Yes, and Catholics agree with you about this. We don't claim that the pope has "absolute authority".

@@HumanDignity10 Fair enough. We can change "absolute" to "infallible".

@@funandmental Yep, and Catholics agree with you on this too. We don’t claim that popes have infallible authority. Catholics criticize and disagree with popes on a regular basis.

@@HumanDignity10 Thanks for the dialogue. I understand that. The point I’m trying to make is that Protestants emphasize the practical headship of Christ over His church. I recognize that Catholics don’t deny that but the reason we’re protesting is because we believe that the authority of the bishop of Rome interferes with the ability of local churches to submit to Christ. The singularity of authority in heaven allows for and encourages a plurality of authority in earth.

@@funandmental Local Catholic Churches are in no way hindered from submitting to Christ. There are Catholic Churches, monasteries, convents, and ministries all over the world who have their own distinct ways of operating and their own distinct ways of expressing their Catholic faith. There is a lot of local control and plenty of plurality. However, some universality is important for lots of reasons I don’t have time to get into. But I will say some universality can lead to so much beautiful unity - for example when I pray the Liturgy of the Hours and I know that people all over the world are praying it too - I love that!

so glad it's been helpful! Let me know if I can be of any further assistance. May the lord bless you and guide you.

I converted to Catholicism from evangelicalism 9 years ago. I also had that concern. Where I was able to find Truth was not in the succession of the Pope or the Apostles but the succession of Dogmatic truth proving the reality of Papal and Apostolic succession. God only has revealed a single line of Truth not 1000’s of different truths depending on what “church” or “pastor” you adhere too. Look at the doctrine of the Eucharist. It can only be True in one manner. Luthers ideas can’t be true at the same time Calvins being true. Authority of the Church is paramount in all areas of faith and morals. Good luck on your journey and God Bless Bob

Supreme, have you ever read, "Jesus, Peter and the keys", ( Hess, Butler). This book includes many Protestant scholars who attest Peter was given primacy over the Apostles and alone the keys of the Kingdom, and that Peter is the rock on whom Jesus Christ built His Church. The office of sole key holder is one of succession. "Peter is the Shepherd of the Universal Church ", ( John Chrysostom). Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is True food and Blood True drink

As a Catholic convert myself from Protestantism my biggest stumbling block was myself. I didn't want to submit to any "human authority". I submit to the Church and the Pope because of my faith in Jesus and His promises that the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church. It is only in the Catholic Church where that protection is promised.

@@markrome9702 what protection does the Roman Catholic church offer ?

Thanks Mitchell, I really appreciate that.

You know what Mitchell? As a fellow Catholic, I can appreciate that. Even if we disagree with the conclusion, we can appreciate the research, sincerity, and cordiality present in Gavin's videos.

m.kzfaq.info/get/bejne/aLN2mtt2tuCVY2g.html papacy

389 I Am the Church. The Church was founded by Me and it can never die Saturday, April 7th, 2012 @ 10:00 My dearly beloved daughter, the schism I spoke of has begun in the Catholic Church. My Teachings, which have never changed since My Holy Scriptures ended with the Book of Revelation, are now being challenged. There have been a number of challenges, opinions and theological assessments of My Holy Word throughout the centuries. Many fine men questioned the instructions and the Teachings, which I imparted to mankind. Some of My Teachings were taken apart, analysed, new interpretations sought and then accepted. Yet this has been unnecessary, for the Truth was given to man by the prophets who came before Me and then by Me during My time on Earth. The Truth has never changed. The Truth is simple. Other information, not contained in Holy Scripture was given, as a Gift to the world, through chosen souls, for one reason only. To help you contemplate on My Sacrifice for mankind and to show and remind you of the Love I hold in My Heart for all of God’s children. Any Divine Revelations given to the world today are to help you prepare for Eternal Life. My Teachings, honoured by the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, are now being attacked in the first of many challenges, which will result in the division of the Church. New laws will be introduced to suit modern opinion and so that they sit comfortably with those who, with pride in their souls, feel a need to pacify mankind, rather than show obedience to the Teachings of the Church. I Am the Church. The Church was founded by Me and it can never die. Many, including those from within, as well as from outside the Church, will attempt to break down its structure. Pray that My Holy Vicar, Pope Benedict XVI, will remain strong amidst the opposition he now faces. This is a deliberate attempt, by those connected with the false prophet, to create a new church. These cunning people will have you believe it will be the same Church, but it cannot be. How can My Church, with new laws, twisted versions of the Truth I gave to the world, represent Me? It can’t. This is why My Father will direct His Church, the true, loyal believers, from the Heavens. He will hold the keys, until the Second Coming, when the New Jerusalem will rise, the One True Catholic Church, out of the ashes to be reclaimed by all of God’s children, all religions, all creeds as one. This is the way it was meant to be in full and final union in the New Era of Peace on Earth. Your beloved Jesus Christ The Book of Truth Second Coming of Jesus Christ

@@michaelt5030 well, yes, maybe, but it can lead people astray in the wrong path....souls are gravely at stake here, eternity has no end. We can make only one mistake and its consequences is forever, our soul is worth more than anything we have here on earth and can we entrust it to one's opinion versus the magisterium of the church that has a 2000 year history. These religious discussions can affect people who are not well founded in their faith and these self proclaimed "bible experts" can lead them into destruction.

Thanks, so glad it was helpful!

Thanks Joseph, so glad it was useful to you!

Joseph, might I suggest the channel Reason and Theology? They are a Catholic channel which has dealt in very in-depth historical debates much like Gavin: that is, a respectful and deep manner. If you are truly vascilating between Protestantism and Catholicism/Orthodoxy, they might be a good channel for you, as they are respectful, and have had discussions with Gavin Ortlund. Most of the recurring guests have also been members of the Protestant, Orthodox, and Catholic faiths at one point or another.

If I may ask, where are you now? I also resonate with what you said in terms of where I am in my faith journey

If you were asking me, I'll be honest and say I don't quite know. What Daniel said about being true to what the CofE is is what I'm thinking at the moment. I'm still not firm on it but I'll just say I'd be surprised if next Christmas I wasn't a Catholic. God bless

Thanks for your responses. I'm not Anglican (non-denominational protestant) but Ive considered joining an ACNA church as I'm drawn to liturgy and consistent partaking in communion (with belief in real presence). Catholicism is attractive but I remain highly skeptical of the papacy and Marian dogmas. The scandals, corruption, Vatican politics, clericalism are also big turnoffs. I wonder, how often do serious Protestants drawn to Catholicism still remain Protestant based on theological conviction? We need more testimonies of these. Or is it true what Newman said: serious Protestants become Catholic, weak Catholics become protestant

It does seem to be true for many who do that dive into history. The expression seems to be more a triumphalist proclamation against protestant Christians though.

@saintejeannedarc9460. My question is this, “Why is that?” The scholarly consensus is that there was no papacy early on…and that the Assumption of Mary is a later accretion. Marian devotion doesn’t come in till around 250 C.E. It really seems that the only way to maintain one’s integrity is to say, “To be deep into history (on a very superficial level) is to, perhaps, convince oneself of the validity of Catholicism.” Dive in any deeper and things completely unravel. The Real Presence in the Eucharist (shared with Anglicanism and Lutheranism) and Baptismal Regeneration (likewise shared with Anglicanism and Lutheranism) are prevalent in the early years. But as far as I have been able to find, up to the year 250, there is not a single RC distinctive in evidence. No invocation of the saints, no icons, no transubstantiation, no purgatory, no penance. If someone “reads their way” into the Catholic Church, they must want it awfully bad, first.

Quote mining Trent.

Yes, quote miner Trent. At it again!

So sorry for mangling your audio! Clearly I have failed as Bishop of Ojai.

@@TruthUnites haha the Bishop is going to need some minions (err, I mean, technical terms for the bishop’s underlings) to take care of that for him!

@@GospelSimplicity I will delegate this matter to the lowly presbyters!!! 😂

Thanks, glad it was useful!

Have you never heard of hierarchy & authority, applies to all entities, so why not to the CC Mt 16 18-19 Without hierarchy & authority, Protestantism has confusion, division & scandal of 000’s of sects when Jesus willed unity Jn 17 11-23

@@geoffjs Firstly, that's a false argument. Protestant is a broad category. There is church government in all of the protestant denominations, and they all function as intended. As far as division, and scandal, the RCC has been soaked in it for centuries, and still is.

Thanks a lot! So glad you found it useful!

Sure, lots of names were changed in the bible. But Simon's was changed to Peter, which means "rock" and Jesus said "And I tell you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

​@@HumanDignity10The big question is, did Jesus give the same authority to Peter's successor? Or did he give Peter the ability to pass it on to his successor. And the answer to that question is, we have no evidence to support that. It's an idea that comes hundreds of years later.

@@not_milk We actually do have scriptural to support the papacy. “Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Papacy” by Brant Pitre is a good resource.

So glad it is helpful, thanks Elvis!

so glad the video was useful, Anna! I know its tough engaging in conversation sometimes when you are outnumbered, but I pray the Lord gives you grace to know how to interact with both truth and love. Thanks for commenting!

Well...hang in there lol...I am Protestant with Catholic friends also...I have been studying/debating Roman Catholicism for 13 years and I'm even more convinced and comfortable than ever before that I am in the right place. I can not imagine ever converting. My mom is Anglican but I attend a non-denominational (my personal theological leaning's are most Reformed i.e Calvinistic though).

740 My Mission is not to give you a new Bible, for that could never be, as My Father’s Book contains the whole Truth Sunday, March 24th, 2013 @ 18:06 My dearly beloved daughter, when you are asked by those who love Me, what is the purpose of your Mission, your answer must be - to save your souls. When you are sneered at, mocked and asked what gives you the right to proclaim the Word of God - the answer is, so that Jesus can save your souls. Then, when those who do proclaim My Holy Word already, and who follow My Teachings, accuse you of heresy - then the answer to them is this. You, who are faithful to Christ, do you not think that you, too, are sinners in the Eyes of God? Don’t you, too, want to salvage your souls? Sin will always stand between you and God. Every single soul, including the most hardened sinner and those amongst you who are chosen souls, will never be free from sin, until I come again. You may be redeemed every time you confess your sins, but your soul will remained cleansed for only a short time. Never feel you are not in need of the Food of Life. My Light draws you, now, to Me, through this very special Mission. I give you great blessings and special graces when you respond to My call, as I beckon you towards My New Kingdom - My New Paradise. You may believe that God would not need to send another prophet - that mankind was released from the stranglehold of Satan, after My death on the Cross, that you have been given the Truth through My Teachings already, and that the Truth is contained in My Father’s Book, the most Holy Bible. And you would be correct, but for this. There is still more you have to know as the prophecies contained in the Book of Revelation are not known to you. You have been given the summary - and yet many of you refuse to acknowledge its contents. You snub the Book of Revelation and have no wish to understand it. My Mission is not to give you a new Bible, for that could never be, as My Father’s Book contains the whole Truth. My Task, in a world, which has plunged into paganism, is to remind you of the Truth on the one hand, and on the other, is My Desire to prepare your souls, for the time of My Second Coming. Many of you say you honour Me, but many have fallen away from the Truth. Many do not believe in Satan or the existence of Hell, and as such, do not take sin seriously. You have been led into grave error through your tolerance for sin. And now the gravest errors will come about, throughout all Christian Churches, when sin will be cast to one side. You will be led into a doctrine of deceit. This is a plan crafted by the Evil One to take you away from Me. Because My Divine Presence, My Body and My Blood, is contained in every Tabernacle in the world - you have been able to fight sin. But now, when the plan to remove the Holy Eucharist comes about, you will be helpless. This is why I reveal to you the Truth of what is to come, so that I can prepare you. It is only because I Love you that I call out to you now. When the errors are exposed, you will then realise how much you have to learn and how pride prevented you from accepting My Hand of Mercy and how you are nothing without Me. Your Jesus The Book of Truth Second Coming of Jesus Christ

Was the bible complete

@@MrMonchis04 No, it wasn't. John's Gospel, Epistles, and Revelation were all written after Peter died, and yet there is still no mention of him passing over some super important office to Clement, or to anyone else in Rome ... and neither do any of the earliest Church Fathers make mention of any such office.

Great argument Beowulf.Appreciate it!

Glad it was useful, thanks Thomas!

Thanks! So glad it came across that way; it is very important to me to aim for that.

awesome to hear! Thanks for the encouragement!

@@TruthUnites I'm a little more blunt and hard-hitting than yourself but I appreciate your work.

@@aGoyforJesus thanks! I believe there is room for different approaches to meet different needs. My approach is definitely not the only way to go about things! Take care.

@@TruthUnites you may find the video I did recently on the "Psychology of the Catholic Convert" pertinent to some of the authority topics you address here.

@@aGoyforJesus liked that video.

Nope, read what Peter says to everyone in the council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 7.

@@koppite9600 James took the lead at the Jerusalem council! Roman bishops are hardly apostolic. The Roman Catholic Church teaches error and false doctrine. They cannot be of God. You people falsely elevated Mary.

@@koppite9600 How does that add any information? If you read the whole chapter, you could just as easily say that James was in charge, since he listens and renders a judgement, v19.

@@erc9468 how can that be, given that Peter had already established he was the one to give a solution Peter said he was chosen for that occasion, James wasn't.

@@koppite9600 The point is that really have to stretch the text to get to Peter acting as some kind of final arbiter. You could say the same about James. And then in v22 you have the whole body of elders coming together. Just like the good Presbyterians that they were.

Glad it was helpful!

Thanks Timothy, glad it was of use!

@@TruthUnites any chance you’ve encountered Brett Salkeld’s book on Transubstantiation? IMO, it’s a must read for both Protestants and Roman Catholics. I think he’d be a great guest for your channel.

@@trupela I haven't encountered it! I will look into it, thanks for the suggestion!

@@TruthUnites Check out the Unitas Fidei KZfaq channel for a couple good interviews with Brett Salkeld.

Thanks Will, glad you enjoyed!

so glad it was helpful! I totally agree, there are way more Catholic critiques of Protestants than vice versa, it seems. May the Lord bless you.

@@TruthUnites God bless you too! Is there an email that you share for people to communicate or is that only through patreon?

@@incana1734 see the "about" section of my channel page.

m.kzfaq.info/get/bejne/aLN2mtt2tuCVY2g.html Papacy

History of Emperor Constantine I find very troubling, he was a pagan not a Christian and he had a lot of influence on the structure/format of church practice. A pagan started the denominational structure that is still with us today. He legalized Christianity for power, not because of a conversion. Also from my study of scripture, there is no way Peter, who was an apostle to the Jews, left the Jewish people given the fact they were going through a severe famine and destruction of the temple about to take place, would have abandoned them and gone off to Rome to be a bishop or pope. That is absolutely a rewrite of history. My concern is Acts 17:10-12. A good church group will apply this tradition that was handed down to the Gentiles from the Jews. This tradition is kryptonite to Roman Catholics, which is why they deny sola scriptura. The more one studies scripture, the more one sees problems with their doctrines. Then they try to wiggle around it by using poor hermeneutics. 🤓

Thanks Jonathan.

glad it was helpful!

interesting idea, thanks for the suggestion!

I'm curious I'm lutheran myself I just want you to clear this up. I don't see this as an argument how is he saying Rome is purley regional he's just saying God resides in the region of the Romans.

No, you're far better than me. Every Catholic priest I meet makes me think, "Maybe it wouldn't be so bad to convert. He's so gracious and he loves Jesus deeply." But every Papist apologist I listen to makes me think, "You really have to be brainwashed to believe the obvious lies of that false religion!"

Exactly. It’s just a slight of hand historical claim that is devoid of evidence and detached from reality

Thanks Chris! Yes that would be great. Glad you enjoyed!

Great to hear, thanks for letting me know!

It seems absurd to me to think apostolic succession survived through the years of people simply purchasing church positions.

@@colepriceguitar1153 it's blasphemy

But having rock-like faith need not be exclusive to Peter. Clearly, others before and after Peter had similar dispositions towards the faith.

what an interesting idea! Hmmm, thanks, I will consider this. It seems like it is such an urgent need right now, right?

@@elvisisacs3955 i totally agree. Such a good reminder that eternal consequences are at stake!

I know, it certainly is ironic 👍

Glad you enjoyed!

@@pastormikewinger7212 Begone, bot.

I think that you will need to do a bit more research, preferably from Catholic sources, about just what exactly a Pope was meant to do. What do you understand by 'govern the entire church from Spain to India'? What is your understanding of the role of the bishops in governing the Church? It might help to think in similar terms about how Roman Emperors governed the vast Roman Empire, although I would not push the analogy too far. As far as Christ's hand chosen apostles still wandering the earth, etc, you might find it helpful to do some research on Clement's Letter to the Corinthians. But, again, I would suggest doing so from Catholic sources. It's probably better to look at what did happen rather than to think in terms of what you think could or could not happen.

Having a pope when John was alive is justified because the highest recognition for a human in the Church is not being a Pope but rather being a saint...Even today, you would come across saintly priests and bad Popes and wonder why these saintly men weren't chosen to be the Pope...The answer lies in God choosing Peter...He could have chose st.John, after all, he was the only one who stood by his side throughout crucifixion, he looked after his mother etc...But why did God choose Peter who denied him 3 times ??

Interestingly, both Linus and Clement are actually named in the Bible. Not sure about Anacletus. But neither of them is called pope or even has any special title at all. Now, that could have been because at the time the scriptures mentioning them were written, neither was pope. They are mentioned implicitly as leaders in the church but they aren't called elder, bishop or even presbyter.

I haven't done anything on it yet! Justification is on my list to get to know for future videos... will be several months though!

Peter actually translates as "small stone. " Jesus meant Himself as the Rock. Elsewhere He is called the CHIEF CORNERSTONE of the church..CORNERSTONE is the basis of a building. Using Peter as the cornerstone is a desperate grab at connecting the papacy to a biblical mandate, which is nonexistent. Make sense? The chief cornerSTONE used a smaller stone like Peter as part of the church.

Peter's confession of faith

Unfortunately, Protestantism thinks that it is logical, but it clearly isn’t & is riddled with error that is ignored or not recognised, starting with optional or symbolic baptism, that baptism has to be by immersion, infants can’t be baptised etc

I hope my Theological Retrieval for Evangelicals could be helpful! Mark Noll's Turning Points is fantastic.

I would think it would have worked like it did with Jesus ( he gave them the same power and authority) when the woman touched his robe and he felt power go out of him. It was "her faith" that determined it, it was always done "according to their faith". But only those who were given such power had such power to give those who would have faith. And the apostles and disciples were given this power.

Hey Cameron! I believe I was speaking of the early church at that point (unless I misremember) -- responding to the idea that prior to the completion of the canon, Christians looked to the church rather than the Scripture. I was trying to say it was both-and. I don't know if that completely resolves your concern; it is certainly right that Protestants leave churches too easily today! Thanks for commenting!

@@TruthUnites Yes, that is my point. It was both-and in the early church, which is more or less the Catholic position, not a protestant position.

@@cameronstreicher9945 ah, thanks for clarifying. As to whether that is the Catholic position, I think it depends on what we mean by "church." Protestants would distinguish apostolic oral teaching from the later teaching of the magisterium, and I think a full-blown two-source theory of revelation takes a long time to develop.

In my experience as a protestant, the picture you outlined doesn't happen as often as you think. Rather than gathering around a pope we gather around core doctrine. In my own church there is a wealth of views on minor issues. People generally don't leave over differences of opinions on those, but usually for other reasons. If someone disagrees with core doctrine it usually cuts against the Gospel and that I'd a different matter

Very well put.

Right!absolutely good observation.

I totally agree with you. As a Protestant (still studying to see what seems to be true) many of Catholic friends, especially online, treat all Protestants like they have no grounds and are blindly listening to progressive pastors or influencers. Unfortunately I think that is what gets more attention, rather than a theology based on church fathers or early tradition.

This is not the historic Protestant position as Luther and Calvin routinely quote the Fathersto support their position It's Sola not Solo Scriptura.

@@elizafarfan6335 I hope you don't convert to RC(or atleast that you don't without deep study and prayer). Take your time and don't be pressured

@@Adam-ue2ig To be blunt, I don’t care about the “historic Protestant position”. I care about what Protestants actually believe.

@@DF_UniatePapist I wasn't addressing you...but there is obviously a difference between what some believe and accurate or official position...this is quite obvious when talking to many lay Catholics that don't get their own official Church teaching accurate.

Maybe when he realizes that he has no real authority over his church. When church members disagree with our Pope Ortlund here, they just go ahead and make a new denomination in which they are their own Pope.

And Aaron has a wife and passed the High Priesthood to His sons but the Pope has none of these.

Thanks for the charitable comment! I appreciate your willingness to wrestle with these things honestly. On Acts 15, I agree that Peter's contribution is important, but it seems to me that it is not definitive in the way we would expect if the Catholic claims regarding the papacy are true. I don't see why Paul and James would even need to speak after him if Peter's claims were definitive, and James' language (v. 19) seems to indicate he is providing his own judgment on the matter. It just looks like a group decision to me in such a way that that no one person is in authority or leadership. I'll grant that the passage is not absolutely conclusive, but I think it favors that view. I think you've already seen my video on the papacy in the 3rd-7th centuries, but on the testimonies of Cyprian and Jerome and Tertullian, I agree that Rome was looked to as a source of unity and bastion of orthodoxy, but I don't think it was looked to as an authority over the other churches, and I think some of these very fathers (e.g., Cyprian) claimed as much. As a Protestant, I'd see the stature of the early Roman church as dependent upon her faithfulness to orthodoxy, not something that continues on indefinitely. This is where concerns about later departures and developments in medieval Catholicism come in. That is how it seems to me, anyway. Thank you again for the charitable and sincere comment!

ah, yes! I did watch that video. I couldn't remember if you addressed these specific quotes. Thanks for the response!

Hello Jacque, I am not Gavin, but I think I may have something for you. On the Church Fathers and Matthew 16, you should look up the work of Karlfried Froehlich as he is an expert on Biblical interpretation in the Early Church. Especially his article in the book, "Religious Roles of the Papacy" edited by Christopher Ryan. The discussion of Peter in the Early Church is a lot more nuanced than people make it out to be. I more accessible work would be William Webster's "The Matthew 16 Controversy". Also, do you have a citation for your quotes from Tertullian and Jerome? I would love to look at them. :)