelites after he died? Weren’t there other kings after david died? The church is God’s kingdom on earth. A kingdom continues to exist because it has kings to rule it.

[@jackelder6047]

Wow- thank you for doing this work-

[@OftheDay247]

1 patriarch out of the 5 total, changed the creed of the 1000 year old faith in Christ. 4 other patriarchs kept the original creed. The one patriarch that changed the creed did not consult the other patriarchs... in changing the declaration of faith. This patriarch that changed the creed of faith in Christ claims that if the other 4 patriarchs do not change their creed of faith as well, they are in schism risking the damnation of everyone not under control of the Pope. Or the patriarch at Rome. Can someone with a better understanding explain why the Eastern Patriarchs are wrong for wanting to continue the original creed of faith ? And maybe explain why Rome shouldn’t renounce the Filioque ?

[@franknwogu4911]

Rome> Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem and Constantinople The four are now muslim cities, Rome is not

[@OftheDay247]

@@franknwogu4911 & the city of Rome is atheist. What’s your point? The gate is narrow and few find it

[@franknwogu4911]

its literally not, its Catholic, the east has some of the while the east has the lowest church attendance rates,@@OftheDay247

[@jeffersonfrunk3210]

@@franknwogu4911 Church attendance rates mean nothing in this sense (that is comparing who is more successful, as a Church) that's something the catholics never understood, they changed their whole Church just to stay with the times (Vatican II), but what's the point of changing the Church and keeping followers if you have corrupted the key message. The Orthodox people change for their Church, but the catholic church changes for its people. (HUGE difference)

[@franknwogu4911]

the orthodox church allows divorce and contraceptives, your church changed@@jeffersonfrunk3210

[@genemyersmyers6710]

That was sad but a great explanation.

[@eddardgreybeard]

The rough part is i do think some of the things they get right, albeit ultimately inconsequential, i consider somewhat appealing (immersive baptism, maintaining the Saturday Sabbath, et. Al). But yes, it's bizarre that nearly a millennium under the papacy they suddenly reject it.

[@beatlecristian]

That’s what I thought, they had no problem with the Papacy until they decided that they did? It doesn’t make sense.

[@hxrx9670]

@@beatlecristian Saint Paul corrected Saint Peter, there was no "papolatry" back then, just the first (elder) bishop among equals under the synod of churches.

[@nathangraham2189]

@@hxrx9670 Do you think that Catholics think the Pope is inerrant or divine? Certainly not: he’s a sinner as are us all, and outside the limited and very select circumstances of ex cathedra, can and does err like anyone else. And St. Paul’s statement about dressing down Peter proves the point more than detracts from it: Paul clearly thought of Peter as THE guy. His statement would be akin to a Secretary in the President’s cabinet saying “I even told the President he was wrong.” The statement UNDERSCORES the authority and place of the President, rather than detracting from it.

[@hxrx9670]

@@nathangraham2189 my friend, I know all the roman catholic arguments in favor of the Pope supremacy, because I was raised roman catholic myself in the most roman catholic place in the world right now, Southamerica. It took me ten years to study it and realize were the ancient Catholic tradition was. Certainly, not in The Vatican. One of the things that is clear like a symptom in roman theology is how it always leads to compare the Church with worldly hierarchy and earthly power, not to mention the legalistic and sterile doctrine that led to the causes of reformation (an exclusivelly western phenomena). All the good things left in roman catholicism are far well preserved in Orthodox Catholicism. Because Orthodoxy is Catholicism, we still state that in the Nicean Creed at the Liturgy.

[@nathangraham2189]

@@hxrx9670 We state the Nicean Creed too, as you know. And? My analogy to the President and a Secretary of his saying he told him he was wrong “to his face” was just that: an analogy. We have to make analogies to other earthly things because that’s ALL WE KNOW in our common experience. That you think it says something pernicious about Catholicism is, frankly, a bit silly. But I love my Orthodox brothers and sisters and wish nothing but the best for you. Pax Christi.

[@thomasmourtacos4432]

You are wrong on two points. One, the orthodox do distinctly believe in Immaculate Conception. She is referred to as the holy virgin. Two, Christ gave ALL his disciples authority, after the resurrection. Not just Paul. He was deemed, first among equals. That was the the way the early church was founded. Still true among Prelates and the Patriarch. He is not iinfallible. Christ did not make the bishop of Rome, who is no called the Pope that designation. The bishops in the early church were equals. The change came when the political ruler in Rome told him and his counterparts that the Roman bishop was the head of the Church. As far as the difference between Moscow and Constantinople. That was a poor decision of the bishop in Moscow, who calls himself the patriarch due to his political alignment with the government. It is not a spiritual decision. It is unfortunate, but it has nothing to do with the spiritually and validity of the church. And as far as the ethnicity and eastern orthodox church, it is what keeps that church strong and valid. It is seen and many of the dissolutions, especially in the United States of the Catholic Church, where the faith has been watered down and the masses minuscule of what it was.

[@christophersalinas2722]

Orthodoxy does not accept the Immaculate Conception as understood by the West. Also, the filioque is true. Therefore eastern orthodoxy is wrong.

[@Nerdskov]

I think both orthodox and Catholics are going to need to have a big piece of humble pie each for them to unite.

[@Dreamingofivoryart]

Jesus coming back as a Muslim would be great

[@Nerdskov]

Why?

[@Dreamingofivoryart]

@@Nerdskov would be a perfect serving of humble pie far too many Christian’s justifying Genocïde rn. Orth. & Cath/ prots included

[@Nerdskov]

Christian’s justifying genocide? If you mean in Gaza what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians honestly more Protestants are on that train than the other Christian denominations. I can tell you for sure in my Orthodox community we have condemned Israel’s actions.

[@Dreamingofivoryart]

@@Nerdskov not all but like half , it’s disturbing

[@aarontschetter1743]

3:50 What does he say here? "From the Protestants to the Orthodox, even the _____"

[@AzureSymbiote]

Papal supremacy is still something I can't wrap my head around.

[@alexchristopher221]

Jesus made Simon, whom he would name Peter, alone the “rock” of his Church. He gave Peter the “keys” of his Church and established him as shepherd of the entire flock. The office of “binding and loosing” was given to Peter and was also assigned to the college of apostles united to its head (CCC, 881). Bishop Vincent Ferrier Gassier explains the importance of this prerogative that our Lord conferred on Peter. “The purpose of this prerogative is the preservation of truth in the Church. The special exercise of this prerogative occurs when there arise somewhere in the Church scandals against the faith, i.e., dissensions and heresies that the bishops of the individual churches or even gathered together in the provincial council are unable to repress so that they are forced to appeal to the Apostolic See (in Rome) regarding the case, or even the bishops themselves are infected by the sad strain of error” (The Gift of Infallibility: Ignatius Press, 2008). This pastoral office of Peter and the other apostles belongs to the Church’s very foundation and is continued by the bishops who are united to the pope under his universal primacy of authority. In the kingdom of David, the king who ascended to the throne delegated his royal authority to a chief steward who would rule and govern in his absence. The king would formally invest his chief steward with this authority by presenting him with the keys to the kingdom. As the keeper of the keys, the chief steward (vizier or vicar) was said to be “over the house” of the king, viz., the house of David. He would be second only to the king and would have plenary power over the palace and the authority to pass judgments over the king’s subjects. Jesus came into the world to restore the kingdom of David to a new dimension, so like his royal ancestors on the throne of David, he presented his chief steward or vicar with the keys to a visible kingdom, namely the Church. He appointed Peter over “the house of God” (cf. 2 Cor 5:1; 1 Tim 3:15; 1 Pet 4:15) who would rule and govern God’s household in the king’s absence after his ascension into heaven. catholicpilgrim2k.wordpress.com/2022/05/21/upon-this-rock-2/

[@wisdomsmart9633]

Here are just a few Early Church writings which shed light on the authority of the bishop of Rome: 1) In A.D. 189, Irenaeus of Lyons wrote, "Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the churches, we put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vanity, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings, by indicating that Tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every church agree with this church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, in so far as the apostolic Tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere" [Against Heresies 3:3:2] 2) In A.D. 251, Cyprian of Carthage wrote, "The Lord says to Peter: “I say to you,” he says, “that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it. And to you I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven. . .” [Mt 16:18-19]. On him he builds the Church, and commands him to feed the sheep [Jn 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were also what Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, by which it is made clear that there is one Church and one chair. . . . If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he think that he holds the faith? If he deserts the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he be confident that he is in the Church?" [Unity of the Catholic Church 4; first edition (Treatise 1:4)] 3) In A.D. 312, Eusebius of Caesarea wrote, "A question of no small importance arose at that time. For the parishes of all Asia, held from an older tradition that the fourteenth day of the moon, on which the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as the feast of the Savior’s passover. . . . But it was not the custom of the churches in the rest of the world to end it at this time, as they observed the practice that, from apostolic Tradition, has prevailed to the present time, of terminating the fast on the day of the Resurrection of our Savior. Synods and assemblies of bishops were held on this account, and all, with one consent, through mutual correspondence, drew up an ecclesiastical decree that the mystery of the Resurrection of the Lord should be celebrated on the Lord’s Day, and that we should observe the close of the paschal fast on this day only. . . . Thereupon Victor, who presided over the church at Rome, immediately attempted to cut off from the common unity the parishes of all Asia, and the churches that agreed with them, as heterodox; and he wrote letters and declared all the brethren there excommunicated. But this did not please all the bishops. And they asked him to consider the things of peace, and of neighborly unity and love. . . . [St. Irenaeus of Lyons] fittingly admonished Victor that he should not cut off whole churches of God that observed the tradition of an ancient custom." [Church History 5:23:1-5:24:11] "Thus Irenaeus, who truly was well named, became a peacemaker in this matter, exhorting and negotiating on behalf of the peace of the churches. And he conferred by letter about this question, not only with Victor, but also with most of the other rulers of the churches." [ibid., 5:24:18] 4) In A.D. 341, Pope Julius I wrote, "[The] judgment [against Athanasius] ought to have been made, not as it was, but according to the ecclesiastical canon. . . . Are you ignorant that the custom has been for word to be written first to us, and then for a just decision to be passed from this place [Rome]? If any suspicion rested upon the bishop there, notice of it ought to have been sent to the church here; but, after neglecting to inform us, and proceeding on their own authority as they pleased, they now desire to obtain our agreement with their decisions, though we never condemned him. Not so have the constitutions of Paul, or the traditions of the Fathers directed; this is another form of procedure, a novel practice. . . . [W]hat I write is for the common good. For what we have received from the blessed apostle Peter is what I signify to you." [Letter on Behalf of Athanasius, contained in St. Athanasius, Apology Against the Arians 1:2:35] 5) In A.D. 342, the Council of Sardica wrote, "It is necessary to add this-that bishops shall not pass from their own province to another province in which there are bishops, unless upon invitation from their brethren, that we seem not to close the door of charity. But if in any province a bishop has a matter in dispute against his brother bishop, one of the two shall not call in a bishop from another province as judge. But if judgment has gone against a bishop in any cause, and he thinks he has a good case, in order that the question may be reopened, let us honor the memory of St. Peter the apostle, and let those who tried the case write to Julius, the bishop of Rome, and if he judges that the case should be retried, let it be done, and let him appoint judges; but if he finds that the former decision need not be disturbed, what he has decreed shall be confirmed. Is this the pleasure of all? The synod answered, It is our pleasure" [Canon 3] "If it seems good to you, it is necessary to add to this decision full of sincere charity you have pronounced, that if any bishop be deposed by the sentence of these neighboring bishops, and asserts that he has fresh matter in his defense, a new bishop not be settled in his see unless the bishop of Rome judge and render a decision." [Canon 4] 6) In A.D. 367, Optatus of Milevis wrote, "You cannot then deny that you know that upon Peter first in the city of Rome was bestowed the episcopal cathedra, on which he sat, the head of all the apostles (for which reason he was called Cephas), that, in this one cathedra, unity should be preserved by all. Neither do the apostles proceed individually on their own, and anyone who would [presume to] set up another chair in opposition to that single chair would, by that very fact, be a schismatic and a sinner. . . . Recall, then, the origins of your chair, those of you who wish to claim for yourselves the title of holy Church" [Schism of the Donatists 2:2] If you want to read more Early Church writings, I recommend getting yourself a copy of "The Fathers Know Best" by Jimmy Akin. I wish you the best, God bless you

[@navinfernandes747]

Well, sometimes seeing the papal authority as Jesus leaving his kingdom to a prime Minister who oversees His work is something that you could think what a Pope does.. Jesus left His church to Peter and through Peter, it was passed down to this very day.. it is not supremacy bcoz Jesus didnt "impose" himself even on sinners and prostitutes,, the Pope stands as a servant or a shepherd to guide the Flock of Jesus.

[@franciscoguzman1065]

@Navin Fernandes when Constantine came he build his own new rome in the east. It was called Constantinople. That’s when the east started to separate from the west and the chair of peter. Constantinople had no apostolic succession. It was very political. Protestants like to make false accusations that Constantine started the catholic church when in reality it was the other way around. Constantine started his own church in the east.

[@navinfernandes747]

@@franciscoguzman1065 sadly, this is a factually incorrect statement.. Rome was and will always be the seat of papal authority... Constantine came much later ...

[@patcandelora8496]

Which form of the Mass do you attend?

[@austinfurgason3634]

When I left Protestantism and was faced with the choice of orthodox or Catholic it was clear that modern Catholics had diverged from original teachings and worship and only the traditional Latin Catholic practice was original. Which begs the question, why would I submit to Rome if you won’t? I feel very happy in Orthodoxy. If you miss Christendom you should covert since we all still support Monarchy and double eagle and tradition and Divine Liturgy etc. You’ll never get that back in Catholic Church which proofs Orthodox position. Let alone the filouque heresy invention and innovation of papal supremacy.

[@JaimeAlvarez-r9u]

Your Protestant by heart don’t expect much from them. In reality what you wanted was aesthetics not the truth something to make you feel good on a certain day not what was preached by christ

[@mislav_]

Where do you get the information that the east gave into the demands of the west?

[@MuttonBiryani1994]

Amen Hallelujah.

[@joannafurtak5143]

Protestans are also not a new church, they are rather a reformed church. Luther was a catholic priest, so consequently we can say that there was the sucsession from apostles in lutheran church. We can get stuck in this discussion for ages: who was from whom, who was first. But the truth is that all Christians are from apostles by receiving the faith from previous generation. Othodox and roman catholics will never agree who was first, additionally they are also internally devided. I asked God once - who is right, who is the church? And I received followong answers: Mar 4:30-32: "And he said, Whereunto shall we liken the kingdom of God? or with what comparison shall we compare it? It is like a grain of mustard seed, which, when it is sown in the earth, is less than all the seeds that be in the earth: But when it is sown, it groweth up, and becometh greater than all herbs, and shooteth out great branches; so that the fowls of the air may lodge under the shadow of it." and: Rom 14:17-23: "For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men. Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another. For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offense. It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak. Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin."

[@theHermitofEngedi]

Thank you. I needed a good belly laugh. Luther and his Protestants are successors of the apostle Judas Iscariot.

[@hxrx9670]

Orthodox here, glad we don't have pachamama synod or lgbt propaganda. We remain in the same faith of the Church fathers.

[@hxrx9670]

@Ave Crux Spes Unica that one with Divine Liturgy, Nicean Creed, Full Holy Communion (bread and wine), Church Fathers tradition, 2000 and plus years of existence, present day martyrs and still thriving in the world despite persecusion in the most hostile places for Christianity. ☦️

[@essafats5728]

@@hxrx9670 Who are your present day martyrs? and only the Orthodox Church has them?

[@hxrx9670]

@@essafats5728 visit Syria, meet their families.

[@essafats5728]

@@hxrx9670 I live way on the other side of the world. Are their stories on-line somewhere? Again, is the Orthodox, in this day and age, the only church that has martyrs?

[@hxrx9670]

@@essafats5728 Sure, you can even find icons of the martyrs of Syria, murdered by Isis and other antichristian terrorist groups. I don't think I can compare any modern case with the ones from the Middle East, but only God knows our hearts and were our worship is placed. I can't judge a sinner, I am one myself, I just must reject the sin.

[@universalflamethrower6342]

Don Bosco has an explanation why the Orthodox split and it was mainly politics even maybe personal ambition

[@georgevladimirovich7190]

Your comments are those of a convert motivated by the emotional adrenaline generated by the new form of faith you have adopted. You describe a lot of motives which make you believe that Christianity should be Catholic and submit itself to the Bishop of Rome, otherwise known as the pope. Quite often in my discussions with Muslims, I observe their surprise when telling them that Orthodox believers have never been the crusaders, they always mention in their accusation against Christianity. Everything you have described can be debatable and the arguments may go for generations instead of just few hours. The bottom line however, which you have never mentioned, is the church organization in five Holly Sees as formulated in the legislation of the emperor Justinian I (527-565), especially in his Novella 131, the theory received formal ecclesiastical sanction at the Council in Trullo (692), which ranked the five sees as Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem; meaning five church administrations which meet regularly in order to debate and agree TOGETHER where the church should head from that moment. This is very much inspired from the Jewish Septuagint in which their scholars debated in similar fashion. And this arrangement worked well, until the Bishop of Rome determined otherwise, generating the schism which still exists today. That being said, myself as an Orthodox Christian can pray equally in any place where the Almighty will give His blessings, including a Catholic church, and strongly hope, the current division of Christianity will be solved somehow.

[@RapidCycling07]

There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Hopefully you will become Byzantine Catholic. That’s what I am. It’s the Eastern “Orthodox” that have been reuniting with Rome thus forming the Eastern Rites/Eastern Catholic Churches. No Catholic Churches leave Rome and have reunions with the “Orthodox” (whom themselves keep splitting up). Lack of Papal Authority and Shepherding results in heresy and schism, which is the work of Satan of dividing and conquering. Just look at the over 100,000 (or whatever the number is) of heretical Protestant groups claiming to be the one true Church of God. Sad but true. I of course look forward to when all divisions are over and we once again only have the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of Our Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ: the Catholic Church (outside of which there is no salvation). Viva Cristo Rey! ☦️

[@AlexanderTheFarmer]

God punished the EO for the Schism by not allowing the EO to convert outside their borders and Constantinople is still under the control of heathens.

[@gerardducharme2146]

It is true that this and other aspects that you brought up are a contentious issue close to the end of your video you brought up historical aspects referring to what the orthodox never bring up. They put the blame on the Catholic Church but they don’t seem to understand that a number of emperors linked arms with Muslims in order to get what they wanted I’m not saying in the west it wasn’t done but it was partly done in the eastern half. You get that in Albania Bulgaria and then they wonder why the countries were taken over by Muslims. also on top of this Luther Calvin also went against the Catholic Church and they were getting coffers from Muslims for their wars against the Catholic Church. The great guy to listen to is Lloyd de Jongh he has a number of great programs dealing with these issue. He is not a Catholic but he sounds definitely like a Catholic show his sources. Enjoy your program. God bless.

[@giovanniserafino1731]

Many Western Christians should know that Orthodox churches are national churches. The central tenant is NOT the Orthodox Faith, but ethnic identity. One can certainly “join” these churches, but unless you are Greek, Russian, Ukrainian, Bulgarian , Romanian etc. you will never be considered a “ real” or full member of that church. Hence, you will always be treated as a “ second class,” member. Catholic means universal, and everyone , no matter what ones ethnic background or nationality may be is welcomed, just as Our Lord wanted. A sign that the Catholic Church is the true and only Church.

[@GloomZzyy]

Who told you this nonsense

[@vassilopoula]

You have a point on that. However Orthodox church is Universal (Catholic) on the sense of the communion of saints. Nationalism, tribalism are human faults; RC Church can not pride herself of being blameless: forced conversions, pope being cesars, masonry, institutional abuse of women/children (Magdalene washrooms) and many more. Jesus wants us to be humble and judging ourselves, not the others

[@TheMacDonald22]

​@@GloomZzyy can you refute it? Genuinely curious.

[@vytautasmikuciauskas222]

Also they are cesaropapist churches

[@jeffersonfrunk3210]

That is a downright lie, many people convert, and are not treated as "second class", that's stupid and contradictory, once they convert to Orthodoxy, they are a part of the Church, no matter what ethnic background.

[@timothymacdonnell9079]

This was very informative. Thanks

[@gottliebgrubber92]

At the very least in Eastern Orthodoxy we dont have Pachamama Worship, Amazonia Synod, altar girls, crazy liberation theology, our Nuns still wear decent habits, lots of vocations, there are almost no closing or merger of empty parishes, raping altar boys cardinal, what else ah we dont have Fr. James Martin, communion in the hands, traditiones custodes, clown masses, circus masses, hippie music from 60’s as Church music… Yeah Right … Roman Catholicism is the True Church … 😂😂😂😂

[@essafats5728]

And yet without the big bad Catholic Church, the West would have been ruled Islam or secularism; the slow molasses Orthodox, with its state, emperor, and national culture and disunity, no help at all.

[@idgafidgaf3059]

Oppss we have some orthobro's ego hurt here 😖

[@mariorizkallah5383]

@@idgafidgaf3059 with all due respect Vatican 1 gave birth to Vatican 2. Rome is reaping the fruits of its schism from the Church

[@mariorizkallah5383]

@@essafats5728 Orthodox were under many persecutions, what exactly is your point?

[@essafats5728]

@@mariorizkallah5383 wat? Pay attention and try to keep up with the rest of us plz

[@brooks3376]

Dude, I’m Catholic in South Carolina. Your channel is awesome bro. Keep going! Deus vult!

[@seekingtruth5637]

If the Catholic church is the true faith then explain pope john paul 2 and Assisi prayer meetings with pagans praying to thier false gods etc...

[@ChristConst]

very true

[@MillionthUsername]

Does Judas invalidate Christ?

[@MillionthUsername]

KZbin shows me your new comment, but will not let me reply directly. I asked you if Judas invalidated Christ because it is the same obviously false 'logic' at work in your accusation against the true Faith of the Church, implying that the Faith must be false if a member of that Faith chooses to sin. What is your response to that? If your logic holds, then Judas invalidates Christ.

[@seekingtruth5637]

@MillionthUsername I am not talking about Judas I am.talking about the vicar of christ, the supreme authority of the church and vatican 2 for example. So how do you compare this to Judas? Was judas teaching error to catholics? But it's not just vatican 2

[@MillionthUsername]

@@seekingtruth5637 I guess you don't understand your own point then. You are saying, are you not, that the Catholic Faith is false if an apostle/pope sins?

[@theroadtodamascus7710]

What is the theme music for your videos? thanks

[@franciscoguzman1065]

Hope the orthodox come back to the chair of Peter. Everyone knew including the early Orthodox Church fathers that rome held a special place in all the sees.

[@hxrx9670]

No thanks, we don't need to submit to papolatry, pachamama cult and modernist theology promoting lgbt propaganda, we are glad keeping the same faith as the church fathers.

[@franciscoguzman1065]

@Hx Rx the orthodox come away by the emperor creating a new “rome” in Constantinople which got overrun by the Turks yet the Holy See still stands. Constantinople had no apostolic succession. They’re indeed in schism.

[@hxrx9670]

@@franciscoguzman1065 so your faith in the Church is based on geography and confort zone, not on the untouched theology of the Church Fathers that still exists despite muslim invasion and communist overtake.

[@franciscoguzman1065]

@@hxrx9670 still dude Constantinople had no apostolic succession and it doesn’t matter the simple fact is that the Orthodox Church knew that rome was first when it came to apostolic sees. Constantine then created a new rome and that’s when the other important sees like Alexandria and Antioch started to see Constantinople as a new rome .

[@hxrx9670]

@@franciscoguzman1065 it seems that you completely ignore the fact that there was something called The Pentarchy, and no, Rome was just one of the early Churches started by the apostles (Jerusalem, Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria), even Antioch was founded by Peter, those churches kept the same faith unchanged, while Rome fell to the Franks who took the orthodox church of Rome and turned it into a political throne. In Orthodox theology we keep the same, no pachamama, no lgbt, no child abuse, no Rothschild owned vatican bank, holy liturgy, nicean creed, bread and wine for communion, right procesion of the Holy Spirit, voluntary celibacy for clergy (monks) and we don't mix faith with geopolitics a.k.a. earthly power, just like Christ stated to the apostles. If you are honest for Christ then abandon worldly idolatry of throne power, become Orthodox.

[@collaborisgaming2190]

12:19 Purgatory is considered Personal Theology but it's still Heretical. It was Acceptance of Papal Authority on Geo-Political Bounds, not Theology. Doesn't prove your point at all when Europe was Saved from Muslim Conquest by non-Filioque thinking Martyrs in the East and West for Centuries.

[@benboulet1724]

Thank God for the Pope venerating Pacha mama. That’s Pope representing Saint Peter

[@AGPArchivist]

Pachamama is a hoax, the image came from an artist's market and was dubbed Our Lady of the Amazon by Catholic natives.

[@Hope_Boat]

When Charlemagne asked saint pope Leo II to add the filioque to the Creed in 810AD, the pope refused and nailed two silver shields on the doors of his basilica with the unaltered Creed (without the filioque) engraved in Greek the Latin and this sentence: I, Leo, did this for the sake and love of the orthodox faith. The orthodox popes of Rome defended the orthodox faith until 880 when the 8th ecumenical council held in Constantinople anathematized anyone who dares to add or remove anything to or from the Nicene Creed. This 8th e.c. was validated by saint pope of Rome John VIII who was murdered soon-after (882) with a war hammer. The Germans ' weapon of choice. Draw your own conclusions. After his martyrdom Rome fall in a period of chaos (called the Pornocratia or rule of the harlot) In 1014 the German emperor finally took control or Rome and imposed the filioque (during emperor Henry II coronation on 14 February 1014 in Rome) and soon imposed German popes. The second one, Leo IX claimed the imperial Insignia for himself, constituted the Pontifical State and provoked the schism with orthodoxy. I will explain how in the next post.

[@Hope_Boat]

1050AD count Bruno von Eguisheim-Dagsbourg becomes the second German pope ever (the first short-lived his appointment as a pope) with the name Leo IX; At that point of history, the Carolingian dynasty is extinct. Charlemagne who was the first emperor of the dynasty based his legitimacy on the Donation of Constantin, a forged roman imperial decree by which the emperor Constantin the Great allegedly transferred the imperial insignia to pope Sylvester. Leo IX claimed the imperial insignia for himself as we can read in Dictatus Papae published in 1075 : "That [the Roman Pontiff] alone can use the imperial insignia. That he alone can use the imperial insignia." Leo IX also established a Roman senate, the assembly of the cardinals and a state Chancellor, Humbert of Moyenmoutiers who will play a major role in the schism. Then he invaded Sicily with his imperial army. At that time Sicily was part of the eastern Roman Empire (Byzantium) but the Normans were trying to invade the island. Once in Sicily Leo tried to force the byzantine clergy to drop the byzantine rite in favor of the Latin rite (the entire rite, not just the bread for osties). The Greek bishops asked to Patriarch Michel of Constantinople what to do and Michel told them to keep the Byzantine liturgy. This infuriated Leo IX who wrote a letter to the Patriarch claiming universal authority over the entire church based on the Donation of Constantin that he hold for genuine and legitimate. Meanwhile the warrior pope suffered total defeat at the Battle of Civitate on 15 June 1053 and became hostage of the Normans. Chancellor Humbert ruled the Pontifical State in his absence and it is thought that he wrote and signed letters in the name of Leo IX. Humbert was traveling tovards Constantinople to receive official recognition of the newborn Pontifical State from the Eastern Emperor when he learned that Leo IX had passed away 19 April 1054. Whatever Humbert did in Constantinople, he did from his own initiative during the inter-reign after Leo's death and the election of the next pope Victor II one year later (Aprils 13 1055). You can't fool God. When Humbert arrived in Constantinople he first delivered an insulting letter to the Patriarch Michel of Constantinople allegedly signed by Leo IX in which the pope accused Michel to be a woman in drag. The letter was in Latin so the Patriarch send it for translation and that was the reson why Humbert was not received immediately. When the Greek translation arrived, Humbert had already been received by the emperor, The state meeting when smoothly and Humbert left the imperial court without any scandal. Before living the town he went to Agia Sophia and dropped on the altar a excommunication bull against Michel of Constantinople. After reading the insulting letter the Patriarch asked the emperor to receive him and presented the letter. The emperor did not believe what he was reading. Alter all his own meeting with Humbert was very cordial. He asked for a second translation. The second translation confirmed the first and the emperor send the cavalry to bring Humbert back to the court. But to no avail. Humbert was already outside the imperial borders. The accusation of being a woman in drag was used also against saint pope of Rome John VIII as I will tell you in my next post.

[@Hope_Boat]

Among other idiotic accusations he made against the Orthodox Church, chancellor Humbert also pretended that the filioque was in the original Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed and that the "Greeks" removed it at some point. This fable could not stand against the oros (decisions) of the 8th ecumenical council hold in Constantinople in 880 and validated by saint pope of Rome John VIII. The oros of the 8th ecumenical council anathematized anyone who ares to add or remove anything to or from the Creed, and the entirety of the creed without the filioque was professed by the council. The solution was to remove saint John VIII from the list of the popes all together, nullifying all his actions and therefore canceling the 8th ecumenical council. This was done by accusing saint pope John VIII to be a woman in drag. The legend of pope Joan was born. Until the 17th century, the Roman Church will propagate this defamation as on can read in the official biography of the popes written by the prefect of the Vatican Library in 1479 : "Pope John VIII: John, of English extraction, was born at Mentz (Mainz) and is said to have arrived at popedom by evil art; for disguising herself like a man, whereas she was a woman, she went when young with her paramour, a learned man, to Athens, and made such progress in learning under the professors there that, coming to Rome, she met with few that could equal, much less go beyond her, even in the knowledge of the scriptures; and by her learned and ingenious readings and disputations, she acquired so great respect and authority that upon the death of Pope Leo IV (as Martin says) by common consent she was chosen pope in his room. As she was going to the Lateran Church between the Colossean Theatre (so called from Nero's Colossus) and St. Clement's her travail came upon her, and she died upon the place, having sat two years, one month, and four days, and was buried there without any pomp." There was even a bust of pope Joan in the collection of busts of past Popes was made for the Duomo of Siena with the inscription : ""Johannes VIII, Foemina de Anglia" (Joan VIII, Woman from England) The Protestants weaponized the legend of pope Joan against the papacy so in 1601, Pope Clement VIII declared the legend of the female pope to be untrue. John VIII was rehabilitated but Rome "forgot" to rehabilitate the 8th ecumenical council and to proclaim John VIII wa saint martyr despite the fact that he was the only pope murdered during his ministry since the dioclesian persecutions. He's considered as a saint martyr of the orthodox faith by the orthodox Church. ☦

[@Hope_Boat]

So here you have it. The schism was an idea of Charlemagne, who wanted better control over the West and therefore needed a schism between Rome and the rest of the Church. The entire Roman Pontiff monarchy relies on a forgery, the Donation of Constantin, that was created to legitimate the coronation of Charlemagne as Roman emperor of the West. The filioque was first recited by Pope Benedict VIII (the last pope of the scandalous Turscullum family involved in the Pornocratia) in Rome for the coronation of the German "Holy Roman" emperor Henry II in 1014, self anathematizing the pope. It stand on the assassination of one of the last orthodox popes of Rome, and his defamation for centuries in order to nullify the anathematization by the 8th ecumenical council of the filioquists. In 1995, at the request of John-Paul II the following clarification concerning the filioque was published : The Catholic Church acknowledges the conciliar, ecumenical, normative and irrevocable value, as expression of the one common faith of the Church and of all Christians, of the Symbol professed in Greek at Constantinople in 381 by the Second Ecumenical Council. No profession of faith peculiar to a particular liturgical tradition can contradict this expression of the faith taught and professed by the undivided Church. In clear english : the filioque is peculiar to the Western tradition and is not the universal (catholic) Creed. This means that since 1014 the only Church professing the universal (catholic) Creed is the Orthodox Church. Which makes the Orthodox Church the real catholic Church. Kyrie eleison ☦

[@christophersalinas2722]

the fathers taught the filioque

[@Hope_Boat]

@@christophersalinas2722 Christ didn't.

[@Journey_of_Abundance]

Debate Jay Dyer

[@imisschristendom5293]

I dont debate. Sorry. I've said what I have to say on the subject, And it is now closed. unless I say otherwise

[@Journey_of_Abundance]

@@imisschristendom5293 Ok. Well that's too bad. I'd like to see how you would respond to his objections to your arguments.

[@imisschristendom5293]

I made a decision when I opened this channel not to get into debates. I just dont have the time. This is not my only gig. I have a day job and a family. I had a channel years ago and tried to convince everyone, I i would spend hours arguing with people. Mainly though the comments. I decided not to do that with this channel. I realized that the people who want to debate, or argue, are not going to change their minds, generally speaking. And the people I convinced i did so through the videos So, I say what I have to say, and people can take it or leave it. Sorry to disappoint you

[@credidimuscaritati]

@@imisschristendom5293 Good on you for such a wise decision! May the Blessed Lady make your apostolate fruitful; you are in my Rosary 🙏

[@Triniforchrist]

​@@Journey_of_Abundance why is dyer afraid to debate Peter Dimond, because his false church teaching will get destroyed, that why

[@lasttrump6015]

I also studied this topic recently and found the Catholics make up that main part of the body of Christ but the Orthodox are like the internal organs -very critical obviously and equally important to the Catholic faith yet more focussed in nature while Catholics make up that broader and more general part of the body. We cannot say one is better than the other as they are equally important. St Paul tells us all this and more with Christs body was setup with no division but equality. Different roles yet equally important.

[@Rabbit19964]

Then become Catholic and bring your church with you,m

[@lasttrump6015]

@@Rabbit19964 Well both sides must modify some doctrines for each party to be happy about that. Its not something anyone can do by themselves. If I could force some changes then I would do just that for the sake of communion.