Schism is a lack of humility of a position that someone was wrong about and can't seem to grasp what was laid out in front of them. Pride is evil and makes us do things that the Lord despises that we do, which is argue and divide ourselves.
I recommend everyone to check out R&T's NICEA II AND THE VENERATION OF ICONS with Dr. Richard Price on YT. Mr. William Albrecht joins a round table discussion regarding this very topic as well...Very edifying material!
Ezekiel is about the images of the pagan gods. In the modern world, our eyes are full of filthy images,,, since the holy images are suppressed. The Catholic Church take care of our 5 senses so that we can be full in the holiness.
Hello I’m a recent subscriber to your channel im a believer and grew up Protestant all of my life first evangelical then dabbled into the messianic movement because I wanted to draw closer to the early roots of the faith realizing the first believers were Jews and since I have some Jewish blood in me though wasn’t raised in Judaism recently I’ve identified more as non denominational and recently I’ve been studying Luther and I came to the conclusion he wasn’t some Godly hero of the faith he said many things I cringe about like saying it’s ok to commit murder and fornicate 1000 times a day that we would never separate ourselves from the lamb also how he hated the book of James and wanted it burned because it contradicts being justified by faith alone .. Paul and James can’t contradict each other so I understand that true faith produces good works. James 2:24 contradicts Luther and even he knew it also weird quotes I found about him being attacked by demons and wanted to put the Devil in his Anus? I really just want to practice closer to first century Christianity if the Catholic Church is true I’d happily accept it I just can’t wrap my head around praying to Mary though I know she’s a great woman of faith or venerating icons that’s what’s my stumbling block. Many Protestant Christians credit Constantine for Catholicism because there was some evidence he still worshipped the sun God and wanted to mix paganism with Christianity another thing that bothers me is Easter and Christmas since it has pagan origins in the catholic tradition the Jewish day of Pentecost is still honored with a new Christian spin the same used to be said with Passover look up Polycrates how he went to Rome to dispute the change from Christian Passover to Easter why was the Change made ? That’s why the word for Easter in other languages is Passover because it was replaced. In Spanish it’s la pascua . I used to believe Catholics are a false church an apostate church but I no longer come to that conclusion I may not agree with all of its doctrines but that doesn’t mean it’s all wrong how were ppl saved prior to the reformation? That’s what got me thinking .. but I still have questions and wish I had the answers I also long to see unity in the body and 30,000 denominations isn’t from God Christianity is the only religion as such what’s your view on Quartodecimanism and polycrates saying John taught him to observe the Passover according to the Gospel? You find similar things about the sabbath being kept in the east while Christians in the west kept the Lords day on a Sunday I was sabbath observant for about 6 months before I relented but it’s still something I go back and forth on polycrates bishop of Ephesus early church father while going up to Rome to dispute the change said "All these observed the fourteenth day of the passover according to the Gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith. And I also, Polycrates, the least of you all, do according to the tradition of my relatives, some of whom I have closely followed. For seven of my relatives were bishops; and I am the eighth. And my relatives always observed the day when the people put away the leaven. I, therefore, brethren, who have lived sixty-five years in the Lord, and have met with the brethren throughout the world, and have gone through every Holy Scripture, am not affrighted by terrifying words. For those greater than I have said 'We ought to obey God rather than man.... “For although almost all churches throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, have ceased to do this. The Egyptians in the neighborhood of Alexandria, and the inhabitants of Thebais, hold their religious assemblies on the sabbath, but do not participate of the mysteries in the manner usual among Christians in general (Socrates Scholasticus. Ecclesiastical History, Book V, Chapter XXII. Excerpted from Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Volume 2. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace.
I was recently told that it's unseemly to show the sides and backs of Christ and the Saints. Good grief. So, they didn't have sides and backs? Ultimately, IMHO, this attitude betrays the reluctance among some Very Online Orthobros to fully appreciate all the implications of the Incarnation.
The claim comes from Pope Hadrian calling statues idols. He did so in the second session of the acts. He said “an image is one thing, a statue is another, that is an idol.”
We are VERY well aware of that hilarious claim and it’s being absolutely wrenched out of context. You won’t find a living scholar to take the position that Hadrian believes all statues are idols.
@@djfan08 Myles, I am VERY well aware of Pope Hadrian’s first letter. I am also aware of the bottom of the barrel arguments claiming that he is saying statues are condemned and are idolatrous. It’s a laugher. In the letter he is quoting where Stephen of Bostra is speaking of IDOLATROUS statuary. Unfortunately the THRUST of the argument and the whole context is laughably RIPPED out of context. Elsewhere in the VERY SAME Council STATUES are defended. In fact, statues are defended SO MUCH that it shows that anyone arguing otherwise is either dishonest or wholly ignorant on the Council. We have examples of statues being used in an acceptable and even fantastic manner such as the veneration cited from Saint Germanos mentioned! The statues in the idealized temple are utilized and rightly so. This is one of the strongest examples from Scripture. This is the PRECISE reason why Dr. Fastiggi used an exact example FROM the Council itself to rebut this argument. I have personally asked Dr. Price what he thinks of that argument, he has noted that anyone making such arguments have not read the Council acts and are seemingly unaware of the usage of statues in the Ancient Church. No slouch himself either, the masterful Dr. Fastiggi who was the main spearhead behind Denzinger, thinks such an argument belongs in the dumpster bin with arguments akin to claiming the Bible condemns images wholesale. Note: I am not saying this is YOUR argument, I am simply replying to this claim. Thanks for commenting!
@@djfan08 I am going to paste a comment I made in another UA-cam channel about Truglia's blunder on this claim. I realize you are merely pointing to the alleged source. But please take note of the following: I listened to the segment by Truglia on Hadrian's letter and the supposed condemnation of statues. I've been shocked more than once at the ignorance of Truglia, but here I find myself experiencing that all over again. This is akin to the Jack Chick tracts against Catholicism back in the 1990s. Truglia should be ashamed of publicly accusing Catholics of idolatry when he here makes a clear mistake, not knowing the original languages, nor the context of what he is reading. Hadrian is contrasting two things, an image and an idol. That is all that is being contrasted. There is no contrast in the context between images and 3-D statues. There are at least a few reasons why we know this. In the Greek version of Hadrian's letter, what is stated is as follows: "There is a difference between an image and statue, namely, an idol". The last part in Greek is τουτέστι ζώδιον, or more literally, "namely, an idol". Therefore, when the word statue is used, it is qualified or further defined as an idol. So what Hadrian is contrasting are images, whether they are paintings or 3-D objects, and idolatrous statuary. Secondly, Richard Price translates the Latin in such a way that this contrast is better seen: "There is a difference between an image and an idol or statue." (Acts of Nicaea 2, Price, 167). Third, further on in the very same letter of Stephen of Bostra, Hadrian cites the following: "And then the cherubim and the six-winged [creatures] around the mercy seat, were they not images of angels and the work of men's hands? Why were they not rejected? But since images of angels were made according to the commandment of God, they were holy, even if they were statues." (Price, 168). In other words, Hadrian continues onward to defend the 3-D objects such as the Ark of the Covenant and the 3-D angels that were surrounding it. Therefore, statuary, pure and simple, cannot be what Hadrian, or Stephen of Bostra, is trying to condemn... otherwise he contradicts himself within a few sentences. So we see that Stephen of Bostra, and Pope Hadrian, are contrasting something else, namely, the function of an object used in veneration. If it is understood to be an "image", then it is not meant to be anything but a depiction of another reality. On the other hand, the idolatrous statues of the gentiles are worshiped. This is confirmed by the Eastern Orthodox theologian Fr. Andrew Louth who comments upon Stephen of Bostra's work: "Stephen of Bostra seems to be the first to make a distinction between veneration expressing divine worship, which is only offered to God, and veneration expressing honor, which may be offered to ANYTHING that honors God or is honored by Him: a distinction taken up and developed by John Damascene" (Three Treatises on the Divine Images, trans. Andrew Louth (St. Vlad Orthodox Seminary Press, 2003, 126n201.)
A wonderful meeting
Sigh! If they couldn't define themselves *against* us, could they define themselves at all?
Fantastic
Weird, I though I had subscribed earlier this week, but that's rectified.
Thank you very much Dr. Fastiggi for you time and your thoughts on this topic. Looking forward to seeing more of you in the future.
Schism is a lack of humility of a position that someone was wrong about and can't seem to grasp what was laid out in front of them. Pride is evil and makes us do things that the Lord despises that we do, which is argue and divide ourselves.
I recommend everyone to check out R&T's NICEA II AND THE VENERATION OF ICONS with Dr. Richard Price on YT. Mr. William Albrecht joins a round table discussion regarding this very topic as well...Very edifying material!
Ezekiel is about the images of the pagan gods. In the modern world, our eyes are full of filthy images,,, since the holy images are suppressed. The Catholic Church take care of our 5 senses so that we can be full in the holiness.
Hello I’m a recent subscriber to your channel im a believer and grew up Protestant all of my life first evangelical then dabbled into the messianic movement because I wanted to draw closer to the early roots of the faith realizing the first believers were Jews and since I have some Jewish blood in me though wasn’t raised in Judaism recently I’ve identified more as non denominational and recently I’ve been studying Luther and I came to the conclusion he wasn’t some Godly hero of the faith he said many things I cringe about like saying it’s ok to commit murder and fornicate 1000 times a day that we would never separate ourselves from the lamb also how he hated the book of James and wanted it burned because it contradicts being justified by faith alone .. Paul and James can’t contradict each other so I understand that true faith produces good works. James 2:24 contradicts Luther and even he knew it also weird quotes I found about him being attacked by demons and wanted to put the Devil in his Anus? I really just want to practice closer to first century Christianity if the Catholic Church is true I’d happily accept it I just can’t wrap my head around praying to Mary though I know she’s a great woman of faith or venerating icons that’s what’s my stumbling block. Many Protestant Christians credit Constantine for Catholicism because there was some evidence he still worshipped the sun God and wanted to mix paganism with Christianity another thing that bothers me is Easter and Christmas since it has pagan origins in the catholic tradition the Jewish day of Pentecost is still honored with a new Christian spin the same used to be said with Passover look up Polycrates how he went to Rome to dispute the change from Christian Passover to Easter why was the Change made ? That’s why the word for Easter in other languages is Passover because it was replaced. In Spanish it’s la pascua . I used to believe Catholics are a false church an apostate church but I no longer come to that conclusion I may not agree with all of its doctrines but that doesn’t mean it’s all wrong how were ppl saved prior to the reformation? That’s what got me thinking .. but I still have questions and wish I had the answers I also long to see unity in the body and 30,000 denominations isn’t from God Christianity is the only religion as such what’s your view on Quartodecimanism and polycrates saying John taught him to observe the Passover according to the Gospel? You find similar things about the sabbath being kept in the east while Christians in the west kept the Lords day on a Sunday I was sabbath observant for about 6 months before I relented but it’s still something I go back and forth on polycrates bishop of Ephesus early church father while going up to Rome to dispute the change said "All these observed the fourteenth day of the passover according to the Gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith. And I also, Polycrates, the least of you all, do according to the tradition of my relatives, some of whom I have closely followed. For seven of my relatives were bishops; and I am the eighth. And my relatives always observed the day when the people put away the leaven. I, therefore, brethren, who have lived sixty-five years in the Lord, and have met with the brethren throughout the world, and have gone through every Holy Scripture, am not affrighted by terrifying words. For those greater than I have said 'We ought to obey God rather than man....
“For although almost all churches throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, have ceased to do this. The Egyptians in the neighborhood of Alexandria, and the inhabitants of Thebais, hold their religious assemblies on the sabbath, but do not participate of the mysteries in the manner usual among Christians in general (Socrates Scholasticus. Ecclesiastical History, Book V, Chapter XXII. Excerpted from Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Volume 2. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace.
Protestants need to hear this video, thank you so much, hermano en la santa fe. May the Queen of Heaven intercede for you.
I was recently told that it's unseemly to show the sides and backs of Christ and the Saints. Good grief. So, they didn't have sides and backs? Ultimately, IMHO, this attitude betrays the reluctance among some Very Online Orthobros to fully appreciate all the implications of the Incarnation.
The claim comes from Pope Hadrian calling statues idols. He did so in the second session of the acts. He said “an image is one thing, a statue is another, that is an idol.”
We are VERY well aware of that hilarious claim and it’s being absolutely wrenched out of context. You won’t find a living scholar to take the position that Hadrian believes all statues are idols.
@@WilliamAlbrecht I’m only pointing out the quote from the second session that is used.
@@djfan08 Myles, I am VERY well aware of Pope Hadrian’s first letter. I am also aware of the bottom of the barrel arguments claiming that he is saying statues are condemned and are idolatrous. It’s a laugher. In the letter he is quoting where Stephen of Bostra is speaking of IDOLATROUS statuary. Unfortunately the THRUST of the argument and the whole context is laughably RIPPED out of context. Elsewhere in the VERY SAME Council STATUES are defended. In fact, statues are defended SO MUCH that it shows that anyone arguing otherwise is either dishonest or wholly ignorant on the Council. We have examples of statues being used in an acceptable and even fantastic manner such as the veneration cited from Saint Germanos mentioned! The statues in the idealized temple are utilized and rightly so. This is one of the strongest examples from Scripture. This is the PRECISE reason why Dr. Fastiggi used an exact example FROM the Council itself to rebut this argument. I have personally asked Dr. Price what he thinks of that argument, he has noted that anyone making such arguments have not read the Council acts and are seemingly unaware of the usage of statues in the Ancient Church. No slouch himself either, the masterful Dr. Fastiggi who was the main spearhead behind Denzinger, thinks such an argument belongs in the dumpster bin with arguments akin to claiming the Bible condemns images wholesale.
Note: I am not saying this is YOUR argument, I am simply replying to this claim.
Thanks for commenting!
@@WilliamAlbrecht thanks, I was in no way making the argument. I was just pointing out where it came from. God bless bro!
@@djfan08
I am going to paste a comment I made in another UA-cam channel about Truglia's blunder on this claim. I realize you are merely pointing to the alleged source. But please take note of the following:
I listened to the segment by Truglia on Hadrian's letter and the supposed condemnation of statues. I've been shocked more than once at the ignorance of Truglia, but here I find myself experiencing that all over again. This is akin to the Jack Chick tracts against Catholicism back in the 1990s. Truglia should be ashamed of publicly accusing Catholics of idolatry when he here makes a clear mistake, not knowing the original languages, nor the context of what he is reading.
Hadrian is contrasting two things, an image and an idol. That is all that is being contrasted. There is no contrast in the context between images and 3-D statues. There are at least a few reasons why we know this. In the Greek version of Hadrian's letter, what is stated is as follows: "There is a difference between an image and statue, namely, an idol". The last part in Greek is τουτέστι ζώδιον, or more literally, "namely, an idol". Therefore, when the word statue is used, it is qualified or further defined as an idol. So what Hadrian is contrasting are images, whether they are paintings or 3-D objects, and idolatrous statuary.
Secondly, Richard Price translates the Latin in such a way that this contrast is better seen: "There is a difference between an image and an idol or statue." (Acts of Nicaea 2, Price, 167).
Third, further on in the very same letter of Stephen of Bostra, Hadrian cites the following: "And then the cherubim and the six-winged [creatures] around the mercy seat, were they not images of angels and the work of men's hands? Why were they not rejected? But since images of angels were made according to the commandment of God, they were holy, even if they were statues." (Price, 168). In other words, Hadrian continues onward to defend the 3-D objects such as the Ark of the Covenant and the 3-D angels that were surrounding it.
Therefore, statuary, pure and simple, cannot be what Hadrian, or Stephen of Bostra, is trying to condemn... otherwise he contradicts himself within a few sentences. So we see that Stephen of Bostra, and Pope Hadrian, are contrasting something else, namely, the function of an object used in veneration. If it is understood to be an "image", then it is not meant to be anything but a depiction of another reality. On the other hand, the idolatrous statues of the gentiles are worshiped. This is confirmed by the Eastern Orthodox theologian Fr. Andrew Louth who comments upon Stephen of Bostra's work: "Stephen of Bostra seems to be the first to make a distinction between veneration expressing divine worship, which is only offered to God, and veneration expressing honor, which may be offered to ANYTHING that honors God or is honored by Him: a distinction taken up and developed by John Damascene" (Three Treatises on the Divine Images, trans. Andrew Louth (St. Vlad Orthodox Seminary Press, 2003, 126n201.)