The Core Causes of the Catholic/Orthodox Schism (w/ Erick Ybarra)
Рет қаралды 10,733
Күн бұрынThis video is sponsored by Faithful Counseling. For 10% off your first month, use the link, www.faithfulcounseling.com/gos...
The somewhat ironically titled "Great Schism" is one of the great tragedies of the Christian Church, resulting in one of the largest and most long-lasting divisions the Church has ever endured. The mutual excommunications between the bishop of Rome and the bishop of Constantinople in 1054 did not happen overnight. Tensions had grown to a boiling point, and in this video, Erick Ybarra joins me to help walk us through what some of the key reasons behind the great schism were. In doing so, my hope is that it will help you understand some of the deep seated divisions between Catholics and Orthodox, and maybe, just maybe, help heal old wounds. Specifically, we look at four contributing factors to the schism: leavened vs. unleavened bread, the insertion of the filioque, the theology of the filioque, and the jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome. These issues continue to divide Orthodox and Catholics, so if you're like me, trying to sort through these divisions, I think this video will be of great help to you.
Get Erick's Book on the Lord's Supper: amzn.to/3pgJv5l
Sign up for Christ Centered Capital and your first month free by using the promo code "C3AUSTIN": christcenteredcapital.com/
Support Gospel Simplicity:
Patreon: / gospelsimplicity
One Time Donation: www.paypal.me/gospelsimplicity
Merch: gospelsimplicity.creator-spring.com
Austin and Eliza's Wedding Registry:
www.zola.com/registry/elizaan...
We in no way expect you all to get us anything, but the generosity of this community always exceeds my expectations, so if you'd like to support us as we start our life together, you're welcome to look at this list.
Follow Gospel Simplicity on Social Media:
Facebook: / gospelsimplicitiy
Instagram: / gospelsimplicity
About Gospel Simplicity:
Gospel Simplicity began as a KZfaq channel in a Moody Bible Institute dorm. It was born out of the central conviction that the gospel is really good news, and I wanted to share that with as many people as possible. The channel has grown and changed over time, but that central conviction has never changed. Today, we make content around biblical and theological topics, often interacting with people from across the Christian tradition with the hope of seeking greater unity and introducing people to the beautiful simplicity and transformative power of the gospel, the good news about Jesus.
About the host:
Hey! My name is Austin, and I'm a 23 year old guy who’s passionate about the beautiful simplicity and transformative power of the gospel. I believe that the gospel, the good news about Jesus, is really good news, and I’m out to explore, unpack, and share that good news with as many people as possible. I'm a full blown Bible and Church History nerd that loves getting to dialogue with others about this, learning as much as I can, and then teaching whatever I can. I grew up around Frederick, MD where I eventually ended up working my first job at a church. They made the mistake of letting me try my hand at teaching, and instantly I fell in love. That set me on a path for further education, and I'm currently a student at Moody Bible Institute in Chicago, IL, studying theology. On any given day you can find me with my nose in a book or a guitar in my hands. Want to get to know me more? Follow me and say hi on Instagram at: @austin.suggs
Video Stuff:
Camera: Sony a6300
Lens: Sigma 16mm F1.4 amzn.to/2MjssPB
Edited in FCPX
Music:
Bowmans Root - Isaac Joel
00:00 - Teaser
01:11 - Introduction
03:05 - Ad #1
06:05 - What Inspired You to Research on this Topic?
10:20 - What is the Great Schism?
13:07 - Context of the Schism
20:17 - Ad #2
23:28 - Was the Schism unavoidable?
28:52 - Clarification/Pushback
32:44 - Are these trivial issues?
38:33 - When does the filioque pop up?
52:36 - Should Catholics drop the filioque?
56:20 - Best Argument for the filioque
1:01:24 - Clarification on filioque theology
01:08:36 - Role papacy in the schism
01:12:43 - hope for reunion?
01:18:56 - Final Four
*Links in the description may include affiliate links in which I receive a small commission of any purchases you make using that link.
@SpidahRidah 2 жыл бұрын
Thank you so much for this interview, Austin. As an Orthodox Catechumen, I must say I respect and admire Erick Ybarra and his colleagues for their patience, friendliness and humility. He seems like a genuinely charitable and well-meaning guy, although we as Orthodox do not agree with him on many issues. I can't do anything but sincerely apologize to on behalf of the online "Orthosphere" for the vulgar, uncharitable, ill-intentioned attitude of many online posters that often target and slander mr. Ybarra, even if only for his appearance. Please pray for them! That being said, I can't recommend interviewing Kabane enough. His knowledge and insights are incredible. He pays the Roman Church its due respect and admits certain similiar elements between it and Holy Orthodoxy that most wouldn't even think of. I recommend checking out his videos where he compares the two. He also shows a respectful, good-natured demeanor that so sadly is lacking in far too many Orthodox KZfaq lay-personalities. Kabane would make an excellent counter-part/supplement for this interview, and the two of you would be a great match, chemistry-wise. God bless you and may the Lord have mercy on us and guide us all to truth and goodness, always.
@justinaacuriouswanderer1496 2 жыл бұрын
Hey, can you please tell me about your journey to Orthodoxy?
@SpidahRidah 2 жыл бұрын
@@justinaacuriouswanderer1496 Hello Justina, and God bless. I'd love to share my journey, but it is a rather lengthy answer if I am to elaborate. I see that you're also interested in Holy Orthodoxy, which is amazing to see. Glory to God for that. Would you like to message on a more convenient platform? Feel free to message me on Díscord, where my name is Sojourner#2348 or let me know another preferred platform. Best regards, In Christ.
@mintyfresh5000 2 жыл бұрын
Glory to All Mighty God for everything you bring Austin. I can only assume you were expecting some rather polarizing comments upon bringing this conversation to your platform. I pray that the Lord with His mercy and loving kindness has shown you that you're absolutely doing the right thing here. I have huge respect for Erick, Reason & Theology, and their whole crew; and I'm Greek Orthodox. I don't think having these open dialogues is disparaging; I believe they're an excellent catalyst for allowing the Holy Spirit to envelope us ever more completely and improving our own zeal for worship and faith no matter where we stand. God be with both of you.
@nuzzi6620 2 жыл бұрын
Austin, you really should interview Kabane. You and him would jive with each other so well it’s not even funny. Plus, he _really_ knows his scriptures and is a total nerd about theology and church history. Check him out!
@matthewemerson5229 2 жыл бұрын
Kabane or Seraphim Hamilton is fantastic and you really should reach out to him Austin. He’s great and his stuff on the papacy really swung me in the Orthodox direction.
@parkermize 2 жыл бұрын
I agree!
@EmSiGer 2 жыл бұрын
Kabane and Austin are like brothers, I would love to watch it
@helpIthinkmylegsaregone 2 жыл бұрын
plus Kabane is a genuinely good guy. He's too based and honest to promote his channel properly, but he's really the number one online theologian IMO
@jattebaleyos116 2 жыл бұрын
I'm gonna watch this after I study for my oral revalida. I know this episode is gonna be awesome because I want to know the Great Schism. Thank you, Austin for this wonderful episode
@user-ii3zs2gr6u 2 жыл бұрын
I have issues with a lot that has been said, but it's not something that can be discussed in a comment section. And as much as I have problems with the interviewee, I will say that I am refreshed to see an RC who acknowledges the depth of the schism, and it's not brushed aside as politics or semantics. Most Catholics I come accross just say it's solvable if we just have humility, and we should be one, but to me that's indifferentism, but if I push back I'm just called divisive or prideful. But if then I get into specifics, then noone's got the answers to them, and that's because there are no answers to them. We can reformulate literally any statement to try and have them say what we believe they should. Either one is wrong, or both are wrong, but it's impossible for both to be right. In any case, keep doing what you're doing, Austin.
@nuzzi6620 2 жыл бұрын
Agreed. I actually do appreciate how realistic he was about depth of the chasm between us. Though that suggestion of using imperial power to force a union or agreement just sounds like the _modus operandi_ of virtually every heresy or robber council that had the support of misguided emperors. Definitely not the most comforting solution to Orthodox Christians who’ve had to deal with such situations for centuries.
@user-ii3zs2gr6u 2 жыл бұрын
@@nuzzi6620 Indeed. Rome wasn't safe from it either, especially until pope Gregory VII. In fact, the filioque wasn't used in Rome until 1014, and that was done because the emperor of the HRE was visiting. Also, problems of simony in both East and West, it wasn't always by violence. And I think he meant it as hypothetically what would have to be done to avoid it, and not as a suggestion of what should have been done. But yes, I think the chasm cannot be closed. People who think the differences that brought about the Schism are the only things still at play are either not informed on the developments afterwards, or are dangerously optimistic. May I ask you, as you seem like you're not emotionally driven, have you heard an explanation on how Eastern Catholics can venerate saints like St Gregory Palamas or St Seraphim of Sarov? How does that square with extra ecclesiam nulla salus? Not because they're Eastern, of course, plenty of pre-schism Eastern saints are Doctors of the Church in the RCC, but these two are post-schism. Also, maybe St Seraphim may be excuse, because he was like hanging out in a forest, fist-bumping bears and what not, but St Gregory Palamas? He was openly hostile to what he saw as innovations of the West. Calling the filioque a doctrine of demons, saying thomistic thinking will lead the West to atheism, etc. I'd like to hear an opinion from a Catholic who won't lash out at me for doing the works of Satan by causing division, or a "radtrad" who seem to be lashing out at everybody (we have those in Orthodoxy too, btw, if an Orthodox bishop goes on TV with a Catholic one, they start screaming about how the skies will cave in, and demons will feast on our kidneys or whatever, they're quite amusing to watch).
@user-ii3zs2gr6u 2 жыл бұрын
@@nuzzi6620 Unless you're Orthodox and the comment above is useless... I just assumed a Catholic would respond. But hey, if there's ever anything I'd like to hear as a correction to me, it's: "No, no, I'm actually Orthodox.".
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@@778FraxK many in the West view the filioque as a language barrier, with it making issues in Greek where it doesn't in Latin and vice versa. That's why RC's don't really care about it as much as the Orthodox.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@@778FraxK it means something different in Greek and Latin, I don't care if you think it's "simplistic", that's literally what happened.
@catholicfamily6719 Жыл бұрын
Love my Protestant and Orthodox brethren. In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, amen 🙏🏻
@pioamalraj9791 2 жыл бұрын
I am a Roman Catholic. From an Asian descent. I believe, the Lord God, in His graciousness and mercy, has allowed diversity. men of color like me and others, to be united. not a uniformity. but a unity. i am what i am. but i am part of the house of the Lord. may be diverse theological opinions are permitted by the Lord Himself. who am i to judge? whereever in the world i travel, when i meet a Christian, who loves Jesus, I automatically feel a connection and a sense of home. a sinner as i am, that is enough for me.
@Deto4508 2 жыл бұрын
❤️🙏🏾
@timothyjordan5731 2 жыл бұрын
I appreciate the cordiality of this discussion. Neither of you see it as a life or death struggle in which you must trounce each other.
@1ho2ruk 2 жыл бұрын
Thank you for great conversationg guys! God bless you and yours families 🙏🙏
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
My pleasure!
@bongR61 2 жыл бұрын
Wonderful sharing between you two. Enjoyed this a lot. :)
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Glad you enjoyed it!
@carolinecaruso2880 2 жыл бұрын
Please interview Kabane! Y'all would make a great dynamic together.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
I really need to check this guy out. Everyone keeps mentioning him
@xpictos777 2 жыл бұрын
Definitely Kabane I think you guys will have a great discussion!
@Marsalis_CW 2 жыл бұрын
I appreciate Erick's insight! The fact that he point out that early Christians didn't seperate things and have secularism is a great point!
@neptali_allane 2 жыл бұрын
18:21 -> The ancient Jews were instructed to use unleavened bread during the feast of Passover. The Passover meal that commemorated the Exodus was therefore to be eaten with unleavened bread (see Ex 29:2; Nm 9:11).
@joshf2218 2 жыл бұрын
And now that the risen Christ is our passover we use leavened bread :)
@Leo-uq6jp 2 жыл бұрын
It would be cool if you brought Kabane in for the other side of this discussion, his takes are usually very rigorous
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
I've heard of him, but I haven't watched his videos. I had Dr. Ed Siecienski on for an Orthodox perspective awhile ago
@orthodoxguy2006 2 жыл бұрын
@@GospelSimplicity seems like a really nice guy from the videos i have seen. He is great with doing Orthodox as well as general Christian takes on things.
@namapalsu2364 2 жыл бұрын
@@GospelSimplicity Kabane is good and very charitable. This is from a Catholic who's disgusted by Orthobros and their patriarch Dyerinomus and Metropolitan Ubius Petrosus.
@nuzzi6620 2 жыл бұрын
@@namapalsu2364 Your online demeanour is what’s really disgusting. I’ve never seen anyone as obsessed with Dyer and Ubi as you are. It’s almost compulsive.
@namapalsu2364 2 жыл бұрын
@@nuzzi6620 Then skip what I said and hold your piece. I feel the need to say to as many people as possible about Dyer and Ubi. You complianing about it is not going to make it stop. So be wise and skip my comment.
@petrosdorizas6814 2 жыл бұрын
So I made the mistake of reading the comments before watching the video, since I couldn't watch it live, and I was worried it was going to be too pro-Catholic or anti-Orthodox, or perhaps too simplified an understanding or explanation. From my point of view, there was no reason for this apprehension, it seems like Ybarra has a good understanding of the theology involved (though this judgment is coming from someone who knows next to nothing about theology), and in general the history seems to be okay as well (from someone who knows a lot about history). Beyond that, as always it's good to have a guest who not only is intelligent and articulate, but well mannered and well natured, and Erick was both. My points of contention (coming from someone who is not well versed in theology): - Erick's argument that the Emperor could have resolved the issue of the Great Schism by choosing the Papal side is an argument that seems ahistorical, because it ignores the fact that the Roman Empire's politics were in a pretty precarious position, with Emperor Constantine IX having much of his legitimacy coming from his wife Theodora, who was liked by the people but disliked by the court. Both of them would be dead by 1056, and there was simply too much turmoil in Rhomania for an Emperor to not only get involved in a theological controversy, but to support the Bishop of Rome as opposed to the Patriarch. Furthermore I don't think the argument that the Emperors should have supported Rome is entirely in good faith here, but it's understandable wishful thinking from the point of view of a Latin Catholic. - I don't think the addition to the Creed was treated with the gravitas it probably deserves. Erick stated that the Orthodox believe it's a big no-no to add anything since it would be contrary to the canons of the Church, and then added that the Creed which is recited now is itself an expansion of the original Creed. That's not entirely honest though, since the Niceno-Constantinopolitan was agreed to by an Ecumenical Council, as was the original Creed, establishing that while a change can be made, it has to be done through the guidance of the Holy Spirit which is manifest in an Ecumenical Council. The issue isn't that adding to the Creed violates a Canon, but that it's adding something without using the same method by which it was created in the first place, that is, through an Ecumenical Council. But yeah, again, don't know anything about theology, but I definitely appreciated the guest.
@phoult37 2 жыл бұрын
I agree with your assessment of the comments. I'm Catholic so maybe I missed some underlining hostility, but Erik seemed quite charitable and tried to present the Orthodox position in good faith considering his own affiliation.
@traceyedson9652 2 жыл бұрын
As an Orthodox, I agree his explanations were less polemical than I’d expected based on other experience. But I didn’t really recognize his re-stating of Orthodox Trinitarian doctrine.
@lyterman Жыл бұрын
I think it was probably in response to Orthodox who overstate the case with the creed. Fr. Josiah Trenham has accused Catholics of violating the fathers' wishes, who said the creed could not be changed by even a syllable. I think Erick's response is legitimate to that type of argument.
@SaintCharbelMiracleworker 2 жыл бұрын
When I try to explain the eucharist leavened/unleavened issue to my protestant friends. They look at me like Im an alien and said "it's so petty" and "both y'all are crazy...that's what started this?" All I can respond with is "well there were other issues too". One baptist said "sounds like you lot were married, had a fight and never made up and over the years started to pick other issues in each other which bothered you and held on tight to those issues for 1000 years+ and each time there was a meeting/debate etc you dive into your bag of "issues" pull something out and beat each other over the head with it."....I mean he is sorta right about that. 😂 We are getting better at communicating since that pivotal moment in 1964.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Haha, I like your friend's metaphor!
@catholicbeth2371 2 жыл бұрын
@@GospelSimplicity It's easy, we use unleavened bread because Jesus used unleavened bread at the last supper. As Exodus shows it's bread for the journey, feeding us pilgrims making our way to our heavenly home. Not something I would go to the barricades about but I like the biblical link and the Passover symbolism.
@LadyMaria 2 жыл бұрын
@@catholicbeth2371 Actually He used artos which is leavened. At any rate Rome used leavened bread for awhile before Judaizing. The Eastern sects in Roman Catholicism still use leavened bread.
@SaintCharbelMiracleworker 2 жыл бұрын
@@LadyMaria Using the bread that Jesus used is Judaizing? Does it also upset you that Jesus is a Jew?
@renatopereira4668 2 жыл бұрын
Austin, if you just consider interviewing Fr. Spyridon Bailey for some spirituality in the show! Thank you !
@evans3922 2 жыл бұрын
That would be nice.. But I doubt Fr. Spyridon would wish to participate in interviews with other denomination representatives... He's doing his work in his channel exposing the Orthodox faith in the most excellent way... And I think this is wise... Time is short to spend it in non fruiful conversations... Anyone who is really interested in Orthodox faith finds his channel and absorbs his teachings... At least this is my opinion... If you check his homilies there are plenty of non Orthodox commentators with positive opinions about him.. Also if I remember well Austin has said he can't get in contact with him.. He didn't answer the emails.. If I remember well... Maybe I'm wrong
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
As Evan mentioned, I've attempted to contact him without any success
@Consume_Crash 2 жыл бұрын
Great interview
@nuzzi6620 2 жыл бұрын
This isn’t going to be controversial at all!
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Definitely not. I'm sure people will display intellectual virtue by waiting to watch the video before making judgements.
@duenstorm 2 жыл бұрын
This is like having Richard Dawkins on and asking everyone not to make judgments
@nuzzi6620 2 жыл бұрын
@@GospelSimplicity You’re totally right about waiting to pass judgment _on this particular episode_ until it comes out. But there are reasons why Ybarra, to put it nicely, enjoys (by far) the _least_ amount of Orthodox support (relative to other RC apologists and content creators online).
@TommyGunzzz 2 жыл бұрын
@@duenstorm true
@TommyGunzzz 2 жыл бұрын
@@GospelSimplicity I think you are too charitable about your audience lol. Excited to listen.
@feeble_stirrings 2 жыл бұрын
An enjoyable conversation! As an Orthodox Christian, there's obviously somethings I disagree with Erick on, but on the whole this felt like a balanced and charitable presentation.
@diegobarragan4904 2 жыл бұрын
This is a honest question. Not in a mean or condescending way. But why would we be interested in this guy’s opinion about the great schism or Eastern Orthodoxy?
@rody3199 2 жыл бұрын
Because Erick has done 10 years of research on this very topic.
@diegobarragan4904 2 жыл бұрын
@@rody3199 10 years? I literally have too, but why would anyone be interested in listening to my opinion? I wouldn’t even be interested in listening to my opinion. Many more people have spent much more time studying these things. And are much more qualified. Intellectual study on Eastern Orthodox and the theological controversy from the outside of the tradition and practice, is literally worthless. It can’t be properly understood in that way. Who is the conversation even directed to? Again I ask, why would we be interested in hearing his opinion on this? Because if 10 years of book reading is your answer then I think I’m proving my point.
@George-ur8ow 2 жыл бұрын
@@diegobarragan4904 I have a feeling it is going to be much like suan sonna's interview some months ago, except of course with a much more negative view of Orthodoxy. All just papal propaganda puff that does not line up with history or theology. Let the listener judge for themself, of course.
@Christian_Maoist. 2 жыл бұрын
@@rody3199 Roman Catholicism is in error so it doesn't really matter how much he's studied.
@jatnarivas8741 2 жыл бұрын
@a Interesting. Can you give a few concrete examples, please?
@Gerrysjamz 2 жыл бұрын
Excellent guest
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Glad you enjoyed it!
@David-kz2im 2 жыл бұрын
Hasn’t Ubi Petrus already refuted this guy?
@IC_XC_NIKA 2 жыл бұрын
Yes lol!
@thelimatheou 2 жыл бұрын
Wrapped him up and tied a bow around him. Dissected his selective quoting, departures from the literature and outright lies. Ybarra has zero credibility outside his small circle of delusional RC apologists - all of whom are equally loose with facts & truth.
@kyriosbooks8400 2 жыл бұрын
hahahahaha orthobros united came as expected in packs with delusions as always! yes, you have defeated everyone, long live LAMIGHTY ORTHODOXY hahahahhaha
@namapalsu2364 2 жыл бұрын
@@thelimatheou Yeah right. And Elijah Yasi (Underground Catholicism) with Allan Ruhl shows how deceptive Ubi can be with quotations. Ubi's charges against Ybarra don't stick.
@Rick-it3tz 2 жыл бұрын
@@kyriosbooks8400 You are triggered, nice, only shows you are feeling insecure. Keep going, don’t drop 😉
@jhealey93 2 жыл бұрын
This comment section is extremely disappointing, no matter which side of the argument you fall on. Good work Austin, as always!
@MycoKing 2 жыл бұрын
Excellent! I love all your videos.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Glad you like them!
@TruePT 2 жыл бұрын
Looking forward to it!
@ALLHEART_ 2 жыл бұрын
I get why Austin felt the need to have this interview. He did interview Jay, after all. Even still, though, Ybarra has extremely bad takes and his knowledge of the relevant history and theology is less than requisite, even as it pertains to the relevant Roman Catholic material. I'd recommend, if I could be so bold, that Austin interview Seraphim Hamilton (aka Kabane) on this or similar topics. He's charitable but firm, as well as well-educated (in an academic context also. He has several relevant degrees, not to make an idol of academia here). I imagine he and Austin would get along well.
@eldermillennial8330 2 жыл бұрын
Even now that I’m Orthodox, I still have tremendous respect for Scott Hahn, whose Programs on EWTN I used to watch a lot of, and hope Austin can interview him eventually. I would also love to see Jay debate a Roman scholar who might present him with at least a tiny challenge.
@xpictos777 2 жыл бұрын
Agree he should definitely interview Kabane :)
@markrome9702 2 жыл бұрын
Ybarra is very knowledgeable. The nouveau perspective from some Orthodox KZfaqrs on the Schism really falls short.
@ALLHEART_ 2 жыл бұрын
@@markrome9702 Depends who we're speaking of, exactly. You can always find people who aren't sufficiently nuanced. I would say Craig Truglia, Seraphim Hamilton, Codex Justinianaeus, Ubi, etc, all have a nuanced and accurate understanding of the Schism. As for Ybarra being knowledgeable, and this isn't meant as an insult, just an observation, Ybarra can name-drop a lot of things and quotes but the analysis of them always seems to fall short, collapsing into non sequitur and circularity. I also haven't really heard Ybarra tackle the hard philosophical questions of the Schism, a la created grace, divine simplicity, the Filioque, unity and multiplicity, etc. Not everyone has to be equipped for every topic, but these topics are absolutely essential to understand the Schism because they precede any ecclesiological discussion in importance. You simply cannot understand the Schism without them. Popular Roman Catholic apologists, at least the ones that I'm aware of, are almost never qualified to speak on these topics, if they even see their importance to begin with or speak on them at all. Even E. Michael Jones, who I greatly respect, seems to be under the impression the Schism is political in character, rather than theological. This is the height of illiteracy. There definitely is substance to the criticism that RC apologetics, at least against Orthodoxy, generally just boils down to papal lawyerism. On the other hand, popular Orthodox apologists, despite any issues their individual perspectives may have, generally *are* equipped with an understanding of the importance of the hard philosophical questions, like the ones I mentioned, and generally have productive things to say regarding them. I think these are defensible observations. God bless.
@markrome9702 2 жыл бұрын
@@ALLHEART_ You believe they have an accurate understanding because you agree with these Popular Eastern Orthodox Apologists. I would question your ability to make such an assessment. Can you name a Catholic who you think has an accurate understanding of it?
@andrewculbreth7302 2 жыл бұрын
Austin can you only invite people that I approve of? Appreciate it.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Assuming this is sarcasm, this is my favorite comment I've seen all day
@andrewculbreth7302 2 жыл бұрын
@@GospelSimplicity you assume correctly sir. I will take my internet points with grace and humility.
@user-dj3is2qh2u 2 жыл бұрын
lmfao. Based.
@tonywallens217 2 жыл бұрын
😂 yeah there’s a lot of pettiness between catholic and orthodox. And I’m a catholic
@truthdefenders- 2 жыл бұрын
@Gospel Simplicity, I have a question. Erick said that the two can no longer share the sacraments, you cant have the Eucharist together, in fact he said these were issues the early members would die over. Is it fair to say that when we find churches downplaying or dismissing these issues they are liberal and ecumenical in the modern sense of the word? Thank you.
@christianorthodoxy4769 2 жыл бұрын
@a That guy T.rust Def`en•dumers is spiritually, blind and he is Heterodox' Big time. Go read his comments/post. On the debate of oK`hell"y_Powers' and Sun🌞genius." Aka' he debated Sum•Genius" that got him to admit it doesn't in fact Say, well you know what I mean.. go and watch the part where he says that admission."
@PrisonMike-_- 2 жыл бұрын
Man..Erick has me hooked. I have a lot of digging to do
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Hope you enjoy the digging process!
@nicoleyoshihara4011 2 жыл бұрын
God Bless you both!
@matuskaandme5408 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for doing this you guys! Eric brings up some good points. And he's totally right, the Schism involved both theological and political differences and disagreements.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
My pleasure!
@paynedv 2 жыл бұрын
Based Ybarra
@delgado.adrian160 2 жыл бұрын
Wow, seven hours left and the comments are starting to be... Eh, what I expected. But eh, So long as Erick can steer clear of the whole mess with Dyer as Dyer did when he came here, this should be a pretty good video
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Perhaps to the disappoint of some, I can say this video was rather uncontroversial in its content, in my opinion at least
@thomasfolio7931 2 жыл бұрын
I think Austin gave an example of a major issue with the Great Schism at the beginning of the video. When we speak modern English, the word "great" has been corrupted to mean something exceedingly good, just as bald means having no hair on one's head. But great also defines something that is massively important, or grave (which of course can mean a burial site, or something serious). Bald was used at the time of the US Revolution to describe someone with white hair, and the American Bald eagle, is named so because its head is crowned with white feathers. So what did you, Austin do, seemingly without knowing what sort of insight to the issue you were giving us? You illustrated how different cultural, linguistic and historical uses of the same ideas can be misunderstood by someone of a different culture or language. Greeks and Latins can say the same thing with a different vocabulary and when they read each other see something different. St. Maximus an Eastern Cleric benefited from his time in Rome, where it was not just an intellectual reading of the Roman position. Living with and among the Latins. We see too how St. Jerome was influenced by the Rabbis he studied with in learning not just Hebrew, but the Jewish (or at least that segment of Jewish teaching on the Canon of the Scriptures). For myself, coming from a Sephardic background, our understanding of the Canon differed from the Rabbis in Jerusalem, as does what constitutes the canon among other Jewish sects. So to try and understand what someone is trying to convey, the old adage of, walking a mile in their moccasins sure does ring true.
@Vereglez-d4z 2 жыл бұрын
Can’t wait to get Erick’s book on the papacy!
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Hope you enjoy it!
@user-pj7sq7ce1f 2 жыл бұрын
@@GospelSimplicity the schism is actually because in the west the Franks wanted to overcome the greek Roman empire of constadinopole actually the split come when the franks got in power .they where actually barbarians. And had an issue with the glory of constadinopole and the greek east. So they had to make up a new dogma in theology that the east did not have to show that they can count on Theologian issues . If you dont understand that actually you cant understand the split when franks got in power at rome and the popes started to be Franks all actually started
@user-pj7sq7ce1f 2 жыл бұрын
@Bb Dl west actually left as the franks got in rome and put Frankish popes. Before all the popes where greek or roman. Dont forget all the Ecumenical councils of the church where in the greek east in greek. When rome actually fall to the franks and as i said Frankish popes got in office all started. The barbarians franks allways hated what was actually greek roman.
@user-pj7sq7ce1f 2 жыл бұрын
@Bb Dl the west fall in Heresy. To back up there Theology they avoid all the greek speaking fathers of the Ecumenical councils and just used a latin Speaking Augustine that could not read greek and said mistakes actually going against the says of the fathers from the Ecumenical councils.
@user-pj7sq7ce1f 2 жыл бұрын
@Bb Dl which nicea you mean because at 325 AD Augustine was not even born.
@ReformaIbague 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for these videos, it's interesting knowing history of christianity...
@rc3088 2 жыл бұрын
Thank you, Austin
@Bogey-man73 2 жыл бұрын
The countdown is real! I'm so excited rn. Erick Ybarra is a legend
@marcuswilliams7448 2 жыл бұрын
I've been reading Rufinus's Commentary on the Apostles Creed. He mentions different versions of the Creed depending upon local circumstances. In the version of the Apostles Creed he writes his commentary about, the First Article includes that the Father is Impassable in order to reject the Sabellian Error, but he notes that "Impassable" is not present in very many other versions. So, Eric's point about slight variations in Creedal Formulations--that are in keeping with the Analogy of Faith, let's say--should not be tantamount to Heresy, Crime, Sin, etc., seems correct and, even, much to my surprise, to have historical precedent, without much upheaval. The East seems to attribute everything they perceive erroneous to be an outgrowth of the West's insistence on the Filioque. I think they protesteth too much.
@toddvoss52 2 жыл бұрын
Funny - I was also reading Rufinus' commentary - about a year and 1/2 ago early in COVID. Noticed same thing. By the way I love that series. So well done.
@brett4748 2 жыл бұрын
I see what you're saying. I think there's something incorrect about comparing the Apostle's creed to the Nicene creed, though: The Nicene creed was created in an ecumenical council under the guidance of the Holy Spirit and exists in the canons of the church. Maybe, lost to history, the same could be said of the Apostle's creed, but that is unknown. The issue with modifying the creed is more about doing anything contrary to church canon. It's like saying the Roman Catholic church has issued many editions of its official catechism, sometimes even changing their mind on an issue - today's Roman Catholic magisterium edits the words of a previous magisterium. Therefore there is a precedent for rewriting theological texts, so what's the big deal about editing the Gospel of John to make the filioque explicit? Let's have John's gospel have Christ saying that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. Clearly that would be tantamount to a criminal violation of the canon of scripture. Somethings are created with the intention of being flexible and other things are not. The argument is that like how only the RC magisterium should change the catechism, only an ecumenical council can change church canons and modify creeds that were created by ecumenical councils.
@orthobroslovemyplaylists6254 2 жыл бұрын
It might sound silly but the issue of leavened and unleavened bread is actually quite a big point of contention. The Latins changed a fundamental material for the Eucharist. It’s a sign of Latin innovation.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
The French Revolution was France's attempt to rebuke papal innovationism and return to Orthodoxy. Freemasonry was originally an Orthodox movement.
@phoult37 2 жыл бұрын
@@glof2553 You are kidding right? Freemasonry is diametrically opposed to Orthodoxy.
@orthobroslovemyplaylists6254 2 жыл бұрын
@@phoult37 he’s just baiting and sperging out.
@nono-bt8gy 2 жыл бұрын
Jesus, as a Jew, likely used unleavened bread for the Pasch... Wilipedia: "Regarding the usage of the primitive Church, knowledge is so scant, and the testimonies so apparently contradictory, that many theologians have pronounced the problem incapable of definitive solution" So, i am not sure how you can affirmatively say that it is an innovation whereas historians who studied this question cannot...
@orthobroslovemyplaylists6254 2 жыл бұрын
@@nono-bt8gy It is still tradition to use leavened bread. History doesn’t necessarily equate to tradition. I think your edit regarding the uncertainty behind the history adds to my point.
@Jeremy-ge6zv 2 жыл бұрын
Austin you the man God Bless You Brother 🫡🙏🏼
@timothyjordan5731 2 жыл бұрын
When it comes to debating the Filioque, the biggest obstacle (in my opinion) is allowing the discussion to devolve into what I call "duelling Patristics". This is when disputants provide their highly selective lists of Patristic quotations, usually out of context, to prove one side or the other. I prefer the Protestant approach; Scripture alone. I believe that a simple and prayerful reading of Sacred Scripture will resolve the issue. Too many disputations give the impression that you require a Ph. D. in Patristics, Philosophy and fluency in Greek and Latin to even discuss the issue. This tends to obscure rather than enlighten. I am willing to discuss with anyone who is willing. May I suggest that if anyone is Orthodox, that this is not a life or death issue. If I can convince you that the Filioque is , at the very least, arguable and not contrary to Scripture, you don't have to leave your Church. You can remain Orthodox and work for reconciliation from your side. I myself am an Eastern Catholic but I also cantor for the Orthodox Church in my town so we are not dealing with "two solitudes".
@danim2897 2 жыл бұрын
The issue with the papacy has been “magnified” today (at least online) due to all of the Protestant coverts to orthodoxy. They joined an apostolic church while maintaining their opposition and disdain for it.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
As demonstrated in this comment section
@physiocrat7143 2 жыл бұрын
This issue with the papacy has been thrown into focus by the current Pope.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@@physiocrat7143 "I don't like pope so that why RC false"
@physiocrat7143 2 жыл бұрын
@@glof2553 The present situation has thrown the
@physiocrat7143 2 жыл бұрын
@@glof2553 The present Pope and his actions have cast a spotlight on a situation which has existed for centuries, once you start to look. People were more willing to live with the shortcomings when popes were less heavy handed. One could not reasonably fault JPII or Benedict. If you go further back into history the Papacy, as an institution, is not very creditable
@Shevock Жыл бұрын
The Council of Florence resolved all of these issues and the then Emporer and Patriarch of Constantinople both signed off on the resolution, including accepting but not adopting the Filioque and reaffirming limited papal supremacy. But then Constantinople fell and many of the Orthodox Catholics there emigrated West and came back to the Catholic Church, initiating the Renaissance.
@halo0360 2 жыл бұрын
You should ask Dr. Jordan Cooper back on or see if you can get Pastor Will Weedon. It’d be cool to see some more Lutherans come on
@TheOtherWhiteNerd 2 жыл бұрын
Have you any intention to uploading on Rumble? I think it may be something worth looking into!
@alphonsustheleast1537 2 жыл бұрын
Odysee is much better than Rumble.
@timothyjordan5731 2 жыл бұрын
I would like to suggest that there is a connection between a Pneumatological error, and an Ecclesiological error and a Mariological error. I'm willing to discuss.
@JengaJay 2 жыл бұрын
Good to see the Dyerites are leaving a bunch of hate comments before the show even starts. Goes to show who are the charitable ones seeking for the truth and who are not
@orthobroslovemyplaylists6254 2 жыл бұрын
Don’t you remember when the R&T crowd did the same thing to Dyer when he came on this show? Worse actually because people like Ybarra were actually demanding the interview be canceled. The hypocrisy is astounding.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@@orthobroslovemyplaylists6254 sauce required
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@a yes, I do think it would be better if a bunch of petulant Orthodork child converts did not make up lies about a Catholic apologist.
@LadyMaria 2 жыл бұрын
@@glof2553 You're not making your religion look very good with all of your childish comments.
@LadyMaria 2 жыл бұрын
@Marcus. Agreed. They don't realize that they are being hypocritical leaving nasty comments.
@maxonmendel5757 2 жыл бұрын
im wondering.... is the Holy Spirit sent through the Son the same way that Jesus is begotten via the Holy Spirit?
@jonathanbohl 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@tonywallens217 2 жыл бұрын
Oh man the toxicity here is outrageous. I’m giving up comment sections for Lent
@PLMilisic 2 жыл бұрын
Everybody should watch Eric's debates with Orthodox before watching this. Only then should come to conclusion.
@PLMilisic 2 жыл бұрын
@@wambambrose Really? Oh wait... 😎😘
@ALLHEART_ 2 жыл бұрын
I'd pay some attention to the debates he's dodged as well, namely the one with Ubi Petrus. You don't have to debate anyone and everyone in your field for your opinions to be taken seriously, don't get me wrong, but the specific reasons why Ybarra didn't debate Ubi and the fact the Ybarra and/or the other Reason & Theology crew set up a dynamic where the people they're associated with aren't supposed to debate Ubi, under pain of being ostracized (see Elijah Yasi saying they would no longer be friends with him if he debated Ubi), and the fact that Ybarra didn't debate Ubi (despite Ubi offering very favorable terms on several occasions) appears very much like an attempt to save face. This is one of the reasons, of the apologists for RCism, Suan Sonna is definitely the most respectable, in my view, because he and Ubi actually did have a very cordial debate.
@andrewhiggins9732 2 жыл бұрын
I did and they are 😬 cringe. It’s funny how he avoids what’s going on now in papism like the plague.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@@andrewhiggins9732 he addresses it, what're you talking about. And I'm not sure how you can watch the Ybarra-Dyer debate and think Dyer won. It's such a clear representation of gross misunderstanding from an Orthobro. Which is pretty par for the course for you guys (talking about things you don't actually understand) but still.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@@ALLHEART_ where did Elijah Yasi say this. Citation, now.
@cb738 2 жыл бұрын
God love you… bravo for being so open to God’s purpose in your life…. To be open for procreation.
@michaelhodges2391 2 жыл бұрын
Maybe you guys should wait to watch a video before you criticize it. Try to come in with an open mind instead of being close minded and you may learn something. Eric is a charitable person and even if you disagree at least wait until you watch the video to judge it. Also you shouldn't be judging someone's motives if you do not know what they are thinking and you should certainly give them a charitable look. I'm looking forward to the video Austin and I'm sure it will be a good one like all your videos are
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@a what else did David Erhan tell you to comment?
@alphonsustheleast1537 2 жыл бұрын
@a I like how you post calumny with no proof whatsoever. And I'm going to go ahead and assume you're a 19 year old convert from protestantism who never dropped the anti-papal revolutionary fervor.
@alphonsustheleast1537 2 жыл бұрын
@a ahahahahaha Ubi Petrus 😂
@alphonsustheleast1537 2 жыл бұрын
@a Catholics are usually the ones who want unity, while I've seen nothing but divisive rhetoric from the Eastern Orthodox. Not to mention that many of your Saints held to Roman Catholic doctrines, such as purgatory, the immaculate conception, and the filioque. What exactly is your goal, because unity definitely doesn't seem like it.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@a Roman Catholic: "I brush my teeth" Orthobro: "I don't see that in the first millennium. Another Papal innovation"
@TaehunGrammar 2 жыл бұрын
I feel like Erick wasn't clear on whether the Filioque is meant to mean that Jesus is an eternal point of origin, or source, of the Holy Spirit. He instead uses the 'sending' to justify it. There was some reference to the monarchy of the Father though. Good talk.
@user-dj3is2qh2u 2 жыл бұрын
I believe the Catholic position is that the Spirit processes eternally from the Father alone, and temporally through the Father and Son. Imo the biggest issue is how it was inserted into the Creed, which implies the eternal procession from both Father and Son.
@TaehunGrammar 2 жыл бұрын
I’m Catholic and I have the same issue with it as well. It needs to be interpreted correctly, but as it’s worded, I wonder how many Catholics have a heretical understanding of it.
@dlfincher6887 2 жыл бұрын
1054 is a misnomer. Constantinople only excommunicated the papal legates personally, not the bishop of Rome and certainly not the western churches. The pope had died, so the excommunication of the bishop of Constantinople by the legates had no authority. Granted, it WAS downhill from there to the Council of Florence, but I’m not sure that the excommunication was any more meaningful than that going on now between Constantinople and Moscow.
@eldermillennial8330 2 жыл бұрын
It really wasn’t until Committed Filioquist Bishops, (in the mould of the nefarious Carolingian bishops from a century earlier who were the Master Mould), went around formally imposing the Gregorian Reforms, the ACTUAL FIRST Reformation, that it really came about on the ground. Yabbara would talk about the reforms as if they had been universally and unquestionably accepted and implemented throughout the western church as quickly as the legates with the list of new rules could reach each diocese on foot, horse or boat, but actually, outside of France and Italy, there was a lot of minority resistance here and there all over Europe, but STRONG local majority resistance for a long time in several key places, with three that stand out to me: Saxon Canterbury resisted until it was usurped by the Normans in 1066. Ireland as a whole resisted until 1179. But the Ultrich Archdiocese in the Netherlands technically lasted longest at technically Orthodox, but they accepted the reforms so slowly that I can’t pinpoint their part of the schism, only that it was complete by some point between 1400 and 1440. They never did abandon the Orthodox Synodal system, either. Now they’re among the worst heretics in Europe, but their forebears were impressive people.
@TP-om8of 2 жыл бұрын
@@eldermillennial8330 4 Bears? 🐻🐻🐻🐻
@eldermillennial8330 2 жыл бұрын
@@TP-om8of I actually thought it was “Forebares” as in “barer”, but no, spellcheck is clear that it is “Forebears”.
@mrjustadude1 2 жыл бұрын
Honestly I like both Erick and Jay.
@Xavilupe 2 жыл бұрын
Erick is aways kind and humble, but everytimes he speaks, a lot of people full of hatred come to the comment section in every collaboration he does. Also, in that video, he often clarify that it's not doing in depth material.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
The Dyerites are triggered
@Christian_Maoist. 2 жыл бұрын
I'm sure this guy will be honest and fair to both sides of the argument. 😂
@Alexandru20101991 2 жыл бұрын
Yea right...
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
Catholics are generally more charitable and less biased on this issue than the Orthodox. Dr. Siecienski is the exception.
@phoult37 2 жыл бұрын
Seeing that you posted before the video even launched, are you going to watch it and then update your comment if Eric shows to be charitable?
@CHURCHISAWESUM 2 жыл бұрын
@@glof2553 Being generally unconvinced of your own position because you're relativistic (because the Pope can change the view at any time) is not the same thing as being genuinely charitable.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@@CHURCHISAWESUM "tell me you don't understand papal infallibility without telling me you don't understand papal infallibility"
@zachlehkyi9951 2 жыл бұрын
This video might get a ton of views but it will be your most disliked video for sure
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Gives me flashbacks of hosting Jay Dyer. Everyone attacks the video before they've heard what's said
@diarmaidobaoill4141 2 жыл бұрын
@@GospelSimplicity Isn't that how it usually is with sensitive subjects? I'm sure you will as fair and balanced as ever.
@ninjason57 6 ай бұрын
It feels almost disingenuous that Erick wouldn't spend much time on his best argument for the filioque. Especially since he did not specify what verse he is referring to in Revelation 22 (almost as if he doesn't want people to look it up themselves to question the argument). I will give him some grace in that I don't think he did this out of manipulation. I think the verse he is referring to is Revelation 22:1 "Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life [Interpreted as the Holy Spirit by the pro-filioque position]-water as clear as coming/proceeding out from the throne of God and of the Lamb (Jesus)." I looked up a couple Catholic commentaries "Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary" and the "Cambridge Greek Testament Commentary" but was surprised to see they did not compare the water of life to the Holy Spirit in their Revelation commentary. I looked up some non-Catholic commentaries that do make the connection with one example being "H. B. Swete identifies the river of life with the Spirit. In the Fourth Gospel Jesus says: "He who believes in me, out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water." John goes on to explain: "This he said about the Spirit which those who believed in him were to receive" ( John 7:38-39). - Barclay's Daily Study Bible. Interestingly as I was researching this myself I ran into these two verses that seem contradictory at first unless you consider that the Holy spirit is sent by both the Father and the Son. - John 14:26 "But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and remind you of everything I have told you." - John 16:7 "Nevertheless, I am telling you the truth. It is for your benefit that I go away, because if I don’t go away the Counselor will not come to you. If I go, I will send him to you." I am not a Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox, nor do I subscribe to being shoe horned into then having to be protestant as if there are only three options. I first and foremost desire to be a follower of Christ, while searching for truth and fighting my biases. If anyone else has insight on these verses I would love to hear it.
@MrSilver2nd 2 жыл бұрын
The link is to 'A Critique of the Balamand Agreement' which contains historic events tied to the Schism being discussed in this video and thereafter. orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/frjr_balamand.aspx
@petebrush6859 2 жыл бұрын
Uh Oh Minute 12: I think that the Eastern Orthodox Church of Jerusalem, and likewise the Church of Alexandria Egypt, would NOT appreciate being called 'an imperial church of Byzantium'. In the 11th century they would literally not understand what in the heck Mr. Ybarra just said.
@ericprine8804 2 жыл бұрын
I mean... they were completely Hellenized.
@ericprine8804 2 жыл бұрын
This part here, it sounds like he's referencing the Council of Florence, 15th century
@user-dj3is2qh2u 2 жыл бұрын
@@ericprine8804 So was the Roman church? Guess what language the Church in Rome used before Latin? Also, Hellenization in the Levant and Egypt has more to do with Alexander the Great than Byzantium.
@ericprine8804 2 жыл бұрын
I see the basic premise Ybarra was trying to say lol. Splitting hairs over things like this is a bit of topic from the actual issues. Nuance is good when it deals with clarity in hammering out problems, but splitting hairs to smear anything against someone you don't agree with doesn't add to dialogue. If I'm not mistaken, during the Council of Florence, the Greek Patriarch of Alexandria was actually residing in Constantinople. Alexandria the city while under Arab rule, the Alexandrian Church kept very close ties to the empire of Constantinople, not only the spiritual branch, but the temporal. While of course Alexandria wouldn't be the imperial church as Constantinople was explicitly, the Chalcedons of Alexandria did very much see themselves as Greeks, greater kin with the Empire than the arabs that had temporal rule over them. Constantinople had an influence over them
@ericprine8804 2 жыл бұрын
While there was much of a Hellenization throughout the early Roman empire, there was very much a Byzantinian influence over the Chalcedonian Jerusalem and Alexandrian Church
@lupinthe4th400 2 жыл бұрын
Oh no! :0
@imagewell5319 2 жыл бұрын
You want simplicity in the New Covenant? Check out the Oriental Orthodox Church. First communion known as orthodox, where I entered into God’s Israel.
@colegest1542 2 жыл бұрын
They are in schism. Need to repent of christology heresy
@imagewell5319 2 жыл бұрын
@@colegest1542 according to you. 🤗
@shannonpsmith1 2 жыл бұрын
Why do people get hung up on this as if they think it matters to saving grace?
@fr.michael9213 10 ай бұрын
Changes to the Creed would need to be made within an Ecumenical Council.
@samtjman 2 жыл бұрын
Orthobois, please wait until the video before opinioning. Even if you disagree, there may be honey or perspective to gather.
@orthobroslovemyplaylists6254 2 жыл бұрын
The R&T crowd in general is just disingenuous. You don’t have to be a fan of Dyer or even Orthodox to get that. There’s a plethora of Roman Catholic internet apologists that are much better then these guys. That’s not to say that Austin can’t have whoever he wants on.
@Guradeaur 2 жыл бұрын
@a Can you direct us to some of your scholarly work? Ybarra's book is being published by Emmaus Academic, where are your books published?
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@a hahahahahah my dude you are LITERALLY lying. The R&T spergout by Orthobros was projection, I see.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@a "I'm not an Orthobro, I'm a Roman Catholic scholar" You're a liar is what you are. You've claimed in multiple other threads to be Orthodox and your behavior indicates you're an Orthobro. "I'm a Roman Catholic scholar" Stop bearing false witness by pretending to be Roman Catholic where it suits you. You're bearing false witness when you do that. Disgusting Orthobro behavior. But what else is new.
@ThruTheUnknown 2 жыл бұрын
Hi Austin, can you interview someone from Eastern orthodox on this matter as well as it would be good to get both sides take on issue I'm sure you'd agree? Thanks, and the Lord be with you. FYI: Someone like Perry Robinson from energetic procession might be good
@orthobroslovemyplaylists6254 2 жыл бұрын
To be fair, Austin has talked to a lot of Orthodox in one on one interviews. He has to give the same courtesy to Catholics. Check out his interviews with Jay or Fr Peter Heers!
@ThruTheUnknown 2 жыл бұрын
@@orthobroslovemyplaylists6254 Yes I completely agree Austin has represented the Orthodox faith well, however this topic specifically should have both views represented. Ecumenicism is not a one sided affair after all, is it?
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
I had Dr. Ed Siecienski on for an Orthodox perspective on the Filioque
@mapaz555 2 жыл бұрын
God is a mystery, trying to box God into details, getting lost and confused in our minds is so human. As long as we have a personal relationship with God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit that’s the most important. If you can call upon and love each one of the Trinity that’s the important part. Politics, issues, egos, nationalities. That’s besides the point. I’m Catholic before I’m anything else. And I’m thankful for the unity and authority it provides in the world. Being South American I’m part of God’s universal Church, that’s who I am. Roman Catholic. I hope the Church is protected, may no more issues divide it further. We stand on the shoulders of our saints through centuries of hardship and chaos. I am God’s daughter. This is my family, where I belong, where I’ve always belonged. Please Don’t leave us my Lord. In the name of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, free us from division and evil, We Love you, Amen. Dear Mother Mary, pray for us your children. We love you, Amen.
@fr.michael9213 10 ай бұрын
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. St. John says "proceeds from the Father." Full stop.
@fr.michael9213 10 ай бұрын
The filioque is just not necessary. If it were, there were 5 subsequent Ecumenical Councils that could have added it.
@reeferfranklin Жыл бұрын
Ybara is aware that Peter was also the Bishop of Antioch, meaning the Antiochan Patriarch traces his patristic lineage back to Saint Peter too...why do Catholics always conveniently leave that out, almost as much as they leave-out the First-Among-Equals status the Bishop of Rome always had up until about, say, 1054 AD.
@phoult37 2 жыл бұрын
Maybe an Orthodox person can help me understand why so many Orthodox feel the need or desire to comment on Catholic videos? As a Catholic, I never go to Orthodox videos/channels and leave comments; am I in the norm or the outlier?
@orthobroslovemyplaylists6254 2 жыл бұрын
People can respond to criticism of their religion, especially if they feel it unfair or wrong. Go look at Gospel Simplicity’s vid “Almost becoming Catholic”. The comment section is filled with Catholics defending their religion.
@phoult37 2 жыл бұрын
@@orthobroslovemyplaylists6254 So do Catholics go on Dyer's or other Orthodox channels and criticize Orthodoxy? I honestly don't know since I don't frequent that content. I mean, I guess I don't see why you care about the opinion of a protestant and a Catholic, since both are in error according to you.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@@orthobroslovemyplaylists6254 it's a commentary on the Schism. Hardly an "attack" or "criticism" of your religion, lol. Orthomasonry is on its last leg.
@orthobroslovemyplaylists6254 2 жыл бұрын
@@glof2553 riiiight 😂 keep kvetching, sperg.
@CHURCHISAWESUM 2 жыл бұрын
@@glof2553 It is literally forbidden to be a Mason
@alexschexnayder8624 2 жыл бұрын
You might consider Craig Truglia as the Orthodox representative on this issue. He tends to be fairly well grounded on history.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
I'd consider it. I've already had Dr. Ed Siecienski on for an Orthodox perspective on the topic though
@kyriosbooks8400 2 жыл бұрын
@@GospelSimplicity hahahaha brother please dont CRaig, if anyone is not fairly grounded its him. He is from orthobro community.
@alexschexnayder8624 2 жыл бұрын
Man. Y'all really didn't understand what was meant by "fairly well" did yall? It has nothing to do with impartiality and everything to do with ability to represent a position on the basis of what he's grounded in.
@alexschexnayder8624 2 жыл бұрын
@Kyrios Books are you really trying to do what you compain that we do again, but with Craig this time? Craig is a pretty easy going guy and an Apologist. An Apologist isn't required to be "balanced" or "impartial" but only truthful. I'm sorry, but you're being rather unrealistic here.
@jeremyfirth 2 жыл бұрын
@@GospelSimplicity The Ed Siecienski video primarily focused on the filioque, though, correct? There are MANY very significant differences between Eastern and Western theology, anthropology, ecclesiology, etc besides just the filioque. Suggesting that an Orthodox Christian addressing the filioque is the Eastern Orthodox view of why we separated feels pretty narrowly focused and very incomplete.
@JonLucPritchard 2 жыл бұрын
lol you know there isn't much hope of settling issues when the main solution people can give is an appeal to the imperial boot.
@Yallquietendown 2 жыл бұрын
Why did they need to start using crackers instead of bread ? To me it seems like the Roman Catholic Church just likes to change things just because they like changing it.
@josephlozano5935 2 жыл бұрын
They're not crackers. It is a bread. And it's unleavened like the Passover bread Jesus used. It's in keeping with Biblical Jewish tradition.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
It's unleavened bread.
@LadyMaria 2 жыл бұрын
@@josephlozano5935 Although it was artos that was used. Judaizing is also a heresy.
@LadyMaria 2 жыл бұрын
@@glof2553 Crackers are unleavened bread, mostly.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@@LadyMaria so are tortillas, flatbread, naan. Unleavened bread is the oldest type of bread.
@traceyedson9652 2 жыл бұрын
This practice of podcasters interviewing other podcasters is highly suspect. And while I highly respect Gospel Simplicity I’m often stymied by his choice of guests. I’m not enamored by self-taught armchair “theologians” whose main thing is online debating. This channel should maintain its high standards.
@glorianiaga2111 2 жыл бұрын
Self-taught armchair "theologians" -- classic ad hom. Ybarra has been great & charitable in pushing through the rcc-orthodox conversation. Erick has never attacked nobody and never in the slightesg interest to do so. That's a grown man. And Austin keep doing what you do, we love your interviews and guests, they're not the usuals. And personally that's why i love your channel.
@traceyedson9652 2 жыл бұрын
@@glorianiaga2111 big fan of Austin. But I’m not a big fan of podcasters relying on other podcasters for whom that’s their main claim to fame. And Ybarra night be charitable, no one said he wasn’t. But R & T is pushing an unhelpful “dialogue” (ahem), and he’s a big part of it. That’s my view. You’re welcome to yours.
@markrome9702 2 жыл бұрын
Like having Jay Dyer on here?
@traceyedson9652 2 жыл бұрын
@@markrome9702 Yes, indeed, and I was critical of that.
@Deto4508 2 жыл бұрын
@@traceyedson9652 Why do you think Michael is pushing an helpful dialogue?
@jonathansoko1085 2 жыл бұрын
The filioque is a poor excuse for division between us
@maxonmendel5757 2 жыл бұрын
any fans of the JHS show? doesn't this guy remind you of Nick from JHS?
@timothyjordan5731 2 жыл бұрын
Constantine had the original anti-Roman attitude when he moved the capital. Rome was too soaked in paganism. He didn't see it as washed in the blood of the martyrs.
@flisom 2 жыл бұрын
The Nicene Creed was set by the Church at the First Council of Nicaea. The Church added clarification to the Creed at the First Council of Constantinople. If the Latin Church felt so strongly about the Filioque they should have called a council to have it added by the entire Church, which would have been appropriate. The Latin Church unilaterally adding the Filioque to the Creed is the source of this problem and one of the first signs of a pope who was first among equals becoming a dictator over all.
@Steve-wg3cr 2 жыл бұрын
I'm Protestant but since learning about the issue of the Filioque I tend to agree with you for the same reason. Whatever the theological reason for adding the Filioque to the Creed, it seems one shouldn't unilaterally change a Creed who's wording was agreed upon by all parties at an Ecumenical Council. Seems like it should require another Ecumenical Council to make such a change.
@phoult37 2 жыл бұрын
The pope wasn't the first one to add the Filioque to the Creed though; from my understanding, it was the local Church in Spain who added it to combat a regional heresy. You can take issue with Papal authority, but I don't see the Filioque as evidence for a papal dictatorship.
@JohnBoysGold 2 жыл бұрын
First among equals has always seemed a contradictory expression to me.
@panokostouros7609 2 жыл бұрын
Me listening to Ybarra: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/rNWJhNeUktKnaZc.html
@orthobroslovemyplaylists6254 2 жыл бұрын
Lmao!
@truckdriver8416 2 жыл бұрын
It is seriously seriously doubtful the Greek made a mistake in reading the new testament and interpreting how the Holy Spirit proceed. The Latin language is where the confusion comes in. Spain and France most certainly was speaking Latin and to put on records the filioque way started there would certainly make sense. When the Nicene Creed was decided deep in Greek territory where they would know the Greek language of the new testament which is written in Greek it would be a very Hard Sell to believe that the Greeks errored
@justinamilal3616 2 жыл бұрын
Please do One with Kabane!
@frankcaciques1318 2 жыл бұрын
A good number of half truths.. very little context .
@L2A815 2 жыл бұрын
The original Nicene Creed is posted, in stone, without the Filioque at St Peters Basilica to this day. The Non-denominational wave of confusion was born out of these 4 fundamental divergences from the Apostolic Faith.
@jonathansoko1085 2 жыл бұрын
Right and the Filioque is a poor excuse for many catholics and E.O to fight about. Its certainly no reason for division. Especially since a catholic doesnt HAVE to affirm it.
@mariorizkallah5383 2 жыл бұрын
Embrace Holy Orthodoxy ☦️
@lefooo 2 жыл бұрын
How about no, the second coming will finally end that exercise in pridefulness as it will forever end the Moloch of Protestantism.
@mariorizkallah5383 2 жыл бұрын
@@lefooo you’re being prideful
@mariorizkallah5383 2 жыл бұрын
@@lefooo with all do respect the roman church brought about Protestantism upon itself, it’s only fitting that a withering branch produces no fruit. Now you expect us to believe muslims worship the true God with us. Give me a break man
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
No 🇻🇦
@jg7923 2 жыл бұрын
@@lefooo LOL at bowing down to paintings and thinking that it makes you pious to do so.
@thewordistheonlytruth8784 2 жыл бұрын
Pride is in both churches and the pride one is satan. Jesus said not even satan would destroid it. We must get pride out of the church an we wil unit.
@LadyMaria 2 жыл бұрын
Mostly the Roman Communion.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@@LadyMaria the fact that your first instinct was to level shade at your opposition as opposed to correcting your own faults is honestly extremely telling about the convertodox mindset. The OP was literally as ecumenical as one can get. "We all should be less prideful." And you used that to throw shade. Fact is, you don't care if you go to hell as long as those evil papists are right down there with you. You people really are unbelievable.
@LadyMaria 2 жыл бұрын
@@glof2553 To be fair, you always are insulting Orthodox and calling them the most juvenile of names, the mildest is your pejorative here. You even use hell as a threat against me. We pray for salvation for all. Do you do that? Or do you pray against us? Your hate is very scary. You even use a pejorative against your faith to elicit self pity, that's alarming. A Christian would not do that. I don't really think you have a place to say much to anyone. Your reply here is just as much evidence of that. Maybe you need to think about things. "Throw shade" must be a Gen Z term. Very odd. I'm not overly familiar with it. I've never called you names or insulted you so you shouldn't do so. I get you're angry for some reason but you can't keep taking it out on others. You are in the rage cage stage of conversion. If I didn't care about you I'd not take my time to try and help you. I hope one day my words seep in. You will be a happier person. May God bless you (and yes I mean it). ☦
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@@LadyMaria "my hate is scary" lmao oh shut up. I have no issue with the Orthodox and the Orthodox I know in real life are some of the kindest and most faithful people I know in any Christian tradition. The online Orthodox, such as yourself, are snakes that are filled with nothing but venom. Venom, intellectual pride, polemical arguments that do nothing but drive people away from your Church. I can be a jerk, but my behavior did not arise in a vacuum. I did not wake up one day intending to antagonize the online Orthodox. My behavior is a response to your behavior. Correct response? Debatable. But a response nonetheless. I use a "pejorative against my faith" (I don't) to get you to see that you're being a Pharisee, condemning us papists while congratulating your own spiritual holiness and superiority to Catholics. You all have a word for this type of delusion: prelest. "If I didn't care about you I wouldn't take the time" will you stop lying, please. This is the Internet. You care about me insofar as I validate your Church and worldview. That's it. You come in the comments, throwing shade against the Catholic Church while then retreating and acting "pious" and like you "care about me." This is a delusion. This is prelest. Please stop. I'm going to say my Rosary and pray that the Blessed Virgin stomps the life out you snakes, so that you may return not as snakes, but as humans united in the Body of Christ. Unlike your plea, this isn't an attempt at emotional manipulation, but a sincere call that you schismatics get your act together and return to Rome.
@deedee9495 2 жыл бұрын
@@LadyMaria “mostly Romans” do you see how prideful your reply is😂 you proved his point.
@timothyjordan5731 2 жыл бұрын
0;59 "Who proceeds from the Father.." That's the present perfect tense , so He IS referring to the eternal procession. It's the only reference to the eternal procession of the Spirit. The Father and the Son both together "send" the Spirit. There is no Johannine reference to the sending of the Holy Spirit that doesn't include both the Father and the Son. If we were to collect all the verses about the sending of the Holy Spirit in John's Gospel, we would see that both the Father and the Son act together. "Sending" implies a "from" and a "to". From me to you. You can only send what comes from you. An equal does not "send" an equal. If the Father and the Son both together send the Spirit, in one act of sending, then it follows that the Holy Spirit must come forth from both the Father and the Son in one act of issuing forth. What part of this is hard to understand? What part of this is unsound or invalid? What part of this is un-Scriptural? What part of this is unreasonable?
@Erick_Ybarra 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks. Present Active still doesn't signify eternality. See Siecienski on the context of John.
@timothyjordan5731 2 жыл бұрын
@@Erick_Ybarra Fine. That doesn't change my point, but nonetheless, how can you be so certain that it does'nt refer to the eternal procession? I agree that this is one of the "sending" texts in which Jesus makes it clear that both the Father and the Son "send" the Spirit and in which He gives deference to the Father Who is greater than (>) Him. I see that you are emphasizing the intrinsic connection between "sending" and "eternally processing", which is good. Historically, "Who proceeds from the Father" has been taken from this text and understood to mean eternally. Actually. everything in the inner life of the Holy Trinity is present perfect, so don't write it off. I did my Honor's Thesis in 1983 on the Trinitarian controversy. I began it as my apologia for becoming Orthodox. My advisor was William (Basil) Zion, an Orthodox priest. My research, however, changed my mind and I became a great defender of the Filioque. He refused to approve my thesis and I never got my Honor's I made many posts on "The Filioque; Orthodox or Heresy" giving sound and reasonable arguments from Scripture. Most of the responses were simplistic and irrelevant. They couldn't even admit that the Filioque is arguable. What I would like to see is an irenic Orthodox author go through the Scriptural arguments and if they are wrong, to show how they are wrong or have the humility to admit that it is entirely arguable from Sacred Scripture. I am not impressed with the "duelling Patristics' and the obscuring rhetoric that predominates on that site. I will check your reference but I don't think it will temporize the eternal.
@timothyjordan5731 2 жыл бұрын
Please befriend me on Facebook so we can communicate.
@thelimatheou 2 жыл бұрын
Can you get Eric to let you know what his academic/theological credentials are that make him qualified to discuss this topic? I suspect you'll get nothing other than a biased Roman Catholic take from this layman, like you always do with Mr. Ybarra.
@zaccheusanton9470 2 жыл бұрын
@Dustin Neely I think the difference is when Austin was gonna interview Jay Dyer, both Eric Ybarra and Michael Lofton were literally in the comments section trying to stop the interview.
@jatnarivas8741 2 жыл бұрын
If he had credentials, would it necessarily mean that he has more knowledge on the matter? Aren't the credentials simply other people's token that you have actually studied the matter appropriately? Wouldn't trusting someone based only on credentials and not so much in concrete evidence of their knowledge and capacity be a logical fallacy of appealing to authority? "He or she must be right because they have a degree that says so" can be a fair assumption, but not always true. Same the other way around.
@thelimatheou 2 жыл бұрын
@@jatnarivas8741 You don't need to be a scholar to read, examine & comment on the literature, but if you decide to depart from the literature and form your own opinions on scholarly works, then you MUST be a scholar to do so with any credibility. Ybarra falls firmly into the former category while unsuccessfully attempting to be part of the latter.
@namapalsu2364 2 жыл бұрын
Erick Ybarra doesn't have any theological degree. His competence is reflected by his works on his blog, his youtube videos and his books. If you're seeking those with just academic credential I suggest John Romanides. Ha!
@thelimatheou 2 жыл бұрын
@@namapalsu2364 Ybarra's reputation speaks for itself.
@imagewell5319 2 жыл бұрын
I find the Oriental Orthodox yo be the best example of a Communion coming out of the better aspects of Imperial tolerance to a Christianity without having blood on its hands from Imperial aggression… almost as if providentially walking that razor edge.
@helpIthinkmylegsaregone 2 жыл бұрын
nice SJW take. Do you have any theological justification for the "Oriental Orthodox" school of thought, or is it just this Michael Eric Dyson tier cretinism?
@imagewell5319 2 жыл бұрын
@@helpIthinkmylegsaregone The fact that I find peacefulness of the Oriental Orthodox to be evidence by good fruit, triggered an SJW comparison from you? If you’ve read St. Cyril, St. Dioscorus, and St. Severus, and studied the Council of Chalcedon, you’ll know that our Christology is sound.
@NavelOrangeGazer 2 жыл бұрын
St. Photios, St. Gregory Palamas, St. Mark of Ephesus. The Three Pillars of Orthodoxy. That's really all you need to study on this topic. Run the line from St. Palamas and St. Photios back to the Cappadocians they are teaching the same faith vs an innovating latin Aristotelean scholasticism. The latin see changed their faith and exited the communion of the Church. It's not difficult to understand and it definitely doesn't require 95 PHds to figure out. All the information is out there. I'm a former cradle catholic and I had to do this to discern Truth of Orthodoxy but it is absolutely worth it as the fruits and comfort that comes from it are indescribable. Uniatism ("byzantine catholicism" or whatever the current PC term is) is subserving faith for temporal gains. (literally the antithesis of what Christ calls us to in the Gospels) God bless Austin, keep the interviews coming. 🙏🏻☦️
@alphonsustheleast1537 2 жыл бұрын
You just posted cringe.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit. The Three Pillars of Catholicism. You can have your Byzantine yogis
@NavelOrangeGazer 2 жыл бұрын
@@glof2553 funny since your uniates venerate these saints. So much for rome's catholicity.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@@NavelOrangeGazer in the Eastern Catholic Churches, yeah. We allow diversity of opinion within our church while adhering to central tenets. Hence why one can be Thomist, Scotist, Augustinian, Molinist, or even Catholic Palamites. Orthodox have this diversity too, the online evangelical convertodox just pretend that they don't. Your most mainstream scholar (David Bentley Hart) is a universalist for goodness sake.
@NavelOrangeGazer 2 жыл бұрын
@@glof2553 so it's literally by definition not catholic (universal) since these groups and such profess different faiths. Having half of your Church professing one creed (with filioque) and one without and the one without venerates a Saint who referred to this insertion as satanic. Do you see the problem? We do not have this diversity. Hence one creed is professed. There is only monasticism, not benedictines, not franciscians, etc. Go back to the creed, one faith.
@6williamson 2 жыл бұрын
There is no sin people are more proud of than their disobedience of John 17:21
@orthobroslovemyplaylists6254 2 жыл бұрын
That verse can’t be used to justify blind ecumenism. There are legitimate issues that need to be sorted out before west and east can reunite.
@jterrellielli7058 2 жыл бұрын
Posting 1, 2, 3 “order” is immediately problematic. Even as an illustration.
@Erick_Ybarra 2 жыл бұрын
All talk of God is technically problematic since we are describing the indescribable. In other words, God can't be apprehended by human minds, and so we are forced to speak in analogy. This is right out of the Cappadocian Fathers who all use analogies for the trinitarian emanation- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
@lizledbitter6711 2 жыл бұрын
Almost all these comments make me think of a quote attributed to Mahatma Ghandi "..........I love Christ. It’s just that so many of you Christians are so unlike Christ............"
@TP-om8of 2 жыл бұрын
Shizm or Skizm? Discuss.
@GospelSimplicity 2 жыл бұрын
Finally, someone has gotten to the real issue at hand
@evans3922 2 жыл бұрын
Only a Greek can promounce it correctly... Σχίσμα.. Schizm but the ch sounds like s +hizma the h is loud not silent...like as it sounds in ' his'
@frankcaciques1318 2 жыл бұрын
It's very sad that those who claim to know east west history are those who know it the least. What a sad display of misunderstanding of admittedly a complex era.., very common among today's crop of historians .This interview was a B minus.
@annabanana2623 2 жыл бұрын
Exactly. Eric was slayed by Jay years ago in debate. Eric lacks knowledge of the biblical cannon. The 7 ecumenical councils are the foundation of the Creed. I can almost guarantee Eric believes Homorius was not a heretic.
@glof2553 2 жыл бұрын
@@annabanana2623 Erick was not "slayed" by Jay, lmao. Jay looked like a buffoon and couldn't stay on topic. "YOUR ENTIRE METAPHYSICS IS BASED ON ONE GUY"
@annabanana2623 2 жыл бұрын
@@glof2553 One guy? This coming from a papist. Oh the irony.
@annabanana2623 2 жыл бұрын
@Brian Farley I wasn't saying he was the best apologist either. I said what I said Jay slayed Eric. There are plenty of Orthodox Christians online.
@tonywallens217 2 жыл бұрын
You must be a solid historian to make such a judgment. I would love to see you and Erick go back and forth a bit
@repentnow6244 2 жыл бұрын
The papacy is heresy, and will be a huge part of the end times "church."
@nono-bt8gy 2 жыл бұрын
Yes exactly. I am sure on the last day, we will be asked about our understanding of the Trinity and the leavened vs unleavened bread. If we give the wrong answer, we will be sent straight to hell. Fortunately, since we spend our lifetime watching videos and debates on the subject (while not praying and not helping the poors), we wil be able to give the correct answer!
@repentnow6244 2 жыл бұрын
@@nono-bt8gy what does understanding the Holy Trinity or anything else you named off have to do with my comment? I'm looking at Pope Francis' fruits, he pushes ecumenism and interfaith. We do not have the same God as Muslims, the Lord Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father but through him, no debate.
@jotunman627 2 жыл бұрын
@@repentnow6244 Pope can have his own opinion and interest, it does not change anything in the church doctrines.
@peterj6740 2 жыл бұрын
There is doctrinal errors in all Churches. Christ invitation was not to recite a creed or a code of ethics to observe but he invited people to Follow Himself whatever creed or color. The Church has done a lot of damage to the cause of Christ. There were schisms , crusades , torture , burning heretics and witches and a 100 years war and accusing Jews of Deicide which ultimately led to the Holocaust I say yes to Christ but no to the church
@peterj6740 2 жыл бұрын
@@repentnow6244 The God of Judaism and the Moslem is the God of Jesus Christ and the God of the Christian is the God of ABRAHAM , ISAAC AND JACOB which is the same God of both Jew and Moslem and Jesus Himself............ Anyone who has the read the bible fully agree with me. If you do not agree the problem is not with me or the bible but the one who reads it wrongly .and that even includes yourself .
Gospel Simplicity
Рет қаралды 20 М.
Gospel Simplicity
Рет қаралды 9 М.
Eater Straw Hat
Рет қаралды 24 МЛН
Gospel Simplicity
Рет қаралды 41 М.
Gospel Simplicity
Рет қаралды 6 М.
Gospel Simplicity
Рет қаралды 80 М.
ShelbysquadHD
Рет қаралды 3 МЛН
Untitled Joker
Рет қаралды 11 МЛН