Catholic vs. Eastern Orthodox (Why CATHOLIC is the TRUE Church!)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 вер 2024
- Catholic vs. Eastern Orthodox (Why CATHOLIC is the TRUE Church!) In this video, we look at the heresies and problems of Orthodoxy along with the false attacks and claims they make against Catholicism.
FOLLOW CATHOLIC TRUTH:
Catholic Truth Family UA-cam channel (Love, Dating, Engagement, Marriage and Kids) / @catholictruthfamily
Podcast: www.buzzsprout...
Instagram: CatholicTruthOfficial
Instagram: CatholicTruthLiving (Love, Relationships, Life)
Love and Relationships Instagram: / catholictruthfamily
Facebook Page: bit.ly/3eDvMO8
Facebook Group Page: / catholictruthct
TikTok: / catholictruthofficial
Twitter: / catholictruth7
Blog: thecatholictru...
Rumble: rumble.com/use...
QUESTIONS? Ask us here: www.subscribep...
SUPPORT: Please help us to keep growing and saving souls!
Monthly: / catholictruth
Monthly, periodically, or one time: catholictruth....
APOLOGETICS TRAININGS:
Would you like 1-on-1 Apologetics training with Bryan? Or a chance to ask questions or get advice? Contact Catholic Truth: info@CatholicTruth.org
BOOK: "WHY Do You Believe In GOD?" amzn.to/33iZSk3
Need a Speaker or Retreat? CatholicTruth.org
Online Confirmation Retreat: catholictruth....
MERCH: catholictruth....
Like our shirts? Designed by Glorybound Apparel: gloryboundco.com/
BOOK: Counterfeit Spirituality: Exposing the False Gods (All about New Age practices, Yoga, Reiki, Astrology, Law of Attraction, etc.)
Our Sunday Visitor: bit.ly/3vtK63Z
Amazon: amzn.to/3e1BqMk
Also see Barnes & Nobles, etc.
Related searches: orthodox vs catholic, eastern orthodox and roman catholic, eastern orthodox church vs catholic, eastern orthodox church vs roman catholic church, eastern orthodoxy vs catholicism
Music Credit: http//www.bensound.com
Orthodox here. There is no such thing as the child of a gay couple.
You can't even see reality anymore and you pretend to judge the real Church of Christ.
Lord have mercy.
You seem to have a lot of insults but not a lot of facts. You're trying to poke holes in the shallowest things just like Protestants do without understanding first.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial You are the one throwing epithets here. Your video pretends that there child of a gay couple was baptized. Children are born from a father and a mother. Check you facts.
@@Hope_Boathonestly there is alot against the roman church we could point out. As pope Benedict said that the Orthodox have the faith of the early millennium of the church and aren't willing to change. Seems to me thier own pope points out we haven't changed the faith, so that means 1 of 2 things
1. The Orthodox hold the faith and therefore impossible to be teaching heresy unlike the roman church that has drastically changed throughout the centuries include separating baptism chrismation, and holy communion including rearranging them and then holding the children back from Holy Communion and making confirmation at a much older date. Etc...
2. If the Orthodox teach heresy but still hold the faith as the pope half said, that means the church taught heresy with is complete nonsense
You yourself fail to see reality, as that couple is not gay, but homosexual. Gay means lighthearted and fancy free, and using it to refer yo sodomy only implicitly approves of their appropriation.
I am now a confirmed Catholic as of yesterday. I was deciding between the two but I do consider the orthodox as our brothers and sisters and wish for unification one day
Us too! Praise be to God! God bless you.
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and today, and forever. If Jesus is unchanging, the Dogmas of his Church should be unchanging. Jesus said in regard to the Holy Spirit John 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: The Ancient Catholic Church said in 381 AD, “And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and life-giver, Who proceeds from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son is together worshipped and together glorified.” The Orthodox Church 2024 “And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Creator of life, Who proceeds from the Father, Who together with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified.” Roman Catholic 2024: “I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified.” Orthodoxy's dogmas are unchanging, like Christ Jesus's; it is the same yesterday, today, and forever. For example, the Status of Saint Peter was elevated to the level of innovation; it was changed, unlike the ever-consistent dogma of Orthodoxy. Saint Gregory Pope of Rome once said, "Whoever calls himself Universal Bishop, or desires this title, is by his pride the precursor to the Antichrist." Later, his very wise words were replaced with an innovative thought that the Pope of Romme was the Universal Bishop! This is a tip for anyone who believes that Saint Peter was above all Apostles instead of being first among equals. Carefully read about the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15. If you read this carefully, you will notice that Saint James presided over this council meeting, the very first council of the Ancient Catholic Church. This begs the question: if Peter held the status that the West often cites that he has, why was another Apostle leading the Council? Should not the Pope over all Churches be presiding? On the same note, why did Saint Paul send a Pastoral Letter to the Church of Rome if Saint Peter was there? Could it be that Saint Peter was in Antioch?
wherever Peter is ... that is where Jesus hand was laid
Youre saying catholic is the true church but youre the second not the first
Catholic is true because it's first. So, that makes no sense.
True enough but the dire liturgies and dismal buildings in the majority of Catholic parishes speak of a fundamental and deep-rooted malaise within the Catholic Church.
Both Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics believe that the Holy Eucharist is not just bread and wine, but the Body and Blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, not endlessly multiplied and divided into sections, but the sole and whole Body of Christ in every consecrated element. In a similar way, each local church is not a segment of the Body of Christ with its head in Rome; rather, it is in itself the sole and entire Body of Christ, such that if every other church all over the world were somehow destroyed, the fullness of the Church, the Body of Christ, would still exist in the world.
This is what it truly means to be “catholic”-that is, “according to the whole” (katholou). Wherever the believers are gathered, there is the Church. Not just a segment of it, but the entire mystical body of Christ and fullness of His teaching. Thus the Orthodox Church is Catholic in the truest and fullest sense. This is the theology of St. Ignatius of Antioch
No it is not Catholic in the fullest sense and cannot be since it is in schism. Not to mention that you can't even say the words Orthodox church since they are fragmented and divided individual churches that all argue and excommunicate each other.
Only the Catholic church is the church that was started by Jesus.
Saint Ignatius of Antioch was a Catholic not an orthodox. So that doesn't help your case. He claimed to be part of the Catholic church not the Orthodox churches.
@CatholicTruthOfficial if the only church history you choose to read is from Mr lofton, then im sorry but you are not a catholic in any sense of the word. Your whole channel and essence is based on spreading things that you clearly do not fully understand. Instead of sprouting hate, how about you ask God to reveal the truth to you, and open your heart, and you will see the errors of the catholic church. Yes, the Orthodox Church has errors, but they lie purely in jurisdictional and human issues, whereas the catholic church has fundamental dogmatic and theological problems which stem from the time the patriarch of Rome begun thinking he has supremacy as opposed to primacy.
Orthodoxy is consistent I.e. church of 100 years ago will look like the church in 100 years. Can you honestly say the same about catholicism?
St Ignatius of Antioch was an early church father, so by you claiming he is catholic and not orthodox is quite ignorant, and should be enough for your 'followers' on this channel to see that you clearly have a biased agenda, which leaves no room for love.
@CatholicTruthOfficial you do know that St Ignatius is a patristic father who existed before the schism right so by definition could not be 'catholic and not orthodox'. Please ask God for guidance and read and understand the early church with an open heart.
You re joking🎉😂
Francis: accepts homosexuality. (The whole church) :🤦♂️
Catholics: That's a lie. 🤦♂️
@@CatholicTruthOfficial the evidence is right in front of your eyes- the supposed heir to Peter saying it’s not his place to judge homosexuals in the church.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial respond
That's what happens when you cherry pick quotes without actually looking into them. That's like taking one Bible verse out of context and ignoring the rest of the bible. It's dishonest. He said he would not judge people and their hearts, but he clearly has condemned homosexuality, same sex marriage, and has said it's intrinsically disordered. You can't get more clear than that.
Patience.
The Episcopalians claim that Jesus founded their church. Can you shed some light on this?
I don't think they do. The only reason the Anglican church exists in the first place is because of King Henry's zipper. And then a pescopilian is an offshoot of that. Either way, they don't have any actual evidence for that. They're just protestants like all the rest of the protestants.
😂😂😂 Whose heresies?! 😂😂😂
Orthodox. As we demonstrated in the short video and the full 2 hour videos.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial What are the points of those videos? Orthodox believers won't convert to Roman Catholicism. They are too firmly rooted in Tradition. The only possible outcome is the fear of the departure of many Roman Catholics.
And as you gracefully flirt with the essence of time, so it shall be.
@@alek27e Orthodox!! firm believers??? I have seen many people in so call popular orthodox nation don't even practice orthodoxy. Example: Russia, Greece atleast 40-50% is nominal orthodox, Serbia and rest of Orthodox Europe is on same path. And those who live in western world have also lost Orthodoxy to large extent.
@@glisonpereira21 The dumber response, I believe, doesn't exist. By the way, I didn't know that the true "faith" and "church" blesses homosexuals, rapes children, steals relics, burns people at the stake... it's all the Western "church".
I've seen many Catholics converting to Protestantism.
@@alek27e
We follow Peter and his successors.
The Orthodox follow what? Or, follow Who?
Sad to see many comments on here about poorly behaved Orthodox. There are hypocrites everywhere. We should not judge something by the people in it we’ve personally experienced, but the saints within that tradition who live holy lives. Don’t judge by something’s abuse but by its proper use, just like we shouldn’t say, “all priests are pedos”, in RC.
Additionally, I have never met a SINGLE prideful orthobro at any Orthodox Church I’ve been to: 2 in Colorado, 3 in NY. The whole persona seems pretty unique to online honestly 🤷♂️
Αμήν
What a coincidence. I’m a former Protestant, don’t really know what I am rn. I’ve been looking heavily into whether to choose catholism over orthodox vice versa. I felt the need to go on UA-cam and look up some videos on it. The first thing that popped up was this video. Could be a coincidence, or could be divine timing.
Let the Holy Spirit guide you.
Orthodox is a fancy name for Protestant 💫
@@Kefa...That would be the Bishop of Rome, the first Protestant, and Protestantism grew out of the Roman Catholic Church.
@@Vaelsung1 , Jesus named Peter, look for Peter's lead when you read❤️
@@Kefa...how do you receive eternal life?
I was expecting a good breakdown here, but then I saw Michael Lofton and realized that I probably wasn’t going to get it. In the future, please get a guest with a solid credential and a fair amount of charity.
Who should he have on?
Yeah Lofton sucks. Erick Ybarra and Trent Horn are much better apologists.
I've been going down this rabbit hole for 3 years and I love Roman Catholicism too but Orthodoxy reminds me of when I was an extremely hard core classic heavy metal fan.
Orthodoxy DOES NOT CHANGE!!! IT DOES NOT COMPROMISE!!!
PERIOD!!!
Except that it does and it did. It has compromised a lot and changed serious dogmas. It actually promotes heresies as we showed in the video. Did you even watch the video? It's obvious and evident, and they are even like protestants and that they can't even agree with each other and excommunicate one another. You've done a good job of buying their talking points, though. ;)
@@CatholicTruthOfficial - God bless Sir but Orthodoxy didn't change the creed or keep adding new dogmas or even change iconography.
Truly God Bless Tho! We should be concerned for our western church and I may still try to be Roman Catholic soon
@DDJD_circusOFpower_MEGACHURCH ..They believe you can divorce up to 3 times, believe in contraception...what do you mean they haven't developed into something different? I love my Orthodox brothers but some of them don't even believe in reuniting and being one Body of Christ they rather stay in Schism which Saint Paul condemns. Paraphrasing here but he said Heresy is better than being in Schism. So no, Orthodoxy has issues too. Having said that I do wish one day they can reconcile.
@@Cata-Holic_Doode you are converting to a Church known for innovations?
It seems to me that many people confuse Eastern Rite Catholic Churches with the Orthodox Churches.
Re baptism, do we Catholics, not conditionally baptise people whose baptismal status is unknown or uncertain? Lastly I do believe that an Orthodox Liturgy [unlike any protestant service] is a valid celebration of the Sacrifice of the Mass, because, unlike protestants, Orthodoxy has maintained the Apostolic Succession and has a valid priesthood [please confirm or correct].
Catholics DO conditionally baptise. This is only done when a person, typically a Protestant, says well I was raised in a Baptist church, then grandma took me to Pentecostal church and mom was raised Catholic but became a Moony and dad was a Mormon that became an Evangelical and my uncle Joe is a Buddhist but he said he remembered going to my baptism in an Anglican church, but he was pretty whacked at the time, so... And even then, the wording is not quite the same. It's made very clear that the person is not actually being baptised, unless they weren't before and we just don't know.
If a Protestant says, yes I was baptised at Christ Lutheran Church, here's my baptismal certificate, then the Catholic will say cool. You've already done that step, you're saved and born again, now let's move on with the rest of salvation!
It sounds like what some of the Orthodox are doing is quite the opposite. If disillusioned Catholic priest goes to an Orthodox church and says I was baptised, confirmed, take the Eucharist and have holy orders, and the Orthodox looks at all the documentation and says it's rubbish, you need to be properly baptised, none of that Romish stuff matters. Well, that's wrong. What those Orthodox forget is that their Church arises out of the unified Apostolic Church and that there is only one baptism. This is uncool and definitely a major scandal!
You are correct that the Orthodox --- Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Assyrian Church of the East, Ethiopian Orthodox --- have maintained the apostolic succession. They have valid priests, valid sacraments, valid liturgy, real presence in the Eucharist.
@@padraicbrown6718 Actually i did say that we Catholics do conditionally baptise. I was conditionally baptised when came over from Anglicanism in 1978. Perhaps I wonded it badly, sorry.
@@michaelhaywood8262--- Oh I'm sorry! I misunderstood!
Well, let me ask then: what was the circumstance that led to your conditional baptism? I understand that Anglicanism comprises a very wide breadth of traditions from the very high church almost Catholic to the are they even Christians. (And that's to say nothing of where the current leadership are taking the Anglican church!)
Was it a matter of missing paperwork and no other corroboration? Or was there a potentially funky baptismal formula used? (This actually happened in a Catholic diocese recently.)
Also, and out of curiosity: are you in an Ordinariate parish? As a former Anglican, I'd be interested to hear your perspective on that.
@@padraicbrown6718 I think it was just the norm, it was over 45 years ago, it was policy to administer conditional baptism to those converting from protestantism. I was received into the Catholic Church age 19, on April 20, 1978, i still try to observe April 20 each year as a day of thanksgiving, like a 'spiritual birthday', I had struggled with Anglicanism through most of my teens, and had started to move towards the Anglo Catholic end of the spectrum when I was 16 and became stricter in my observance. I decided to convert to Catholicism in the autumn of 1977, age 19, and had instruction until I was received in April 1978. This was towards the end of the Paul VI pontificate.
Were you even around in 1977/8 or was it before your time? By your name I would guess you are Irish, is this right? I live at St Leonards in Sussex on the south coast of England, near hastings.
@@michaelhaywood8262 -- I was very little then. I've heard it was a crazy time for many in the Church. Especially here in the US. I think you're probably right that it was a policy.
I actually don't live too far from St. Leonards here in Maryland. That was one of the early Catholic settlements in the Colonies.
ubi petrus ibi ecclesia
So if the pope on the throne is infallible, then why was the latin mass abandoned in Vatican 2? Why was so much changed by an infallible figure from an infallible figure? Seems to make no sense to me.
Orthodoxy is the Truth!!! Orthodoxy had never changed!!! ☦️☦️☦️
Claims 2:
Facts 0.
And it's changed a LOT!! So much so that the different orthodox churches can't agree with each other on some pretty basic doctrines and excommunicate one another.
I believe in god- which all of creation symbolizes.. something you 2 seem to totally forget. Stop trying to get sheep to follow your pitty party parade into “heaven” and teach them to pick up their sword and fight with humility. Ohh I forgot masculinity only really exists in orthodoxy… keep your sheep, you know where the lions are🙌
Sadly, this comment is laughable and ignorant. You forgot to add something to your comment. Facts. We offered many in the video, you offered nothing but your opinion. We will pray for you.
Our lady calls the catholic church, the true church,
Good enough for me.
So lets keep firm in our faith, pray.
The church is on a last trial.
We will come through, just fine.
Mary died in Ephesus? Also they changed the creed
The thing with Orthodoxy in America is that it’s mostly a big city religion. There’s no Orthodox parish even close enough to me to even consider their liturgy. Meanwhile the Catholic Church is always readily available to me. There’s rarely a town that’s not thirty minutes at least away from a Catholic Church.
There are even catholic church in Antarctica!! It truly is a universal church, fulfilling old testament prophecies of all nations worshipping daily with a perfect offering (eucharist)
”Orthodoxy” are ethnic sects.
@@Catholic-Christiannot necessarily, at least not any more than the various Eastern Catholic groups are. I think the fundamental issues that modern Orthodoxy faces stem from the Russian Orthodox Church and various cynical machinations within it. The failure of Constantinople's effort at an Ecumenical Council should have made that clear to many, but many are still in denial. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that Moscow today seems to be shadowing Constantinople's gameplay from the 11th century, and definitely considers itself "first among equals." It has no respect for Constantinople, as Constantinople is no longer an Imperial See. Alexandria? Jerusalem? All also historical anomalies surrounded by non-Christians. Further, Russian Orthodoxy seeks to appeal to the same disaffected traditionalists that Catholic trad groups do, and its politics simply cannot be separated from the logic of Empire and Russian nationalism/Imperialism in its secular form. It's a complicated mess, and I'm convinced the long term goal is to be the sole arbiter of Orthodoxy, period. And, I'm more than cynical enough to belief none of this has anything to do with concerns about souls as much as pure concerns of power and Empire. Your mileage may vary.
@@ahwhite2022 I agree with you on Russia.
@@evanorthochristianyet you pull that interpretation out of your behind because there is no basis of legitimate authority you can fall back on.
The Bible is the inspired word of God.
1 Timothy 2:5 “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;”
Luke 1:46-47 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, 47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior
Romans 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
1 Corinthians 10:4 “And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.”
1 Samuel 2:2 “There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God.
Mark 7:7. “Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”
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.”
John 14:6 “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”
1 Timothy 4:3 “Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.”
2 Timothy 3:15 “And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.”
Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; 3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
1Ti 3:2 - A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
Tit 1:7 - For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God;
Hosea 6:6 “For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.”
Rev 3:16 - So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
Better to be a born again Christian and find a good home Bible study group.
Jesus started the Catholic Church, a teaching and preaching authoritative Church on Peter and the apostles (Mt. 16:18-19, Eph. 2:20; 1 Cor. 12:28-30; Mt. 18:15-18). He did not start a bible only church which removes all of the Protestant denominations. Rather, he trained the disciples to be the leaders of the Church and gave them his authority (Mt. 28:19-20, Jn. 20:21-23) and said we 'must' listen to their authority. If we don't listen to their authority, then we reject Christ himself (Lk. 10:16, Heb. 13:17, 1 Thess. 5:12-13). They also passed on their authority to others through the laying on of hands. The church that Jesus started was teaching and preaching, correcting and reproving, and making doctrine before the New Testament even begun to be written (Acts. 16:4-5; Acts. 11:1-15; 1 Tim. 5:11; Eph. 4:11-12 and many more).
When you realize that Jesus didn't start a Bible only religion but started a teaching and preaching church, you will realize that it's the Catholic Church, the only church that goes back 2000 years to the first century. This was the same church that made and canonized the Bible in the first place.
The Bible says the true church has Bishops, priests, and Deacon's, and also the laying on of hands to pass on Authority. If your church doesnt have those three offices, its not the Church of Jesus. (Mt. 28:19; Mt. 16:18-19; Jn. 20:21-23; Mt. 18:15-18; 1 Cor. 12:28-30, Lk 10:16, Heb. 13:17, Eph. 4:11-12, Acts. 11:15, 1 Tim. 5:11, Acts 6:1-6, 1 Tim. 5:17, 2 Tim. 4:5; Titus 1:5).
Bishops include Timothy and Titus (1 Tim. 5:19-22; 2 Tim. 4:5; Titus 1:5).
Priests (presbyters) 1 Tim. 5:17; Jas. 5:14-15).
Deacons: Acts 6:1-6
Priests (presbuteroi) are also known as “presbyters” or “elders.” In fact, the English term “priest” is simply a contraction of the Greek word presbuteros. They have the responsibility of teaching, governing, and providing the sacraments in a given congregation (1 Tim. 5:17; Jas. 5:14-15).
We dee Peter and his primacy all over the NT. He is mentioned in the bible 195 times. Saint John, 29 times, St. James 16 times. Peter does first miracle and the first speech. Peter receives the revelations from God. He has a special relationship with Christ who trains him. Acts 15:11. Peter alone settled the dispute. Lists of apostles are always Peter and 11. Peter and the others. Peter and the Apostles. He is always listed 1st and Judas last. Luke 5:1-10: Peter chosen for ministry as fisher of men. Luke 22:24-32. Leader of the brothers. John 21:1-17: chosen as shepherd of church under Christ.
In Mt. 16:18-19, Jesus makes Peter the head of the church. He calls PETER rock, not himself. He even changes his name from Simon to Peter, which means "rock." Complete coincidence? He could have changed it to anything but he changed it to a name which means Rock. Jesus even calls Simon the Rock at other times as well like in Jn. 1:42 as did Paul. (Cephas means Rock).
Also, intentionally traveled with the apostles hundreds of miles to Cesarea Philippi to do this, where there is a huge 500 foot rock. That is the exact spot that Jesus changed Simon's name to Rock and said that you are the rock upon which I will build my church. And at this very moment he gave him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven giving him a primacy of authority.
Name changes are significant in Scripture. When Jesus changes his name from Simon to Peter, it symbolizes a change in status and a change in mission (like Abram to Abraham and Issac to Israel, etc). Peter was receiving a special call to be the head of the church which is why he alone singularly received the keys of the kingdom alone. The keys come from Isaiah 22 and symbolize the primacy of authority over the whole household of God.
We agree Jesus is the ultimate rock, cornerstone and foundation of the church. Some people say that Jesus is the rock so Peter cannot be. But two people can be the same thing in different ways. For example, in Ephesians 2:20, it says the apostles and the prophets are the foundation. But in the book of Revelation, it says Jesus is the foundation. It's not a contradiction, it's just different understandings. Jesus is the ultimate rock and cornerstone, but he clearly made Peter the head of the church when he gave him the keys of the Kingdom and a special authority. Thus, the Church is built on Peter as Jesus said, but he is the ultimate cornerstone.
Thank you for keeping the faith
I was having a conversation with an Orthodox friend over FB in responding to the Orthodox beginning Eucharist immediately after being baptized (infant baptisms, not adults). In a way, I see where they come from on this, since the Eucharist is not bound by our understanding of it. I responded that I believe we wait until the age of reason to (hopefully) decrease the "snackification" of and increase reverence towards the Sacrament. Interested to see how other Catholics would respond.
In 1910, Pope Pius X issued the decree Quam singulari, which changed the age at which First Communion is taken to 7 years old, due to the case of Ellen Organ. Previously, local standards had been 10 or 12 or even 14 years old.
In the case of First Communion, there is no age restriction. The Church simply requires that children possess the use of reason, know and understand what the Eucharist is, and are properly disposed. Canon law states,
The administration of the Most Holy Eucharist to children requires that they have sufficient knowledge and careful preparation so that they understand the mystery of Christ according to their capacity and are able to receive the body of Christ with faith and devotion. (CIC 913 §1)
It is primarily the duty of parents and those who take the place of parents, as well as the duty of pastors, to take care that children who have reached the use of reason are prepared properly and, after they have made sacramental confession, are refreshed with this divine food as soon as possible. It is for the pastor to exercise vigilance so that children who have not attained the use of reason or whom he judges are not sufficiently disposed do not approach Holy Communion. (CIC 914)
If you would like to watch the full videos, see them here.
Why Orthodox are Wrong Part 1: ua-cam.com/video/NQpK79qISwA/v-deo.html
Why Orthodox are wrong Part 2: ua-cam.com/video/RjAPNbTYwpM/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/NQpK79qISwA/v-deo.html
Pray tell if you have read the ecumenical councils and explain the filioqe my dear buddy
I argue with people a lot who seem to think that religions shouldn't rely on evidence for faith.
My counter is I need REASONS to believe something, not blind faith.
We would agree with you. If faith isn't informed by rational evidence, then it's just blind faith. We don't accept purr blind faith in the Catholic Church. That's why we are not afraid of science as many Protestants are.
@@CatholicTruthOfficialsince when were prots unscientific?
I've been to many different protestant churches over the years and many are just plain off their rockers. One assembly of God church said all believers can raise the dead and even said a pastor did just that. Weird. God bless.
Certain denominations eat God. Crazy 🤪
@@angelosophy Bryan's conversion story differs from baptism saves?
Ask Bryan & see if he'll give an answer?
No it does not give a different answer than baptism saves.
@@markwilson1724 in response to the following: "Certain denominations eat God. Crazy". John 6:53
Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you.
@@Gregori-mi2vy8nc6y Colossians 2:20-23
I’m Brazilian, and here are always the same “arguments”, or even worse. I saw a Protestant call us as apostate. Apostate related to what? Your own mind and her fantasies about the Word of God? Or about some kinda of absolute truth? Nop, just the first one.
Exactly!
Interesting how people who pretend that Bergoglio is a true Roman pontiff have no problem disobeying him. He says "no, no, no" to people who want to convince others of their own religion because that is a "venom" against Ecumenism. But here they go again.
I considered orthodoxy and was told I would need to be re-baptized and have an exorcism. I was also not allowed to receive the Eucharist from any other church.
That's insanity. So many of them are such extremists. Rad trads.
It's not re-baptism if the previous baptism was not sacramental. Also there is only one holy catholic apostolic Church as we orthodox proclame in the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed. You contradict the creed if you teach that one can take communion in multiple 'Churches' .
Also the Roman Catholic eucharistic is not correct. The priest says 'take and drink all of you' as Christ said and they does not give the blood of the covenant to the faithful. You pretend that the bread is the same thing as the wine, adding words our Lord didn't spoke to nullify what he actually said.
Same for the filioque.
Our Lors said that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. You added words to his teachings in order to create a schism within the Church and called 'schismatics' those who remained faityto the Lord and the ecumenical councils.
Lord have mercy on us sinners.☦️
@@CatholicTruthOfficial
@MarkSeydel Stated, "I considered orthodoxy and was told I would need to be re-baptized and have an exorcism. I was also not allowed to receive the Eucharist from any other church". Catholic Truth Officials responded, "That's insanity. So many of them are such extremists. Rad trads". Could it be that our extremism is built on Church teachings? Àλλὰ καὶ ἐὰν ἡμεῖς ἢ ἄγγελος ἐξ οὐρανοῦ ὑμῖν [b]εὐαγγελίζηται παρ᾽ ὃ εὐηγγελισάμεθα ὑμῖν, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.
In my journey from cradle evangelical to the Catholic Church, I almost headed into Orthodoxy (after heavy study of the Church Fathers, and attending both Catholic and Orthodox liturgies).
Through confirmations, the Lord led my wife and I into Catholic Christianity. Though many aspects of Orthodoxy (and also various Protestant churches) are faith filled and beautiful offerings to God, the very reasons mentioned in your video here are red flags that I couldn’t overlook at the time of discernment.
Additionally: the chair of Peter was another matter that, after heavy study into the Church Fathers, found that many Orthodox authorities either give intentionally misleading, or ignorant statements on.
I wasn’t looking to prove Catholicism valid. But the evidence is undeniable once examined.
Praise God! Thank you for sharing.
You have the holy Catholic Church. You have 48,000 protestant CULTS.
@operationgreyscale I was cradle Protestant and God led me to the Orthodox Church. I've met many people whom God has led to the Orthodox Church.....but also met many whom he's led to Rome instead.
What do we do with that? This may be controversial to the more conservative members of both our Churches, but I've come to believe God leads people to where they're willing to be led. I personally still believe that the Orthodox Church is "the" Church, but after being here for over 20 years, I also have to say that I know that He leads some people elsewhere, and at the end of the day, I have to conclude He knows what people need better than we do.
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and today, and forever. If Jesus is unchanging, the Dogmas of his Church should be unchanging.
Jesus said in regard to the Holy Spirit John 15:26
But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
The Ancient Catholic Church said in 381 AD, “And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and life-giver, Who proceeds from the Father,
Who with the Father and the Son is together worshipped and together glorified”.
The Orthodox Church 2024 “And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Creator of life, Who proceeds from the Father, Who together with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified.”
Roman Catholic 2024: “I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified.”
Orthodoxy's dogmas are unchanging, like Christ Jesus's; it is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
For example, the Status of Saint Peter was elevated to the level of innovation; it was changed, unlike the ever-consistent dogma of Orthodoxy. Saint Gregory Pope of Rome once said, "Whoever calls himself Universal Bishop, or desires this title, is by his pride the precursor to the Antichrist."
If you are leaning toward believing that Saint Peter was above all Apostles instead of being first among equals. I would advise you to carefully read about the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15. If you would read this carefully, you will notice that Saint James presided over this council meeting, the very first council of the ancient Catholic church. This begs the question: if Peter held the status that the West often cites that he has, why was another Apostle leading the Council? On the same note, why did Saint Paul send a Pastoral Letter to the Church of Rome if Saint Peter was there? Could it be that Saint Peter was in Antioch?
I say the following in love: revisit your Church history research project. You can't disregard the facts that I have presented above. God bless you, dear friend, in Christ, Gregori!
@operationgreyscale
May God guide you in your journey. I have a question: Do you read Latin? How about Greek? Do you trust the words of a Pious Pope? Saint Gregory The First, Pope of Rome, once said, "Whoever calls himself Universal Bishop, or desires this title, is by his pride the precursor to the Antichrist." Later, his very wise words were replaced with an innovative thought that the Pope of Rome was the Universal Bishop! This is a tip for anyone who believes that Saint Peter was above all Apostles instead of being first among equals. Carefully read about the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15. If you read this carefully, you will notice that Saint James presided over this council meeting, the very first council of the Ancient Catholic Church. Why was Saint James presiding over this Council? The answer is simple: he was the Bishop of Jerusalem because he was an equal to all Apostles. Thus, he presided over the Council that was in his jurisdiction; he was in charge of the very first Church Council. This begs the question: if Peter held the status that Rome often cites that he has, why was another Apostle leading the Council? Should not the Pope over all Churches be presiding? On the same note, why did Saint Paul send a Pastoral Letter to the Church of Rome if Saint Peter was there? Could it be that Saint Peter was in Antioch? The question is, during your research, did you actually visit a library for your research? Project, or did you depend solely on the internet? When you read in the Sacred Scriptures that Peter the Rock is where Jesus built his Church, did you read this in English, or did you read the actual original passage in Koine Greek? I am often intrigued when people believe that the internet is infallible. Thus, it should be trusted for empirical research.
I still looking into the issue of the Baptism, but it is a good question.
From my understanding, in Australia Christmation is sufficient, although Baptism is preferred.
In the rest of the churches, its baptims to my understanding.
In regards to the way theae guys are arguing, they are approaching this discussion the wrong way.
If you want to open up the Baptism rabit hole, ive been to two Catholic baptisms recently and not one person at all at any point confirmed the denomination of the Godparents or require proof.
At the Orthodox Church, the rules were clear and proof required.
Would you like to answer this?
Also i alot of these claims are just trying to raffirm your confirmation bias with no real explanation or substance.
The issue woth Russia and Constantinople are no secret, very loud and clear and dont change Orthodoxy.
These are men making error and the Church will deal with it because it is not the same structure as the Roman Catholics.
How to Catholics cut off the Pope if hes in error?
When will Archbishop Vigano clean up the church?
I pray he does.
And to ve fair, at the heart of Orthodoxy is truth.
If an orthodox is being arrogant or rude to make his point, its wrong.
All they requested all these years is to not deviate from truth.
All they qanted wanted at the council of florence was universal truth.
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and today, and forever. If Jesus is unchanging, the Dogmas of his Church should be unchanging.
Jesus said in regard to the Holy Spirit John 15:26
But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
The Ancient Catholic Church said in 381 AD, “And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and life-giver, Who proceeds from the Father,
Who with the Father and the Son is together worshipped and together glorified”.
The Orthodox Church 2024 “And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Creator of life, Who proceeds from the Father, Who together with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified.”
Roman Catholic 2024: “I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified.”
Orthodoxy's dogmas are unchanging, like Christ Jesus's; it is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
For example, the Status of Saint Peter was elevated to the level of innovation; it was changed, unlike the ever-consistent dogma of Orthodoxy. Saint Gregory Pope of Rome once said, "Whoever calls himself Universal Bishop, or desires this title, is by his pride the precursor to the Antichrist." Later, his very wise words were replaced with an innovative thought that the Pope of Rome was the Universal Bishop!
This is a tip for anyone who believes that Saint Peter was above all Apostles instead of being first among equals. Carefully read about the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15. If you read this carefully, you will notice that Saint James presided over this council meeting, the very first council of the Ancient Catholic Church. This begs the question: if Peter held the status that the West often cites that he has, why was another Apostle leading the Council? Should not the Pope over all Churches be presiding? On the same note, why did Saint Paul send a Pastoral Letter to the Church of Rome if Saint Peter was there? Could it be that Saint Peter was in Antioch?
I'm an inquirer into Orthodoxy. The eastern church makes the more sense to me based on the history. The Papacy as its developed today is not how the early church viewed the Pope. Peter never asserts himself supreme over the other Apostles yes Peter had a primacy role but it wasn't to be an autocrat over the entire Church this is a development.
On the question whether someone should be rebaptized, why not let local Priests decide? They are the spiritual Father over this person so they should know whats best. You can never guarantee the heterodox baptism is valid so I don't see the issue with rebaptizing other Christians.
Actually the early church did understand the papacy very much like it did today, and even Edward the Confessor among other early Christians said that we all must agree with the bishop of Rome who has the Primacy over the church. Not to mention that the early popes even in the early church excommunicated the Eastern churches when they went into heresy and the Eastern churches repented and came back. There's a whole history of the Primacy of Peter who had the Keys of the Kingdom of heaven. We talked about this in part 2 I think if you're interested.
ua-cam.com/video/RjAPNbTYwpM/v-deo.html
The reason why the local priests cannot decide about rebaptism is because the Catholic church, the Church of Jesus christ, already settled the matter definitively back in the earliest centuries once and for all. It's only some Orthodox who are now changing the early Christian teachings to their own likings. And since they have no Central authority, all they do is bigger with each other and excommunicate one another.
"Orthodox" heresies lol. You sound like vaticancatholic Peter Dimond.😂
Actually we are debunking them this weekend. But we actually gave facts, so feel free to disprove the facts. Running away from them is not intellectually honest.
That's a compliment
@@CatholicTruthOfficial ik you're against them but I'm just commenting this because it's lind of funny
The Eastern Orthodox has always been a cesspool of heresies and schisms which remains until today. The east authored every single heresy in the first millennium. Your false ecclesiology of National Autocephalous sects cannot be found anywhere in tradition. Show me one document from tradition or Ecumenical council where the ecclesiological terminology of Autokefali was used and defined? Its found nowhere.
Worldly pope, sin blessings and changed litergy is in favor of orthodox.
Worldly is a shallow judgment, and worse, you said he blesses sin showing you didn't read the document which says the church *can't bless sin." You are therefore engaging in slander and bearing false witness.
The pope also said: "The church does NOT have the power to impart blessings on unions of same-sex couples!" You need to repent my friend.
The liturgy has gone through changes since the first century. So that's a moot point. The church has the authority given by God to make non doctrinal changes.
As an orthodox, I strongly disagree, but I guess catholicism is the bigger church so it has more YT channels, however, being a big church doesn't make you the true church
Orthodox claim The successor of Peter fell off.
Outrageous
@@koppite9600 For your general culture, Peter did not establish the Church in Rome,it was Peter and Paul. One was dropped! OH OH! The Rock was always Christ! Ah...why do i even stress...in a bunch of years your pope will bless man and camel couples and you will still be blind.
Keep whining. Whining doesn’t mean you’re more correct either.
@@zealousideal
I was not trying to engage in a personal attack or belittle your faith. I was simply expressing my own beliefs and perspective on the matter.
Second, I find your accusation of "whining" to be quite ironic. After all, it was you who initially made a comment that could be perceived as offensive to me and my faith. If anyone is being overly emotional or dramatic, I would argue that it's not me.
Third, I'm disappointed that you would resort to such cheap jabs and insults instead of engaging in a respectful conversation. I thought that Catholics were more interested in having constructive ecumenical dialogue, but it seems that I was wrong.
. If you're genuinely interested in having a dialogue like a debate, I'm more than happy to continue this conversation. However, if you're only going to engage in sarcasm and insults, I'm afraid I'll have to decline.
You should know better if you are a follower of Christ
@@zealousideal @zealousideal
I was not trying to engage in a personal attack or belittle your faith. I was simply expressing my own beliefs and perspective on the matter.
Second, I find your accusation of "whining" to be quite ironic. After all, it was you who initially made a comment that could be perceived as offensive to me and my faith. If anyone is being overly emotional or dramatic, I would argue that it's not me.
Third, I'm disappointed that you would resort to such cheap jabs and insults instead of engaging in a respectful conversation. I thought that Catholics were more interested in having constructive ecumenical dialogue, but it seems that I was wrong.
. If you're genuinely interested in having a dialogue like a debate, I'm more than happy to continue this conversation. However, if you're only going to engage in sarcasm and insults, I'm afraid I'll have to decline.
You should know better if you are a follower of Christ
Jesus wouldn't watch this stuff. It's trivial and divisive. Jesus would try to increase tolerance and forgiveness and help the poor. Why is that so hard to see for some people? Why oh why?
Are you so sure? Did Jesus tolerate the Pharisees or did he call out their hypocrisy?
Exactly. Jesus cares very much about truth. Divisiveness It's all about arguing, but we presented rational facts from beginning to end and quoted sources.
Respectfully, I disagree. I feel they handled it in a respectful manner. They are merely presenting their arguments for why they believe in the Catholic Church as they have experienced it. Is it disrespectful to tell truth? As was pointed out Jesus would point our truth and hypocrisy no matter who it offended. If we worry about offending more than telling truth, how do you speak against gay marriage or abortion? You will offend people. Something to think about. God bless
I gotta say though, the Divine Liturgy definitely feels more middle eastern original Christianity
I wish Sam shamoun would watch this!!!
Why?? Sam has been slowly becoming more and more catholic. Currently he is going to Catholic Church and claims he’s Catholic .
(But also he “still on the fence discerning”) but he’s pretty much 98% in the Catholic Church. That’s HUGE for him.
I’m Protestant but will convert to Catholicism or orthodoxy. But currently I’m looking into both and Catholicism in my eyes from what I’ve heard has a much better case. The main orthodox argument I’ve heard against catholics is the Filioque but I 100% believe the Filioque is biblical.
I'm struggling with the Catholic view of the Filioque so I would deeply appreciate why you think John 15:26 tells us the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father?
@@clivejames5058 John 15:26 tells us that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and that Jesus sends Him (the Spirit). I’ve heard many orthodox Christians claim that just because Jesus doesn’t mention himself in the procession, that means He only proceeds from the Father. Though exactly a chapter before that in John 14:26, it says “But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything and remind you of all that I have said to you.” In this verse Jesus only mentions the Father sending the Spirit. Does that mean only the Father does send the Spirit? No, since Jesus says that He also sends Him in John 15:26. And so because he doesn’t mention Himself in this particular verse, it doesn’t mean the Spirit doesn’t proceed from/through Him as well. There are several verses that shows that the Spirit also proceeds from the Son. And the most obvious of these is Revelations 22:1 “Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, bright as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb” (the water of life is the Holy Spirit, see John 7:38-39) and there are other verses that mentions the Spirit of Christ or the Spirit of the Son (Galatians 4:6, romans 8:9, Philippians 1:19, 1 Peter 1:11). Now I personally believe that the Spirit cannot be the spirit of Christ unless He proceeds from/through Christ. If the spirit is simply sent by Him, He can’t be the Spirit of Christ, which the Bible clearly states. (As I read this, I realised it can be difficult to know who I’m referring to since I call all three persons “Him”. If you can’t tell which person I mean just tell me and I’ll tell you who I was thinking of.)
@@Gloria_In_Excelsis_Deo Thank you for the Scripture references. I'll go and do some more research.
@@Gloria_In_Excelsis_DeoIf I may ask, what sort of Protestant church did you / do you attend?
It would seem that since you're deliberating between Eastern Orthodoxy & Roman Catholicism your most foundational conviction is something like: Protestantism is in serious error. Where and what then is Christ's one true church (Mat16:18, 18:17)?
Yes?
@@AnHebrewChild I’m currently a Lutheran, but it’s the church of Sweden, and it’s extremely liberal and barely a real church. They wed same-sex couples, they have female priests and the former archbishop was even a woman, and worst of all they support abortion. And even if it weren’t liberal, I’d still convert. Sola scriptura is false and Christ gave authority to the church. So yes I wonder which church is the true church.
The RCC keeps changing its faith doctrine. For centuries it teaches Limbo. In the later days, it got rid of this doctrine. 😅
It was never a doctrine. Sorry.
If anybody wants to know about the authorised Church of Jesus one has to read and meditate on is Mathew 16:13-18 and John 21:15-17. Jesus has not given authority to anybody else except BAPTISM of water BUT remember it must also recieve BAPTISM of Holy Spirit to become fully valid.
It's called Confirmation: )
Water is symbolic but not needed.
The Holy Spirit is the real deal.
But I'm not Christian. In time, every religion and all Gods are voided out... Again.
C'mon bro, Eastern Orthodoxy is high church Protestantism? Don't be silly.
Why is it silly? It's very much similar. Just saying it silly doesn't mean it is.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial You guys have Protestant style Norvus Ordo masses, there is nothing like that in Orthodoxy.
The claims made here are laughable. Cope & seethe. ☦️
We agree, but we pray for the Orthodox. They don't know better. Their arguments mainly, and ironically, come from Protestantism. That's why we went into depth debunking them.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial Get real dude. Lofton is a joke. You don't know 💩.
@@CatholicTruthOfficialThey are the first protestants
I love this video. I thought that the orthodox were different 😮happy to be Catholic
You are so right about the anti-logic. After becoming Catholic, I once considered becoming Orthodox until I heard my 'sponsor' ridicule Thomas Aquinas. He and fellow Orthodox buddies in the AOC bemoaned the exceptionally logical teachings of Thomasinianism expressly for that reason: it's too logical like the Catholic Church is too logical.
Hey, I struggled with mental illness. I need logic. Logic is my best friend. I left in a cloud of dust and never came back. Why stop with Aquinas? Why not ridicule the logic that builds skyscrapers and gives us cell phones and great medicine?
You can't really criticize a group until they put it in writing. I guess to one-up the publishing of the CCC, in 1993, they came out with something similar, "The Orthodox Study Bible." (NT only.) A great example of its bad scholarship can be found in its notes for Matthew 19:12. After stupidly redefining the word 'eunuch' way, way out of historical context and the verse's own context, the notes say that the Church prohibited the practice of self-castration for anyone...regardless of what Christ and science say how it helps. It goes on to cite the first canon of Nicaea of 325 AD. Yet anyone can read the first canon and see that it only applies to clergy; the laity is not mentioned at all.
Well said!
Are you saying that self castration has benefits according to Christ and science? I’m not saying that’s wrong I just want to hear your perspective, especially as someone who has struggled with understanding this.
@tomsaltsman either you didn't understand your sponsor or your sponsor didn't understand the argument. The problem with Scholasticism isn't logic. The problem with the Scholasticism of Aquinas is it seeks to understand God in exclusively or nearly exclusive rationalistic categories. Using rationalism can be helpful to a certain degree, but God transcends categorical definitions. Orthodox Christians have always held education in high regard, but has held Divine Revelation and experience of God higher.
Probably the quintessential example of the place where Orthodox and Roman Catholics diverge is the debate between Palamas and Barlaam, Akindynos, and Kalekas, which highlighted the differences in how the East and West believe one can experience God most fully. The East believes God is most fully experienced directly, one might say mystically, and the West believes that one most fully experiences God by Divine Contemplation. I'm sure you're aware that near the end of his life, Aquinas had a mystical experience with God that caused him to stop dictating his Summa Theologica, stating "I can write no more. I have seen things that make my writings like straw."
Logic is fine. It has its place. If you've found God and peace in the Catholic Church, then God bless you and keep you.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial Science suggests self-castration only in the case of metastatic prostate cancer, knowing that the cancer cells feed from testosterone. Testosterone is the basic male hormone that not only enables sexuality but also supports the male muscle system. The loss of testosterone has devastating effects on the male body, regardless of religion or dogma.
I am extremely disappointed by your exclamational reply to a person who admits that he has struggled with mental illness and who considers that the Gospels and the Church propose literal self-castration. This was a greatly irresponsible act on your part. Sorry.
He got it correct, early on.
“They Aren’t Listening.”
I personally do not find it comical; I find it incredibly sad.
For sure.
Have father Josiah Trenhem on
I am baptised as an Eastern Orthodox but the Moronite church welcomed me with open arms. I confess my sins and attend mass there. I find Catholics to be graceful. The orthodox friends I have tell me that I need to go back to the Orthodox Church and re confess my sins and confess that I became part of the Maronite (catholic) order because it's all Heresy. They don't even acknowledge the saints of the Catholic Church that are canonized after the split. I don't understand the hate from the orthodox side. Like I said, the catholic (Maronite) priests accepted me with open arms as a child of God. They hear my confessions and give me communion.
Thanks so much for sharing with us, and may God bless you.
Are you an EMT? If you are, thanks for your service! Were you a Cradle Orthodox? If I could offer one bit of advice, it would be not to perceive the words of Orthodox Christians as hate speech. It comes from a place of theological understanding. Please read the following carefully; this may explain the ideology of Orthodox Christians.
Galatians 1:8
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Jesus said in regard to the Holy Spirit John 15:26
But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
The Ancient Catholic Church said in 381 AD, “And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and life-giver, Who proceeds from the Father,
Who with the Father and the Son is together worshipped and together glorified”.
The Orthodox Church 2024 “And in The Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Creator of life, Who proceeds from the Father, Who together with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified.”
Roman Catholic 2024 “The Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son,
who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified.”
You may not believe what I am about to say, but the Filioque is a different Gospel, which is why many pious Orthodox are unwilling to compromise with other groups; in our eyes, it is not being hateful; it's about being truthful.
@@Gregori-mi2vy8nc6y hello I am not an EMT. It’s an abbreviation for my name. Thank you for the information. I did my research on the matter. I love both churches. But my decision is to stick to the church where I am baptized in. Which is the Eastern Orthodox church. I am working on finding a spiritual father for confessions and guidance. I love the bothers in catholocisim also. It’s just that lately I have been drown back to my church which is the Orthodox Church.
@@Gregori-mi2vy8nc6y you seem very informed. I wish there is a way we can communicate in private. God bless you
why the hell are you participating in Ecumenism?
Message to Catholic Truth, thank you for allowing me to express my thoughts on Church matters on your platform. Thank you from the bottom of my heart. In Christ, Gregori
You are very welcome! It's our pleasure. May God bless you
@@CatholicTruthOfficial@CatholicTruthOfficial May God bless you as well. May the Lord have mercy on us. Love you, dear friend!!
Eastern Orthodox at least maintained their liturgy as do the eastern Catholics. We in the west have denigrated the liturgy.
Doesn't matter if you have fallen into numerous heresies, are divided in your churches and are heading toward schism.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial - you haven’t thought this through. There is no higher form of worship than the liturgy. When you understand that it was a Freemason Fr anniballe Bugnini who developed the new world order mass , you have to realize that we changed the liturgy for the WORSE. Eastern Rite Catholics did not. Ditto for orthodoxy. If we are to reunite, we must go back to an apostolic liturgy. The novus ordo feeemasonic- originated liturgy is not apostolic.
I have debated an Orthodox theologian about Mariology especially about the Immaculate Conception and it was so fun. I find Orthodox has the extreme hatred towards the Catholic Church and considered the Catholic Church as heretics using the writings of the Church Fathers and had not founded by Jesus Christ. As I have observed in their arguments, they are so strong in early Church writings not to evangelize Christ but intend to destroy Catholicism. I find them also contradicting and paradoxical in terms of arguments and interpretations without understanding the central point of the doctrine. They also insulted the Catholic Saints and the Church Fathers who wrote about in favor of Catholicism. They only believe the views of the early Orthodox Fathers and the idea of how Orthodox church propagated which is very invalid. When it comes also on debates, they have strong evident aggressions against the Catholic Church with cussing words. Everything what the Catholic Church said even using the early Church Fathers will always have them rejected and blame the Catholic Church for heresies and schisms since the year 1054. They even cited that it was the Catholic Church who parted from the Orthodox church and their church was older than the Catholic Church which totally contradicted the Church Traditions and the history of the Catholic Church. They had also a strong judgment against the sinners. I don't understand this worst and corrupt theology of the orthodox church. ^^
I hadn't replied him because he was so toxic and completely contradicting in all of his words, and he did not realize that. I have come across the internet and surprisingly found the view of the Orthodox church on the Immaculate Conception and there I found him said, "I am also an Orthodox and believe in the Immaculate Conception of the Theotokos" and actually defended it, and when we debate, he turned against the Immaculate Conception. ^^
With that debate, I have finally realized and absolutely convinced that the Catholic Church is One True Church of Jesus Christ. Orthodox church for me is a second class Christianity and a fragment from the main Church, the Catholic Church. They are the original Protestants to me because of their rubbish theology. ^^
lol whos " they "
@kingdaniel4756
Hi Daniel, Greetings in Christ Jesus. I am often intrigued when I read such comments that Orthodox people “has the extreme hatred towards the Catholic Church.” First, may I ask for your forgiveness on behalf of any Orthodox Brother or Sister who may have acted in a hateful way toward you and your community? That is not what Orthodoxy is about. Truly Pious Orthodox Christians would never act in a hateful manner towards any community. We take the heart of the words of Christ Jesus, “ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν,” love our neighbor as we love ourselves. Personally, I will never support an Orthodox Christian who is being hateful towards others.
But I must add a caveat: often, as we defend our faith, our fervor may be interpreted as hateful. However, I have noticed that a minority of Orthodox Christians fail to abide in Ορθοδοξία Ήθος/the Orthodox Ethos regarding those who believe differently from us.
Now, I will address your comment that we perceive you guys as heretics; yes, I have heard that term from Orthodox as well as Roman Catholics. Yes, we differ on such subjects as the Immaculate Conception and the Filioque. Have you ever heard the term lost in translation? That is a true phenomenon; here is a fact: All of the original Church documents, including the Septuagint, were written in Koine Greek, not Latin, not Italian, and definitely not English. The original Greek was translated into other languages. Thus, important nuances were lost, often creating false dogmas. Here is another fact: for the last 2,000 years, there has not been a day that Koine Greek failed to be spoken in many of our churches and Monasteries. You would be surprised how many false doctrines are out there based on a faulty understanding of Greek. We are reading the Church Fathers in Koine Greek, the language used for the Septuagint, the New Testament, and the Ecumenical Councils. You are judging us based on your English comprehension and reading skills, yet we are reading the actual documents as written!
However, the main reason we do not perceive the Church of Rome as the Ancient Catholic Church is due to many obvious innovations.
Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and today, and forever. If Jesus is unchanging, the Dogmas of his Church should be unchanging. Jesus said in regard to the Holy Spirit John 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: The Ancient Catholic Church said in 381 AD, “And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and life-giver, Who proceeds from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son is together worshipped and together glorified.” The Orthodox Church 2024 “And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Creator of life, Who proceeds from the Father, Who together with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified.” Roman Catholic 2024: “I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified.” Orthodoxy's dogmas are unchanging, like Christ Jesus's; it is the same yesterday, today, and forever. For example, the Status of Saint Peter was elevated to the level of innovation; it was changed, unlike the ever-consistent dogma of Orthodoxy. Saint Gregory Pope of Rome once said, "Whoever calls himself Universal Bishop, or desires this title, is by his pride the precursor to the Antichrist." Later, his very wise words were replaced with an innovative thought that the Pope of Rome was the Universal Bishop! This is a tip for anyone who believes that Saint Peter was above all Apostles instead of being first among equals. Carefully read about the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15. If you read this carefully, you will notice that Saint James presided over this council meeting, the very first council of the Ancient Catholic Church. This begs the question: if Peter held the status that the West often cites that he has, why was another Apostle leading the Council? Should not the Pope over all Churches be presiding? On the same note, why did Saint Paul send a Pastoral Letter to the Church of Rome if Saint Peter was there? Could it be that Saint Peter was in Antioch?
@@Gregori-mi2vy8nc6y
Greetings my brother in Faith. I understand that you have seen the realities between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church.
I would like to address those points you have mentioned about the doctrinal conflicts between the Churches we belong but see to it that we are not "debating" here just as the lost Orthodox theologian I have debated for the past few months. Let me address directly to the points as a Catholic Faithful:
1. FILIOQUE
~Filioque issue was one of the most sensitive and heated issue that led the Unified True Church divided since year 1054. Indeed you are right that the early Church Fathers including their writings were firstly introduced Apostolic Creed as "from the Father" in referenced to John 14:15 Jesus saying that "I will ask the Father and He will send you the Advocate" clearly stated that the Holy Spirit truly proceeds from the Father in Heaven as the first Creed declared, but there are deeper Biblical passages that Jesus was declaring Godship as also a Sender of the Holy Spirit just like the Father (John 16:7) "I will send Him to you." Jesus explicitly stated that the Father is not only the Sender of the Advocate but also the Son. Jesus does not only mentions this once but twice that the Son will send the Advocate from the Father (John 15:26). Remember, Jesus said "I will send" and the Apostles also testified that the Son Himself poured it (Acts 2:33) as He is the Baptizer of the Holy Spirit (John 1:33). These Biblical texts mainly supports the authenticity of the Filioque as the truest Apostolic Creed. Now, it is undisputable and undeniably given that the Father is the Sender of the Holy Spirit since He is the Principal Divine Persona in the Holy Trinity. Notice also that John 16:12-15, the Son stated that "all" that the Father has is also the Son's and that includes the proceeding of the Holy Spirit from Father as also the same with the Son. If the Holy Spirit only proceeds from the Father not with the Son, then why is it that St. Paul the Apostle explicitly mentioned that the Spirit of the Son is also the Spirit of God (Romans 8:9-11, Galatians 4:6) and St. Paul truly recognized that the Spirit of God who dwells in the Church there is obviously the same with the Spirit of Christ. The Spirit of God [the Father] in verse 9 is directly refers to as the Spirit of Christ packed in the same verse, so there can hardly be a doubt, biblically speaking, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. We cannot conclude that the Spirit of Christ is not the Holy Spirit since it existed from the Son who is part of the Trinitarian God. In the same way, we can conclude that the Holy Spirit that proceeds from the Father and the Son, not on the Father alone since both of them are Senders of the Advocate. In this case, when we declare that we are truly in the Trinitarian Faith and the Oneness of the Father and the Son (John 10:30), we should not separate the Authority of God and exclude the Son whose also being proceeded by the Holy Spirit just like as Father is. The early Church Fathers in both Latin and Greek translations saying "the Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son" is the the same thing with the "the Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son." How can the Son cannot be proceeded by the Holy Spirit if the Advocate Himself shall be sent through the Son? It means, the Father does not directly send the Holy Spirit to people but through the Son, therefore, the Holy Spirit is proceeding also from the Son before the Church. This is clear because the Son is the Baptizer of the Holy Spirit (John 5:19-20) and as He baptizes the believers with the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit Himself glorifies the Son as He also glorifies the Father (John 16:14). Moreover, the Council of Florence in the year July 6, 1439 and has been accepted the Filioque doctrine by the Greek Orthodox. The early Church Fathers also before the Great Schism have also believed and declared the Filioque Faith as the Church's Creed including the homilies, writings, and the councils. St. Cyril of Alexandria also confessed that "The Spirit proceeds (proeisi) from the Father and the Son; clearly, he is of the divine substance, proceeding (proion) substantially (ousiwdwV) in it and from it" (St Cyril of Alexandria, Thesaurus, PG 75, 585 A)." They know, indeed, that the Father is the sole Cause of the Son and of the Spirit, of one by generation and of the other by ekporeusiV - but they explained that the latter comes (proienai) through the Son, and they showed in this way the unity and the immutability of the essence" (Letter to Marinus of Cyprus, PG 91, 136 A-B). Hilary of Poitiers also confessed that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son (The Trinity 2:29, 357 AD, ibid., 12:56). Didymus the Blind also believed in Filioque (The Holy Spirit 37, 362 AD). Epiphanius of Salamis (The Man Well-Anchored 75, 374 AD). St. Basil the Great (The Holy Spirit 18:45, 375 AD and ibid., 18:47). Ambrose of Milan (The Holy Spirit 1:15:152, 381 AD). Gregory of Nyssa (Against Eunomius, 382 AD). The Athanasian Creed (Athanasian Creed, 400AD). St. Augustine of Hippo (The Trinity 5:14:15, ibid., 15:17:29, and the Homilies of John 99:8, 416 AD). Council of Toledo (First Council of Toledo, 400 AD). Fulgence of Ruspe (The Rule of Faith 53 and ibid., 54, 524 AD). John Damascene (The Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 8, 712 AD / ibid., 12, and Dialogue Against the Manicheans 5, 728 AD). Council of Nicea II (Profession of Faith, 787 AD). Lastly, the Eastern Orthodox Bishop Kallitos Ware, an aggressive critic and adamant opposer of the Filioque doctrine states, "The filioque controversy which has separated us for so many centuries is more than a mere technicality, but it is not insoluble. Qualifying the firm position taken when I wrote [my book] The Orthodox Church twenty years ago, I now believe, after further study, that the problem is more in the area of semantics and different emphases than in any basic doctrinal differences” (Diakonia, quoted from Elias Zoghby’s A Voice from the Byzantine East, 43 and Speech to a Symposium on the Trinity: Rose Hill College, Aiken, South Carolina, May, 1995). I strongly believe in Filioque that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as what the Catholic Church professes with the traditions of the early Church Fathers.
@@Gregori-mi2vy8nc6y
2. THE YEAR 381 WAS THE COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE.
The year 381 Creed you have mentioned was the Council of Constantinople of 381 mainly discusses the Nicene Creed. In the year 380 the emperors Gratian and Theodosius I decided to convoke this council to counter the Arians, and also to judge the case of Maximus the Cynic, bishop of Constantinople. The council met in May of the following year. One hundred and fifty bishops took part, all of them eastern Orthodox, since the Pneumatomachi party had left at the start. In fact, scholars find difficulties with the creed attributed to the council of Constantinople. Some say that the council composed a new creed. But no mention is made of this creed by ancient witnesses until the council of Chalcedon; and the council of Constantinople was said simply to have endorsed the faith of Nicaea, with a few additions on the holy Spirit to refute the Pneumatomachian heresy. Moreover, if the latter tradition is accepted, an explanation must be given of why the first two articles of the so-called Constantinopolitan creed differ considerably from the Nicene creed. No copy of the council’s doctrinal decisions, entitled tomos kai anathematismos engraphos (record of the tome and anathemas), has survived. So what is presented here is the synodical letter of the synod of Constantinople held in 382, which expounded these doctrinal decisions, as the fathers witness, in summary form: namely, along the lines defined by the council of Nicaea, the consubstantiality and coeternity of the three divine persons against the Sabellians, Anomoeans, Arians and Pneumatomachi, who thought that the divinity was divided into several natures; and the enanthropesis (taking of humanity) of the Word, against those who supposed that the Word had in no way taken a human soul. All these matters were in close agreement with the tome that Pope Damasus and a Roman council, held probably in 378, had sent to the East.
Generally, the Council of Constantinople in 381 was only to counter the heresies that believes Jesus was not Divine as the Father (Arianism and other heretical groups). Eastern Orthodox Churches who rejected the Filioque do not even defeated the Arian heresy, but rather those who believed that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son had led the Arianism to collapse. The adamant main debater and combater against Arianism heresy, St. Athanasius, believed in Filioque in which proves the Godship of the Son stating that the "Holy Spirit is from the Father and the Son" (The Creed of St. Athanasius). In addition to, the Filioque doctrine was the formula to counter the rise of Arianism in the early Christian times and that convinced the Roman emperors to dissolve the Arian beliefs which led him to defeat Arian heresy.
3. I AM JUDGING YOU BASED ON ENGLISH COMPREHENSION AND READING SKILLS YET YOU WERE READING THE ACTUAL DOCUMENTS WRITTEN.
Absolutely untrue at all.
Why should I judge you based on my English comprehension and reading skills? Yet, you actually read the documents written, therefore you are slamming yourself by telling me "I judged you based on reading skills?" You recognized my reading skills and you actually reading those documents, therefore, you only read it without applying skills and read it without understanding since reading skills should have reading comprehension. It's your words testifies that I was right and you were actually judging me of judging you over your Church.
@@Gregori-mi2vy8nc6y
4. DOCTRINAL CHANGES BETWEEN ORTHODOXY AND CATHOLICISM.
The Orthodox's dogmas are unchanging?
That's not true at all.
In fact, the Eastern Orthodox Church's dogmas are quite changed unlike the Catholic Church since they rejected several councils and the practices were not aligned and barely opposes the Nicaea II. The Catholic Dogmas actually remains unchanged because the Catholic Church still upholds it in other way. As you mentioned that the Catholic Church changes citing the elevation of the Chair of Peter is definitely the doctrines of the early Church Fathers. The Papal Infallibility was actually believed by the early Church Fathers and at the same time, misunderstood by our Orthodox brethren and Protestant friends. Let me cite St. Cyprian of Carthage in 251 AD, he was an Orthodox bishop who actually defended Catholicism against the schismatic Orthodox Church by saying,
"If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church? (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251])." St. Augustine of Hippo believed in the Authority of the Chair of Peter by saying, "Rome has spoken; the case is concluded." (Sermons 131, 10).
Since you are an Orthodox faithful who criticizes the Chair of the Peter, are you saying me that you are still part of the True Church according to the Orthodox Father, St. Cyprian of Carthage?
In this case, the Dogmas of the Catholic Church were remain unchanged at all unlike Orthodox Churches who rejected several writings of the Church Fathers in favor to heresy.
5. ST. GREGORY OF ROME ABOUT UNIVERSAL BISHOP.
According to him, "I say it without the least hesitation, whoever calls himself the universal bishop, or desires this title, is, by his pride, the precursor of Antichrist, because he thus attempts to raise himself above the others. The error into which he falls springs from pride equal to that of Antichrist; for as that Wicked One wished to be regarded as exalted above other men, like a god, so likewise whoever would be called sole bishop exalteth himself above others....You know it, my brother; hath not the venerable Council of Chalcedon conferred the honorary title of 'universal' upon the bishops of this Apostolic See [Rome], whereof I am, by God's will, the servant? And yet none of us hath permitted this title to be given to him; none hath assumed this bold title, lest by assuming a special distinction in the dignity of the episcopate, we should seem to refuse it to all the brethren."
You totally misunderstood it and strayed yourself from the truth about this issue just to accuse the Roman Catholic Church of claiming those. This statement from St. Gregory does not point out to the Pope of the Catholic Church since he was also a Pope who believed in the Chair of St. Peter. There was no single pope in the Church history claiming he was the Universal Bishop of the Church and the term "Universal Bishop" is actually a general term that never limits on the Catholic Church. In fact, he actually pointed out the certain Orthodox bishop who desires power over the empire and the Church in which the controversy within the Orthodox Church called as "Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople" who exalts himself above bishops in the Orthodox Church. Gregory protested vehemently against it in a long correspondence addressed first to John, then to the Emperor Maurice, the Empress Constantina, and others. He argues that "if one patriarch is called universal the title is thereby taken from the others" (Epp., V, xviii, ibid., 740) in which the idea has been usurped by the Orthodox bishops and is directly competed to the Chair of Peter which the West and East Churches recognized. Pope Leo IX writes to Michael Cærularius of Constantinople (in 1053): "How lamentable and detestable is the sacrilegious usurpation by which you everywhere boast yourself to be the Universal Patriarch" (op. cit., p. 182). No Catholic bishop since then has ever dared assume this title.
6. THE FIRST COUNCIL OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IN ACTS 15.
I think, you never read it that's why you are straying yourself believing that St. James was actually presided the council and there's none mentioned that James was the presider. In fact, Acts 15:7, the first one who stood before the council was Peter and not James, and Peter supposedly be the main presider of the council with respect to the Keys of Heaven given to Him by Jesus Christ (Matthew 16:18-19) while St. James seconded Peter after Paul and Barnabas testimonial conversion (Acts 15:13). It's the same phenomenon that St. Paul stood up first in the meeting before the public in Acts 13:16 and seconded by St. Barnabas in the verse 46. It concludes that you are misinterpreting the Bible and only seeks to prove the Truth of the leadership of St. Peter in the Church of Christ.
I feel like this grossly misrepresents Orthodoxy as someone who is a Catechumen of the EO Church. . . We do not worship Mary. We do not worship our Icons. There seems to be a huge misunderstanding that’s happening with the Catholics. Lord have mercy on them.
We never claimed you worshiped icons or Mary. Why would we ever claim that? That's what Protestants say about us. I think you grossly missed the point or misunderstood.
She apparently didn’t even watch the video but yet left a comment about nonsense. If she actually watched the video and did her homework she would see and know why Orthodox is incorrect. I’m ex Orthodox too. Once I kept studying much deeper for many years plus with Micheal’s help I saw through their teachings and claims. Plus all the early fathers and Saints (even their own Eastern ones), pointed to Rome as their head. It’s very obvious.
Do roman-catholics know that St.Peter established also the orthodox Church of Antioch.....?!!!
It's not an orthodox church. It was a Catholic Church in that day. The Orthodox did not exist. Ignatius of Antioch was a Catholic and so is Peter the first pope.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial Antioch is a Orthodox church till today like it was in the early times of christianity! 5 Churches existed and one splitt up. Quess who!!! Catholic=a greek word not latin and means universal nothing more nothing less. The One Apostolic, Catholic Church which the Apostles build exists till today and is known by people as Orthodox church. Orthodox= THE RIGHT GLORY-DOGMA. The terme ,,pope,, also not existed in the early time of the Church. There were patriarchs but no popes. Read the original text from this time and you will know who lies to you and who not! Your church is roman-catholic.... According to Christian tradition three patriarchates were established by the apostles as apostolic sees in the 1st century: Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria (recognized by the Council of Nicaea). Constantinople was added in the 4th century and Jerusalem in the 5th century. Together, these five were recognised as the pentarchy by the Council of Chalcedon in 451. // St. Peter was the first Apostle among equals!!! If you know what that means.....
😂 this! Guess u didn’t get the memo. 📋
Stop lying guys. Seriously we know you very well. None of us say what you claim we say or believe. Simply liars. Go and have a meaningful debate with Orthodox Kyle or Jay Dyer or someone knowledgeable instead of affirming eachothers blindness.
Orthodox apologists and evangelists are the worst. Bottom of the barrel. All you do is accuse people of lying but you can't actually refute our facts or give any of your own. And then you try to get other people to fight your battles for you. Seriously, if you don't have any knowledge, don't even comment. You need to be more open to God and truth. Only facts convince us, not your condemnations.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial it seems like an angry child wrote this. I’m calling you out because you blatantly lied about us. Be respectful and have some integrity. Open to God and the truth? Say that to yourself. Fight our battles? Are you serious? You want to argue with a random person instead of engaging with knowledgeable apologists? What a flop. May God enlighten you.
😂. As a former RC who became Orthodox you two are wrong on so many levels.
What Orthodox did you become? Greek, Russian, Coptic? All of which are out of communion with each other btw
You didn't even have the guts or honesty to watch the video. You're not being honest before God. Yoy say we got things wrong and yet can't even name one thing. We quotes Orthodx theologians, Councils, and documents, you literally quotes nothing.
@@WHEREYOSAFEAT thats a lie...... blatant nonesense
They simply are liars.
This video was so cringe for the Holy Spirit. I’ll tackle the elephant in the room. The hypocrisy here is that ‘Catholics’ believe their Roman Bishop has supremacy over Christ’s Church. Even worse, a Cardinal was dressed as “Barney” celebrating homosexuality. But Christianity is all about love and forgiveness. So, if you’re not striving for Apostolic reunification as a Christian, then you are not fulfilling the holy will of God, and are thus grieving the Spirit. ‘Catholicism’ was born out of Orthodoxy, just as Protestantism was birthed from ‘Catholicism’ to counter the heretical innovations of the Roman Church. Repent.
The reason this video was "cringe," is either because you couldn't handle the truth and ran away, which is why you didn't give any facts of the video to substantiate your claim, or you didn't watch it at all and are just giving shallow talking points without being informed. We will pray for you.
Even if a cardinal was dressed as Barney. So what? A Cardinal is not the Church. Judas did worse than that and he was a bishop and betrayed our Lord. What Judas did was evil, but that is not a reflection on the rest of the Apostles or the Church. You also ignore the disgusting things Orthodox bishops and priests have said and done.
Peter does have primacy over the whole church because he himself received uniquely the keys of the kingdom of heaven from Jesus himself, giving him a universal primacy in the Church.
Catholicism existed for 10 centuries before "Orthodoxy." The Orthodox broke away from the Catholic Church and the authority of the Pope in the 11th century. Read the earliest Christians. They were _all_ Catholic, not Orthodox. Not in a generic sense only but in a specifically Catholic sense.
The Orthodox came returned to the Catholic Church twice in history and submitted to the pope again only to break away again later. It never happened the other way showing they were the ones who broke away in the first place. Not to mention the Council of Florence when everyone came back, and then left again a decade later.
Plus, there's no one Orthodox church. They are nationalized churches that fight with each other and excommunicate each other and are going into schism with each other. Lets not even mention the fact that the Eastern Churches agreed with the Pope and then changed their teachings many centuries later.
The orthodox can't even agree on major heresies and doctrines and are still debating them, which stem back to the 5th century.
- Orthodox can't agree on the Filioque
- They also have major disagreement on the role of the first among equals. There's a schism going on right now in the orthodox churches, between three major sees, just on that doctrine alone.
- Rebaptism controversy going on. Many big Orthodox have called this scandalous.
- They had took 100 years to call a synod and a council. And it was an abomination and did absolutely nothing. Honestly, it's a joke.
- They debate about contraception which was a settled matter for 1900 years. Until the protestants broke from it. And now many orthodox also break from it. And it's a big disagreement within their churches.
These are major doctrines and Their church is torn in half right now with no way to fix it.
@@CatholicTruthOfficialHi friend, I have a question, why most of Romano Catholic Churches, at least where I am from (Spain) give only bread? While Jesus gave wine and bread?
EO has always struck me as an early "protest"; they use the term "orthodox" more as a marketing term. They claim to be more legitimate because they had limited themselves to the "first [7] councils", as well as rejecting the Catholic approach to faith via rationalism, etc (claiming that rationalism is worldly, ultimately leading to rejection of God). But.. the councils, kept as tradition by Papacy, IS a tradition lol (we just don't wait around for worldly emperors anymore)l. And rationalism is something I love very much, and it fulfills the hunger for Godly knowledge to supplement the mystical. I love Catholic philosophy and their involvement in education and sciences. I'm so glad I'm returning to finish RCIA.
Correction: "The seven ecumenical (sic) councils".
After the split of the Churches, the Orthodox Church also keeps the councils as tradition, but labels no council as "ecumenical" - not even their own ones.
If I were Catholic, I imagine I might be really hurt and offended if people said the type of baptism my priests performed wasn't good enough for them. The disagreement over baptism definitely sounds like a source of conflict between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church.
@@angelosophy It's my understanding that our Catholic brothers and sisters do believe that baptism of infants has spiritual benefits, but since I'm not actually Catholic, I can't really explain it.
Baptism regenerates the soul. The child is born again and ceases to belong to the enemy. We aren't hurt by orthodox silliness on the matter. But they're heretical notion is shocking.
Les protestants de mon village vont baptiser les confirmants par immersion dans l’eau du lac… polluée! Quel scandale pour moi, quel irrespect pour ce sacrement. Bon, nous savons que le baptême d’eau de Jean est mort avec lui ! Ils devront tous passer par le baptême du Christ, le baptême du St Esprit. L’eau de ce baptême n’est pas une simple eau, du lac ou de la rivière, elle contient les huiles Saintes, l’huile étant le vecteur de l’Esprit ! Ils devront aussi renoncer à Satan…. Un jour viendra pour eux aussi ? Je l’espère, maintenant ils ne recevront qu’un simili - baptême !
@@evangelion1962 Je crois que tu aurais mieux fait de te taire ! Tu ne connais rien du vrai baptême du Christ dans l’Esprit Saint ! Le baptême orthodoxe. Le baptême d’eau de Jean et mort avec lui! Relis les Actes des Apôtres. Les évangéliques sont enfoncés dans des œuvres de mort: la foi sans les œuvres est MORTE (St Jacques), le baptême d’eau de Jean mort avec lui et ainsi de suite ! Un peu de bon sens .
If what you’re saying is true, then surely Orthodox Christians wouldn’t be allowed to to commune in your churches. However, we all know that that’s not the case. The Bishop of Rome Offers full communion to orthodox Christians, then who are you to think you know better?
What do you mean? Its not a secret of history that they were excommunicated and left the Church, yet they share valid sacraments. While they are not in full communion with the Church, they have valid Sacraments through Apostolic Succession.
Here's what the Church says:
"The Eastern churches that are not in full communion with the Catholic Church celebrate the Eucharist with great love. These Churches, although separated from us, yet possess true sacraments, above all-by apostolic succession-the priesthood and the Eucharist, whereby they are still joined to us in closest intimacy.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial My apologies, brother. I mistakenly posted having read your episode description, which talked about heresies of the Orthodox Church. My point is that if the Orthodox Church was teaching heresy, why would the Pope allow Orthodox Christians to commune in RC churches without any kind of confession or rejection of said heresies or charismation?
So thank you for pushing back. I listened through the episode and realized your episode description was misleading, and didn't mention any heresies (with the possible exception of rebaptism--but again, if it's an actual heresy, then why would the 'Vicar of Christ' allow any Orthodox Christian to commune of the precious body and blood of our Lord without a recanting or rejection of said beliefs?). I also realized your arguments against the Orthodox fell into the kind of strawman arguments you accused Orthodox Christians of perpetrating.
As an Orthodox Christian, I will say that many of the online discourse by so-called Orthodox Christians is saddening. I suspect many of these armchair apologists were once Protestants themselves; the uncharitable and combative arguments they offer are not the types of things we'd normally hear in the Church. I will also say that there are legitimate concerns/arguments against the Church of Rome as it exists today, things that crept into the West way before Vatican II. But I'm confident that neither of us are willing to give on these matters, so I'll just leave it at that. May God be with you, I wish you the best.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial Apologies for the lack of clarity. Your episode description talks about the “heresies” of the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church does not commune heretics. When Christians from Rome wish to become joined to the Orthodox Church, they must renounce their beliefs in the heresies of Papal infallibility, the Philipque, and the Immaculate Conception. If Orthodox Christians are heretics, why are they not required to renounce their heretical beliefs to enter the Church of Rome?
I'm in between, but the "orthodox and the heterodoxy" podcast completely destroyed Catholicism. so, what's the true church?
And this three-part video series destroyed Orthodoxy, so-called. It always seems like destruction when you only listen to one side , and yet Jesus started the Catholic Church
@@CatholicTruthOfficial I'm really trying to look for the truth but so far, your videos haven't done that. orthodox and the heterodoxy podcast still beats your claims.
@@Usernamebreh Eastern Orthodoxy is purely and exclusively Byzantine. How could a single liturgical rite lay claim to be the one true church? That doesn't make any sense. They aren't even in communion with the rest of the Orthodox world like the Coptics, Armenians and Ethiopians, and they have difficulties even communing with each other. Furthermore, they are fiercely divided amongst ethnic and nationalist lines. If there is one true church shouldn't it be transcending these things?
@@gunshotlagoon922
The only link for Roman Orthodox is St. Peter.
But time doesn't exist for me. I require a church that isn't so weak to the stream of time. The Cosmos will inevitably erase every religion and every church.
So I wonder... What is the true Church of YHWH??? When all churches fall.
I know the history of Anceint Rome. They chose Christianity for obedience and control. Scripture has nothing to do with it.
Not catholique but roman catholique AKA papist. Buahahahaha. AKA heretics
There is not Catholic and Roman Catholic. There is only one Catholic and apostolic Church under the pope for 2000 years.
@CatholicTruthOfficial you wish buahahahaha you are heretic papist, church founded some 1K years ago. Roman catholique!!!!!! You left unity of 5 and now you are outcast. Just look how looks papist church these days? Has nothing to do with original church, statues, music instrumental, no fast, scandals, crimes ..... go faq yourself
@@CatholicTruthOfficial go ⛱️ in Jerusalem in the church of Jesus tomb and make Holly 🔥 buahahahaha. Never since you are heretic outcasts
@CatholicTruthOfficial you have no arguments. ⛱️!!!!
@CatholicTruthOfficial This ⛱️ has no arguments and erases my comments, buahahahaha
My big issue with Orthodox church is that it isn't universal.
wdym?
The "Roman Catholics" are neither Roman nor Catholic. Rather we could talk about Franks, or Latin or papal protestants.
Roman catholic is just Rite in the Church. There are 22 Rites all under the pope for 2000 years.
There's no one Orthodox church. They are nationalized churchrd that fight with each other and excommunicate each other and are going into schism with each other. Lets not even mention the fact that the Eastern Churches agreed with the Pope and then changed their teachings many centuries later.
Or we can talk about Ortho gypsies 😅
@@CatholicTruthOfficial Eastern Catholics refute this and you guys are in communion with many with different beliefs ua-cam.com/video/LrSU0afdDrs/v-deo.html
Papacy is a CORPORATION
Not at all. Divinely instituted.
You will know them by thier fruits why i became eastern Orthodox its such a shame u guys have to twist cannons so bad to claim rome is infallable
If you know them by their fruits, then you would be Catholic and not Orthodox since the Orthodox split away from the True Church of Jesus christ. They're only a thousand years old and not 2000 years old. Also their fruits are rotten in many ways.
Plus, there's no one "Orthodox church." They are nationalized churchrd that fight with each other and excommunicate each other and are going into schism with each other. Lets not even mention the fact that the Eastern Churches agreed with the Pope and then changed their teachings many centuries later.
The orthodox can't even agree on major heresies and doctrines and are still debating them, which stem back to the 5th century.
- Orthodox can't agree on the Filioque
- They also have major disagreement on the role of the first among equals. There's a schism going on right now in the orthodox churches, between three major sees, just on that doctrine alone.
- Rebaptism controversy going on. Many big Orthodox have called this scandolous.
- They took 100 years to call a synod and a Council. And it was an abomination and did absolutely nothing. Honestly, it's a joke.
- They debate about contraception was a settled matter for over 1900 years until the Protestants broke from that Tradition, and now many Orthodox are also breaking from that Tradition. It's a big disagreement within their churches.
These are major doctrines, and their church is torn in half right now with no way to fix it.
Rome wanted and created the schism to pursue political ambitions.
The filioque was rejected by saint Pope Leo III in 810AD when Charlemagne first tried to force it's addition to the Roman creed.
Leo III nailed two silver shields on the doors of his basilica with the unaltered text of the creed engraved in Greek and Latin followed by the sentence:
I, Leo, did this for the sake and love of the orthodox faith.
The following orthodox popes of Rome resisted to the Carolingian dynasty until the 8th ecumenical council of 880AD anathematized anyone who adds or remove anything to or from the creed.
This was validated by Saint Pope of Rome John VIII.
The filioque debate was closed back then.
Unfortunately saint pope John VIII was murdered with a war hammer in 882AD and later removed from the list of the popes on the forged pretext that he was a woman in drag, pope Joan. This defamation allowed the Roman schismatic Church to reject the 8th ecumenical council of 880.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial you sure u wanna compare problems or u want to stop while your ahead?
Orthodoxy leads to Russia and Putin. Protestantism leads to everywhere. Catholicism leads to the Kingdom of God on Earth and to Jesus the ONLY Lord, God and King of the Universe ie., Catholicism. No contradiction! Q.E.D.!!
Thousands of years ago..... the Creator authorized and sent Jesus Christ from heaven to earth to preach and teach the "Kingdom of God" and "Resurrection of the Dead" to imperfect, suffering, and dying human beings.
MOCKERS and HATERS of the CREATOR
Thousands of years and nothing has changed on planet Earth.... Imperfect, suffering, and dying Atheists, Evolutionists, and Satanists
still
mock and degrade the Creator as worthless, useless, lower, lesser, and far inferior than they are
and
trick and deceive their their own families and neighbors to mock and oppose the Creator's Sovereignty and believe their LIE and FALSE CLAIM that the Creator doesn't exist and even if existing is still cruel, merciless, unworthy and undeserving to be honored and respected as the True and Sovereign GOD
MOCKERS and HATERS of JESUS CHRIST
Thousands of years and nothing has changed on planet Earth.... Imperfect, suffering, and dying Catholics, Jehovah's Witnesses, SDAs, Mormons, Baptists, Methodists, Born Again Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and fanatics of all kinds of Religions in the world
still
mock and degrade Jesus Christ as worthless, useless, lower, lesser, and far inferior than they are
and
trick and deceive their own families and neighbors to mock and oppose the authority and teachings of Jesus Christ about the "Kingdom of God" and "Resurrection of the Dead" and believe instead their LIES and FALSE TEACHINGS about "Armageddon", "Trinity", "rapture", "heaven and hellfire", and "reincarnation"
The WORTH, VALUE, and IMPORTANCE of the LIVES and EXISTENCE on EARTH of LOWLY, ORDINARY, KIND, and RESPECTFUL PERSONS
Thousands of years and nothing has changed.... ETERNAL LIFE and existence on earth without sufferings, pains, griefs, sickness, and death as written in Revelation 21: 3, 4
is still
the loving, kind, and merciful Creator's favor and reward
NOT
for arrogant, cruel, merciless, offensive, rebellious, and deceitful persons on earth
but
ONLY for lowly, ordinary, kind, respectful, and submissive persons
who
willingly SUBMIT to the authority of his Christ and OBEY his teachings about the "Kingdom of God" and "Resurrection of the Dead" as written in Matthew 28: 18, Luke 4: 43, and John 11: 25, 26.
Thousands of years and nothing has changed.... the TRUTH remains
that all human beings will just become worthless and useless dusts on earth after their deaths just like the animals as written in Ecclesiastes 3: 19, 20 ; 9: 5, 6
but
loving, kind, and respectful worshippers of the Creator and followers of Jesus Christ who died recently and thousands of years ago will still not remain as worthless and useless dusts on earth forever,
instead,
in the Creator's right and proper time and as written in John 11: 25, 26,
Noah, Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Jacob, Job, Moses, Ruth, Naomi, King David, Daniel, Jesus Christ's followers, and many others will be gladly RESURRECTED back to life by Jesus Christ
so
they can all happily and abundantly live and exist on earth forever as submissive and obedient subjects of the "KINGDOM of GOD"
and
fully enjoy his and the Creator's eternal love, kindness, goodness, generosities, compassions, favors, and blessings for eternity under his loving and kind rulership, guidance, and protection as the Creator's Chosen King and Ruler of the heavens and the earth as written in Revelation 11: 15
where does ethiopia lead to? what about greece? kingdom is not earthly ....see right there false teaching out da gate....read the bible first then all other books after that....
So where does Greek Orthodox lead to? Not to Russia or Putin.
Catholic actually blasphemy the theophanies of the Bible saying they are some created forms .
Source: yourself.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial are the Theophanies of God In the OT God himself or some creatures?
Both. It depends on the passage. Nothing in Scripture can be a blanket statement for all things.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial so how can it be a theophany if it is not actually God Theophany is a greek word that means God shows himself
It’s not bad to be an orthodox. Just keep in mind that if you want the fullness of truth. Be a Roman Catholic
My issues with orthodox churches:
- as a Croatian, which "national" OC should I join? Serbian, Montenegrin, Macedonian, Greek, Russian, Ukrainian, Syrian, etc,..?
-which "national" OC went out to spread the Gospel around the world? For example now in Amazonas area, some small groups of "Indians" never heard of Jesus, which OC they should join? Russian, Greek, Serbian, etc ..?
-last but not least: divorce and remarriage in OC, absolut no-go for me
In case you're sincere, to answer your question:
1) Any one (canonical) of them 1a) You can enter all of them by baptism - you can receive holy orders in all of them - you can become a Saint in all of them 1b) You do not receive a distinct kind of grace in them that is Serbian, Romanian or Greek, it is the same everywhere 1c) Ultimately they are not "national" churches in the sense they include some and exclude others - When you hear "Russian" Orthodox Church it is the jurisdiction of 15 Countries, with some of them having nothing to do with Russia (like China and Japan). You will be under the Serbian Church that is canonical in Croatia and this absolutely doesn't mean you'll be a Serb (!!!) cause you don't have to abandon anything from your culture by joining it.
2) The Orthodox have evangelized from America (Innocent of Alaska) to Japan (Nicholas of Japan) and Australia. You can read their stories.
3) The Eastern Church has been teaching thus from at least 920 and the Tome of Union, the years of the united church - It has biblical precedent (Jesus saying that Moses allowed for divorce because people's hearts were hardened, if they were then why wouldn't they be now) and canonical (St. Basil's Canons). You are welcome of course to study all of these.
If you reject orthodoxy, reject it for what it is, not what misinformed or even dishonest people are telling you it is. The guy you see on the left in this video is one of them. The host at least seems honest.
@@sihtnaelkk2187 In regard to divorce, Matt 19:8-9, Jesus said "Because of the hardness of their hearts, Moses allowed divorce, but from the beginning it was not so. But I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery". The reason Moses allowed divorce is because men would kill their wives to be rid of them because they were unable to divorce them. Clearly, Jesus is saying divorce and remarriage is sin and not allowed, so you can't say that there is precedent for Jesus allowing divorce.
@@rsmith5244 My comment still stands. If hardened hearts were the case then, why aren't they now for remarriage to be allowed in economy? (and even so, second or third marriages are strictly penitential and not a sacrament in orthodoxy)
Peu importe, mais choisis une paroisse où on célèbre dans ta langue maternelle, à défaut en anglais, mais ici c’est rare ! Que le D’ Tout puissant te guide. Il y a aussi le Mt Athos où tu trouveras un moine parlant ta langue , à coup sûr !
@@bernardauberson7218 Jesi li uopće razumio o čemu se radi pajdo?
Eastern Orthodoxy is the original protestantism.
So, there are 5 Patriarchates. And one of them decides it is not cool to hang out with the others anymore. Guess who's the first protestant
@@pavelcrestin1 for real 🤣. I would ask him to consider which of the two created protestantism and who's theology protestantism is more similar *to*
What of the Assyrians and Coptics then?
gay blessers and quran kissers are not Christians
@@theinhumanguest They broke off Eastern Orthodox is the only true Orthodox
We can all.
Be united by denying ourselves, taking up our cross, and following after Jesus Christ. God is sovereign. The way we feel, what we think, and what we believe does not move god. God is the same yesterday today and tomorrow. God is unchanging. He is eternal and everlasting. Everything will pass away, but God and his love will always remain. If you're experiencing God working in your life, then I have one question for you. How are you responding to God?
I totally agree with you as I'm a cradle Catholic,but in this present era the present pope is listening too much to worldly philosophy and compromising with it by his ambiguous statements, documents.
For example in the FS document ,there's gravity towards blessing of adulterous heterosexua couples and LGBTQ couples. Those Bishops , priests and laities who are against it are not stupid seeing the outrageous meaning of perverted blessing nor they are ignorant our beloved English language.
Why this ambiguous parlances never occurred in John Paul nor Benedict eras?
JP and Benedict were not in the world during the time of the rainbow uprising. Pray for dear Pope Francis as he navigates the rough seas.
What are they supposed to do deny the child baptism? I sounds to me like you would deny the child baptism for the sins of its parents. Maybe im misunderstanding you
Any good video on different Catholic rite and how they are different? I only know the Latin/Roman rite.
Honestly, probably better to find written material.
With the exception of a very few, like Bryan; UA-cam doesn’t draw the best sources of information.
I’m Latin Rite, with the same desire to explore, but have found it difficult.
I’m not interested in moving East, but they have some incredibly valuable insights.
Protestants/Evangelicals, do not know what to do, when approached with Eastern Terminology, and understandings. Of what we both teach.
It completely throws them off their game.
This particular series of videos on the subject, by Bryan are excellent.
EWTN, has Light of the East, hosted by a Byzantine, and other knowledgeable Catholics.
Hope this helps.
Pax. ❤
@@paulgritter7957--- Concur on Light of the East. The best thing you can do, Paul, is to look for an Eastern Rite parish within an hour's drive or so and just go to liturgy there a few times! It's perfectly fine to catch one of the ushers and just say hey, I'm Roman Rite and want to worship with you guys today...
Not currently, but we hope to in the future.
Wow! This really helped me! I didn't know Orthodoxy was like this. I've had some run ins with orthodox people lately and I have to admit I stumbled a little bit over what they said. This makes everything sooooo much more clear. Thank you guys for posting and thank GOD for Your one true Catholic Church!
Our pleasure!
Heretic.
At the very least before you make your decision turn to the many protestant academics and read why they chose Orthodoxy over Roman Catholicism. For instance Father Paul Truenback, Jay Dryer and a host of many others who will explain to you why the Franks, and the Great Schism were caused by many changes to the original church after the first thousand years due to pride and vainglory as a result of Peter association with Rome and that he was leader amongst the disciples; however from the ecumenical councils all the bishops had equal authority until Rome's pride felt that not only did they want the position of authority, but eventually change many things with brand new RC innovations to suit their pride to wanting to be the head of the church
Like murdering many Orthodox who refused Papal infallibility and adding things like indulgences, where many people bought their salvation, to Augustine's insurance to making the blessed mother immaculate to justify our lord being born of a human, to undermining the holy spirit with changes to the original creed with the addition the filioque, to changing the eucharist, to the concept of original sin instead of ancestral sin, plus many, many more Innovations caused by RC pride.
May God help us all Christians to Unite according to His will. Let us pray for Christian Unity, the keys being Love and Humility.
Where the Mother Chuch is ,is where you will find Jesus in the Holy Eucharist real presence. You are missing the food for your soul.St. Michael the archangel Guard our soul. JESUS OF THE SACRED HEART ,Jesus of Divine Mercy , Jesus of the Precious Blood, have mercy on us .🙏 Be Bold Be Catholic.
I Was A Tier Two Latin Rite Roman Catholic Until 🎄 Day, Monday, December 25th, 2023, When I Officially Converted To Byzantine Rite Eastern Orthodoxy and Became A Member of The Tier One and Only, Holy, Eastern Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church ☦️ ⛪️ And I Thank God Almighty For The Great Escape From Apostate, Blasphemous, Heretical and Hetrodox Rome. AXIOS ☦️ 🕊 🕯 🙏 📿☦️⛪️‼️
So basically you left the Catholic Church for a schismatic church. Correction, for individual nationalized churches based on nationality and not on christ, that all contradict each other like Protestants and excommunicate each other. And they have no way of settling their disputes because they have no authority.
You have an incredibly emotional and non-intellectual conversion.
Would enjoy watching you talk with Hank Hanegraff (Bible Man). There is valid argument on both sides with non salvation issues. If I were a catholic, it would be hard to accept the infallibility of the current pope with his doctrines. All churches have issues due to the sinful nature of all men. In His Rest!
True, all have issues, but only one was started by Jesus. :)
I am orthodox and I’ve been trying to find videos of people talking about their conversion to Roman Catholicism from orthodoxy but can’t find many. The best I can find is these Catholic channels that criticize orthodoxy from their perspective.
The person in this video is a convert from the Orthodox faith. He was a Catholic who left the Catholic Church to become Orthodox and then came back to the Catholic Church. Also if you watch the full videos, they aren't criticisms, but rather, we are answering the criticisms of Orthodox against us.
Here is the conversion story: ua-cam.com/video/oCkxSgiF6D0/v-deo.htmlsi=KvjmoZfYsLmC6YSG
Also, if you would like to watch the two videos this man made with an open mind, it was presented very charitably.
Answering Orthodox (Part 1):
ua-cam.com/video/NQpK79qISwA/v-deo.htmlsi=YUXfofb8gm7z-WZ9
Answering Orthodox (Part 2):
ua-cam.com/video/RjAPNbTYwpM/v-deo.htmlsi=3VPN021P5Zv5NxdK
I am Catholic, and eastern orthodox do not baptize if you have already been baptized, my priest told me I can only get cristmated but there is one ONE baptism and I already received so.
We would agree with you and that's the ancient Church teaching. Maybe yours don't rebaptize, which is good, but many other Orthodox do. And that's the problem.
Ortho bro here. 6:27 Can someone cite this? Never heard of it. Also, if a bad pope doesn’t disprove the papacy, then a priest baptizing a boy with gay dads doesn’t disprove orthodoxy.
Agreed.
This is a clip of a much longer video on this topic. He gives examples of what you're looking for I believe in the longer video.
I don't remember if it's part 1 or part 2. Sorry
Answering Orthodox (Part 1):
ua-cam.com/video/NQpK79qISwA/v-deo.htmlsi=YUXfofb8gm7z-WZ9
Answering Orthodox (Part 2):
ua-cam.com/video/RjAPNbTYwpM/v-deo.htmlsi=3VPN021P5Zv5NxdK
6:20 we believe previous baptisms are valid and you don’t have to get rebaptized though?
Edit: read the nicene creed “one baptism for the remission of sins” that’s orthodoxy 101
Except that many Orthodox teach that you do need to be rebaptized hence the heresy and why many people are arguing about this in the Orthodox church. Even Scholars and Priests and high up people are saying you need to be rebaptized. Depends which Orthodox you're part of.
The first 2 minutes doesn’t even pertain to the true or falsity of orthodoxy.
Edit: kind of hypocritical how in the first 2 minutes they talk about how orthodoxy brings up basic “you worship Mary” arguments then IMMEDIATELY goes with the “orthodoxy is anti intellectual”
Much of it is anti-intellectual today especially online orthodoxy. They give Protestant arguments which really aren't good in the first place.
3:19 when did we fall out of agreement with the 7 ecumenical councils? We never have. In fact you are the one that ignores the 7th council and commit idolatry in church. I know it’s a basic argument but it’s true you use 3D images (condemned in the 7th council) icons are supposed to be pictures (2D)
You will see by the end of the console as we give several big things you've departed on
I left christianity 5 years ago… i visited bible studies and really dived into it until it i rejected it to be the truth at all
Sorry to hear that. We will pray for your conversion home.
3:12 you haven’t watched jay dyer he incredibly consistently uses Saints to refute arguments.
Yes, but not these. Michale Lofton refutes all of this more with sources in his book on Orthodoxy.
8 minutes in they still are cherry picking one in a million cases that don’t happen in a normal orthodox church.
Yes they do actually. Hence the comment.
All are believing in God is really believing Jesus, Jesus never created religion.
His religion is God love
Jesus started a teaching and preaching authoritative church built on the apostles and peter.
Gotta love the comments about the Orthodox can't even agree among themselves.....
Roman rite: Infant baptism, yes. Infant Chrismation, no. Infant Holy Eucharist, no.
Eastern Catholics: Infant baptism, yes. Infant Chrismation, yes. Infant Eucharist, yes.
We didn't say you disagreed with each other in everything, just many things and even heretical things. What you are saying the Roman Rite disagrees on is a discipline. Not a doctrine. Big difference.
@CatholicTruthOfficial I rewatched your video and failed to see where you mentioned anything having to do with heresy. Everything you spoke of has to do with discipline, thus my comment stands.
12:00 If I may play devil's advocate, Catholics (even though under one Pope) are ALSO all over the place. One priest will say something, and you go down the street to another parish and that priest will say something else. And I am not even talking about NO vs. TLM.
Such as….. never heard of that. But I did see it ALL the time in EO
@@zealousideal Really? I have one Church near my house who has a priest that is very liberal. And then in a nearby town, there is another priest who is super conservative. He doesn't allow girls to be altar servers, uses altar rails for communion, etc. You don't see inconstancies from one church to another?
I was baptized Orthodox a couple months ago. They were careful to ensure I had not already been baptized. I was taught that if you are already baptized in the name of the Trinity you will not be re-baptized.
I was also taught that we were sister churches and that your sacraments are valid. I love catholics, but I would not be throwing stones in the way you seem to be. None of the reasons you are giving are theological, but you are pointing out the human flaws in the Orthodox church’s structure. That is not an area where the Catholic church is solid or infallible, but I would never go around saying that it would be a bad idea to become Catholic because of that. If a non believer becomes catholic, I congratulate them and praise God. I do not say “you need to be Orthodox.” even if I have personal reservations about the Catholic church.
I’m ex orthodox and you missed the points. I’ve had the exact experiences they are talking about here and MANY I know. In fact it is a huge problem within orthodoxy and they know it and won’t fix it. Among endless other issues they have. I got sick and tired of the orthodox constantly demonizing Catholics literally every day I could go on and on with the endless issues, but I’m not here to do that especially to a new convert.
I wish you well. I believe we’re all brothers despite our semantics.
This is an apologetic channel by the way anyway, and both guys on here are Catholic apologists and that’s what their channels are here for. So that’s their job is to defend the Catholic faith and expose the heresies in other faiths.
But another thing that I like about Catholic Church is that we don’t badmouth and demonize the orthodox on a daily basis. in fact you never ever hear about it except for in these apologetic channels. And we used to not even talk about ortho at all. But it’s becoming more and more common now I think because the orthodox constantly badmouth us every day and there’s hundreds of their channels now doing it too. And w e are just defending our faith and setting the record straight finally.
But it’s not something we sit around doing. We don’t usually talk about them (especially at the parishes) like they do to us. I was in many Ortho parishes and jurisdictions and they all strangely had this chip on their shoulder about the Catholic Church for some wierd reason. I’ve not once seen or heard this in our faith and I’ve now been with several Catholic parishes. Infact usually I hear the opposite as overall, they respect the orthodox
@@zealousideal yeah, I still don’t think we should be doing it at all. I would tell that to any Orthodox video like this I see too, but I haven’t seen any. I believe you that there are some, though. Human nature is human nature. We should heed the dogma of our church, but why debate it like this at all? What good does it bring? People aren’t gonna watch this video and become more interested in knowing Christ.
ORTHODOXY AND CATHOLICISM ARE TWO DIFFERENT WORLDS YOU ARE FREE TO CHOOSE WHAT IS NEAR OF YOUR SOUL
But Jesus started the Catholic church. So that's the first choice.
Im a baptized and confirmed Lutheran, searching for truth. If the Catholic church is the only true church, someone refute me and I'll convert. I mean it.
Jesus said to Peter that the statement he made was the rock on which he would build his church. He never said "you", he said "this". Peter isn't an it, he's a he. HOWEVER, having said that, he did give Peter "the keys." The question is, can you define the keys without expressing them as specific powers and rights?
So, my question is, when he gave Peter "the keys", SPECIFICALLY what authority and powers did that entail?
I believe the answer is found in Matt 16:19, you know, when Christ tells peter he's giving him the keys, then defines what that entails.
NOW, 2 chapters later he sends the REST of the apostles to their respective churches. What powers and authorities did he give them? That's defined in Matt 18:18.
Please, compare the specifics of the powers and rights given to Peter in Matt 16:19, to that given to the other not-Peter apostles in Matt 18:18, and get back to me and refute me.
I retract my statement. I decided to do the research myself, and wound up refuting myself in the process. My protestantism has fallen apart in the past few weeks in all the research I've done. I'm attending RCIA in the fall
@@88BuckMeistergreat. I’m a retired pastor myself. And ex orthodox. Now happily catholic for many years. Despite with all the naysayers say you made the right choice!
5:44 your so called representative of God attended what pagan ritual?
Even if he did, doesn't disprove his authority. Peter did dumb things, still had authority.
Just for the record I am not a catholic but within a few seconds you are insulting your audience .how .You complain about having to address the same issues such as Mary and say that people are not listening..Tough.What about anyone who is listening for the first time !!! Buy
Not sure what you're even talking about. You sound triggered. Maybe you should be more open to truth, my friend, rather than emotionally reacting. Feel free to give one thing that we said that was factually incorrect.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial perhaps you should listen again specifically to the first couple of minutes of the video and ask yourself how that would sound to a non believer who was searching for answers and this was the first thing they heard !!!
I pray for the day when UA-camrs make videos based solely on the merits of their faith Community versus attacking other faith groups. I have no desire to attack Rome; why? I believe my faith group is able to stand alone without the need to attack others' religions. Can I make such videos? Of course!! I attended a Catholic University for an MA in Theology and am confident in my knowledge of Catholic teachings. But, I have no desire to attack you guys because these types of videos are not edifying to Christ Jesus. I am bewildered by the many "Why I am Catholic and not Orthodox/Why I am Orthodox and not Catholic" videos. I find that these types of videos produce pride on both sides.
It would be great if everyone took a breath and worked towards becoming Christ-like; being Christ-like does not necessarily mean that we should be passive in all matters; no, we should stand for the truth of the Ancient Catholic Church that is well and alive! I believe I am in the Church Christ established in 33AD, but I have many Catholic Friends who believe the same. No problem; we don't have to fight about who is right and who is wrong. Both groups have issues, some worse than others. Both Churches have clergy and Bishops who are going off the Apostolic script; as laity, we should not tolerate it.
I am truly perplexed that so many people are putting time into making videos attacking those who believe differently. This question should be asking, "Can my religious group stand alone without attacking those who believe differently?
May the Lord have mercy on us, sinners!
Nobody is attacking anyone here. If you watched our 2-hour presentation on the attacks from Orthodox on catholics, you will see that we are just defending our faith from Orthodox attacks, and we did it in the most charitable manner. Rather than being triggered why don't you listen with an open mind. And if you want to know why these are made, it's because of all the incessant and unending attacks by Orthodox on Catholics lately. It's never the other way around, but Orthodox are like Protestants who just attack the Catholic church with a vitriol.
@@CatholicTruthOfficial@CatholicTruthOfficial , thank you for the response; I am frustrated with the theology on UA-cam; trust me, I address Orthodox who attack Catholics; I have discovered that many of the Orthodox guys are recent converts to the faith. I do not blame you or anyone who defends their faith; one should defend what one believes, ἔσται μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν χάρις ἔλεος εἰρήνη παρὰ θεοῦ πατρὸς καὶ παρὰ Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐν ἀληθείᾳ καὶ ἀγάπῃ. May the grace and mercy of the Lord be with you!
Here in England the Orthodox Church is insignificant and I don’t personally know any members of it. All I know about Orthodoxy is what I see online, and it doesn’t impress. If someone makes a video about the 21 Coptic martyrs, pretty soon there will be an Eastern Orthodox comment to the effect that they were all heretics. Dreadful!
Ray comfort and living water a another video about you and catholic truth they are that it again
That's because they're threatened and they have a bone to pick. But we would recommend not watching their channel at all or giving them views.
Our Lord Jesus Christ founded his ONE and ONLY CATHOLIC CHURCH in 33A.D. along with the Apostles; Mt.16:18-19 In the year 107A.D, St. Ignatius of Antioch, (A DIRECT DISCIPLE OF ST. JOHN THE APOSTLE) used the Greek word; "KATOLICÓS" (UNIVERSAL) to describe the Catholic Church. In 313A.D. Emperor Constantine issued the the Edict of Milan which PROHIBITED the PERSECUTION of the Catholic Church...NOT THE ORTHODOX! In 380A.D, Emperor Theodosius OFICCIALLY DECLARED the Catholic Church as that of Rome...NOT THE ORTHODOX!
There were no Orthodox churches at the time of Constantine. Or Theodocius. Constantine legalized Christianity in general, the whole Catholic Church.
that is drunk history....lmao you got nothing correct....not one thing is factual....presh needed a good laff🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@terririchter2279 What is factual without a doubt is/are the over 70,000 False, Man Made, Reformed, Heretical, Protestant, Religions and Churches that started with Martin Luther, (Father of Protestantism) in 1520 and use his Adulterated Bible and NONE of them agree with each other! Those are Facts! And, the Main fact is, that Jesus Christ and the Apostles founded his One and ONLY Catholic Church in 33A.D.