What Saint Justin Popovich says is so meaningful. Once I was looking at a Catholic video on UA-cam, and a believer commented: Our Holy Father would never do it... And I said to myself, how do you know what Jesus Christ would do? And then I suddenly realised that this person didn't mean the Lord by our Holy Father, but the Pope!!! Can this be Christian? God forbid 🙏✝️⛪❤️
I am so happy a small orthodox press in my native language brings out the first time ever this book by St. Justin in our language, I already ordered it, though I have the english book. Glory to God for all things!
The Pope and the subsequent horrors they enforced after the Schism are two big (though not the only) reasons I saw Orthodoxy as the historical catholic apostolic Church and not Roman Catholicism as I have left Protestantism. Even when Orthodoxy wasn't on my radar, and I kept bouncing back and forth between Catholicism and Protestantism, I could never fully commit to either because of the lack of Church Authority in Protestantism, and the obvious abuse of it in Catholicism after the Schism. Thank God for leading me home! I was doubting, but Christ led me to His Church. I knocked, and He certainly opened.
Eastern orthodoxy is definitely a false religion. If you want, I can prove that the first 7 ecumenical councils and the church fathers taught the Papacy, the Filioque, Divine Simplicity (not palamism) ...
@@the4gospelscommentaryYet they didn't. The books on this from Uncut Mountain Press disprove you completely. The RCC says we have valid Sacraments, so guess you're not RC.
On point. I consider myself so blessed and I am so grateful that my Lord called me and grafted me into His body: the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Praise Him and peace in Christ to all my Orthodox brothers and sisters.
Same here.. I don't understand how they understand the infallibility of the pope, but as i know is when the pope orders/teaching which of course by the church.. That's the infallible one.. But with the pope himself is not, we know that humans are sinners, even Peter was condemned by John for he's doing wrong, but it doesn't mean his teachings which is inline of the teaching of God is wrong..We can condemn priest, bishops and even pope who teach NOT the teaching of Jesus, we can condemn there wrong behaviour even the Pope... BUT when it comes to declaration of doctrines, dogmas and Saints by the Churches? THAT'S the infallible.. Catholics protect it with lives..from the Apostolic until present...💪💪 Glory to Father, Son and Holy Spirit..
@@LadyMaria Well, I, living around Orthodox people in Eastern Europe, having a degree in Theology and having Orthodox univeristy professors, have a different opinion. That almost got demolished by your rebuttal. But I held on. What an impasse.
@@szilardfineascovasa6144 Alleged degrees and allegedly having lived around Orthodox people do not equal knowing your subject. Your comment that I replied to is verbatim what low church Protestants say, and rather vague at that, so nothing new or worthy enough to merit a long drawn out reply. You merely stated a vague opinion yourself on an Orthodox forum that was informed by low church Protestant theology. (This szilord person has arrogance down well. Worship of self? Check!)
Amen y Amen. So glad my family left the heretical Roman Catholic church many years ago afone of ter my uncles questioned their heretical teachings and the priest showed his true colors by telling my uncle not to return. Praise God Jesus is on the throne and not the Pope. The Orthodox Church continues to teach the truth about Jesus. Praise God! 😊🙏☦️
The Greek inflection in pronouncing Ex Cathedra made me smile. On a more serious note, the problem (or at least, one of the problems) with papal infallibility is that the whole "it has been used only once" argument falls flat on its face when you consider that it was introduced in 1870. That's 150 years ago. That's not a long time. It could be used again, and while it's technically safeguarded by the magisterium, a particularly heretical Pope could find a loophole and introduce an antichristian heresy.
I understand what you mean but notice one detail: there is no such thing as an heretical pope. A pope that falls on formal and public heresy is no more a pope but an antipope. And it is possible for the college of cardinals to take measures to forcibly remove him. Yes im catholic and not excessively found of the infalibility dogma but all details must be tought of here. And yes im aware most orthodox think were a bunch of heretics anyway. I know it very well. As for my perspective the problem started at the Vatican II council that completely disfigured the Latin rite.
@@MrTzarBomb correct, I used the wrong term. Indeed it was *defined* in 1870. However it has been used only once to dogmatize the Immaculate Conception and Heavenly Assumption of Mary. Canonizations don't really require papal infallibility as such.
New to orthodoxy, after being reborn back in 2010 I went thru all types of doctrines.. starting w televangelists believe it or not, then Pentecostal doctrines, Calvinist doctrines, Protestantism etc etc.. Thru out the yrs the I gained more knowledge more wisdom and it lead me to orthodoxy.. it fits me.. I feel I’ve reached a final destination
You have indeed arrived, my dear friend. If you have not done so yet, I might recommend reading “Father Seraphim Rose: His Life and Works”. In it, you will find the chapter about advice to new converts. Also, try to get a copy of “Law of God” by Father Daniel Sysoev. But most importantly, in between these, never cease reading Holy Scripture, along with the fathers of the Church, most especially the early fathers; these are the men who interpreted biblical exegesis for us. These are the men who decided which books will appear in the biblical canon in the specific order that we know them. Anything that deviates from correct doctrine is not orthodox. The one thing that Protestants get wrong is that they lack the consensus of the faith, which is the church fathers as well as the seven ecumenical councils. Without these, not only is one totally unable to understand holy scripture, but they do not even have the authority to do so. Forgive me for throwing too much at you but also please be very careful of getting too immersed in cyberdoxy. Don’t get caught up in all the theological squabbling and debating on the internet. Stay out of that and concentrate on prayer. Pray to our Lord that He will send you a spiritual father to guide you in your catechesis. One of the reasons why there is so much scandal among the “cyberdox” types is that they lack spiritual counsel. They think they know everything and are addled to quarrelling with other Orthodox on the internet. Very, very bad for one’s spiritual health.
@@charlesmaximus9161if you are saved and I mean truly saved you don't need a bunch of boy lovers to tell you what is true doctrine and what is not.. All you need is a relationship with Jesus Christ.. Catholicism is a cult and not anything special.. I get so sick of Catholics quickly and proudly letting everyone know they are Catholic instead of claiming to be a CHRISTIAN... I am a southern baptist by denomination but above everything else I am a Christian
im really struggling. everyday im fearing for my salvation because i cant discern whether to be catholic of orthodox. im only 14, and i dont know what to do. i dont know what to believe, and im terrified of standing before the throne of God and finding out i did something wrong. i struggle with catholics claiming they're the same as they've always been, while also having Vatican I and II, and adding doctrines like the filioque and the Marian Dogmas. but i also struggle with the lack of a pope in the orthodox church, but Orthodox is looking really good right now. im so scared God isnt happy with me and that ill go to hell. i need help. prayers and advice are very welcome.
Truth is, God is not happy with anybody, all are under God's judgement and deserving of hell. But by God's mercy and love he sent his Son Jesus Christ to save the world from eternal judgement and sin, repent of your sins and have faith in him and you will be saved! This a promised For this is how God loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. (John 3:16) For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 3:23) Look at the Early Christians from the 1st and 2nd centuries, they didn't have a Pope or Multiple Ecumenical Councils all they have is a Bible and truly believed in Jesus, and they got saved! Open and Read your Bible! God bless you
@@ministeriosemmanuel638The Bible wasn't compiled until the 5th century, 6th in the East. Orthodox Christians (1st century) had some written Epistles they shared with one another but no Canon, and they used the Septuagint for OT. They relied on Holy Tradition guided by the Holy Spirit, which is also how Scriptures were found to be inspired and added to the Canon when it came time for a compilation. There was no Papacy, no, but there was from the time of Acts a synodal model for the Church which we see in the Ecumenical Councils and local synods.
The Catholic Church 16] Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” [17] Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. [18] And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. [19] I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”. Christ knows all things yes he gave authority to the other apostles but he singled out Peter. The Eastern Orthodox are not in communion with Peter.
@@donutsrgood4491 No, the truth of the Papal institution is said here on this channel, and thank goodness it is as the RCC suppressed the truth for so long. We're the Orthodox Catholic Church, so not anti-Catholic. Uh, yeah, I do know the history of the first millennium. No one said you lot believe in Sola Scriptura. If I had meant you lot, I would have said "Papal Protestant". You get it now? Goodbye.
Excellent presentation, thank you! Yes indeed, this infallibility heresy is a biggie. And unless I'm mistaken, it is a relatively recent innovation from Rome. Either 18th or 19th century I think.
@@orthodox1717what is the heresy from the 11th century is your perspective? The issue with the procession of the Holy Spirit? Yes, i do agree we shouldnt have changed that. On the other hand i do have an orthodox prayer book in my possession and did some research...the orthodox side changed other expressions in the creed. Are they on the same relevant conceptual level as the nature of the Holy Trinity? Maybe not, but i think both sides need to try to find what is the oldest and most accurate version of the creed. And yes, the infalibility dogma isnt so good but there must be an agreement on who is the Head of the Universal Church and who has the supreme authority should several Patriarchs enter into conflict. And Peter is the rock. All of this should be the subject of an honest theological dialogue between holy and knowledgeable men on both sides. I am also aware the liberal infiltration on the RC is excessive so this is unlikely to happen. But i still pray that God Allmighty will do something that will fix all of it in the future.
@@etcwhateverOrthodoxy never changed anything about the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed. What are you even talking about? The Filioque was never part of the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed. Period. The rock is St. Peter's confession of Christ.
Papal infallibility has put the Catholics in a paradox. Up until the schism, all Popes said that the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father. After they changed the creed and said it proceeds from the Father and Son. This means that the former Popes were wrong (according to Catholic doctrine). But how can they be wrong if they are infallible?
They have my Roman Catholic relatives believing this untruth! They just shrug it off not really understanding what they are talking about, and try to make me as the one in apostasy!!
“In the city of Rome the episcopal chair was given first to Peter, the chair in which Peter sat, the same who was head - that is why he is also called Cephas - of all the apostles, the one chair in which unity is maintained by all. Neither do the apostles proceed individually on their own, and anyone who would [presume to] set up another chair in opposition to that single chair would, by that very fact, be a schismatic and a sinner. . . .Recall, then, the origins of your chair, those of you who wish to claim for yourselves the title of holy Church” -St Opatatus 4th century Saint in both East and West.
This channels sole objective is to sow disunity between the East and West it's not spiritually healthy to hate. This channel does nothing but teach hate and slander about Western Christians.
Saying the pope is infallible in anything is Heresy we are man we are broken and flawed creatures. to say anyone of us who became pope could suddenly be perfect at reading and understanding the scripture is false and wrong. the only person who could have done that as a human died over 2 thousand years ago and his name was Jesus Christ. The first and last "human" who was infallible
And the Holy Spirit is infallible in the Church, for those who can discern His comfort and guidance, and it is He who we discern in the infallible consensus of the fathers and saints.
@@youngsandwich967Colm isn't the heretic. He's stating the Orthodox belief. We don't believe any man is infallible. The consensus he mentions is of the Holy Spirit.
Misunderstood. Pope commits errors because he is just a human according to Roman Catholic church but there is a part that makes him infallible only if he teach what jesus taught us and if he met certain conditions...I am sad for those who lives and fighting for a wrong understanding..
As a Protestant Christian who reads Deuterocanon (I love the Prayer of Manasseh btw)... You are absolutely correct. It's absolutely not in the Bible. Not in the Septuagint, not in the Vulgate. Nowhere.
I am trad catholic, near to be orthodox. And it is interesting to see that all catholics believe in traditional monarchy as the best system, however the fall of monarchy, the corruption of monarchy which lead to the modern democracies was ABSOLUTIST MONARCHS, that nobody could criticize, judge and who took absolute control and power over all their kingdoms. The fall of the spanish empire was as soon they had a new freemason dinasty called the Borbons who were french and "had the new ideas" of the revolution... The same is happening with the church of Rome, the "infalible, supreme, with no error" monarch which is the pope, is leading the church to it's end.
@patriceagulu8315The original Seat was Antioch, Alexandria and Rome together. Rome had primacy of honor being the Seat of the Emperor of the Ecumene too at the time. Rome left so no longer has any seat.
Were the prophets of the Old Testament merely inerrant in their writings or also infallible at the same time? And if they were only inerrant, were they inerrant at the time they wrote their verses, or did that come afterward? Because it would seem to me that when an OT prophet declares something to a king or nation, they're both inerrant in their writings and infallible in their declarations. And, if that's true, then the same could be said of the declarations of Peter, James, Paul, John, and Jude in the NT during their lifetime. And, if that's true, why can't this be repeated again with the pope?
*INFALLIBILITY EXPLAINED* _Bonus Material: Infallibility vs. Impeccability_ Quoting the Prophet Isaiah, Jesus said to Peter: “Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Mt 18:19, cf. Is 22:20-22) In saying this, Jesus guarantees that the Church’s definitive decisions would be backed up by the authority of heaven itself. So radical is this authority that He would also say of His Church, "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me." (Matt. 10:40; cf. Luke 10:16; 1 Tim. 3:15; Eph. 3:10; 4:11-15). Jesus cannot teach error; anyone who hears Jesus cannot hear error, and anyone who hears Jesus’ apostles cannot hear error. Thus the authority of the Church which speaks in the name of Jesus cannot err; it is an infallible authority, i.e., the authority of Christ himself. This infallible Church (and not the Bible) is “the pillar and foundation of the truth”. (cf. 1 Tim 3:15) *Infallibility vs. Impeccability* In Catholic theology, impeccability refers to the state of being without sin. Catholics do not ascribe impeccability to the Pope, recognizing that he, like all human beings, is capable of sin. Infallibility, according to Catholic doctrine, signifies that the Pope, under the protection of the Holy Spirit, is incapable of formally teaching error in matters of faith and morals when speaking ex cathedra, or officially from the seat of Peter, in the name of Jesus Christ. This divine protection ensures that the Pope cannot lead the faithful astray when making universal pronouncements on matters of doctrine. It's important to note that infallibility does not extend to the Pope's private opinions, even if expressed publicly or informally. The pope can be mistaken in his private opinions, public statements, or disciplinary decisions that do not meet the stringent requirements for an infallible definition. But when solemnly and formally defining a doctrine on faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, the pope is preserved from error by divine assistance. Individual "churches" - small "c" - which today would be considered dioceses in the Catholic Church had strengths and weaknesses. So what? The Catholic Church - as a whole - is protected by the same charism of infallibility. Individual bishops say and do stupid things, and individual parishes can get out of balance in one way or another, but the Church, the Bride of Christ, cannot.
Yes, infallibility of the pope is a heresy. Why ? because Jesus said he would send the comforter, which is the Holy Spirit who knows the will of God, because he is god, and that all of the bishops would know what to do because they would all come to the same conclusions being different people, but being led by the Holy Spirit. And by the way, if you don’t mean infallibility, then don’t use the word he is either infallible or he isn’t, and he isn’t.
@@MrTzarBomb- At the other end of the spectrum, it also matters what the demons have to say about the Papacy. What do the demons say; do the supporters of the Papacy know what the demons say?
@@kyrie_eleison33 talk about Lambo don’t you remember that Peter and Paul had an argument how could they have had an argument if one of them was infallible you defy logic and the gospel does not, but you keep believing your little fairytale we’ll see what happens on judgment day
@@kyrie_eleison33 you talk about lame well when Peter and Paul, after Jesus has risen, got into an argument, and Paula was right and Peter was wrong. I guess that infallibility thing was a mistake.? You have twisted logic and common sense to make this appear correct on the judgment day we will find out, won’t we? There is another scripture you should read. It says there is a way that seems right to a man, but the end is destruction.
I am a former monastic in Catholicism and my biggest problem with the notion of papal infallibility is that it was used to declare and dogmatically enshrined a blasphemy known as the immaculate conception. When something questionable bears bad fruit like this there is no doubt about its nature.
To be honest, the vast majority of Christians are not obsessing over doctrine. I'm “Catholic” and the vast majority of Catholics I know do not believe the doctrine down to a t, I hope it is the same for Orthodox... Because this is what separates us from the bible thumping evangelicals, Talmudists and Muslims.
@@kyrie_eleison33 How do you get it so wrong? To the Holy Apostles, Christ said, Matthew 18:18 Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Psalms 18:2 The LORD is my rock, my fortress and my deliverer; my God is my rock, in whom I take refuge, my shield and the horn of my salvation, No! The pope is not my Lord!
@@kyrie_eleison33 Mark 9:33 Then they came to Capernaum. While Jesus was in the house, He asked them, “What were you discussing on the way?” 34But they were silent, for on the way they had been arguing about which of them was the greatest. If the Holy Apostles understood it like you why would they be arguing? Why didn’t Christ confirm Apostle Peter? Why would there be a need of councils to settle issues? Why was Saint James the head of the council of Jerusalem? The gates of hell will not prevail, yet your pope kissed the abomination, the quran! My last question to you. WOULD YOU KISS A BOOK THAT DENIES CHRIST AS THE SON OF GOD???
There is no hope in the fallible pope. Yahshua Hamasiach is the only one who was, is and will be infallible. In Him we have our Hope. There is no comparison.
Then if the Popes have always been fallible then that means there is a chance that the final decision made regarding the chosen 27 New Testament Canon could be completely wrong, yet when you read your bible today, despite there being other manuscripts, you choose to only read from those chosen 27 that was finalized by Pope Damasus I in 382 A.D
At last, the Church that knows who it is. Not stone (RC) or wood (RefP), but earth (EO) from dirt we are to Christ we return. These were the base substances I thought the Lord showed me when I was searching for the true church (more the Lord drawing me than my dismal effort). Two from surface though one from underneath, yet both from the earth Christ created through the Father's command by the power of the Holy Spirit, the co-eternal Godhead. Even a dismal Protestant can clearly see that the pope, and to the other extreme, ourselves, have bypassed 1Tim2v5. One Mediator between God and man, Christ Jesus the man. Please, my non-Orthodox companions do the research, step down from the throne of your human reason and let Christ show you, or die in your personal interpretations and hear, "I never knew you. Depart from Me you worker of lawlessness". Don't be that guy or girl, let the Head be the head of the Body, His church.
@MajorMustang1117 not an easy decision to apply to the Western worldview. I tried to 'fake it til I make it' because I thought, "True so I must believe everything instantly". That just burnt me out, so I've had to take it slowly and submit to the truth of the church and allow God to adjust my intellect so that I understand what I believe. The big one for me is we use the same words but there are different meanings like, the difference between veneration and worship. I had no idea that my worship in the Protestant church was actually veneration. I now see Mary, the icons, the word of God, even Jesus Himself differently. I'm so grateful to the Lord for showing me, Satan stepping up his game caught me off guard but at least now I get to choose life or death. The Lord bless & keep you ☦️
You say that the idea of the Vicar of Christ banishes the God-Man, who only speaks in ecumenical councils.... but you can't hold such a council so who then has truly banished the God-Man?
Annulments are just divorce with amnesia. They were marriages but man's traditions with loopholes declared them not to have been marriages no matter the amount of time spent thinking they were married and the RCC treating them like they were including receiving their communion. All to say they've never been married so that they can marry. No, they're actually divorced. Plain and simple. Legalism has no place in the true Faith.
Hopefully this can be resolved and we can someday Merge both the Orthodox and the Catholic Church back together to a singular church. The true church of Christ
The Orthodox is already the true Church of Christ and always has been. It’s the One Holy Apostolic Catholic Church. Rome must rid itself of its many heresies and come out of schism and back into communion with the Church.
@@countryboyred their no way Rome is way to large while the Orthodox Church is tiny in comparison. It’s much easier for Eastern Orthodox to join into communion with Rome than the other way around. Orthodoxy is almost non existent in Latin America and Northern America
@@vman9347 arguments from numbers is a complete fallacy. Islam is bigger than Roman Catholicism, does that make Islam true because they have bigger numbers? No one is ever too “large” to come home to the truth. Our goal as Christians is to evangelize the whole world. Also why would the orthodox come into communion with a heretical and schismatic sect? For unity to happen Rome must repent of its many many heresies it has acquired since the schism.
@@LadyMaria it’s true though the Roman Catholic Church is enormous. While the eastern church not so much. I live in the east coast and u see Catholic Church in every corner. And i had to drive miles away to find 1 Orthodox Church. The original church always had a pope. And we’re the church that still has a pope so I would say we’re the original church and you split away not us.
Then Holy Scripture is fallible too, since no Man can teach infallible Truth by God speaking through him or his office! Jesus Christ built His Church on Peter the rock, way before the later development of the orthodox Church and their false teachings! Was Moses one of many equals, or his successors? Was King David one of many equals, or his successors? Did their God given authority diminish the authority of God? Absurd logic from Father Seers! Peter Heers's heresies and false teachings do not prevent me from praying for his soul as he journeys toward Truth! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true
Why do you compare the old covenant with the new? The prophets of old only were prophets of the Israelites. They were not of foreign nationality. The papacy looks nothing like its former self. The Orthodox Church was not a later development, for you can look at the linage and see the same teachings. Unfortunately you can’t say the same! Kissing the quran is one of many papist heresies. Would you kiss the quran??? I still await your answer!
@gritsteel3225 Why did Jesus Christ teach, "if you wish to enter into life, then keep the commandments "? Is that old Covenant as well, or still applicable? Best of luck to you! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink
@@matthewbroderick6287 Oh keep thy commandments??? You shall have no other gods before me. So what do you call quran kissing??? Would you kiss the quran??? Clearly your to embarrass to answer!
Im Catholic, here out of curiosity and trying to get a bigger picture of Christian denominations.. orthodox seem to me like they didn't even read or tired to understand what dogma teaches in depth, you judged book by it's covers, or the dogma by it's name ...
sorry but yous doesn't make sense, what do you think The Holy fatehrs did in their councils ? People far more educated than you and me. Saints amongst them saying one word only for the pope with one voice, ''Anathema''
@@cvrki7 Mary mother of jesus Christ was born with inherited original sin from Adam but she lived a sinless life but she did need the sacrifice of Christ otherwise like Catholics believe she wouldn't need jesus's sacrifice which is unbiblical
@@Haramjojo123 We orthodox don’t believe in original sin but that we’re born with the consequences of Adam’s sin which is corrupt nature. everything else you said was correct
@@kyrie_eleison33e believe in eternal hell (Gehenna, lake of fire). Universalism is heresy. The "immaculate conception" has never been a dogma nor a doctrine in the Church. The rest of what you wrote is unintelligible ranting.
@@Phantom-xp2cothere’s 68 saints in the Orthodox Church that were bishop of Rome. Unless you really think none believed in Papal infallibility, there’s a contradiction to this video calling it horrible and Protestantism. I don’t even think this guy is a real orthodox priest either
The scriptures and the ecumenical councils do not teach error. The fathers of the church in east and west had some sort of belief in the infallibility of the church. Is it really a de incarnational and humanistic principle to say that there is a special charism given to Peter that will help the church to stand the test of time but men who wrote the scriptures or who represented Christ’s truth at the councils are not humanistic or de-incarnational? Your arguments prove too much... they are based on Protestant principles that you are standing on which argue against your own tradition. Christ breathed His divinity into His church and she somehow shares in His divinity which includes teaching the truth, no? Then why this hyper reaction against a claim that this gift can at times be preserved and manifested through the office of Peter ? It could be true that it’s only through the whole body of Christ that this gift is preserved and manifested but you are way too over-reactive to the idea that it’s both the whole body of Christ and that this includes a special Petrine office which confirms the brethren.
Have you even read what St Justin even teaches about this issue? Nobody is questioning the infallibility of an ecumenical council or the church as a whole, but there is no such thing as an episcopus episcoporum who teaches infallibly. The Bishop of Rome historically was not above any other bishop but a patriarch who held a primatial role among the pentarchy, but he never held an infallible charism. The Church operates on a conciliar & synodal model, there was never a papal-monarchical system until much later, after the schism during the Gregorian Reforms which radically reshaped the Papacy.
The Pope isn't the Church. The Bishop of Rome was never the whole Church nor supreme leader. There is no special "charism". "First among equals" is an administrative role. Always has been. Our principles are what we've always believed. The Papacy went nuts toward the end of the first millennium and declared itself the Church.
We do. A few jurisdictions celebrate Christmas (or, as we call it, the Nativity of Christ) on Dec. 25th of the Gregorian calendar. The majority celebrate Christmas on Dec. 25th of the Julian calendar which is January 7th on the Gregorian calendar.
The crux of the matter is Jesus lied? He explicitly promised Peter that gates of hell (heresy) will not prevail against it. Nah.... Just a pipedream. Have faith in Christ and his words nd the holy spirit the supreme teacher who dwells in the Pope when he teaches
No, we don't. In eternity the Father is the Source, the Son is begotten, the Holy Spirit proceeds. No two share any of those unique facilities or it imbalances the Holy Trinity. Everything else is shared in common.
The Pope is Infallible in matters of Magisterial teaching Only. He's only so when speaking Ex Cathedra. Infallibility does Not imply he's right or correct in All matters
Was Moses one of many equals?🤔 Was King David one of many equals?🤔 Did their God given authority over all the people, diminish the authority of God?🤔 Such ridiculous Theology from this False teacher that Saint Paul warned us about! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink
False teacher😂🤣😂 How many qurans have you kissed lately? The pope is among equals with politicians! The Holy Gospel speaks of your type, wolves in sheep clothing 😳🤭
What Saint Justin Popovich says is so meaningful. Once I was looking at a Catholic video on UA-cam, and a believer commented: Our Holy Father would never do it... And I said to myself, how do you know what Jesus Christ would do? And then I suddenly realised that this person didn't mean the Lord by our Holy Father, but the Pope!!! Can this be Christian? God forbid 🙏✝️⛪❤️
And people say Orthodox are the idol worshippers...
@@wilder11 rule no 1, don't listen to what people say. It's what God says that matters
@@JosephLucienVanBelleghem not what I heard with my own ears though. The person said our holy father clearly meaning the pope
I am so happy a small orthodox press in my native language brings out the first time ever this book by St. Justin in our language, I already ordered it, though I have the english book.
Glory to God for all things!
The Pope and the subsequent horrors they enforced after the Schism are two big (though not the only) reasons I saw Orthodoxy as the historical catholic apostolic Church and not Roman Catholicism as I have left Protestantism.
Even when Orthodoxy wasn't on my radar, and I kept bouncing back and forth between Catholicism and Protestantism, I could never fully commit to either because of the lack of Church Authority in Protestantism, and the obvious abuse of it in Catholicism after the Schism.
Thank God for leading me home! I was doubting, but Christ led me to His Church. I knocked, and He certainly opened.
Heresy has infected the Church before.
@@MrTzarBombThe Holy Spirit purged it without a Papacy in the first millennium, and to this day in the Church.
@@LadyMaria
In the Holy Church ☦
Eastern orthodoxy is definitely a false religion. If you want, I can prove that the first 7 ecumenical councils and the church fathers taught the Papacy, the Filioque, Divine Simplicity (not palamism) ...
@@the4gospelscommentaryYet they didn't. The books on this from Uncut Mountain Press disprove you completely.
The RCC says we have valid Sacraments, so guess you're not RC.
On point. I consider myself so blessed and I am so grateful that my Lord called me and grafted me into His body: the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Praise Him and peace in Christ to all my Orthodox brothers and sisters.
Same here.. I don't understand how they understand the infallibility of the pope, but as i know is when the pope orders/teaching which of course by the church.. That's the infallible one.. But with the pope himself is not, we know that humans are sinners, even Peter was condemned by John for he's doing wrong, but it doesn't mean his teachings which is inline of the teaching of God is wrong..We can condemn priest, bishops and even pope who teach NOT the teaching of Jesus, we can condemn there wrong behaviour even the Pope... BUT when it comes to declaration of doctrines, dogmas and Saints by the Churches? THAT'S the infallible..
Catholics protect it with lives..from the Apostolic until present...💪💪 Glory to Father, Son and Holy Spirit..
Accretion, the same way the Orthodox added men's teachings to the original revelation from God, and put them on same standing.
@@szilardfineascovasa6144Nope, never happened.
@@LadyMaria
Well, I, living around Orthodox people in Eastern Europe, having a degree in Theology and having Orthodox univeristy professors, have a different opinion. That almost got demolished by your rebuttal. But I held on.
What an impasse.
@@szilardfineascovasa6144 Alleged degrees and allegedly having lived around Orthodox people do not equal knowing your subject. Your comment that I replied to is verbatim what low church Protestants say, and rather vague at that, so nothing new or worthy enough to merit a long drawn out reply.
You merely stated a vague opinion yourself on an Orthodox forum that was informed by low church Protestant theology.
(This szilord person has arrogance down well. Worship of self? Check!)
Amen y Amen. So glad my family left the heretical Roman Catholic church many years ago afone of ter my uncles questioned their heretical teachings and the priest showed his true colors by telling my uncle not to return. Praise God Jesus is on the throne and not the Pope. The Orthodox Church continues to teach the truth about Jesus. Praise God! 😊🙏☦️
The Greek inflection in pronouncing Ex Cathedra made me smile.
On a more serious note, the problem (or at least, one of the problems) with papal infallibility is that the whole "it has been used only once" argument falls flat on its face when you consider that it was introduced in 1870. That's 150 years ago. That's not a long time. It could be used again, and while it's technically safeguarded by the magisterium, a particularly heretical Pope could find a loophole and introduce an antichristian heresy.
I understand what you mean but notice one detail: there is no such thing as an heretical pope. A pope that falls on formal and public heresy is no more a pope but an antipope. And it is possible for the college of cardinals to take measures to forcibly remove him. Yes im catholic and not excessively found of the infalibility dogma but all details must be tought of here. And yes im aware most orthodox think were a bunch of heretics anyway. I know it very well. As for my perspective the problem started at the Vatican II council that completely disfigured the Latin rite.
It was defined in 1870s not introduced, and it has been used more than once.
@@MrTzarBomb correct, I used the wrong term. Indeed it was *defined* in 1870. However it has been used only once to dogmatize the Immaculate Conception and Heavenly Assumption of Mary. Canonizations don't really require papal infallibility as such.
@@GigiGhiba as conceived by Rome post Schism? Absolutely.
@@etcwhateverll Bishops of Rome in the last millennium are heterodox. Yes, the official stance is that the RCC is heterodox.
New to orthodoxy, after being reborn back in 2010 I went thru all types of doctrines.. starting w televangelists believe it or not, then Pentecostal doctrines, Calvinist doctrines, Protestantism etc etc.. Thru out the yrs the I gained more knowledge more wisdom and it lead me to orthodoxy.. it fits me.. I feel I’ve reached a final destination
You have indeed arrived, my dear friend. If you have not done so yet, I might recommend reading “Father Seraphim Rose: His Life and Works”. In it, you will find the chapter about advice to new converts. Also, try to get a copy of “Law of God” by Father Daniel Sysoev.
But most importantly, in between these, never cease reading Holy Scripture, along with the fathers of the Church, most especially the early fathers; these are the men who interpreted biblical exegesis for us. These are the men who decided which books will appear in the biblical canon in the specific order that we know them. Anything that deviates from correct doctrine is not orthodox. The one thing that Protestants get wrong is that they lack the consensus of the faith, which is the church fathers as well as the seven ecumenical councils. Without these, not only is one totally unable to understand holy scripture, but they do not even have the authority to do so.
Forgive me for throwing too much at you but also please be very careful of getting too immersed in cyberdoxy. Don’t get caught up in all the theological squabbling and debating on the internet. Stay out of that and concentrate on prayer. Pray to our Lord that He will send you a spiritual father to guide you in your catechesis. One of the reasons why there is so much scandal among the “cyberdox” types is that they lack spiritual counsel. They think they know everything and are addled to quarrelling with other Orthodox on the internet. Very, very bad for one’s spiritual health.
@@charlesmaximus9161if you are saved and I mean truly saved you don't need a bunch of boy lovers to tell you what is true doctrine and what is not.. All you need is a relationship with Jesus Christ.. Catholicism is a cult and not anything special.. I get so sick of Catholics quickly and proudly letting everyone know they are Catholic instead of claiming to be a CHRISTIAN... I am a southern baptist by denomination but above everything else I am a Christian
If he is capable of being wrong, then he can't be infallible, regardless of where he is talking from.
Amen! Agreed 100 percent!
im really struggling. everyday im fearing for my salvation because i cant discern whether to be catholic of orthodox. im only 14, and i dont know what to do. i dont know what to believe, and im terrified of standing before the throne of God and finding out i did something wrong. i struggle with catholics claiming they're the same as they've always been, while also having Vatican I and II, and adding doctrines like the filioque and the Marian Dogmas. but i also struggle with the lack of a pope in the orthodox church, but Orthodox is looking really good right now. im so scared God isnt happy with me and that ill go to hell. i need help. prayers and advice are very welcome.
Truth is, God is not happy with anybody, all are under God's judgement and deserving of hell. But by God's mercy and love he sent his Son Jesus Christ to save the world from eternal judgement and sin, repent of your sins and have faith in him and you will be saved! This a promised
For this is how God loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
(John 3:16)
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
(Romans 3:23)
Look at the Early Christians from the 1st and 2nd centuries, they didn't have a Pope or Multiple Ecumenical Councils all they have is a Bible and truly believed in Jesus, and they got saved!
Open and Read your Bible!
God bless you
@@ministeriosemmanuel638The Bible wasn't compiled until the 5th century, 6th in the East.
Orthodox Christians (1st century) had some written Epistles they shared with one another but no Canon, and they used the Septuagint for OT.
They relied on Holy Tradition guided by the Holy Spirit, which is also how Scriptures were found to be inspired and added to the Canon when it came time for a compilation.
There was no Papacy, no, but there was from the time of Acts a synodal model for the Church which we see in the Ecumenical Councils and local synods.
The Catholic Church
16] Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” [17] Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. [18] And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. [19] I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”. Christ knows all things yes he gave authority to the other apostles but he singled out Peter. The Eastern Orthodox are not in communion with Peter.
@@donutsrgood4491 My comment stands. Goodnight.
@@donutsrgood4491 No, the truth of the Papal institution is said here on this channel, and thank goodness it is as the RCC suppressed the truth for so long. We're the Orthodox Catholic Church, so not anti-Catholic.
Uh, yeah, I do know the history of the first millennium. No one said you lot believe in Sola Scriptura. If I had meant you lot, I would have said "Papal Protestant". You get it now? Goodbye.
Literally just sat down to read this and came across this video.
Excellent presentation, thank you!
Yes indeed, this infallibility heresy is a biggie. And unless I'm mistaken, it is a relatively recent innovation from Rome. Either 18th or 19th century I think.
Regardless, RC has been heresy ever since 1054. Not suggesting you're saying otherwise…..just commenting
@@orthodox1717what is the heresy from the 11th century is your perspective? The issue with the procession of the Holy Spirit? Yes, i do agree we shouldnt have changed that. On the other hand i do have an orthodox prayer book in my possession and did some research...the orthodox side changed other expressions in the creed. Are they on the same relevant conceptual level as the nature of the Holy Trinity? Maybe not, but i think both sides need to try to find what is the oldest and most accurate version of the creed. And yes, the infalibility dogma isnt so good but there must be an agreement on who is the Head of the Universal Church and who has the supreme authority should several Patriarchs enter into conflict. And Peter is the rock. All of this should be the subject of an honest theological dialogue between holy and knowledgeable men on both sides. I am also aware the liberal infiltration on the RC is excessive so this is unlikely to happen. But i still pray that God Allmighty will do something that will fix all of it in the future.
@@etcwhateverOrthodoxy never changed anything about the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed. What are you even talking about? The Filioque was never part of the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed. Period.
The rock is St. Peter's confession of Christ.
@@etcwhatever Can you elaborate on what your research said the Orthodox changed?
It's a heresy that leads to more heresies.
Thank you Father.
Papal infallibility has put the Catholics in a paradox. Up until the schism, all Popes said that the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father. After they changed the creed and said it proceeds from the Father and Son. This means that the former Popes were wrong (according to Catholic doctrine). But how can they be wrong if they are infallible?
Don't be a fool there what is called changes and evolution, adjustment to certain ages 😊
@@Megamindentertainment the Unchanging God CANNOT be changed, evolved, and adjusted by man or by anything.
The canon was closed in AD66. By claiming a pope is infallible with additional revelation, is to deny the canon was closed.
They have my Roman Catholic relatives believing this untruth! They just shrug it off not really understanding what they are talking about, and try to make me as the one in apostasy!!
Stay strong and don’t let the demons pull you away. I’m speaking to myself as well. God be with us.
“In the city of Rome the episcopal chair was given first to Peter, the chair in which Peter sat, the same who was head - that is why he is also called Cephas - of all the apostles, the one chair in which unity is maintained by all. Neither do the apostles proceed individually on their own, and anyone who would [presume to] set up another chair in opposition to that single chair would, by that very fact, be a schismatic and a sinner. . . .Recall, then, the origins of your chair, those of you who wish to claim for yourselves the title of holy Church” -St Opatatus 4th century Saint in both East and West.
This channels sole objective is to sow disunity between the East and West it's not spiritually healthy to hate. This channel does nothing but teach hate and slander about Western Christians.
Saying the pope is infallible in anything is Heresy we are man we are broken and flawed creatures. to say anyone of us who became pope could suddenly be perfect at reading and understanding the scripture is false and wrong. the only person who could have done that as a human died over 2 thousand years ago and his name was Jesus Christ. The first and last "human" who was infallible
And the Holy Spirit is infallible in the Church, for those who can discern His comfort and guidance, and it is He who we discern in the infallible consensus of the fathers and saints.
@@colmwhateveryoulike3240 Sounding like a Catholic to me heretic
@@youngsandwich967Colm isn't the heretic. He's stating the Orthodox belief. We don't believe any man is infallible. The consensus he mentions is of the Holy Spirit.
Misunderstood. Pope commits errors because he is just a human according to Roman Catholic church but there is a part that makes him infallible only if he teach what jesus taught us and if he met certain conditions...I am sad for those who lives and fighting for a wrong understanding..
@mikeson5519 disagree the catholics are just heretics
True and important words
As a Protestant Christian who reads Deuterocanon (I love the Prayer of Manasseh btw)...
You are absolutely correct. It's absolutely not in the Bible. Not in the Septuagint, not in the Vulgate. Nowhere.
I am trad catholic, near to be orthodox. And it is interesting to see that all catholics believe in traditional monarchy as the best system, however the fall of monarchy, the corruption of monarchy which lead to the modern democracies was ABSOLUTIST MONARCHS, that nobody could criticize, judge and who took absolute control and power over all their kingdoms. The fall of the spanish empire was as soon they had a new freemason dinasty called the Borbons who were french and "had the new ideas" of the revolution... The same is happening with the church of Rome, the "infalible, supreme, with no error" monarch which is the pope, is leading the church to it's end.
@patriceagulu8315The original Seat was Antioch, Alexandria and Rome together. Rome had primacy of honor being the Seat of the Emperor of the Ecumene too at the time. Rome left so no longer has any seat.
@@LadyMaria It was not just a primacy of honor. This is something that is routinely misrepresented by the Orthodox.
@@VelthurLausa It was just primacy of honor. It's not been misrepresented, no.
@@LadyMaria It wasn't. You're not talking to someone who is uninformed. You are entitled to your own opinion. Peace.
The Bourbons were masons? Wut?
Were the prophets of the Old Testament merely inerrant in their writings or also infallible at the same time? And if they were only inerrant, were they inerrant at the time they wrote their verses, or did that come afterward? Because it would seem to me that when an OT prophet declares something to a king or nation, they're both inerrant in their writings and infallible in their declarations. And, if that's true, then the same could be said of the declarations of Peter, James, Paul, John, and Jude in the NT during their lifetime. And, if that's true, why can't this be repeated again with the pope?
Thank you Fr. Peter. What is the chant at the end? I love it!
Axion Estin
A prayer (Hymn) for Our Lady the Theotokos (Mother of God) in english: "it is truly meet"
*INFALLIBILITY EXPLAINED*
_Bonus Material: Infallibility vs. Impeccability_
Quoting the Prophet Isaiah, Jesus said to Peter:
“Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Mt 18:19, cf. Is 22:20-22)
In saying this, Jesus guarantees that the Church’s definitive decisions would be backed up by the authority of heaven itself. So radical is this authority that He would also say of His Church,
"He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me." (Matt. 10:40; cf. Luke 10:16; 1 Tim. 3:15; Eph. 3:10; 4:11-15).
Jesus cannot teach error; anyone who hears Jesus cannot hear error, and anyone who hears Jesus’ apostles cannot hear error. Thus the authority of the Church which speaks in the name of Jesus cannot err; it is an infallible authority, i.e., the authority of Christ himself. This infallible Church (and not the Bible) is “the pillar and foundation of the truth”. (cf. 1 Tim 3:15)
*Infallibility vs. Impeccability*
In Catholic theology, impeccability refers to the state of being without sin. Catholics do not ascribe impeccability to the Pope, recognizing that he, like all human beings, is capable of sin.
Infallibility, according to Catholic doctrine, signifies that the Pope, under the protection of the Holy Spirit, is incapable of formally teaching error in matters of faith and morals when speaking ex cathedra, or officially from the seat of Peter, in the name of Jesus Christ. This divine protection ensures that the Pope cannot lead the faithful astray when making universal pronouncements on matters of doctrine. It's important to note that infallibility does not extend to the Pope's private opinions, even if expressed publicly or informally.
The pope can be mistaken in his private opinions, public statements, or disciplinary decisions that do not meet the stringent requirements for an infallible definition. But when solemnly and formally defining a doctrine on faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, the pope is preserved from error by divine assistance.
Individual "churches" - small "c" - which today would be considered dioceses in the Catholic Church had strengths and weaknesses. So what? The Catholic Church - as a whole - is protected by the same charism of infallibility. Individual bishops say and do stupid things, and individual parishes can get out of balance in one way or another, but the Church, the Bride of Christ, cannot.
Yes, infallibility of the pope is a heresy. Why ? because Jesus said he would send the comforter, which is the Holy Spirit who knows the will of God, because he is god, and that all of the bishops would know what to do because they would all come to the same conclusions being different people, but being led by the Holy Spirit. And by the way, if you don’t mean infallibility, then don’t use the word he is either infallible or he isn’t, and he isn’t.
The protection of the Church by the Holy Spirit is exactly what Papal Infallibility is talking about.
@@MrTzarBombAnd what's why the RCC is in the state it's in.
@@MrTzarBomb- At the other end of the spectrum, it also matters what the demons have to say about the Papacy. What do the demons say; do the supporters of the Papacy know what the demons say?
@@kyrie_eleison33 talk about Lambo don’t you remember that Peter and Paul had an argument how could they have had an argument if one of them was infallible you defy logic and the gospel does not, but you keep believing your little fairytale we’ll see what happens on judgment day
@@kyrie_eleison33 you talk about lame well when Peter and Paul, after Jesus has risen, got into an argument, and Paula was right and Peter was wrong. I guess that infallibility thing was a mistake.? You have twisted logic and common sense to make this appear correct on the judgment day we will find out, won’t we? There is another scripture you should read. It says there is a way that seems right to a man, but the end is destruction.
I am a former monastic in Catholicism and my biggest problem with the notion of papal infallibility is that it was used to declare and dogmatically enshrined a blasphemy known as the immaculate conception. When something questionable bears bad fruit like this there is no doubt about its nature.
You were never a monastic.
Papocaesarism is where the baptism of the Imperium - idols & all - stops short.
To be honest, the vast majority of Christians are not obsessing over doctrine. I'm “Catholic” and the vast majority of Catholics I know do not believe the doctrine down to a t, I hope it is the same for Orthodox... Because this is what separates us from the bible thumping evangelicals, Talmudists and Muslims.
Yeah bc masses are always lukewarm
Saint Matthew 18:18
Truly I tell you whatever you bind on Earth will be bound in Heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in Heaven.
Refers to the Church, not the Pope...
@@kyrie_eleison33
Did Christ say it to anyone else?
@@kyrie_eleison33
How do you get it so wrong?
To the Holy Apostles, Christ said,
Matthew 18:18
Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
Psalms 18:2
The LORD is my rock, my fortress and my deliverer; my God is my rock, in whom I take refuge, my shield and the horn of my salvation,
No! The pope is not my Lord!
@@kyrie_eleison33
Mark 9:33
Then they came to Capernaum. While Jesus was in the house, He asked them, “What were you discussing on the way?” 34But they were silent, for on the way they had been arguing about which of them was the greatest.
If the Holy Apostles understood it like you why would they be arguing?
Why didn’t Christ confirm Apostle Peter?
Why would there be a need of councils to settle issues?
Why was Saint James the head of the council of Jerusalem?
The gates of hell will not prevail, yet your pope kissed the abomination, the quran!
My last question to you.
WOULD YOU KISS A BOOK THAT DENIES CHRIST AS THE SON OF GOD???
@@kyrie_eleison33
You must be a dancer.
You’ve danced around every question.
This is great. Who is translating his dogmatics into English?
There is no hope in the fallible pope. Yahshua Hamasiach is the only one who was, is and will be infallible. In Him we have our Hope. There is no comparison.
Then if the Popes have always been fallible then that means there is a chance that the final decision made regarding the chosen 27 New Testament Canon could be completely wrong, yet when you read your bible today, despite there being other manuscripts, you choose to only read from those chosen 27 that was finalized by Pope Damasus I in 382 A.D
Can you tell me on who's authority he was "canonized"?
Father bless!
Will this book be accessible through Uncut Mountain Press?
In Christ.
Where can I get St. Eustine's book at?
At last, the Church that knows who it is. Not stone (RC) or wood (RefP), but earth (EO) from dirt we are to Christ we return.
These were the base substances I thought the Lord showed me when I was searching for the true church (more the Lord drawing me than my dismal effort). Two from surface though one from underneath, yet both from the earth Christ created through the Father's command by the power of the Holy Spirit, the co-eternal Godhead. Even a dismal Protestant can clearly see that the pope, and to the other extreme, ourselves, have bypassed 1Tim2v5. One Mediator between God and man, Christ Jesus the man. Please, my non-Orthodox companions do the research, step down from the throne of your human reason and let Christ show you, or die in your personal interpretations and hear, "I never knew you. Depart from Me you worker of lawlessness". Don't be that guy or girl, let the Head be the head of the Body, His church.
You beautifully explained why I left my Protestant church. Thank you for that.
@MajorMustang1117 not an easy decision to apply to the Western worldview. I tried to 'fake it til I make it' because I thought, "True so I must believe everything instantly". That just burnt me out, so I've had to take it slowly and submit to the truth of the church and allow God to adjust my intellect so that I understand what I believe. The big one for me is we use the same words but there are different meanings like, the difference between veneration and worship. I had no idea that my worship in the Protestant church was actually veneration. I now see Mary, the icons, the word of God, even Jesus Himself differently. I'm so grateful to the Lord for showing me, Satan stepping up his game caught me off guard but at least now I get to choose life or death. The Lord bless & keep you ☦️
You say that the idea of the Vicar of Christ banishes the God-Man, who only speaks in ecumenical councils.... but you can't hold such a council so who then has truly banished the God-Man?
The church hasn't faced any major apostasy or heresy for 1000 years. Maybe the old calendarists, but it's such a small group and only quite recent.
So we'll have to wait for an apostocy?
that so many remarried exCatholics with no annulment are receiving valid Eucharist is a very sad reality… very sad
Annulments are just divorce with amnesia. They were marriages but man's traditions with loopholes declared them not to have been marriages no matter the amount of time spent thinking they were married and the RCC treating them like they were including receiving their communion. All to say they've never been married so that they can marry.
No, they're actually divorced. Plain and simple. Legalism has no place in the true Faith.
Hopefully this can be resolved and we can someday Merge both the Orthodox and the Catholic Church back together to a singular church.
The true church of Christ
The Orthodox is already the true Church of Christ and always has been. It’s the One Holy Apostolic Catholic Church. Rome must rid itself of its many heresies and come out of schism and back into communion with the Church.
@@countryboyred their no way Rome is way to large while the Orthodox Church is tiny in comparison. It’s much easier for Eastern Orthodox to join into communion with Rome than the other way around.
Orthodoxy is almost non existent in Latin America and Northern America
@@vman9347 arguments from numbers is a complete fallacy. Islam is bigger than Roman Catholicism, does that make Islam true because they have bigger numbers? No one is ever too “large” to come home to the truth. Our goal as Christians is to evangelize the whole world. Also why would the orthodox come into communion with a heretical and schismatic sect? For unity to happen Rome must repent of its many many heresies it has acquired since the schism.
@@vman9347Rome was one of our churches once so can come back into communion with repentance.
Also, numbers fallacy.
@@LadyMaria it’s true though the Roman Catholic Church is enormous. While the eastern church not so much. I live in the east coast and u see Catholic Church in every corner. And i had to drive miles away to find 1 Orthodox Church.
The original church always had a pope. And we’re the church that still has a pope so I would say we’re the original church and you split away not us.
Then Holy Scripture is fallible too, since no Man can teach infallible Truth by God speaking through him or his office! Jesus Christ built His Church on Peter the rock, way before the later development of the orthodox Church and their false teachings! Was Moses one of many equals, or his successors? Was King David one of many equals, or his successors? Did their God given authority diminish the authority of God? Absurd logic from Father Seers! Peter Heers's heresies and false teachings do not prevent me from praying for his soul as he journeys toward Truth! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true
Spot on..
Michael lofton rebutted this joke Pete on reason and theology today
If you really think the Bible is fallible then, congratulations, you've achieved common ground with Islam.
Why do you compare the old covenant with the new?
The prophets of old only were prophets of the Israelites. They were not of foreign nationality.
The papacy looks nothing like its former self.
The Orthodox Church was not a later development, for you can look at the linage and see the same teachings. Unfortunately you can’t say the same!
Kissing the quran is one of many papist heresies.
Would you kiss the quran???
I still await your answer!
@gritsteel3225 Why did Jesus Christ teach, "if you wish to enter into life, then keep the commandments "? Is that old Covenant as well, or still applicable? Best of luck to you! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink
@@matthewbroderick6287
Oh keep thy commandments???
You shall have no other gods before me.
So what do you call quran kissing???
Would you kiss the quran???
Clearly your to embarrass to answer!
Im Catholic, here out of curiosity and trying to get a bigger picture of Christian denominations.. orthodox seem to me like they didn't even read or tired to understand what dogma teaches in depth, you judged book by it's covers, or the dogma by it's name ...
sorry but yous doesn't make sense, what do you think The Holy fatehrs did in their councils ? People far more educated than you and me.
Saints amongst them saying one word only for the pope with one voice, ''Anathema''
Did Mary, the Mother of Christ, ever sin?
Only Christ was sinless to my understanding
@@cvrki7 Mary mother of jesus Christ was born with inherited original sin from Adam but she lived a sinless life but she did need the sacrifice of Christ otherwise like Catholics believe she wouldn't need jesus's sacrifice which is unbiblical
@@Haramjojo123 We orthodox don’t believe in original sin but that we’re born with the consequences of Adam’s sin which is corrupt nature. everything else you said was correct
@@cvrki7 oh okay thank you
Who was St Peter?
eh... might be a stretch to be the "ultimate heresy" theres probably greater heresies than this
This isn’t papal infallibility. Papal infallibility is a protection of the Church from being bound to heresy.
Not a positive power of the Pope.
Yet it hasn't protected the RCC from heresy.
@@kyrie_eleison33e believe in eternal hell (Gehenna, lake of fire). Universalism is heresy. The "immaculate conception" has never been a dogma nor a doctrine in the Church. The rest of what you wrote is unintelligible ranting.
So well ignore Constantinople III and Nicea II letters from the pope which the eastern bishops agreed with
No one ignored anything, it's just not how you're portraying it. There's much information on this channel to refute you, also books, etc.
68 Eastern Orthodox saints were the Bishop of Rome. You sure not one believed in Papal infallibility?
Yes, since this doctrine defined dogmatically just at the First Vatican Council of 1869-1870.
The personal beliefs of the Pope are not a matter of doctrine in orthodoxy.
You need a council for that
@@Phantom-xp2co stick to the topic. The video claims not one believed in papal infallibility in the first millennium. It’s false.
@@CPATuttle you can claim you are the Pope for all we care, it doesn't mean thah you are actually the Pope.
Or infallibile
@@Phantom-xp2cothere’s 68 saints in the Orthodox Church that were bishop of Rome. Unless you really think none believed in Papal infallibility, there’s a contradiction to this video calling it horrible and Protestantism. I don’t even think this guy is a real orthodox priest either
Hey i resemble that remark: Catholic
The scriptures and the ecumenical councils do not teach error. The fathers of the church in east and west had some sort of belief in the infallibility of the church. Is it really a de incarnational and humanistic principle to say that there is a special charism given to Peter that will help the church to stand the test of time but men who wrote the scriptures or who represented Christ’s truth at the councils are not humanistic or de-incarnational? Your arguments prove too much... they are based on Protestant principles that you are standing on which argue against your own tradition. Christ breathed His divinity into His church and she somehow shares in His divinity which includes teaching the truth, no? Then why this hyper reaction against a claim that this gift can at times be preserved and manifested through the office of Peter ? It could be true that it’s only through the whole body of Christ that this gift is preserved and manifested but you are way too over-reactive to the idea that it’s both the whole body of Christ and that this includes a special Petrine office which confirms the brethren.
Have you even read what St Justin even teaches about this issue? Nobody is questioning the infallibility of an ecumenical council or the church as a whole, but there is no such thing as an episcopus episcoporum who teaches infallibly. The Bishop of Rome historically was not above any other bishop but a patriarch who held a primatial role among the pentarchy, but he never held an infallible charism. The Church operates on a conciliar & synodal model, there was never a papal-monarchical system until much later, after the schism during the Gregorian Reforms which radically reshaped the Papacy.
Could you pls elaborate what you said about being based upon “Protestant principles?” Thank you
The Pope isn't the Church. The Bishop of Rome was never the whole Church nor supreme leader. There is no special "charism". "First among equals" is an administrative role. Always has been. Our principles are what we've always believed. The Papacy went nuts toward the end of the first millennium and declared itself the Church.
Orthodox don't celebrate Christmas on December 25 .
We do. A few jurisdictions celebrate Christmas (or, as we call it, the Nativity of Christ) on Dec. 25th of the Gregorian calendar. The majority celebrate Christmas on Dec. 25th of the Julian calendar which is January 7th on the Gregorian calendar.
Jesus is infallible, when the Pope speaks ex cathdedra he is infallible. Jesus said to the early Church "He who hears you hears Me".
No man is infallible.
the pope is an apostate
The crux of the matter is Jesus lied? He explicitly promised Peter that gates of hell (heresy) will not prevail against it. Nah.... Just a pipedream. Have faith in Christ and his words nd the holy spirit the supreme teacher who dwells in the Pope when he teaches
The gates haven't prevailed. No matter what the Orthodox Church is still here. The Papacy is not of God.
Orthodox don't believe Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.
No, we don't. In eternity the Father is the Source, the Son is begotten, the Holy Spirit proceeds. No two share any of those unique facilities or it imbalances the Holy Trinity. Everything else is shared in common.
The Pope is Infallible in matters of Magisterial teaching Only.
He's only so when speaking Ex Cathedra.
Infallibility does Not imply he's right or correct in All matters
At this point aren't you just moving the goal post.
That’s literally the definition of infallible.
@@JHolifayThat's the point of the comment, to define it. But, no man is infallible.
Was Moses one of many equals?🤔 Was King David one of many equals?🤔 Did their God given authority over all the people, diminish the authority of God?🤔 Such ridiculous Theology from this False teacher that Saint Paul warned us about! Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink
False teacher😂🤣😂
How many qurans have you kissed lately?
The pope is among equals with politicians!
The Holy Gospel speaks of your type, wolves in sheep clothing 😳🤭