This is exactly the problem with the Rad trad side. It was never a utopia in the church. We have always been in the end times

The church has always been under attack, and it has seen even worse times than this... however, the real issue plaguing the church today is that it can't identify its enemies and that it has been infiltrated by a homosexual cabal...

As a catholic, I agree. The Church has always been in conflict, even since her earliest days. It wasn’t that we were all 100% unified at one point and then suddenly things went south. I find that many radical Catholics oversimplify our history like this

What does that mean in practical terms, the "one true church"? Does that mean everybody outside of the church is going to hell regardless of what they do believe or not believe? If they are not going to hell, then what is saving them?

@@gideondavid30 the mercy of God

Totally agree. How anyone could be mean to Erick is beyond me. Such a class act.

@@bethanyann1060 It's because Orthodox are converting to Catholicism because of him

Exposing contradiction and lies spoken by Erik is not slander. Ubi Petrus has multiple videos on it.

@@diegobarragan4904 I’ve seen them slander him and assume bad intentions on his part. Also they make fun of his appearance.

@@bethanyann1060 Ybarra constantly patronizes Orthodox and dismisses those who disagree with him as uneducated… reeks of pride, but you don’t smell it.

do you mean the uncharitable characters or the uncharitable characters who try to foist off an uncharitable caricature of the great Erik Ibarra? The man has a mind like a steel trap. He can hold an idea clear in his mind in the face of a firestorm of hysterical baloney like none that I’ve ever seen. Thank you Erik for your steadfast and gentlemanly conduct.

A king? That's a podcast of catholic apologists not a great philosophers and church scholars debate.

@@paolody438 a very knowledgeable, humble Christian man, a king as much as we all are in Christ

true.

@@bloodoranges2631 Catholics claim Sunday is a holy day made by God. I will ask these questions again which NO ONE can answer. And I know you will NOT!!! Where in the Holy Bible does GOD say HE RESTED on the First day of Creation?--(to make the day special). Where in the Holy Bible does GOD say HE BLESSED the First day of the week ?--(to make the day special). Where in the Holy Bible does GOD say HE SANCTIFIED the First day of the week ?--(to make the day special). Where in the Holy Bible does GOD say HE NAMED the First day of the week ?--(to make the day special). Where in the Holy Bible does GOD say HE DECLARES the First day of the week as HIS HOLY DAY?--(to make the day special). FACTS: The ONLY DAY GOD RESTED on---7th day. The ONLY DAY GOD BLESSED---7th day. The ONLY DAY GOD SANCTIFIED---7th day. The ONLY DAY GOD named--7th day.-Sabbath -Isaiah 58:13 The ONLY DAY GOD DECLARES AS HIS HOLY DAY------7th day---Sabbath--Isaiah 58:13 .Quote the Holy Bible and prove me wrong!!! (When a law is once enacted by proper Authority, that law must remain in force until that same Authority repeals it; and the repeal must be as plainly stated as the original enactment." - anonymous) ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

Your comment is so wholesome. God bless you sister. Please continue to remain strong in your catholic faith 😇 🙏

You’re right on how Erick “represents the struggle so well.” He’s brilliant and can definitely stand with many of the “big name” Orthodox channels but Erick’s disposition is saintly. Honestly I’m convicted by how he comports himself. The wisdom throughout these videos is incredibly pastors for an “academic” like Ibarra! Much prayers to him!

qyote---he best way to get daily scripture and pray the rosary! --unquote I have read the Holy Bible many times looking for scripture that mentions praying to beads. Have not found it yet.Please--quote it from the Holy Bible. Also, many have told me that Mary prayed to beads--Again, have not read it in the Holy Bible.---

@@mitchellosmer1293 non sequitur.

​@@mitchellosmer1293Is kneeling and grasping your hands when in prayer in the Bible? It's not. God is fine with it either way, as long as we keep it humble and authentic. I mean sure, God is strict with worship/sacrifice, but never was He strict with prayer was he?

Why? These two were just spitting disinformation and straight out propaganda the entire time: 1. Rome never has any supremacy since there used to be five ancient patriarchies which were equal with eachother and only came together when they wanted to condemn someone... ironically they eventually condemned eachother. 2. Jesus never established the catholic church. He was never in rome. Probably peter was never in rome either. The tomb of peter was based on a hearsay. 3. The reason why catholicism is so widespread is because of imperialism. Spain and portugal were the largest imperial colonial power in the world in the 16th century and under the the banner "gospel, gold, and glory" they spread catholicism while killing and robbing the entire world. 4. There isnt any philosophical unitiy within the catholic church. So have leftist groups who believes in the liberation theology and lunatics from the opus dei, all calling themselves true catholics while condemning eachother.

@@misterprogressive8730 ahahaha go away, liar.

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oJygppWhmsvMcmQ.html

@mister progressive Let me ask you, what kind of church does Christ want to build? Where are what is the Church?

@@alphonsustheleast1537 was there any live chat ?

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oJygppWhmsvMcmQ.html

@@joshuamoore8278 the devil would win.

1:39:45 There was NO EAST and WEST, only the ONE SINGLE, Christian Roman Empire Led first by Rome, for a short while, then Constantinople. In the early centuries, THE WEST was also used to note, the language, of Latin, used mostly in the western part of the empire, and Greek language used mostly in THE EAST, or eastern part of the empire. IT WAS NEVER SPILT INTO TWO EMPIRES. Over centuries “Greekness” tended to eventually dominated over the whole empire. Greek influence was already part of the historical influence of the Roman civilisation from its conception, even well before it became an empire. Once Rome became a pagan empire, and later Christian, it became the capital of Christendom. This was only for a few centuries early on. For the over whelming majority of the longest running empire in world history, …the Christian Roman Empire, it was overwhelmingly Greek, and led by the capital of Christendom, Constantinople, which moved from Rome. Byzantine Empire, or Byzantium was NOT it’s name. It was the name of a very ancient pagan City, long gone, by the time Constantinople was built onto it. Because of its rich historical context, which included its geographical position, …made it the ideal position to build the jewel of Europe, and capital of Christendom, glittering Constantinople. On the flip side, there was no real “Holy “ Roman Empire, there was nothing “Holy” about it, nor was it the Roman Empire . There was only ever ONE ,…ROMAN EMPIRE, and it’s capital was first Rome, then Constantinople, it didn’t ever split in two, one led by Rome, and the other led by Constantinople, that is ridiculous.

Where there any live chat ?

I had the same experience of dreading the transition between High Anglican liturgy and the Roman Catholic Novus Ordo. In fact, it took me 30 years to overcome. I love the Tridentine Mass, and I'm blessed to attend a church with a magnificent Novus Ordo. But I still use my Book of Common Prayer from the Episcopal Church of my youth. It's such a beautiful collection of prayers.

@@MrFisherteach Catholics claim Sunday is a holy day made by God. I will ask these questions again which NO ONE can answer. And I know you will NOT!!! Where in the Holy Bible does GOD say HE RESTED on the First day of Creation?--(to make the day special). Where in the Holy Bible does GOD say HE BLESSED the First day of the week ?--(to make the day special). Where in the Holy Bible does GOD say HE SANCTIFIED the First day of the week ?--(to make the day special). Where in the Holy Bible does GOD say HE NAMED the First day of the week ?--(to make the day special). Where in the Holy Bible does GOD say HE DECLARES the First day of the week as HIS HOLY DAY?--(to make the day special). FACTS: The ONLY DAY GOD RESTED on---7th day. The ONLY DAY GOD BLESSED---7th day. The ONLY DAY GOD SANCTIFIED---7th day. The ONLY DAY GOD named--7th day.-Sabbath -Isaiah 58:13 The ONLY DAY GOD DECLARES AS HIS HOLY DAY------7th day---Sabbath--Isaiah 58:13 .Quote the Holy Bible and prove me wrong!!! (When a law is once enacted by proper Authority, that law must remain in force until that same Authority repeals it; and the repeal must be as plainly stated as the original enactment." - anonymous) ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

1:39:45 There was NO EAST and WEST, only the ONE SINGLE, Christian Roman Empire Led first by Rome, for a short while, then Constantinople. In the early centuries, THE WEST was also used to note, the language, of Latin, used mostly in the western part of the empire, and Greek language used mostly in THE EAST, or eastern part of the empire. IT WAS NEVER SPILT INTO TWO EMPIRES. Over centuries “Greekness” tended to eventually dominated over the whole empire. Greek influence was already part of the historical influence of the Roman civilisation from its conception, even well before it became an empire. Once Rome became a pagan empire, and later Christian, it became the capital of Christendom. This was only for a few centuries early on. For the over whelming majority of the longest running empire in world history, …the Christian Roman Empire, it was overwhelmingly Greek, and led by the capital of Christendom, Constantinople, which moved from Rome. Byzantine Empire, or Byzantium was NOT it’s name. It was the name of a very ancient pagan City, long gone, by the time Constantinople was built onto it. Because of its rich historical context, which included its geographical position, …made it the ideal position to build the jewel of Europe, and capital of Christendom, glittering Constantinople. On the flip side, there was no real “Holy “ Roman Empire, there was nothing “Holy” about it, nor was it the Roman Empire . There was only ever ONE ,…ROMAN EMPIRE, and it’s capital was first Rome, then Constantinople, it didn’t ever split in two, one led by Rome, and the other led by Constantinople, that is ridiculous.

Catholics claim Sunday is a holy day made by God. I will ask these questions again which NO ONE can answer. And I know you will NOT!!! Where in the Holy Bible does GOD say HE RESTED on the First day of Creation?--(to make the day special). Where in the Holy Bible does GOD say HE BLESSED the First day of the week ?--(to make the day special). Where in the Holy Bible does GOD say HE SANCTIFIED the First day of the week ?--(to make the day special). Where in the Holy Bible does GOD say HE NAMED the First day of the week ?--(to make the day special). Where in the Holy Bible does GOD say HE DECLARES the First day of the week as HIS HOLY DAY?--(to make the day special). FACTS: The ONLY DAY GOD RESTED on---7th day. The ONLY DAY GOD BLESSED---7th day. The ONLY DAY GOD SANCTIFIED---7th day. The ONLY DAY GOD named--7th day.-Sabbath -Isaiah 58:13 The ONLY DAY GOD DECLARES AS HIS HOLY DAY------7th day---Sabbath--Isaiah 58:13 .Quote the Holy Bible and prove me wrong!!! (When a law is once enacted by proper Authority, that law must remain in force until that same Authority repeals it; and the repeal must be as plainly stated as the original enactment." - anonymous) ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oJygppWhmsvMcmQ.html

That’s bs. The vernacular mass is the same mass wherever you go. I’ve been to mass in places where English and Spanish were not an option for me, and I was still able to follow along. It would not be a Catholic Church if the mass isn’t the same. Even if you go to 2 different churches and the mass is in English, it’s the same mass. It’s all one single mass being celebrated. You just want to hate on NO for no reason with no proof.

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/Y6qmqbRmvNbDqaM.html Or is it?

@@ntmn8444 I think what Ricardo meant is that It (the NO) is the same mass, but in different languages. The beauty of having one, universal liturgical language like Latin is that no matter where you go, you will always know what's going on and understand. Hence, Latin mass = I can go to India, Mexico, Germany, etc. and everywhere will be the same. Now if I go to a NO in any of those countries, yes, they will have the same form of the mass but the languages are all different and I won't understand. No unity. Every major world religion has a liturgical language, so it's always confused me why the Church abandoned hers entirely in order to pursue the vernacular. Muslims have Arabic, Hindus have Sanskrit, Jews have Hebrew... the Church had Latin but not anymore. You should try attending the Latin mass. My wife and I started attending over a year ago and have never looked back.

It was an icon of the Blessed Mother so?

@@t.d6379 no it is not. End of story.

@markeedeep 🤣🤣🤣 comical reply but okay suit yourself.

From what I hear phusis has multiple meanings

unfortunately, Christ poked all kinds of holes in that... he went counter to "perfect sense" and tradition maybe the Spirit is meant to be the leader and guide? the "streams" come from the Spirit?

Found his channel last week. It’s wonderful!

What is his channel?

Lol when I first read your comment I thought you said “pre-schism” music

@@bethanyann1060 I'm not that old!! 😄

@Daniel Smith I think he got it from Brian Zahnd who got it from someone else.

@Daniel Smith I actually interviewed Brian (as well as Brad) and I think he said something about it on there. Not 100% for sure though.

Totally agree Ryan (I prefer guitars but I love that we can turn up to the same mass as brother sand sister despite some differences in taste

Great point. It reminds me of the time I was looking into “Anglo-Catholicism” and happened upon a website of theirs that bragged about their liturgy being “more Catholic than the Catholics”. And then the next paragraph they were bragging about being accepting of homosexuality as a non-sinful lifestyle, women priests, etc. It was quite bizarre.

I'm sorry. It is "The Lost History of Christianity". I confused the two

@@Erick_Ybarra Thank you for clarifying. Your interview was great by the way.

Hi Michael Holwey, I touched upon this in my book on the Filioque which is available on Amazon. In short, the Filioque is seen in Fathers such as Ambrose, Augustine, Pope Leo, Pope Gregory the Great, Pope Leo III, and many other saints that are venerated as chief witnesses to the Apostolic faith by both Catholics and Orthodox. An Ecumenical Council as well as the Synodikon of Holy Orthodoxy include some of these names, making them premiere saints within the Orthodox faith. It would be extremely unfitting to have so many saints on the calendar who upheld "a heretical doctrine of the Filioque" for so many centuries. In the 19th century, the Orthodox were comparing the Filioque error to Arianism, and so the doctrine received a serious condemnation by the Orthodox Church. A condemnation which I don't think is fitting given their acceptance of these saints as fathers and doctors of Christ's body. John VIII never condemned the Filioque. Rome defended the Filioque doctrine ever since the beginning. What C'ple 879 condemned was any alterations or additions to the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed. However, such a rule is not inherent within the preaching of Jesus or the Apostles, and thus it does not make up the sacred deposit of faith. Consequently, it can be changed by the proper authority so long as the sacred deposit is thereby defended. Since the Filioque is biblical, patristic, and reasonable, the West added Filioque to the creed, and this does not contradict anything essential to Christianity even given the condemnatory decree of Cple 879. The Greeks accepted this twice at the Councils of Lyons 1274 and Florence 1439, though both of these Councils are rejected by the Eastern Orthodox. I would recommend looking into the writings on the filioque by an Orthodox scholar Peter Gilbert whose website (de unione ecclesiarum) is devoted to transmitting the ecumenical papers of John Bekkos, the Patriarch of Constantinople who was pro-union with Rome via Filioque.

@@Erick_Ybarra Thank you for your reply. I am trying to understand the western position on this as I feel there is confusion as to what "procession" really means. Are we talking about the spiration of the Holy Spirit in the Godhead before creation, or are we talking about the sending of the Holy Spirit into the world as part of salvation history, or both? As I understand it, these are two very different things and shouldn't be confused. I have been reading up on some of these western saints' writings on the Holy Spirit, and I can see what you mean. So far I've read Ambrose and a little bit of Augustine. Augustine's language is certainly very strong, but he admits his theology is speculative and is open to correction. In any case, I would be very careful to suggest that the filioque teaching was a part of the deposit of faith in the west. The deposit of faith, as you already mentioned, is what the Apostles themselves handed down. East and west received the same deposit from the Apostles. It doesn't seem fair to call some of these fathers' writings from the fourth century and later the deposit. Great saints, like Augustine, did their best to discourse on theology without the ability to collaborate with their eastern brothers so some of their writings do feel very speculative and open to criticism, however, its not something we can necessarily hold against the saints since no saint said and did everything perfectly. I would also ask if the filioque was a part of the deposit of faith in the west, why did the western fathers not push for it in the 2nd Ecumenical Council (Constantinople 1) where the Creed was finalized and agreed upon by both east and west? I apologize if you answer this question in your book. I hope to pick that up sometime in the near future. As you said yourself in the interview, this is a very complicated topic, so I really do appreciate your thoughts and insights on these matters. Thank you for your time.

​@@michaelholwey4611- The filioque was not added into the creed during the early councils because it was not an issue without the challenge of Arianism. The denial of Christ's divinity was the goad that called for a response affirming his place in the Trinity. Thus "filioque" asserted that wherever there is one person of the Godhead, there must be present the other two also. And as noted, the idea of filioque was not actually rejected in 879, but the arrogance of unilateral insertion of anthing into the creed without calling another ecumenical council. It was in effect a denial of the usurpation of authority, on the disputed grounds of "petrine" leadership supposedly bestowed by Jesus. Basically, they were saying, "You can't do that without asking us first." It was not the word itself which they rejected.

It’s called “Divine Worship Daily Office” but it’s hard to find because it was just recently updated. My parish sells them at their store, so if you happen to be close to an Ordinariate parish, you could try calling them to see if they have any.

@@bethanyann1060 thank you!

@@VACatholic You’re welcome 😊

Ew

@@mariorizkallah5383 ew بعينك

@@danielkakish lol bki aktar ya kafir

@@mariorizkallah5383 شو ما عندك كيبورد عربي على تليفونك يا مشرك