Oh come on! There is plentiful diversity in the Catholic Church--of orders, of habits, of spiritual traditions, of theological styles, of saints, of liturgical expressions, etc., etc. Diversity is one thing; fundamental disagreement about essential doctrine is something else altogether.
Trying to say that catholic diversity Bishop Barron said above is equivalent to the protestant babel of fundamental differences is a false analogy, a fallacy.
BISHOP BARON I NEED UR HELP , AM DYING AS RESULTS OF MY INTAKE OF DROGS ....AM WEAK NUT STILL CANT DO WITHOUT DRUGS...AM DYING EACH DAY .....JELP ME MY LORD
@tony Feel free to cite where you got your information supporting the claim that Catholics aren't Christian... Otherwise, I think it's you that should re-explore the Bible.
@tony I'm not sure you fully understand the bible. None of us do. But God is not a God of confusion. He would not try to confuse his children, so, you should act in Jesus's example and not try to confuse people who are correct with you Protestant Jibberish. I pray for you too! I hope you find your way back to the True Church of Christ.
@tony Catholics are Christ's True Church. They were the first and they are the only Church with Authority. Through the Apostles to Bishops, Priests, and Deacons through the centuries. The Catholic Church is the Only Church with With Christs Authority.
@tony I'm down for your Challenge. I will be pressing through a KJV Bible for the rest of this week. But I have a NAB and a Douay Rheims Bible on the way to get a full understanding. Yes, I know of Matt 16, when he properly establishes his Church. So, you go first.
Pretty hard to dislike Father Barron - he takes on the hard questions and escapes without harming himself or the questions, and yet he engages and scores.
I loved these Fr. Barron videos back in the day! I binged-watched them and they helped so much in my journey home to the Catholic Church. Fr. Barron was ordained a bishop just three months after I joined the Church, so it felt like I had a connection with him and we were accompanying each other as we entered a new stage of life. God bless💕
@@edrash1 Have you talked to a person who identifies as "Reformed" lately? There's such a diversity of opinions that repeating verbatim what one "reform" Christian said would get a dozen other "reform" Christians up in arms. They don't have much of a centralized theology...
I am soon to marry, and as the spiritual leader of my home, I am deeply searching for our spiritual home. In my research, I have found great encouragement in the Catholic church. I believe I am now on a proper path and will soon begin the search to find a Catholic church for my family.
I know this is an older post but I hope you and your wife talked about it and agreed. I too am married and to a woman that reads her Bible everyday. I too am the spiritual leader of the home, unfortunately my wife has decided not to follow. It has created deep divisions in our relationship. It would have been helpful to know before hand.
I met you at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in NY over a decade ago. You were nice enough to talk with my sister-who could not be there-on the phone. A wonderful day for me and my sister. Prayers for you, Bishop Barron!
Interesting, well-balanced presentation, Fr. Barron. I have a friend who's a Lutheran pastor. He keeps wishing his church had a magisterium. It makes him cringe to see matters of doctrine voted upon by people who have no training in theology. I think many people don't understand that the development of doctrine is not an arbitrary thing, teachings imposed by people in authority simply because they have authority. Doctrine must be consistent with Scripture, and it must make logical sense.
Oh indeed! My biggest problem with these "spring up churches" of today. No particular theological basis or backing. To me this is such a maverick way, dangerous, and leaves ample avenues for any and all wrong information to fall in to place under the rooves of these start up (upstart?) church communities where the well meaning leaders and followers remain albeit clueless and somewhat innocent, uninformed. Yet, my humble opinion is that all involved ought to feel the responsibility to be seeking the real actual Truth, rather than making up the "feel good" so called "truth" as they stumble forward with a Bible in their hand. May the mighty Holy Spirit help these folks, guide them, breathe the breath of reality on us all as we stumble toward Heaven in the murky secularity of this life!
Thank you Rodney. That actually makes sense. I've watched the entire 'Catholicism' series and was really impressed. Everything I had ever heard about Catholicism came from non-Catholics (I'm originally from south Alabama) so my view was very skewed. I've been watching nearly all of Fr. Barron's UA-cam videos. They all make sense to me. Thanks again for the response!
You're very misguided, sorry for whoever taught you that, terrible thing to say, you should ashamed of yourself, you must be very young because no true, responsible adults would have such evil things to say about any religion
I have been a protestant Christian pretty much my entire adult life. I have always thought of the catholic church as a strange and basically heretical in their teachings. However, I have begun to listen to Bishop Barron and Patrick Madrid on the radio. I suddenly have started to read about the catholic faith and watched UA-cam videos about the faith. Of course, I 've done further research. I feel it is a great church. I guess the whole Mary thing ha me a bit perplexed. The whole asking saints for intercession also cause me some problems. However, I feel better about the catholic church. Don't know if I will change denomination.
Yay Fr. Barron..you explained clearly that the church is a living church and that it needs an authority. Just like Jesus said to Peter:"Man has not reveiled this to you But my father". So has God reviled this to you Fr.....now Bishop Barron. We love you! We needed someone like you here in California. Mi Casa 🏡 Es Tu Casa🏡. We are praying for you..please pray for us.😊
I became Catholic not because I "liked" it better, but for the same reason Neumann said. Writings of the Eastern Orthodox helped me a lot in this regard by the way, for they, and the Oriental Orthodox, and the Assyrian, are stronger proof than anything that the ideas of apostolic succession as just a succession of believers or presbyters is just not sustainable; we were getting it wrong for well over 1000 years before Luther figured it out? Sorry, but that doesn't work. Most of the Protestant arguments simply fall apart on this point. I pray they look at it and realize it, apostolic succession wasn't an invention of Rome. It just wasn't.
John Collins LOL I likely know more real scientists than you know actual people. Cultists like you are destroying science, BTW. www.deanesmay.com/2016/05/05/the-scientific-reality-of-the-scientism-religion/
John Collins Stephen Hawking is an idiot when it comes to philosophy and theology, but he's not a cult leader. It'd be nice if he'd give Father Geroges LeMaitre a little more credit though, given that LeMaitre's the one responsible for most of his career. No, the cult leaders are people like Richard Dawkins.
This is part of why I think most people don't trust atheists--the clear dishonesty. Atheist cults have been around for thousands of years and are still highly active today.
Chritianity has been divided unfortunately which resulted in the conflict and I think what Fr. Robert mentioned is a good starting point to really think about how we can narrow the gaps among Christian brothers and sisters. May God's grace and love be with you all !!
My father is an Evangelical and my mother is a Catholics. Having to go back and fort between these denomination makes my head burst to find which is which is true to follow. But , somehow , my heart always never lose focus to Jesus be it wherever and whatever denominations I go to. Now , as I got older , it's pretty clear that to be able to questions much of everything about how Faiths work , I found the path of Evangelical have always been my calling to stand in the faith ( Even when I am dealing with my current sin ). Catholics still ring most to my heart still ( probably because I spend most of my childhood more with my mom than my dad ) and I only got into protestant when I finally moved out with my dad since dad's place kinda the only place that in majority , got protestant churches. One things for sure , it was a culture shock . In Catholics faith , you got a lot of statues and decorations that resembles the faith but Protestants are minimalist ( it's their way of saying that faith in Christ is the focus inside you and not the things that you have ). Protestants got instruments ranging in a complete rhythm sections and I first play the keyboard then shift my majors to electric guitar. Learn music once in classical trained literacy but now as protestant , it's pop jazz and Gospel feel ( although sometimes , we are inclined to go for the classical style ) In short , my transitions does change my culture of serving the Lord through church but It doesn't change the foundations of my own living church inside me...JESUS. My focus have always been to Him all the time. Right now , I am currently far away from home and constantly dealing with a lot of stuff ( so much that my catholic side tells me to repent and make a confessions ). But , I am grateful to God when He sent me different people fo the same faith but different denominations to carry me up when I am down by offering me to go with them at the church. I believe that God's work is always in motions and if it wasn't for Him , I would have already lost not of faith in churches of men but the church that build personally within my heart with Him. God Bless Everyone and do also say a prayers for this sinners that smokes and drink to go oftenly if best , eradicate it....
28 And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his teachings: 29 For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.
My small town in the UK has one Catholic church and at least seven Protestant ones of different denominations. How powerful it would be if we were all one.
Robert. I had a partner in business once upon a time. And in the busness, we had many disagreements in our practice. But one thing we learn because we were both very good at what we did. We learned that if we strongly disagreed on something, that meant that we were both right. It's simple, we were both right and the answer is not one or the other but in fact both. What made that way of thinking work, was the fact that we seen the genius of it. If I may say that. The problem we had was that we had to figure out a way to gear the two. Not always easy, but necessary and in time was a very powerful mechanism.
I became Anglican a few years ago and have found myself drawn more to the Anglo-Catholic end of the spectrum, and now feel drawn to Rome. I'm hoping someday to enter full communion with Rome, but at least for now I'm living practically as a Catholic. At a certain point I realized (as Newman did) that many of the Anglo-Catholic traditions are beautiful, but they're also kind of empty dead traditions without the living tradition of the Catholic Church. If we all follow one God, one Jesus, one faith, one Church, how can it be that we are all using wildly different interpretations of the same text? I think it's fine to debate scripture and doctrine, we should even encourage it because it promotes a greater familiarity with the Scripture and with theological concepts, but at the end of the day we need a unified voice of truth in the world to guard against heresy.
I have no problem with people who are Protestant Christian. In fact my girlfriend is a Protestant Christian and her Protestant denomination is Baptist. And when I told her that my denomination is Catholic, she and I respected each other and there was mutual understanding.
Dude, you are not part of any denomination. Protestants are, because there are more than 60,000 of them. They have to set themselves apart from the other 59,999. The Catholic Church is the only one true church. It is not a denomination. It is not one among many. Just think about it.
Respectfully...the almost 2,000 year old Catholic Church is not a denomination...but the very Church our Lord Jesus Christ established in Matthew 16:18.
The Pillar and Foundation of Truth is the CHURCH, not the Bible. (1 Tim 3.15) The Church wrote, assembled and canonized the Bible. No effect can be greater than it's cause. Think about it...
God Himself wrote the Bible through men. 2 Peter 1:19-21; see also 2 Timothy 3:15-17, Proverbs 30:5-6, 1 Corinthians 4:6, 2 Peter 3:15-16, 1 Peter 4:17, 1 Peter 1:22-25, James 5:10, James 1:18, 21-25, Hebrews 13:7, 11:, 4:12, 1:1-4, and I'll post others as I find them.
He is Right every man and woman seem to have different opinions about everything. But Ibelieve I have a small universal truth in this. It goes something like; God listens to people in great despair. And he shows them great miracle of comfort.
and do youbelieve you are able to interpert Scripture for yourself better than the Church and the Magesterium . I beg to differ. And how do you explain that it is the Catholic Church that gave us the Books of the Bible.
John Dattoma all u need do after u have accepted Jesus as savior and asked Him to forgive ur sins and live inside ur spirit, is read & study the bible 4 ur self without the influence of any denomination or religion. The bible is truth, and every man is a liar.
25,000 plus different denominations all claiming to be guided by the Holy Spirit and understand scripture correctly, everyone else is wrong, what else do you call it? LOL
truth, beauty, goodness all in catholic faith. No where else offers that. You have to wear "catholic glasses" to see it. I love the peace and humility in Catholics. I don't believe Protestants have fullness of truth as many books were left out by ex-Augustinian monk matin Luther. Second you need traditions to understand many things in bible that only Catholics can answer correctly. For example, you wouldn't understand exactly if you read my love letter written to my spouse 20yrs ago unless you know both families.
Has anyone asked how did Protestanism come about? Surely anyone can see that it comes from the root word Protest! And Protest against what? Well history reveals Protestanism was to Protest against the roman 💒 departure from The Authority of Holy Bible WORD doctrines! Pure n simple!!!👏👏👏👏👏
The protest was initally against indulgences. Luther felt it was an attempt to sell salvation which... Is impossible. But i can see where were starting to fall apart as well. Our denominations have let things in that scripture clearly condemns but yet we reject things that seem to be supported by scripture which is a clear violation of Sola Scriptura... :-( im deeply puzzled... :-( sincerily a deeply concerned Presbyterian. :-(
Does your Bible believing church teach that you must physically eat the flesh of Jesus and drink His blood to have life in you (John 6:53)? John 6:53 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you
Tim Spangler Jesus Promises His Real Presence in the Eucharist John 6:4,11-14 - on the eve of the Passover, Jesus performs the miracle of multiplying the loaves. This was prophesied in the Old Testament (e.g., 2 Kings 4:43), and foreshadows the infinite heavenly bread which is Him. Matt. 14:19, 15:36; Mark 6:41, 8:6; Luke 9:16 -these passages are additional accounts of the multiplication miracles. This points to the Eucharist. Matt. 16:12 -in this verse, Jesus explains His metaphorical use of the term "bread." In John 6, He eliminates any metaphorical possibilities. John 6:4 - Jesus is in Capernaum on the eve of Passover, and the lambs are gathered to be slaughtered and eaten. Look what He says. John 6:35,41,48,51 - Jesus says four times "I AM the bread from heaven." It is He, Himself, the eternal bread from heaven. John 6:27,31,49 - there is a parallel between the manna in the desert which was physically consumed, and this "new" bread which must be consumed. John 6:51-52- then Jesus says that the bread He is referring to is His flesh. The Jews take Him literally and immediately question such a teaching. How can this man give us His flesh to eat? John 6:53 - 58 - Jesus does not correct their literal interpretation. Instead, Jesus eliminates any metaphorical interpretations by swearing an oath and being even more literal about eating His flesh. In fact, Jesus says four times we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. Catholics thus believe that Jesus makes present His body and blood in the sacrifice of the Mass. Protestants, if they are not going to become Catholic, can only argue that Jesus was somehow speaking symbolically. John 6:23-53 - however, a symbolic interpretation is not plausible. Throughout these verses, the Greek text uses the word "phago" nine times. "Phago" literally means "to eat" or "physically consume." Like the Protestants of our day, the disciples take issue with Jesus' literal usage of "eat." So Jesus does what? John 6:54, 56, 57, 58 - He uses an even more literal verb, translated as "trogo," which means to gnaw or chew or crunch. He increases the literalness and drives his message home. Jesus will literally give us His flesh and blood to eat. The word “trogo” is only used two other times in the New Testament (in Matt. 24:38 and John 13:18) and it always means to literally gnaw or chew meat. While “phago” might also have a spiritual application, "trogo" is never used metaphorically in Greek. So Protestants cannot find one verse in Scripture where "trogo" is used symbolically, and yet this must be their argument if they are going to deny the Catholic understanding of Jesus' words. Moreover, the Jews already knew Jesus was speaking literally even before Jesus used the word “trogo” when they said “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” (John 6:52). John 6:55 - to clarify further, Jesus says "For My Flesh is food indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed." This phrase can only be understood as being responsive to those who do not believe that Jesus' flesh is food indeed, and His blood is drink indeed. Further, Jesus uses the word which is translated as "sarx." "Sarx" means flesh (not "soma" which means body). See, for example, John 1:13,14; 3:6; 8:15; 17:2; Matt. 16:17; 19:5; 24:22; 26:41; Mark 10:8; 13:20; 14:38; and Luke 3:6; 24:39 which provides other examples in Scripture where "sarx" means flesh. It is always literal. John 6:55 - further, the phrases "real" food and "real" drink use the word "alethes." "Alethes" means "really" or "truly," and would only be used if there were doubts concerning the reality of Jesus' flesh and blood as being food and drink. Thus, Jesus is emphasizing the miracle of His body and blood being actual food and drink. John 6:60 - as are many anti-Catholics today, Jesus' disciples are scandalized by these words. They even ask, "Who can 'listen' to it (much less understand it)?" To the unillumined mind, it seems grotesque. John 6:61-63 - Jesus acknowledges their disgust. Jesus' use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" means the disciples need supernatural faith, not logic, to understand His words. John 3:6 - Jesus often used the comparison of "spirit versus flesh" to teach about the necessity of possessing supernatural faith versus a natural understanding. In Mark 14:38 Jesus also uses the "spirit/flesh" comparison. The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. We must go beyond the natural to understand the supernatural. In 1 Cor. 2:14,3:3; Rom 8:5; and Gal. 5:17, Paul also uses the "spirit/flesh" comparison to teach that unspiritual people are not receiving the gift of faith. They are still "in the flesh." John 6:63 - Protestants often argue that Jesus' use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" shows that Jesus was only speaking symbolically. However, Protestants must explain why there is not one place in Scripture where "spirit" means "symbolic." As we have seen, the use of "spirit" relates to supernatural faith. What words are spirit and life? The words that we must eat Jesus' flesh and drink His blood, or we have no life in us. John 6:66-67 - many disciples leave Jesus, rejecting this literal interpretation that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. At this point, these disciples really thought Jesus had lost His mind. If they were wrong about the literal interpretation, why wouldn't Jesus, the Great Teacher, have corrected them? Why didn't Jesus say, "Hey, come back here, I was only speaking symbolically!"? Because they understood correctly. Jesus Institutes the Eucharist / More Proofs of the Real Presence Matt. 26:26-28; Mark. 14:22,24; Luke 22;19-20; 1 Cor. 11:24-25 - Jesus says, this IS my body and blood. Jesus does not say, this is a symbol of my body and blood. Matt. 26:26; Mark. 14:22; Luke 22:19-20 - the Greek phrase is "Touto estin to soma mou." This phraseology means "this is actually" or "this is really" my body and blood. 1 Cor. 11:24 - the same translation is used by Paul - "touto mou estin to soma." The statement is "this is really" my body and blood. Nowhere in Scripture does God ever declare something without making it so. Matt. 26:26; Mark. 14:22; Luke 22:19 - to deny the 2,000 year-old Catholic understanding of the Eucharist, Protestants must argue that Jesus was really saying "this represents (not is) my body and blood." However, Aramaic, the language that Jesus spoke, had over 30 words for "represent," but Jesus did not use any of them. He used the Aramaic word for "estin" which means "is." Matt. 26:28; Mark. 14:24; Luke 22:20 - Jesus' use of "poured out" in reference to His blood also emphasizes the reality of its presence. Exodus 24:8 - Jesus emphasizes the reality of His actual blood being present by using Moses' statement "blood of the covenant." 1 Cor. 10:16 - Paul asks the question, "the cup of blessing and the bread of which we partake, is it not an actual participation in Christ's body and blood?" Is Paul really asking because He, the divinely inspired writer, does not understand? No, of course not. Paul's questions are obviously rhetorical. This IS the actual body and blood. Further, the Greek word "koinonia" describes an actual, not symbolic participation in the body and blood. 1 Cor. 10:18 - in this verse, Paul is saying we are what we eat. We are not partners with a symbol. We are partners of the one actual body. 1 Cor. 11:23 - Paul does not explain what he has actually received directly from Christ, except in the case when he teaches about the Eucharist. Here, Paul emphasizes the importance of the Eucharist by telling us he received directly from Jesus instructions on the Eucharist which is the source and summit of the Christian faith. 1 Cor. 11:27-29 - in these verses, Paul says that eating or drinking in an unworthy manner is the equivalent of profaning (literally, murdering) the body and blood of the Lord. If this is just a symbol, we cannot be guilty of actually profaning (murdering) it. We cannot murder a symbol. Either Paul, the divinely inspired apostle of God, is imposing an unjust penalty, or the Eucharist is the actual body and blood of Christ. 1 Cor. 11:30 - this verse alludes to the consequences of receiving the Eucharist unworthily. Receiving the actual body and blood of Jesus in mortal sin results in actual physical consequences to our bodies. 1 Cor. 11:27-30 - thus, if we partake of the Eucharist unworthily, we are guilty of literally murdering the body of Christ, and risking physical consequences to our bodies. This is overwhelming evidence for the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. These are unjust penalties if the Eucharist is just a symbol. Acts 2:42 - from the Church's inception, apostolic tradition included celebrating the Eucharist (the "breaking of the bread") to fulfill Jesus' command "do this in remembrance of me." Acts 20:28 - Paul charges the Church elders to "feed" the Church of the Lord, that is, with the flesh and blood of Christ. Matt. 6:11; Luke 11:3 - in the Our Father, we ask God to give us this day our daily bread, that is the bread of life, Jesus Christ. Matt. 12:39 - Jesus says no “sign” will be given except the “sign of the prophet Jonah.” While Protestants focus only on the “sign” of the Eucharist, this verse demonstrates that a sign can be followed by the reality (here, Jesus’ resurrection, which is intimately connected to the Eucharist). Matt. 19:6 - Jesus says a husband and wife become one flesh which is consummated in the life giving union of the marital act. This union of marital love which reflects Christ's union with the Church is physical, not just spiritual. Thus, when Paul says we are a part of Christ's body (Eph. 1:22-23; 5:23,30-31; Col. 1:18,24), he means that our union with Christ is physical, not just spiritual. But our union with Christ can only be physical if He is actually giving us something physical, that is Himself, which is His body and blood to consume (otherwise it is a mere spiritual union). Luke 14:15 - blessed is he who eats this bread in the kingdom of God, on earth and in heaven. Luke 22:19, 1 Cor. 11:24-25 - Jesus commands the apostles to "do this," that is, offer the Eucharistic sacrifice, in remembrance of Him. Luke 24:26-35 - in the Emmaus road story, Jesus gives a homily on the Scriptures and then follows it with the celebration of the Eucharist. This is the Holy Mass, and the Church has followed this order of the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist for 2,000 years. Luke 24:30-31,35 - Jesus is known only in the breaking of bread. Luke is emphasizing that we only receive the fullness of Jesus by celebrating the Eucharistic feast of His body and blood, which is only offered in its fullness by the Catholic Church. John 1:14 - literally, this verse teaches that the Word was made flesh and "pitched His tabernacle" among us. The Eucharist, which is the Incarnate Word of God under the appearance of bread, is stored in the tabernacles of Catholic churches around the world. John 21:15,17 - Jesus charges Peter to "feed" His sheep, that is, with the Word of God through preaching and the Eucharist. Acts 9:4-5; 22:8; 26:14-15 - Jesus asks Saul, “Why are you persecuting me?” when Saul was persecuting the Church. Jesus and the Church are one body (Bridegroom and Bride), and we are one with Jesus through His flesh and blood (the Eucharist). 1 Cor. 12:13 - we "drink" of one Spirit in the Eucharist by consuming the blood of Christ eternally offered to the Father. Heb. 10:25,29 - these verses allude to the reality that failing to meet together to celebrate the Eucharist is mortal sin. It is profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Heb. 12:22-23 - the Eucharistic liturgy brings about full union with angels in festal gathering, the just spirits, and God Himself, which takes place in the assembly or "ecclesia" (the Church). Heb. 12:24 - we couldn't come to Jesus' sprinkled blood if it were no longer offered by Jesus to the Father and made present for us. 2 Pet. 1:4 - we partake of His divine nature, most notably through the Eucharist - a sacred family bond where we become one. Rev. 2:7; 22:14 - we are invited to eat of the tree of life, which is the resurrected flesh of Jesus which, before, hung on the tree.
pepe bastardes I'm certainly no saint but I can't comprehend it either. When I see terms like "wafer God" and "death cookie" I feel sick. And worse that it comes from people who call themselves "Christian" and think they have some God-given authority to "save" Catholics.
justthinken1 they’ve corrected that and this link also provides where that information originally came from. Clearly there are thousands of protestant denominations. Even if it’s not the erroneous 33,000. The church corrected itself. The church is made of humans who are indeed fallible. m.ncregister.com/blog/scottericalt/we-need-to-stop-saying-that-there-are-33000-protestant-denominations
justthinken1 The fact that exactly 33,000 protestant denominations does not change The authority of the first traditional Christian church: the Catholic Church. There’s tradition, authority, reason, and BIBLE. I don’t know why people say Catholics are not taught to read their Bible. That’s absolutely not true. We do have Catholic Bible studies you know and the families are biblical-based
justthinken1 Just a simple observation. Being rude calling names and generally acting unChristlike is not very convincing to anyone. I wasn’t rude to you and have no idea why some people feel that being that rude online is OK. Shrug. To each his own ... work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
no. I will never leave Him nor He me. every day I walk in the light and guidance of the Holy Spirit. I actually know Him and have a real experience of Him. once every week or two I gather with my fellow true believers to learn about and praise Him and his Spirit comes among us. We break bread and share wine in remembrance of Him as He commanded. this is holy communion as it should be celebrated. And we sense the results of it by His real presence among us.
Where in the Bible does it say this? It doesn't. Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based solely on a book? It doesn't.
My interpretation of scriptures is of God. Yours is of what men taught you.I asked and prayed to God for understanding.God freely gives wisdom to all who ask.
The Catholic Church IS THE CHURCH...it is where all Christians belong....that being said..The Prostestant churches ( most).. share one key belief with the Catholic Church..Hell is a real place and people go there....how strange that some people dont agree with this teaching as 1) Jesus himself told us so..2) Our blessed Mother told us many go there because they have no one to pray for them 3) The Saints have told us it is real and people DO go their.....yes very strange that some believe hell just might be empty🤔🤔🤔
Only God and Jesus have authority. all we do is to be for their will and glory. Our salvation is in grace through blood Jesus, nothing else and through no organization nor person.
pat mark So you put him at a open shame at every mass do you? You kill Jesus over and over? Hebrews 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Is the writer of Hebrews a liar or is the Catholic church ? Once for all.
Tommy. Your understanding is completely simplistic and childish, that is why you need a teaching authority who understands these mysteries. The Church understands all of these things and can explain them biblically and with intelligence and reason as well. You cannot. You accuse because you have no understanding. Those outside of the Church are puffed up with their own pride and will accept no teaching or authority and that's why they are so confused. But stop casting stones if you are ignorant. You people don't understand because you refuse to learn.
Prancer1231 Typical Catholic person. Cant answer any of my questions resort to insults. If you gave the world the bible as YOU Catholics say, How is it YOU have no understanding of it? I can I am saved,can you? I am a child of God, Can you say this? You insult Jesus by telling him he didn't do a very good job on forgiving sins thus saying one has to go to purgatory BEFORE going to Heaven. If you were a mature adult ,why not refute me with your bible? Reason why you don't is simple. You are either not mature enough or you lack what the word of God says. So which is it? Try this seeing Paul says to DO THIS! 2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Thank you, thank you, thank you, Bishop Barron! I just finished listening to Patrick Madrid and James White 1993 debate on sola scriptura, and, though Mr. Madrid did a great job in showing the falseness of sola scriptura's claims, it left me very discouraged. Your clarity and wisdom in this video lifted my spirits. I am so grateful for your ministry.
It's best to go to God in prayer for His opinion instead of listening to human debates. Ask God whether His word is the only source of true Christian teaching and if so, why, or does He approve of human arguments because His testament does not really testify to His teachings being inerrant, but is rather a book of guidelines to be accepted or rejected, modified and corrected by RC theologians. The Holy Spirit is the voice, clear voice and living voice leading those who want to obey God and do His will.
Does your Bible believing church teach that the Church itself (rather than the Bible) is the pillar and bulwark (foundation) of Truth (1 Timothy 3:15)? 1 Timothy 3:15 But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.
John Reynolds I would argue that this verse was written long before anything resembling the Catholic Church and it's hierarchy had developed. The Church in those days resembled much more the diversity of today than the uniformity of the pre-schism catholic church. In the days of Paul you already have jewish christians and greek christians.
hisredrighthand The First Letter from St. Paul to St. Timothy was written approximately in A.D. 55... Below is the very first written account that has survived the centuries with the formal name of “The Church”: "See that ye all follow the bishop,even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church." Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrneans, 8:2(c. A.D. 110). We see from this short text that by the end of the first century the following has already been well established, there are Bishops, Priests, Deacons, and especially the term “Eucharist” and the formal name of the Church. Ignatius uses this formal name of the Church our Lord Jesus Christ established as if it is already widely known. Sure sounds like the Catholic Church of today….don’t you think?
hisredrighthand “The Church” is Hierarchical Matt. 16:18; 18:18 - Jesus uses the word "ecclesia" only twice in the New Testament Scriptures, which demonstrates that Jesus intended a visible, unified, hierarchical, and authoritative Church. Acts 20:17,28 - Paul refers to both the elders or priests ("presbyteroi") and the bishops ("episkopoi") of the Church. Both are ordained leaders within the hierarchical structure of the Church. 1 Cor. 12:28 - God Himself appoints the various positions of authority within the Church. As a loving Father, God gives His children the freedom and authority to act with charity and justice to bring about His work of salvation. Eph. 4:11 - the Church is hierarchical and includes apostles, prophets, pastors, and teachers, all charged to build up the Church. The Church is not an invisible entity with an invisible foundation. Phil. 1:1 - Paul addresses the bishops and deacons of the Church. They can all trace their unbroken lineage back to the apostles. 1 Tim. 3:1; Titus 1:7 - Christ's Church has bishops ("episkopoi") who are direct successors of the apostles. The bishops can trace the authority conferred upon them back to the apostles. 1 Tim. 5:17; Titus 1:5; James 5:14 - Christ's Church also has elders or priests ("presbyteroi") who serve the bishops. 1 Tim. 3:8 - Christ's Church also has deacons ("diakonoi"). Thus, Jesus Christ's Church has a hierarchy of authority - bishops, priests and deacons, who can all trace their lineage back to Peter and the apostles. Exodus 28:1 and 19:6 - shows the three offices of the Old Testament priesthood: (1). high priest - Aaron (Ex. 28:1) (2). Ministerial priests - Aaron’s sons (Ex. 19:6; 28:1) (3) Universal priests - Israel (Ex. 19:6). The New Testament priesthood also has three offices: (1) High Priest - Jesus Christ (Heb. 3:1) (2) Ministerial priests - the ordained bishops and priests (Rom. 15:16; 1 Tim. 3:1,8; 5:17; Titus 1:7) (3) Universal priests - all the baptized (1 Pet. 2:5,9; Rev. 1:6)
John Reynolds Where is the mandate to WORSHIP the Eucharist? Scripture? Nope. The Creeds? Nope. Your reference? Nope. It isn't a minor thing. You MUST know that if the Eucharist is NOT supposed to be worshiped, then this is idolatry of the worst kind, right?
The problem with a referee is that his word is final..Theres the answer, once its accepted the questioning stops.......I trust no man and i test the spirits. Protestants do rely on the spirit as the final source, sometimes he makes us wait for answers, but we continue to study and pray and learn and grow.....quick easy answers is man's way, not God's......As long as we have questions and concerns we will bury ourselves in the bible, always seeking for more......if we had no questions or concerns or desire to know more the Holy Bible would be sitting on the shelf collecting dust.....mines beside my bed, worn and comfortable and filled with gum wrappers to bookmark my favorite pages.......deception in religion is so rampant, i may be a tad bit paranoid, but the paranoia keeps me alert and diligent...:)
But whose reading of the Bible? There are tens of thousands of Protestant churches, each one representing a distinctive interpretation of the Bible. And the referee I'm talking about is one that has received the sanction of the Holy Spirit.
i read alone, and in a study group and always pray for guidance beforehand...even when i attend church (Baptist) i have open book in hand....i do not trust anyone's interpretation 100%. , its not that i question their expertise in the scriptures. ...I question purposeful deception in a corrupt world full of corrupt men........if i find myself in hell it will be because of my own evil doings, not because i followed someone else there. ....i was once very trusting. 15 years later i still pray for deliverance from the cult of the SDA's...........getting back to the church that I was raised in has helped, but has left me guarded and paranoid Reply Fr. Robert Barron
Bibleindepth there is no true Christianity without the Eucharist, which is the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread and wine.
I wish all the Churches could be one but it now seems impossible. So many interpretations of the bible when it is so simple to understand. The Catholic Church shot itself in the foot when it added doctrines which are not found in the bible such as infant baptism, Acts 8:35-38 praying to saints and Mary, 1 Tim. 2:5, selling indulgences, Rom. 6:1, bowing and worshipping statues, 1 John 5:21, forbidding to marry of certain groups such as nuns and priests which in turn led to sexual perversion among some of them, 1 Tim. 4:1-3, giving one man power to give his word the same weight as scripture. 2 Thess. 2:3-4 If they had just stayed true to the beliefs of the first century church, there would have been no break up. Jude 3
Tommy. Jude 3 pretty much tells us there was a complete doctrine which needed no additions or subtractions which is pretty much what happened over the centuries. I'm glad we have the bible or new testament to read for ourselves. The first century Christian Church recorded in the new testament wouldn't have recognized the Roman Catholic or Orthodox Catholic Church of today. Jude 3 "Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was ONCE delivered to the saints." There was no need for pagan practices which were later adopted by the apostate Church of Rome since they already had the complete doctrine of Christ which needed no additions or subtractions. Thanks Tommy.
horseman528 The bible says that whole families were baptized together. Infant baptism was practiced in the earliest days of the church, read the church fathers. Baptism brings you into the family of God, like the Jews circumcized their infants when they were 8 days old. When you can make an adult decision you are confirmed. Paul says it is better to remain single because if you marry you have to focus on your spouse. The clergy stays single because it gives them more time to focus on God. There is far more sexual perversion in the non-Catholic, non-celibate world. There are more protestant clergy accused of child abuse according to insurance statistics. If celibacy leads to perversion then why are all forms of sexual perversion more rampant outside of the Catholic church?
Prancer1231 Whole families were baptized in the cases of Lydia and the Philippian jailer according to Acts 16:15 and Acts 16:33, but it nowhere mentions infants. Salvation is a decision that one must make for themselves. I can't decide for anyone to be baptized; they must decide for themselves when they come to an age of reason and accountability. Without faith first being applied to baptism, it is nothing more than an empty ceremony of getting wet. There is no forgiveness of sins without faith. Only after one believes and confesses that Jesus Christ is the Son of God can that baptism wash away their sins according to Acts 8:35-38 and 22:16. Ephesians 2:8 "For by grace are ye saved through FAITH..." It is impossible for an infant to have faith since it has no knowledge of those things. As far as bishops being celibate, the Holy Spirit speaking through Paul in 1 Timothy 3:1 stated that a bishop MUST be blameless, THE HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE...This requirement of a bishop being the husband of one wife is repeated in Titus 1:6. Any person who has matured and is healthy has a sex drive. God gave us marriage to satisfy that sex drive. When there is no outlet for that sex drive, people will find other ways to satisfy it which will be sinful whether it be through pornography, fornication, or pedophila. The forbidding to marry was one characteristic of the apostate church according to 1 Timothy 4:1-3. Most Catholics appear to be good people and sincere, but people can be sincerely wrong.
horseman528 The early church fathers write about infant baptism. Yes, you need to make an informed decision when you are of an age to do that. That is why Catholics are confirmed at around the age of 14. Jewish infants don't make the decision to be circumcized. It brings them into the family of God, it sets them apart. Baptism is similar. We are born with original sin. How can an infant repent of original sin?
You keep saying there is rampant disagreement which I agree with and also disagree with. If you really look into the differences between denominations you find a overwhelming unity on the essentials of scriptures. All true Christian churches believe in Christs deity, the trinity, Jesus’ death, burial, and bodily resurrection, His ascension to the right hand of the Father, His intercession for His people, and salvation through faith in Christ. I don’t like that there are all these denominations, but I also know Gods word is ultimate authority and His people will hear His voice. God bless
WORK OUT YOUR SALAVATION IN FEAR AND TREMBLING Mat 12:33-37 Matt. 24:13; 25:31-46 Rom. 11:22 2 Pet 2:20-21 Col 1:21-23 Phil 2:12 Heb 10:26-29. If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left... only a fearful expectation of judgment.."
So true. What a wonderful evangelist Fr Robert is. I certainly don't begrudge protestant's holding a different view, but it would be wonderful if quite a few of them could see the beauty and reason of having our living voice and guidance in the Holy Father, Pope Francis. His gentle guidance is a beautiful thing to behold. Come and take up the beauty and truth of my faith and yours.
a few years back and it ultimately led me to Christian mystics and monks. I quickly realized they are all Catholic, which led me to look into Catholicism for myself. I bought "Catholicism" and a few other of Fr. Barron's videos. Like a breath of fresh air. I can see my way back to God now. I'm taking it slow bc I don't want it to be an emotional response to really well made videos but one I can defend intellectually and feel grounded in.
I’ve heard a lot of people recommend Scott Hahn. The lamb’s supper is supposed to be a great book. I am currently reading Hahn’s signs of life. It explains the biblically 40 of the Church’s teachings.
Bishop Barron makes some good points. I am a Protestant of no particular denomination. God gave prophets and teachers to interpret the Bible, and Christians should read the Bible and listen to God. No pope, cardinal or preacher gets it right everytime. There must be some authority in the church, but every person is responsible for hearing and doing the word of God.
I find this particularly intriguing. The Protestant rejection of authority in America is something I think can be linked to America's Democratic system and culture of individualism. I would feel more confident if I read more protestant theology but I'm fairly familiar with American political thought being an American university student, by no means an expert though. Love the umpire analogy that Bishop Barron uses. God bless!
I believe in the power of Christ' blood so much that I will go Mass today and have my soul sprinkled and purified with His precious blood and I will offer up His body and Blood for you my friend.
I'm more of a traditionalist Catholic, not Sedevacantist or anything though. I only go to Latin mass because I simply prefer it but despite all my opinions I still have great respect for Bishop Barron, I don't see eye to eye with him on everything but I'm still proud to say that he's a Bishop in my Church, more accurately our Church
Thank you Fr Barron. May I just add, that to refer to Protestantism as one monolithic movement may be one ‘thing’ and the articles of faith (or dissent) and that this was also unique and coherent as opposed to mainstream Christianity ie the (Catholic) Church, maybe a misnomer. The front-running voice may have been Martin Luther et al. But I think this misses a lot more. I think the discussion should focus on handling the nature of dissent and best way forward with dealing with dissent and discourse, and not so much the content of those discussions. Because as we have seen, this tendency to not conduct and/or contain dissent ‘properly’ (what is “proper” anyway), still leads to further fragmentation for even those who stepped aside to propose they have the solutions. In any case thank you, your videos and perspectives have been enriching and enlightening. God bless you and keep shedding light were so everyone (literally, within and without the fold) can untangle the myths and contentious that have so far been very divisive to all Christians and Christianity, which helps us internet worms through. Perhaps at a later date you can address the differences of the Reformists from later movements such as Revivalists, etc. Also the influence of political and nationalist identities on Christian identities and the identity of the Church.
"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with Divine words." -Gregory of Nyssa
Father Barron has some great insights, I. too. admire John Henry Newman. Thomas Moore was the individual that tried terribly to prevent Henry VIII from separating -- this was very much for political reasons. Since then, there has not been a sense of wholeness within Christianity -- as the 'One and True Church' would very like to have. Yes, the secular function of the Church might have been taking positions that we, today, find uncomfortable.(This is what a very self-pious Martin Luther railed against. I am confident that his motives were sincere.) The World was changing at the time; the Catholic Authority was strongly looking for an answer. The Protestant Movement fit that feeling. But, like so many similar things, it was based on the concept that, "Too Many Cooks Make the Best Stew." Today's "Church" challenges and changes that -- with wisdom. Thank you, Father Barron, for your comments
I enjoyed your video and think that you made some great points. Here's my counter argument. Tertullian of Carthage once declared that the Living Voice for the Church, who he called the Vicar of Christ, is the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit is our Teacher and Advocate and a Comforter who guides us into all truth, I would argue that while a human living voice that can shepherd the churches is of tremendous worth and value, various declarations made by ecclesiastical authority, must be judged adequate or inadequate critically through the assistance that is provided by the Holy Spirit that God has given to all who obey the Gospel. If the Church hierarchy has swerved from the Rule of Faith and the teaching of Christ and his Apostles, Christians must remain with Christ rather than a visible body who declares authoritatively and incorrectly. All Christians are guided by a Living Voice and this Voice is the Spirit of Truth. This must be our criteria.
+Steven Strnad Indeed friend you speak some truth, however you misunderstand what Catholics believe about the Pope. It is not the Pope in and of himself that we trust to be infallible; it is the Holy Spirit that we trust. We believe that the same Holy Spirit who miraculously guided the original authors of Scripture to write infallibly, and who speaks Truth to all of us, still today miraculously guides the Pope to always protect him from error whenever he speaks authoritatively on matters of faith and morals. God Bless
"[T]he most revolutionary change the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday....People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become 7th Day Adventists, and keep Saturday holy." Bishop Barron, you said that there needs to be a living voice. Well, there is! Hebrews 4:12 says: "Indeed, the word of God is living and effective.." Hebrews 4:7 “Today, if you will hear His voice..."
@DannyGirl The Catholic Encyclopedia says different, it says the church made the change (under the title "commandments"). (My guess is the new CCC changed what was the historic position of the Catholic Church, which previously freely admitted to making the change in the law.) Isaiah 66:23 says we will keep the sabbath in Heaven. There's no such thing as a "jewish sabbath" - it is the sabbath of the Lord. He calls it "my holy day." Sunday is pagan, it comes from sun worship. Many things in the Catholic church have their origins in pagan worship; such as Christmas and Easter and Halloween.
@DannyGirl "But you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify.” James Cardinal Gibbons (Archbishop of Baltimore), The Faith of our Fathers(1917 edition)pg.72-73 (16th edition)pg.111 (88th edition) pg. 89. Originally published 1876. "The Church, on the other hand, after changing the day of rest from the Jewish Sabbath, or seventh day of the week, to the first, made the Third Commandment refer to Sunday as the day to be kept holy as the Lord's Day." - The Catholic Encyclopedia "Commandments of God" What day is God's holy day? Isaiah 58:13a - If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day... What day is the Lord's day? Matthew 12:8 - For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day. Does God ever change? Malachi 3:6a - For I am the Lord, I change not What day will be celebrated in Heaven as the Lord's day? Isaiah 66:23 - And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord.
@DannyGirl Why would we keep the sabbath in Heaven, if Jesus abolished it? I showed you the historical context, even the (former) Archbishop of Baltimore said the church made the change, and it's not in the Bible.
@DannyGirl No scripture says to keep Sunday holy. Look at all the first day of the week scriptures - none is the Lord's day or sabbath day. I don't feel like writing a rebuttal for each of them, but it's easy to refute. The Catholic Church has historically taught that it is the power who changed the sabbath - even from the archbishop and catholic encyclopedia which I quoted you. Was the Archbishop wrong?
@DannyGirl Moses didn't make the 10 commandments, GOD did. The fourth commandment says that the sabbath is given to man (same word as Adam) because God created the Heavens and Earth in 6 days and rested on the 7th.
My pleasure, and are you familiar with RCIA? The Catholic Church offers it to people who would like to learn more about Catholicism; it's a 9-month series of meetings/discussions led by priests and nuns where all the major points are explained. Then at the Easter Vigil you can choose whether or not to become a Catholic.
But isn't it really problematic if the "one voice" creates doctrine that isn't even in scripture, let alone doctrine which clearly is opposed by scripture?
As an Anglican, I have a great respect for the office of the Pope, and his ability to address the issues of the day as a living voice to set the tone. However, definitive interpretation of the voice of the Holy Spirit belongs to the whole Catholic church (its bishops) in counsel, presided over by Peter's successor. The bishop of Rome is supposed to be first among brother bishops, but the development of universal jurisdiction in the early medieval period was not, imho, a natural development of doctrine but one that evolved due to socio-political exigencies of a collapsed Western Roman empire. Ultimately the authority of the Church is always going to be weakened as long as it remains divided. I don't say that the Anglican system is the perfect solution of course (it's kind of a mess to be honest since there's no referee), but that definitive discernment must be done according to the spirit of brotherhood and mutuality that existed amongst the twelve Apostles, rather than the Petrine See overriding its ancient-defined bounds of authority (not by as much as most Protestants claim, mind you, but still significantly). Even now Anglicanism has a pope-shaped gap in its ecclesiology, but Rome has, so it seems to me, glossed over its ecclesiological gap in its desire for more (and speedier) certainty and uniformity. I pray that both of our communions might learn this of one another and move closer together. The church divided is as natural as a body divided from its soul-- that is to say, not natural-- we need true unity that still preserves diversity in the local context in order to see the Lord's Prayer fulfilled as much as it can be in this Age. Best wishes Bp. Barron.
2 Timothy 3:16-17: No matter how traditionalists twist it, it still says that scripture alone is all-sufficient to equip us for EVERY good work. not most not partially but every EVERY got it? EVERY. Luke 10:26: "What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?" Jesus expected even his enemies to correctly interpret the Bible by simply reading and studying it.
Fr. Barron, what is your view then on the Episcopal Church and their ideas for interpretation of scripture and using not only tradition but also reason? I'm not theologian but if I am understanding correctly, St. Thomas Aquinas was a big advocate for using reason when interpreting scripture. Thanks Fr. Barron.
Oh come on! There is plentiful diversity in the Catholic Church--of orders, of habits, of spiritual traditions, of theological styles, of saints, of liturgical expressions, etc., etc. Diversity is one thing; fundamental disagreement about essential doctrine is something else altogether.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
So beautifully put. ❤️
So true!!
Trying to say that catholic diversity Bishop Barron said above is equivalent to the protestant babel of fundamental differences is a false analogy, a fallacy.
BISHOP BARON I NEED UR HELP , AM DYING AS RESULTS OF MY INTAKE OF DROGS ....AM WEAK NUT STILL CANT DO WITHOUT DRUGS...AM DYING EACH DAY .....JELP ME MY LORD
This video started my investigation that led me to the Catholic Church.
tony why? Are Catholics not Christians?
@tony Feel free to cite where you got your information supporting the claim that Catholics aren't Christian... Otherwise, I think it's you that should re-explore the Bible.
@tony I'm not sure you fully understand the bible. None of us do. But God is not a God of confusion. He would not try to confuse his children, so, you should act in Jesus's example and not try to confuse people who are correct with you Protestant Jibberish. I pray for you too! I hope you find your way back to the True Church of Christ.
@tony Catholics are Christ's True Church. They were the first and they are the only Church with Authority. Through the Apostles to Bishops, Priests, and Deacons through the centuries. The Catholic Church is the Only Church with With Christs Authority.
@tony I'm down for your Challenge. I will be pressing through a KJV Bible for the rest of this week. But I have a NAB and a Douay Rheims Bible on the way to get a full understanding. Yes, I know of Matt 16, when he properly establishes his Church. So, you go first.
I am proud to be Catholic and love Father Barron's commentary.
Keep the faith brother, God bless
I am not a Catholic and I love Father Barron's commentary.
Michael Abrahams then its only time...
Pride is from the devil
im back home to the Catholic Church 2017!! thank you Jesus
Pretty hard to dislike Father Barron - he takes on the hard questions and escapes without harming himself or the questions, and yet he engages and scores.
I loved these Fr. Barron videos back in the day! I binged-watched them and they helped so much in my journey home to the Catholic Church. Fr. Barron was ordained a bishop just three months after I joined the Church, so it felt like I had a connection with him and we were accompanying each other as we entered a new stage of life. God bless💕
Same!
I truly struggled with this. Scott Hahn's journey from protestant to Catholic is a great source for those struggling with this issue
Hahn strawmans the Reformed position heavily, specifically on the sacraments.
@@edrash1 Have you talked to a person who identifies as "Reformed" lately? There's such a diversity of opinions that repeating verbatim what one "reform" Christian said would get a dozen other "reform" Christians up in arms. They don't have much of a centralized theology...
Very insightful and pastorally engaging and theologically captivating. Fr Robert is a God's gift to the world.
I am soon to marry, and as the spiritual leader of my home, I am deeply searching for our spiritual home. In my research, I have found great encouragement in the Catholic church. I believe I am now on a proper path and will soon begin the search to find a Catholic church for my family.
I also suggest that you become a Catholic which will enable you to receive communion.
You absolutely should come over to the one and true Church established by Christ.
I know this is an older post but I hope you and your wife talked about it and agreed. I too am married and to a woman that reads her Bible everyday. I too am the spiritual leader of the home, unfortunately my wife has decided not to follow. It has created deep divisions in our relationship. It would have been helpful to know before hand.
This guy is a gem amongst pebbles.
Peter Travere he is a jewel in a sea of broken glass
Rodney gave a good response. Prayers in your quest to discover God's will for you.
I met you at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in NY over a decade ago. You were nice enough to talk with my sister-who could not be there-on the phone. A wonderful day for me and my sister. Prayers for you, Bishop Barron!
Interesting, well-balanced presentation, Fr. Barron. I have a friend who's a Lutheran pastor. He keeps wishing his church had a magisterium. It makes him cringe to see matters of doctrine voted upon by people who have no training in theology.
I think many people don't understand that the development of doctrine is not an arbitrary thing, teachings imposed by people in authority simply because they have authority. Doctrine must be consistent with Scripture, and it must make logical sense.
Joe Offer you really laid it out well!! Thank you Joe
Oh indeed! My biggest problem with these "spring up churches" of today. No particular theological basis or backing. To me this is such a maverick way, dangerous, and leaves ample avenues for any and all wrong information to fall in to place under the rooves of these start up (upstart?) church communities where the well meaning leaders and followers remain albeit clueless and somewhat innocent, uninformed. Yet, my humble opinion is that all involved ought to feel the responsibility to be seeking the real actual Truth, rather than making up the "feel good" so called "truth" as they stumble forward with a Bible in their hand. May the mighty Holy Spirit help these folks, guide them, breathe the breath of reality on us all as we stumble toward Heaven in the murky secularity of this life!
Barron is a super intellectual who explains in daily words. Wise guy.
Much appreciated. So true. Pray for Holy Catholic Church. Thank you Fr Barron.
Thank you Rodney. That actually makes sense. I've watched the entire 'Catholicism' series and was really impressed. Everything I had ever heard about Catholicism came from non-Catholics (I'm originally from south Alabama) so my view was very skewed. I've been watching nearly all of Fr. Barron's UA-cam videos. They all make sense to me. Thanks again for the response!
Research Newnan on line.
This is the most important explanation of authority, protestants (and Catholics) need to hear. God bless, everyone 🙏🏻
The Catholic Chuch is Christ's mystical body
Watch your mouth
You're very misguided, sorry for whoever taught you that, terrible thing to say, you should ashamed of yourself, you must be very young because no true, responsible adults would have such evil things to say about any religion
Someday you'll grow up be patient
+Noah G ignorance is astounding...
+rosegarden23 quoting some passages and ignoring others doesn't serve your point very well.
That was an excellent analogy with the umpire.
I have been a protestant Christian pretty much my entire adult life. I have always thought of the catholic church as a strange and basically heretical in their teachings. However, I have begun to listen to Bishop Barron and Patrick Madrid on the radio.
I suddenly have started to read about the catholic faith and watched UA-cam videos about the faith. Of course, I 've done further research. I feel it is a great church. I guess the whole Mary thing ha me a bit perplexed. The whole asking saints for intercession also cause me some problems. However, I feel better about the catholic church. Don't know if I will change denomination.
did you?
Love your word best Teacher Prophet, ever I sit in awe . 🙏💯💯🕊️🕊️🕊️🙌🏻🔥🔥
Yay Fr. Barron..you explained clearly that the church is a living church and that it needs an authority.
Just like Jesus said to Peter:"Man has not reveiled this to you But my father". So has God reviled this to you Fr.....now Bishop Barron. We love you! We needed someone like you here in California.
Mi Casa 🏡
Es Tu Casa🏡.
We are praying for you..please pray for us.😊
I became Catholic not because I "liked" it better, but for the same reason Neumann said.
Writings of the Eastern Orthodox helped me a lot in this regard by the way, for they, and the Oriental Orthodox, and the Assyrian, are stronger proof than anything that the ideas of apostolic succession as just a succession of believers or presbyters is just not sustainable; we were getting it wrong for well over 1000 years before Luther figured it out? Sorry, but that doesn't work. Most of the Protestant arguments simply fall apart on this point. I pray they look at it and realize it, apostolic succession wasn't an invention of Rome. It just wasn't.
John Collins
Yeah that's why people increasingly look at atheists like they're just shallow uneducated people.
John Collins LOL another atheist with pretensions to "science." Doubtful you even understand science, son.
John Collins LOL I likely know more real scientists than you know actual people. Cultists like you are destroying science, BTW. www.deanesmay.com/2016/05/05/the-scientific-reality-of-the-scientism-religion/
John Collins Stephen Hawking is an idiot when it comes to philosophy and theology, but he's not a cult leader. It'd be nice if he'd give Father Geroges LeMaitre a little more credit though, given that LeMaitre's the one responsible for most of his career. No, the cult leaders are people like Richard Dawkins.
This is part of why I think most people don't trust atheists--the clear dishonesty. Atheist cults have been around for thousands of years and are still highly active today.
Oh my Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell. Lead all souls to Heaven, especially those most in need of Thy mercy. amen
Chritianity has been divided unfortunately which resulted in the conflict and I think what Fr. Robert mentioned is a good starting point to really think about how we can narrow the gaps among Christian brothers and sisters. May God's grace and love be with you all !!
My father is an Evangelical and my mother is a Catholics. Having to go back and fort between these denomination makes my head burst to find which is which is true to follow. But , somehow , my heart always never lose focus to Jesus be it wherever and whatever denominations I go to.
Now , as I got older , it's pretty clear that to be able to questions much of everything about how Faiths work , I found the path of Evangelical have always been my calling to stand in the faith ( Even when I am dealing with my current sin ). Catholics still ring most to my heart still ( probably because I spend most of my childhood more with my mom than my dad ) and I only got into protestant when I finally moved out with my dad since dad's place kinda the only place that in majority , got protestant churches.
One things for sure , it was a culture shock . In Catholics faith , you got a lot of statues and decorations that resembles the faith but Protestants are minimalist ( it's their way of saying that faith in Christ is the focus inside you and not the things that you have ). Protestants got instruments ranging in a complete rhythm sections and I first play the keyboard then shift my majors to electric guitar. Learn music once in classical trained literacy but now as protestant , it's pop jazz and Gospel feel ( although sometimes , we are inclined to go for the classical style )
In short , my transitions does change my culture of serving the Lord through church but It doesn't change the foundations of my own living church inside me...JESUS. My focus have always been to Him all the time.
Right now , I am currently far away from home and constantly dealing with a lot of stuff ( so much that my catholic side tells me to repent and make a confessions ). But , I am grateful to God when He sent me different people fo the same faith but different denominations to carry me up when I am down by offering me to go with them at the church.
I believe that God's work is always in motions and if it wasn't for Him , I would have already lost not of faith in churches of men but the church that build personally within my heart with Him.
God Bless Everyone and do also say a prayers for this sinners that smokes and drink to go oftenly if best , eradicate it....
28 And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his teachings:
29 For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.
In a way the living voice could be the Eucharist also. It is truly God living as a voice for truth.
So worth returning to these older videos. Thank you Bishop Barron for your clear articulation of this crucial issue.
“A living voice…an umpire “
Also guidance of the Holy Spirit 🙏🏾❤️🩹
Amen
"You are my Luther, and on my Luther I shall build my Church, 1500 years from now"
Lol.
HAHAHAHAHAHAH
My small town in the UK has one Catholic church and at least seven Protestant ones of different denominations. How powerful it would be if we were all one.
Most of those Protestant church buildings aren't used today, I imagine.
Robert. I had a partner in business once upon a time. And in the busness, we had many disagreements in our practice. But one thing we learn because we were both very good at what we did. We learned that if we strongly disagreed on something, that meant that we were both right. It's simple, we were both right and the answer is not one or the other but in fact both. What made that way of thinking work, was the fact that we seen the genius of it. If I may say that. The problem we had was that we had to figure out a way to gear the two. Not always easy, but necessary and in time was a very powerful mechanism.
Let us pray for all people to go to believe in Jesus and go to Mass on sunday.
Let us pray to you
I became Anglican a few years ago and have found myself drawn more to the Anglo-Catholic end of the spectrum, and now feel drawn to Rome. I'm hoping someday to enter full communion with Rome, but at least for now I'm living practically as a Catholic. At a certain point I realized (as Newman did) that many of the Anglo-Catholic traditions are beautiful, but they're also kind of empty dead traditions without the living tradition of the Catholic Church. If we all follow one God, one Jesus, one faith, one Church, how can it be that we are all using wildly different interpretations of the same text? I think it's fine to debate scripture and doctrine, we should even encourage it because it promotes a greater familiarity with the Scripture and with theological concepts, but at the end of the day we need a unified voice of truth in the world to guard against heresy.
We are told we are accountable of all our deeds and words. This is just a fact.
We are searching as to why we ALL cannot be under one roof. God Bless David. Kasine speaks highly of you.
I have no problem with people who are Protestant Christian. In fact my girlfriend is a Protestant Christian and her Protestant denomination is Baptist. And when I told her that my denomination is Catholic, she and I respected each other and there was mutual understanding.
please lead her out of the false Baptist denomination, her soul depends on this.
Dude, you are not part of any denomination. Protestants are, because there are more than 60,000 of them. They have to set themselves apart from the other 59,999. The Catholic Church is the only one true church. It is not a denomination. It is not one among many. Just think about it.
until you marry and the kids come along. then watch how understanding you both are.
Faro Catolico
Protestant denominations are not 60,000. Why are you lying?
Respectfully...the almost 2,000 year old Catholic Church is not a denomination...but the very Church our Lord Jesus Christ established in Matthew 16:18.
The Holy Spirit is the living voice today and until the end of the age.
The Pillar and Foundation of Truth is the CHURCH, not the Bible. (1 Tim 3.15)
The Church wrote, assembled and canonized the Bible.
No effect can be greater than it's cause.
Think about it...
God Himself wrote the Bible through men. 2 Peter 1:19-21; see also 2 Timothy 3:15-17, Proverbs 30:5-6, 1 Corinthians 4:6, 2 Peter 3:15-16, 1 Peter 4:17, 1 Peter 1:22-25, James 5:10, James 1:18, 21-25, Hebrews 13:7, 11:, 4:12, 1:1-4, and I'll post others as I find them.
He is Right every man and woman seem to have different opinions about everything. But Ibelieve I have a small universal truth in this. It goes something like; God listens to people in great despair. And he shows them great miracle of comfort.
Newman was amazing. The oak tree and the acorn don’t look the same
But in essence they are
The Word of God vs.The Word of Man =The Word of God wins Always!!
And how do you determine what is what? By verifiable evidence. Of which there isn't any.
and do youbelieve you are able to interpert Scripture for yourself better than the Church and the Magesterium . I beg to differ. And how do you explain that it is the Catholic Church that gave us the Books of the Bible.
John Dattoma all u need do after u have accepted Jesus as savior and asked Him to forgive ur sins and live inside ur spirit, is read & study the bible 4 ur self without the influence of any denomination or religion. The bible is truth, and every man is a liar.
Ewald where does it say that in the Bible?
Joejoe The dogface boy. Says what? Please refresh
Here come the angry Protestants... *epic battle music plays in the background*
Just kidding!
ua-cam.com/video/RdxdnVqn08E/v-deo.html
I love all of you on here, liking you all is the hard part.
Without Papal infallibility all you are left with is personal infallibility.
WhyCatholic That is a lie. Typical RCC propaganda. I've never met a Bible believing Christian clam infalliblity...other than the Bible.
25,000 plus different denominations all claiming to be guided by the Holy Spirit and understand scripture correctly, everyone else is wrong, what else do you call it?
LOL
WhyCatholic Don't engage this person, he is an anti-Catholic troll.
WhyCatholic Please do show who proclaims infalliblity. I will join you in rebuking them. Or maybe your accusation has no foundation.
Tim Spangler are you infallible?
truth, beauty, goodness all in catholic faith. No where else offers that. You have to wear "catholic glasses" to see it.
I love the peace and humility in Catholics.
I don't believe Protestants have fullness of truth as many books were left out by ex-Augustinian monk matin Luther.
Second you need traditions to understand many things in bible that only Catholics can answer correctly.
For example, you wouldn't understand exactly if you read my love letter written to my spouse 20yrs ago unless you know both families.
Has anyone asked how did Protestanism come about? Surely anyone can see that it comes from the root word Protest! And Protest against what? Well history reveals Protestanism was to Protest against the roman 💒 departure from The Authority of Holy Bible WORD doctrines! Pure n simple!!!👏👏👏👏👏
Wil liam I wish things were that simple. If it were, the church would be united already.
People like you keep me away from being a catholic. For sure.
Bless Pascal that’s a shame you keep yourself from something due to someone.
The protest was initally against indulgences. Luther felt it was an attempt to sell salvation which... Is impossible. But i can see where were starting to fall apart as well. Our denominations have let things in that scripture clearly condemns but yet we reject things that seem to be supported by scripture which is a clear violation of Sola Scriptura... :-( im deeply puzzled... :-( sincerily a deeply concerned Presbyterian. :-(
Your four full lines of response demonstrates how well it works with you.
Does your Bible believing church teach that you must physically eat the flesh of Jesus and drink His blood to have life in you (John 6:53)?
John 6:53 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you
John Reynolds The "bible believers" only believe the parts of the bible that they like.
John Reynolds When Jesus said "I am the bread of life", did he turn into bread? "The vine"? "The Gate"? "The Lamb"?
Tim Spangler
Jesus Promises His Real Presence in the Eucharist
John 6:4,11-14 - on the eve of the Passover, Jesus
performs the miracle of multiplying the loaves. This was prophesied in the Old
Testament (e.g., 2 Kings 4:43), and foreshadows the infinite heavenly bread
which is Him.
Matt. 14:19, 15:36; Mark 6:41, 8:6; Luke 9:16 -these
passages are additional accounts of the multiplication miracles. This points to
the Eucharist.
Matt. 16:12 -in this verse, Jesus explains His
metaphorical use of the term "bread." In John 6, He eliminates
any metaphorical possibilities.
John 6:4 - Jesus is in Capernaum on the eve of Passover,
and the lambs are gathered to be slaughtered and eaten. Look what He says.
John 6:35,41,48,51 - Jesus says four times "I AM the
bread from heaven." It is He, Himself, the eternal bread from heaven.
John 6:27,31,49 - there is a parallel between the manna
in the desert which was physically consumed, and this "new" bread
which must be consumed.
John 6:51-52- then Jesus says that the bread He is
referring to is His flesh. The Jews take Him literally and immediately question
such a teaching. How can this man give us His flesh to eat?
John 6:53 - 58 - Jesus does not correct their literal
interpretation. Instead, Jesus eliminates any metaphorical interpretations by
swearing an oath and being even more literal about eating His flesh. In fact,
Jesus says four times we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. Catholics thus
believe that Jesus makes present His body and blood in the sacrifice of the
Mass. Protestants, if they are not going to become Catholic, can only argue
that Jesus was somehow speaking symbolically.
John 6:23-53 - however, a symbolic interpretation is not
plausible. Throughout these verses, the Greek text uses the word
"phago" nine times. "Phago" literally means "to
eat" or "physically consume." Like the Protestants of our day,
the disciples take issue with Jesus' literal usage of "eat." So Jesus
does what?
John 6:54, 56, 57, 58 - He uses an even more literal
verb, translated as "trogo," which means to gnaw or chew or crunch.
He increases the literalness and drives his message home. Jesus will literally
give us His flesh and blood to eat. The word “trogo” is only used two other
times in the New Testament (in Matt. 24:38 and John 13:18) and it always means
to literally gnaw or chew meat. While “phago” might also have a spiritual
application, "trogo" is never used metaphorically in Greek. So
Protestants cannot find one verse in Scripture where "trogo" is used
symbolically, and yet this must be their argument if they are going to deny the
Catholic understanding of Jesus' words. Moreover, the Jews already knew Jesus
was speaking literally even before Jesus used the word “trogo” when they said
“How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” (John 6:52).
John 6:55 - to clarify further, Jesus says "For My
Flesh is food indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed." This phrase can only
be understood as being responsive to those who do not believe that Jesus' flesh
is food indeed, and His blood is drink indeed. Further, Jesus uses the word which
is translated as "sarx." "Sarx" means flesh (not
"soma" which means body). See, for example, John 1:13,14; 3:6; 8:15;
17:2; Matt. 16:17; 19:5; 24:22; 26:41; Mark 10:8; 13:20; 14:38; and Luke 3:6;
24:39 which provides other examples in Scripture where "sarx" means flesh.
It is always literal.
John 6:55 - further, the phrases "real" food
and "real" drink use the word "alethes."
"Alethes" means "really" or "truly," and would
only be used if there were doubts concerning the reality of Jesus' flesh and
blood as being food and drink. Thus, Jesus is emphasizing the miracle of His
body and blood being actual food and drink.
John 6:60 - as are many anti-Catholics today, Jesus'
disciples are scandalized by these words. They even ask, "Who can 'listen'
to it (much less understand it)?" To the unillumined mind, it seems
grotesque.
John 6:61-63 - Jesus acknowledges their disgust. Jesus'
use of the phrase "the spirit gives life" means the disciples need
supernatural faith, not logic, to understand His words.
John 3:6 - Jesus often used the comparison of
"spirit versus flesh" to teach about the necessity of possessing
supernatural faith versus a natural understanding. In Mark 14:38 Jesus also
uses the "spirit/flesh" comparison. The spirit is willing but the
flesh is weak. We must go beyond the natural to understand the supernatural. In
1 Cor. 2:14,3:3; Rom 8:5; and Gal. 5:17, Paul also uses the
"spirit/flesh" comparison to teach that unspiritual people are not
receiving the gift of faith. They are still "in the flesh."
John 6:63 - Protestants often argue that Jesus' use of
the phrase "the spirit gives life" shows that Jesus was only speaking
symbolically. However, Protestants must explain why there is not one place in
Scripture where "spirit" means "symbolic." As we have seen,
the use of "spirit" relates to supernatural faith. What words are
spirit and life? The words that we must eat Jesus' flesh and drink His blood,
or we have no life in us.
John 6:66-67 - many disciples leave Jesus, rejecting this
literal interpretation that we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. At this
point, these disciples really thought Jesus had lost His mind. If they were
wrong about the literal interpretation, why wouldn't Jesus, the Great Teacher,
have corrected them? Why didn't Jesus say, "Hey, come back here, I was
only speaking symbolically!"? Because they understood correctly.
Jesus Institutes the Eucharist / More Proofs of the Real
Presence
Matt. 26:26-28; Mark. 14:22,24; Luke 22;19-20; 1 Cor.
11:24-25 - Jesus says, this IS my body and blood. Jesus does not say, this is a
symbol of my body and blood.
Matt. 26:26; Mark. 14:22; Luke 22:19-20 - the Greek
phrase is "Touto estin to soma mou." This phraseology means
"this is actually" or "this is really" my body and blood.
1 Cor. 11:24 - the same translation is used by Paul -
"touto mou estin to soma." The statement is "this is
really" my body and blood. Nowhere in Scripture does God ever declare
something without making it so.
Matt. 26:26; Mark. 14:22; Luke 22:19 - to deny the 2,000
year-old Catholic understanding of the Eucharist, Protestants must argue that
Jesus was really saying "this represents (not is) my body and blood."
However, Aramaic, the language that Jesus spoke, had over 30 words for
"represent," but Jesus did not use any of them. He used the Aramaic
word for "estin" which means "is."
Matt. 26:28; Mark. 14:24; Luke 22:20 - Jesus' use of
"poured out" in reference to His blood also emphasizes the reality of
its presence.
Exodus 24:8 - Jesus emphasizes the reality of His actual
blood being present by using Moses' statement "blood of the
covenant."
1 Cor. 10:16 - Paul asks the question, "the cup of
blessing and the bread of which we partake, is it not an actual participation
in Christ's body and blood?" Is Paul really asking because He, the
divinely inspired writer, does not understand? No, of course not. Paul's
questions are obviously rhetorical. This IS the actual body and blood. Further,
the Greek word "koinonia" describes an actual, not symbolic
participation in the body and blood.
1 Cor. 10:18 - in this verse, Paul is saying we are what
we eat. We are not partners with a symbol. We are partners of the one actual
body.
1 Cor. 11:23 - Paul does not explain what he has actually
received directly from Christ, except in the case when he teaches about the
Eucharist. Here, Paul emphasizes the importance of the Eucharist by telling us
he received directly from Jesus instructions on the Eucharist which is the
source and summit of the Christian faith.
1 Cor. 11:27-29 - in these verses, Paul says that eating
or drinking in an unworthy manner is the equivalent of profaning (literally,
murdering) the body and blood of the Lord. If this is just a symbol, we cannot
be guilty of actually profaning (murdering) it. We cannot murder a symbol.
Either Paul, the divinely inspired apostle of God, is imposing an unjust
penalty, or the Eucharist is the actual body and blood of Christ.
1 Cor. 11:30 - this verse alludes to the consequences of
receiving the Eucharist unworthily. Receiving the actual body and blood of
Jesus in mortal sin results in actual physical consequences to our bodies.
1 Cor. 11:27-30 - thus, if we partake of the Eucharist
unworthily, we are guilty of literally murdering the body of Christ, and
risking physical consequences to our bodies. This is overwhelming evidence for
the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. These are unjust penalties if the
Eucharist is just a symbol.
Acts 2:42 - from the Church's inception, apostolic
tradition included celebrating the Eucharist (the "breaking of the
bread") to fulfill Jesus' command "do this in remembrance of
me."
Acts 20:28 - Paul charges the Church elders to
"feed" the Church of the Lord, that is, with the flesh and blood of
Christ.
Matt. 6:11; Luke 11:3 - in the Our Father, we ask God to
give us this day our daily bread, that is the bread of life, Jesus Christ.
Matt. 12:39 - Jesus says no “sign” will be given except
the “sign of the prophet Jonah.” While Protestants focus only on the “sign” of
the Eucharist, this verse demonstrates that a sign can be followed by the
reality (here, Jesus’ resurrection, which is intimately connected to the
Eucharist).
Matt. 19:6 - Jesus says a husband and wife become one
flesh which is consummated in the life giving union of the marital act. This
union of marital love which reflects Christ's union with the Church is
physical, not just spiritual. Thus, when Paul says we are a part of Christ's
body (Eph. 1:22-23; 5:23,30-31; Col. 1:18,24), he means that our union with
Christ is physical, not just spiritual. But our union with Christ can only be
physical if He is actually giving us something physical, that is Himself, which
is His body and blood to consume (otherwise it is a mere spiritual union).
Luke 14:15 - blessed is he who eats this bread in the
kingdom of God, on earth and in heaven.
Luke 22:19, 1 Cor. 11:24-25 - Jesus commands the apostles
to "do this," that is, offer the Eucharistic sacrifice, in
remembrance of Him.
Luke 24:26-35 - in the Emmaus road story, Jesus gives a
homily on the Scriptures and then follows it with the celebration of the
Eucharist. This is the Holy Mass, and the Church has followed this order of the
Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist for 2,000 years.
Luke 24:30-31,35 - Jesus is known only in the breaking of
bread. Luke is emphasizing that we only receive the fullness of Jesus by celebrating
the Eucharistic feast of His body and blood, which is only offered in its
fullness by the Catholic Church.
John 1:14 - literally, this verse teaches that the Word
was made flesh and "pitched His tabernacle" among us. The Eucharist,
which is the Incarnate Word of God under the appearance of bread, is stored in
the tabernacles of Catholic churches around the world.
John 21:15,17 - Jesus charges Peter to "feed"
His sheep, that is, with the Word of God through preaching and the Eucharist.
Acts 9:4-5; 22:8; 26:14-15 - Jesus asks Saul, “Why are
you persecuting me?” when Saul was persecuting the Church. Jesus and the Church
are one body (Bridegroom and Bride), and we are one with Jesus through His
flesh and blood (the Eucharist).
1 Cor. 12:13 - we "drink" of one Spirit in the
Eucharist by consuming the blood of Christ eternally offered to the Father.
Heb. 10:25,29 - these verses allude to the reality that
failing to meet together to celebrate the Eucharist is mortal sin. It is
profaning the body and blood of the Lord.
Heb. 12:22-23 - the Eucharistic liturgy brings about full
union with angels in festal gathering, the just spirits, and God Himself, which
takes place in the assembly or "ecclesia" (the Church).
Heb. 12:24 - we couldn't come to Jesus' sprinkled blood
if it were no longer offered by Jesus to the Father and made present for us.
2 Pet. 1:4 - we partake of His divine nature, most
notably through the Eucharist - a sacred family bond where we become one.
Rev. 2:7; 22:14 - we are invited to eat of the tree of
life, which is the resurrected flesh of Jesus which, before, hung on the tree.
John Reynolds You are what you eat.
pepe bastardes I'm certainly no saint but I can't comprehend it either. When I see terms like "wafer God" and "death cookie" I feel sick. And worse that it comes from people who call themselves "Christian" and think they have some God-given authority to "save" Catholics.
From Father to Bishop to... Pope?
Cardinal Timothy Dolan..
“A gradual consensus.” 30,000 Protestant Churches
justthinken1 they’ve corrected that and this link also provides where that information originally came from.
Clearly there are thousands of protestant denominations. Even if it’s not the erroneous 33,000. The church corrected itself. The church is made of humans who are indeed fallible.
m.ncregister.com/blog/scottericalt/we-need-to-stop-saying-that-there-are-33000-protestant-denominations
justthinken1 The fact that exactly 33,000 protestant denominations does not change The authority of the first traditional Christian church: the Catholic Church. There’s tradition, authority, reason, and BIBLE. I don’t know why people say Catholics are not taught to read their Bible. That’s absolutely not true. We do have Catholic Bible studies you know and the families are biblical-based
Mary Rigney if u count every mom and pop church I’m sure it’s way higher than 33K
justthinken1 please do tell me how many Protestant denominations there are ? I dare u
justthinken1 Just a simple observation. Being rude calling names and generally acting unChristlike is not very convincing to anyone. I wasn’t rude to you and have no idea why some people feel that being that rude online is OK. Shrug. To each his own ... work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
no. I will never leave Him nor He me. every day I walk in the light and guidance of the Holy Spirit. I actually know Him and have a real experience of Him.
once every week or two I gather with my fellow true believers to learn about and praise Him and his Spirit comes among us. We break bread and share wine in remembrance of Him as He commanded.
this is holy communion as it should be celebrated. And we sense the results of it by His real presence among us.
Who put the Bible together? Someone must have had an authority to put it together? It didn't fall out of the sky from God.
It was assembled under the influence of the Holy Spirit.
The Catholic church put the bible together.....Google it
@@AFreckledAngel And those in the Church were working with the help of the Holy Spirit.
Where in the Bible does it say this? It doesn't. Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based solely on a book? It doesn't.
Great referee analogy - papal refs are at an advantage, since they have some help from above. God doesn't miss any calls.
My interpretation of scriptures is of God. Yours is of what men taught you.I asked and prayed to God for understanding.God freely gives wisdom to all who ask.
When I say 'Jesus' Satan trembles, when I say 'Luther' the Heavens cry.
The Catholic Church IS THE CHURCH...it is where all Christians belong....that being said..The Prostestant churches ( most).. share one key belief with the Catholic Church..Hell is a real place and people go there....how strange that some people dont agree with this teaching as 1) Jesus himself told us so..2) Our blessed Mother told us many go there because they have no one to pray for them 3) The Saints have told us it is real and people DO go their.....yes very strange that some believe hell just might be empty🤔🤔🤔
"The Catholic Church IS THE CHURCH...it is where all Christians belong"
Show me this in scripture
Only God and Jesus have authority. all we do is to be for their will and glory. Our salvation is in grace through blood Jesus, nothing else and through no organization nor person.
our souls are sprinkled and purified with the precious blood of Jesus Christ at every Mass.
pat mark So you put him at a open shame at every mass do you? You kill Jesus over and over? Hebrews 10:10
By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Is the writer of Hebrews a liar or is the Catholic church ? Once for all.
You are doing nothing more than making assertions. Without verification by demonstrable evidence, they remain only assertions.
Tommy. Your understanding is completely simplistic and childish, that is why you need a teaching authority who understands these mysteries. The Church understands all of these things and can explain them biblically and with intelligence and reason as well. You cannot. You accuse because you have no understanding. Those outside of the Church are puffed up with their own pride and will accept no teaching or authority and that's why they are so confused. But stop casting stones if you are ignorant. You people don't understand because you refuse to learn.
Prancer1231 Typical Catholic person. Cant answer any of my questions resort to insults. If you gave the world the bible as YOU Catholics say, How is it YOU have no understanding of it?
I can I am saved,can you? I am a child of God, Can you say this? You insult Jesus by telling him he didn't do a very good job on forgiving sins thus saying one has to go to purgatory BEFORE going to Heaven. If you were a mature adult ,why not refute me with your bible? Reason why you don't is simple. You are either not mature enough or you lack what the word of God says. So which is it? Try this seeing Paul says to DO THIS!
2 Timothy 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Thank you, thank you, thank you, Bishop Barron! I just finished listening to Patrick Madrid and James White 1993 debate on sola scriptura, and, though Mr. Madrid did a great job in showing the falseness of sola scriptura's claims, it left me very discouraged. Your clarity and wisdom in this video lifted my spirits. I am so grateful for your ministry.
It's best to go to God in prayer for His opinion instead of listening to human debates. Ask God whether His word is the only source of true Christian teaching and if so, why, or does He approve of human arguments because His testament does not really testify to His teachings being inerrant, but is rather a book of guidelines to be accepted or rejected, modified and corrected by RC theologians. The Holy Spirit is the voice, clear voice and living voice leading those who want to obey God and do His will.
Does your Bible believing church teach that the Church itself (rather than the Bible) is the pillar and bulwark (foundation) of Truth (1 Timothy 3:15)?
1 Timothy 3:15 But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.
John Reynolds I would argue that this verse was written long before anything resembling the Catholic Church and it's hierarchy had developed. The Church in those days resembled much more the diversity of today than the uniformity of the pre-schism catholic church. In the days of Paul you already have jewish christians and greek christians.
hisredrighthand The First Letter from St. Paul to St. Timothy was written approximately in A.D. 55...
Below is the very first written account that has survived the centuries with the formal name of “The Church”:
"See that ye all follow the bishop,even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church." Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrneans, 8:2(c. A.D. 110).
We see from this short text that by the end of the first century the following has already been well established, there are Bishops, Priests, Deacons, and especially the term “Eucharist” and the formal name of the Church. Ignatius uses this formal name of the Church our Lord Jesus Christ established as if it is already widely known.
Sure sounds like the Catholic Church of today….don’t you think?
hisredrighthand “The Church” is Hierarchical
Matt. 16:18; 18:18 - Jesus uses the word
"ecclesia" only twice in the New Testament Scriptures, which
demonstrates that Jesus intended a visible, unified, hierarchical, and
authoritative Church.
Acts 20:17,28 - Paul refers to both the elders or priests
("presbyteroi") and the bishops ("episkopoi") of the
Church. Both are ordained leaders within the hierarchical structure of the
Church.
1 Cor. 12:28 - God Himself appoints the various positions
of authority within the Church. As a loving Father, God gives His children the
freedom and authority to act with charity and justice to bring about His work
of salvation.
Eph. 4:11 - the Church is hierarchical and includes
apostles, prophets, pastors, and teachers, all charged to build up the Church.
The Church is not an invisible entity with an invisible foundation.
Phil. 1:1 - Paul addresses the bishops and deacons of the
Church. They can all trace their unbroken lineage back to the apostles.
1 Tim. 3:1; Titus 1:7 - Christ's Church has bishops
("episkopoi") who are direct successors of the apostles. The bishops
can trace the authority conferred upon them back to the apostles.
1 Tim. 5:17; Titus 1:5; James 5:14 - Christ's Church also
has elders or priests ("presbyteroi") who serve the bishops.
1 Tim. 3:8 - Christ's Church also has deacons
("diakonoi"). Thus, Jesus Christ's Church has a hierarchy of
authority - bishops, priests and deacons, who can all trace their lineage back
to Peter and the apostles.
Exodus 28:1 and 19:6 - shows the three offices of the Old
Testament priesthood:
(1). high priest - Aaron (Ex. 28:1)
(2). Ministerial priests - Aaron’s sons (Ex. 19:6; 28:1)
(3) Universal priests - Israel (Ex. 19:6).
The New Testament priesthood also has three
offices:
(1) High Priest - Jesus Christ (Heb. 3:1)
(2) Ministerial priests - the ordained bishops and
priests (Rom. 15:16; 1 Tim. 3:1,8; 5:17; Titus 1:7)
(3) Universal priests - all the baptized (1 Pet. 2:5,9;
Rev. 1:6)
John Reynolds Where is the mandate to WORSHIP the Eucharist? Scripture? Nope. The Creeds? Nope. Your reference? Nope. It isn't a minor thing. You MUST know that if the Eucharist is NOT supposed to be worshiped, then this is idolatry of the worst kind, right?
John Reynolds Did you forget "Pope"? Not a single mention of that position's description like the other positions' descriptions? Why?
The problem with a referee is that his word is final..Theres the answer, once its accepted the questioning stops.......I trust no man and i test the spirits. Protestants do rely on the spirit as the final source, sometimes he makes us wait for answers, but we continue to study and pray and learn and grow.....quick easy answers is man's way, not God's......As long as we have questions and concerns we will bury ourselves in the bible, always seeking for more......if we had no questions or concerns or desire to know more the Holy Bible would be sitting on the shelf collecting dust.....mines beside my bed, worn and comfortable and filled with gum wrappers to bookmark my favorite pages.......deception in religion is so rampant, i may be a tad bit paranoid, but the paranoia keeps me alert and diligent...:)
But whose reading of the Bible? There are tens of thousands of Protestant churches, each one representing a distinctive interpretation of the Bible. And the referee I'm talking about is one that has received the sanction of the Holy Spirit.
i read alone, and in a study group and always pray for guidance beforehand...even when i attend church (Baptist) i have open book in hand....i do not trust anyone's interpretation 100%. , its not that i question their expertise in the scriptures. ...I question purposeful deception in a corrupt world full of corrupt men........if i find myself in hell it will be because of my own evil doings, not because i followed someone else there. ....i was once very trusting. 15 years later i still pray for deliverance from the cult of the SDA's...........getting back to the church that I was raised in has helped, but has left me guarded and paranoid
Reply
Fr. Robert Barron
Sally Brown how ironic, that Baptist theology actually de-emphasizes baptism.
Fr. Robert Barron does not over-concentration on religion tend to insanity?
Bibleindepth there is no true Christianity without the Eucharist, which is the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread and wine.
I wish all the Churches could be one but it now seems impossible. So many interpretations of the bible when it is so simple to understand. The Catholic Church shot itself in the foot when it added doctrines which are not found in the bible such as infant baptism, Acts 8:35-38 praying to saints and Mary, 1 Tim. 2:5, selling indulgences, Rom. 6:1, bowing and worshipping statues, 1 John 5:21, forbidding to marry of certain groups such as nuns and priests which in turn led to sexual perversion among some of them, 1 Tim. 4:1-3, giving one man power to give his word the same weight as scripture. 2 Thess. 2:3-4 If they had just stayed true to the beliefs of the first century church, there would have been no break up. Jude 3
horseman528 I agree with you Horseman.
Tommy. Jude 3 pretty much tells us there was a complete doctrine which needed no additions or subtractions which is pretty much what happened over the centuries. I'm glad we have the bible or new testament to read for ourselves. The first century Christian Church recorded in the new testament wouldn't have recognized the Roman Catholic or Orthodox Catholic Church of today. Jude 3 "Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was ONCE delivered to the saints." There was no need for pagan practices which were later adopted by the apostate Church of Rome since they already had the complete doctrine of Christ which needed no additions or subtractions. Thanks Tommy.
horseman528 The bible says that whole families were baptized together. Infant baptism was practiced in the earliest days of the church, read the church fathers. Baptism brings you into the family of God, like the Jews circumcized their infants when they were 8 days old. When you can make an adult decision you are confirmed. Paul says it is better to remain single because if you marry you have to focus on your spouse. The clergy stays single because it gives them more time to focus on God. There is far more sexual perversion in the non-Catholic, non-celibate world. There are more protestant clergy accused of child abuse according to insurance statistics. If celibacy leads to perversion then why are all forms of sexual perversion more rampant outside of the Catholic church?
Prancer1231 Whole families were baptized in the cases of Lydia and the Philippian jailer according to Acts 16:15 and Acts 16:33, but it nowhere mentions infants. Salvation is a decision that one must make for themselves. I can't decide for anyone to be baptized; they must decide for themselves when they come to an age of reason and accountability. Without faith first being applied to baptism, it is nothing more than an empty ceremony of getting wet. There is no forgiveness of sins without faith. Only after one believes and confesses that Jesus Christ is the Son of God can that baptism wash away their sins according to Acts 8:35-38 and 22:16. Ephesians 2:8 "For by grace are ye saved through FAITH..." It is impossible for an infant to have faith since it has no knowledge of those things. As far as bishops being celibate, the Holy Spirit speaking through Paul in 1 Timothy 3:1 stated that a bishop MUST be blameless, THE HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE...This requirement of a bishop being the husband of one wife is repeated in Titus 1:6. Any person who has matured and is healthy has a sex drive. God gave us marriage to satisfy that sex drive. When there is no outlet for that sex drive, people will find other ways to satisfy it which will be sinful whether it be through pornography, fornication, or pedophila. The forbidding to marry was one characteristic of the apostate church according to 1 Timothy 4:1-3. Most Catholics appear to be good people and sincere, but people can be sincerely wrong.
horseman528 The early church fathers write about infant baptism. Yes, you need to make an informed decision when you are of an age to do that. That is why Catholics are confirmed at around the age of 14. Jewish infants don't make the decision to be circumcized. It brings them into the family of God, it sets them apart. Baptism is similar. We are born with original sin. How can an infant repent of original sin?
Amen
excellent explaination. as a new orthodox christian, I am finding your explainations very enlightening. thanks.
You keep saying there is rampant disagreement which I agree with and also disagree with. If you really look into the differences between denominations you find a overwhelming unity on the essentials of scriptures. All true Christian churches believe in Christs deity, the trinity, Jesus’ death, burial, and bodily resurrection, His ascension to the right hand of the Father, His intercession for His people, and salvation through faith in Christ. I don’t like that there are all these denominations, but I also know Gods word is ultimate authority and His people will hear His voice. God bless
WORK OUT YOUR SALAVATION IN FEAR AND TREMBLING
Mat 12:33-37
Matt. 24:13; 25:31-46
Rom. 11:22
2 Pet 2:20-21
Col 1:21-23
Phil 2:12
Heb 10:26-29. If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left... only a fearful expectation of judgment.."
So true. What a wonderful evangelist Fr Robert is. I certainly don't begrudge protestant's holding a different view, but it would be wonderful if quite a few of them could see the beauty and reason of having our living voice and guidance in the Holy Father, Pope Francis. His gentle guidance is a beautiful thing to behold. Come and take up the beauty and truth of my faith and yours.
a few years back and it ultimately led me to Christian mystics and monks. I quickly realized they are all Catholic, which led me to look into Catholicism for myself. I bought "Catholicism" and a few other of Fr. Barron's videos. Like a breath of fresh air. I can see my way back to God now. I'm taking it slow bc I don't want it to be an emotional response to really well made videos but one I can defend intellectually and feel grounded in.
Welcome to the fray. God bless you.
Really appreciate this video.
Wow. Thank you for guiding us, the faithful, in this confused world.
Keep on preaching Brother!
I’ve heard a lot of people recommend Scott Hahn. The lamb’s supper is supposed to be a great book.
I am currently reading Hahn’s signs of life. It explains the biblically 40 of the Church’s teachings.
Such an enlightening topic.
Bishop Barron makes some good points. I am a Protestant of no particular denomination. God gave prophets and teachers to interpret the Bible, and Christians should read the Bible and listen to God. No pope, cardinal or preacher gets it right everytime. There must be some authority in the church, but every person is responsible for hearing and doing the word of God.
I find this particularly intriguing. The Protestant rejection of authority in America is something I think can be linked to America's Democratic system and culture of individualism. I would feel more confident if I read more protestant theology but I'm fairly familiar with American political thought being an American university student, by no means an expert though. Love the umpire analogy that Bishop Barron uses. God bless!
I believe in the power of Christ' blood so much that I will go Mass today and have my soul sprinkled and purified with His precious blood and I will offer up His body and Blood for you my friend.
What a great analogy...I look forward to using it...
The word of God is living and active; sharper than a two edged sword
I'm more of a traditionalist Catholic, not Sedevacantist or anything though. I only go to Latin mass because I simply prefer it but despite all my opinions I still have great respect for Bishop Barron, I don't see eye to eye with him on everything but I'm still proud to say that he's a Bishop in my Church, more accurately our Church
Thank you bishop Barron! You are another Fulton sheen!
Thank you Fr Barron. May I just add, that to refer to Protestantism as one monolithic movement may be one ‘thing’ and the articles of faith (or dissent) and that this was also unique and coherent as opposed to mainstream Christianity ie the (Catholic) Church, maybe a misnomer. The front-running voice may have been Martin Luther et al. But I think this misses a lot more. I think the discussion should focus on handling the nature of dissent and best way forward with dealing with dissent and discourse, and not so much the content of those discussions. Because as we have seen, this tendency to not conduct and/or contain dissent ‘properly’ (what is “proper” anyway), still leads to further fragmentation for even those who stepped aside to propose they have the solutions.
In any case thank you, your videos and perspectives have been enriching and enlightening. God bless you and keep shedding light were so everyone (literally, within and without the fold) can untangle the myths and contentious that have so far been very divisive to all Christians and Christianity, which helps us internet worms through. Perhaps at a later date you can address the differences of the Reformists from later movements such as Revivalists, etc. Also the influence of political and nationalist identities on Christian identities and the identity of the Church.
"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with Divine words." -Gregory of Nyssa
WOW JJ! you learn a new word at school today? I am impressed.Great work you did.I applaud you at the highest.
Father Barron has some great insights,
I. too. admire John Henry Newman. Thomas Moore was the individual that tried terribly to prevent Henry VIII from separating -- this was very much for political reasons.
Since then, there has not been a sense of wholeness within Christianity -- as the 'One and True Church' would very like to have.
Yes, the secular function of the Church might have been taking positions that we, today, find uncomfortable.(This is what a very self-pious Martin Luther railed against. I am confident that his motives were sincere.)
The World was changing at the time; the Catholic Authority was strongly looking for an answer. The Protestant Movement fit that feeling. But, like so many similar things, it was based on the concept that, "Too Many Cooks Make the Best Stew."
Today's "Church" challenges and changes that -- with wisdom.
Thank you, Father Barron, for your comments
The living voice is Jesus Christ! He is the authority and the word is the truth!
I enjoyed your video and think that you made some great points. Here's my counter argument. Tertullian of Carthage once declared that the Living Voice for the Church, who he called the Vicar of Christ, is the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit is our Teacher and Advocate and a Comforter who guides us into all truth, I would argue that while a human living voice that can shepherd the churches is of tremendous worth and value, various declarations made by ecclesiastical authority, must be judged adequate or inadequate critically through the assistance that is provided by the Holy Spirit that God has given to all who obey the Gospel. If the Church hierarchy has swerved from the Rule of Faith and the teaching of Christ and his Apostles, Christians must remain with Christ rather than a visible body who declares authoritatively and incorrectly. All Christians are guided by a Living Voice and this Voice is the Spirit of Truth. This must be our criteria.
+Steven Strnad Indeed friend you speak some truth, however you misunderstand what Catholics believe about the Pope. It is not the Pope in and of himself that we trust to be infallible; it is the Holy Spirit that we trust. We believe that the same Holy Spirit who miraculously guided the original authors of Scripture to write infallibly, and who speaks Truth to all of us, still today miraculously guides the Pope to always protect him from error whenever he speaks authoritatively on matters of faith and morals.
God Bless
AM greek ortodox church part , much in commen with catolics, but lets all be united and be one in JESUS!!! JESUS IS our UNION and our GOD
"[T]he most revolutionary change the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday....People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become 7th Day Adventists, and keep Saturday holy."
Bishop Barron, you said that there needs to be a living voice. Well, there is! Hebrews 4:12 says: "Indeed, the word of God is living and effective.." Hebrews 4:7 “Today, if you will hear His voice..."
@DannyGirl The Catholic Encyclopedia says different, it says the church made the change (under the title "commandments"). (My guess is the new CCC changed what was the historic position of the Catholic Church, which previously freely admitted to making the change in the law.) Isaiah 66:23 says we will keep the sabbath in Heaven. There's no such thing as a "jewish sabbath" - it is the sabbath of the Lord. He calls it "my holy day." Sunday is pagan, it comes from sun worship. Many things in the Catholic church have their origins in pagan worship; such as Christmas and Easter and Halloween.
@DannyGirl "But you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify.” James Cardinal Gibbons (Archbishop of Baltimore), The Faith of our Fathers(1917 edition)pg.72-73 (16th edition)pg.111 (88th edition) pg. 89. Originally published 1876.
"The Church, on the other hand, after changing the day of rest from the Jewish Sabbath, or seventh day of the week, to the first, made the Third Commandment refer to Sunday as the day to be kept holy as the Lord's Day." - The Catholic Encyclopedia "Commandments of God"
What day is God's holy day? Isaiah 58:13a - If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day...
What day is the Lord's day? Matthew 12:8 - For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.
Does God ever change? Malachi 3:6a - For I am the Lord, I change not
What day will be celebrated in Heaven as the Lord's day? Isaiah 66:23 - And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord.
@DannyGirl Why would we keep the sabbath in Heaven, if Jesus abolished it?
I showed you the historical context, even the (former) Archbishop of Baltimore said the church made the change, and it's not in the Bible.
@DannyGirl No scripture says to keep Sunday holy. Look at all the first day of the week scriptures - none is the Lord's day or sabbath day. I don't feel like writing a rebuttal for each of them, but it's easy to refute. The Catholic Church has historically taught that it is the power who changed the sabbath - even from the archbishop and catholic encyclopedia which I quoted you. Was the Archbishop wrong?
@DannyGirl Moses didn't make the 10 commandments, GOD did. The fourth commandment says that the sabbath is given to man (same word as Adam) because God created the Heavens and Earth in 6 days and rested on the 7th.
Scripture distinguishes sins that cannot be forgiven either before or after death from sins which can be forgiven after death (Matthew 12:31)
My pleasure, and are you familiar with RCIA? The Catholic Church offers it to people who would like to learn more about Catholicism; it's a 9-month series of meetings/discussions led by priests and nuns where all the major points are explained. Then at the Easter Vigil you can choose whether or not to become a Catholic.
But isn't it really problematic if the "one voice" creates doctrine that isn't even in scripture, let alone doctrine which clearly is opposed by scripture?
As an Anglican, I have a great respect for the office of the Pope, and his ability to address the issues of the day as a living voice to set the tone. However, definitive interpretation of the voice of the Holy Spirit belongs to the whole Catholic church (its bishops) in counsel, presided over by Peter's successor. The bishop of Rome is supposed to be first among brother bishops, but the development of universal jurisdiction in the early medieval period was not, imho, a natural development of doctrine but one that evolved due to socio-political exigencies of a collapsed Western Roman empire. Ultimately the authority of the Church is always going to be weakened as long as it remains divided. I don't say that the Anglican system is the perfect solution of course (it's kind of a mess to be honest since there's no referee), but that definitive discernment must be done according to the spirit of brotherhood and mutuality that existed amongst the twelve Apostles, rather than the Petrine See overriding its ancient-defined bounds of authority (not by as much as most Protestants claim, mind you, but still significantly).
Even now Anglicanism has a pope-shaped gap in its ecclesiology, but Rome has, so it seems to me, glossed over its ecclesiological gap in its desire for more (and speedier) certainty and uniformity. I pray that both of our communions might learn this of one another and move closer together. The church divided is as natural as a body divided from its soul-- that is to say, not natural-- we need true unity that still preserves diversity in the local context in order to see the Lord's Prayer fulfilled as much as it can be in this Age. Best wishes Bp. Barron.
You are all just making it up as you go along.
More relevant today then ever.
Thank you Fr. For this very in depth video.
that bread as you refer to it is the body and blood of Christ
2 Timothy 3:16-17: No matter how traditionalists twist it, it still says that scripture alone is all-sufficient to equip us for EVERY good work. not most not partially but every EVERY got it? EVERY.
Luke 10:26: "What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?" Jesus expected even his enemies to correctly interpret the Bible by simply reading and studying it.
Fr. Barron, what is your view then on the Episcopal Church and their ideas for interpretation of scripture and using not only tradition but also reason? I'm not theologian but if I am understanding correctly, St. Thomas Aquinas was a big advocate for using reason when interpreting scripture.
Thanks Fr. Barron.