Just got your book on this topic Erick, hoping it’s jam packed with information and cross examination of history from both sides of East and West as all your books are jam packed 👍 keep up the great work
I love the editing style of the new videos. The only thing that would make them better is Subway Surfers gameplay and Family Guy clips in the background.
I shattered Luigi's newfound worldview on his IG when he posted about how wrong the Filioque is. He posted an example of how the Holy Spirit actually proceeds. It sounded familiar to me and sure enough it was an almost direct lift from the Catechism. So I cut and pasted the Catechism but took the paragraphs numbers out. I asked if that was a good way of understanding it. He enthusiastically agreed. So I naturally reposted it with the paragraphs and said "Congratulations, you're Catholic." No response.
@@garrettbar2212 the guy who is racking up constant W’s has no need to cope. I think it’s you projecting your cope onto others, son. It’s obvious and is pure desperation.
@voxpopuli8132 I mean, sure. Internet larpers could at least get baptised, confirmed, and go to mass before they play-pretend at being byzantine and slavic zealots.
Losing all of my respect for EOs. Comment section is full of cope and made up historical narratives that belong in a fiction novel rather than serious discussion. But there's no serious discussion possible since both east and west believed in Filioque.
Shaved clergy insults Jesus only and by living this way , their punishment is coming , their repentance to Orthodoxy only saves , this is what they need to know.
as a Catholic Chadwagner supporter, your comment was a nice get back at that guy, we gotta give the Orthobros a win in this sub comment section, nice job, nice job, very good of comedic irony
Time-stamp 9:42 - Not all procession is hypostatic procession. 11:06 - Use of the Athanasian Creed 12:02, 12:35 - What type of Filioque? 14:45 - Is this about the economy, or what the Holy Spirit is hypostatically?
This is splitting hairs. Do you think Christ will be deciding the eternal fate of people based on their view of the filioque? Both sides are just striving to be right and win a point. It is childish.
@@planteruines5619 The filioque was added to the creed in the 9th century, so everyone, up until that point, who believed they were in Christ but never thought about or declared "and the Son" are now in hell?
@@thenowchurch6419 you're , first of all , confusing doctrinal developpement and heresy , to say that would also mean Abraham Isaac and Jacob would not have eternal life because they didn't know all of the doctrines , that's not how it works , it's a willful rejection of a true doctrine even if you get corrected by God himself, secondly , the filioque, while not on the creed , was accepted by the latin fathers and the eastern fathers , the creed could be modified (expanded , not a change of doctrine ) in order to exterminate the heresy , this is what happened in the west
@@planteruines5619 Not exactly. Abraham,Isaac and Jacob all put their faith in Yahweh and His sacrificial Lamb, to come, so their ignorance about the Passion and Crucifixion in all details would not place them in heresy. The Roman Catholic insistence that the filioque is a doctrine essential for salvation would damn all professed Christians who either never heard of it or simply did not comprehend its details. I believe that if qualification for heresy is "wilful rejection" then neither those Christians nor the majority of professed Christians today are in danger of hellfire for ignorance about that doctrine.
What's most damaging is people like Jay dyer teach that all uniquely catholic dogmas descend from the filioque. If we're right on the filioque then we're also right on Everything else
Have you read their diaries for yourself? I would be skeptical of anything people simply tell you online (as much of that has been exposed by people who have studied the topic).
Hi Wagner, i have a question. Could you make a video on the thomistic position on the arguments brought forth by Blessed Duns Scotus on the filioque not being a necessity for the distinction of the Son and the Spirit? I see Scotus heavily lean on Disparate relations as a way of distinguishing them. I know you’ve answered this in some of your vids but would it be possible to make an actual video focusing on this issue and showing that the thomistic position is the correct one?
They articulated Maxmus' letter as presented in this video, but they simply questioned whether the letter was authentic (which many scholars still do to this day).
Why would we accept it as a formula of reunion? Us Catholics and the EOs both have interpretations of the Letter to Marinus that are contradictory. How can a document with contradictory interpretations be the document for unity in faith?
@@dwong9289 St. Mark of Ephesus wanted both parties to affirm St. Maximus’ letter but the Latins refused to do so. Since Florence was an attempt at reunion, it would make sense to start from a place of at least verbal agreement, no?
@@dwong9289 the Latins said they agreed with the Greeks present though. The Latins believed they believed the same thing. Yet, they were unwilling to reconcile with the Greeks if the Greeks confessed St. Maximus’ letter.
Whenever you challenge orthobros to delve into the texts and prove why it's wrong to interpret the Eastern and Western Fathers as teaching the Filioque they start recommending Siecienski' book as some defeater - but they themselves probably didn't read it XD
Yeah, indefectability that's more Michael Lofton's wealhouse, and it involves something like his "charism of safety" (I'd prefer something more like "charism of Sureity," "charism of assurance").
Get a bishop from each patriachy that agree to who is a heretic and who isnt and we can talk, maybe that talk leads to another schism, it would be how many schisms in the last 5 years? 2 or 3?
It's a question of whether or not the Holy Ghost proceeds _in essence_ from two sources. The answer would be no. He proceeds from the Father in essence, He proceeds from the Son in His energies. A very real person cannot proceed from two sources. He was sent by the Father in the name of the son upon the ascent of the son into heaven.
Real. Athanasian creed was talking about hypostatic origin in the first half of the sentence and switched to energy without any indication or explanation in the second half. Few will grasp the mystery of this.
@@dianekamer8341 It's not a trope. The essence and energies distinction is the perfect explanation of faith. Despite being separate from God in his essence, we know of him through his energies. Scripture backs this up, the holy Ghost proceeds in essence from the Father, and in his energies from the son Did the Apostles receive the holy Ghost twice, both in John and in Acts upon the descent? Or did they encounter the energies in John and receive the essence in Acts?
We need to stop focusing on only pwning prots and take the pwning to the schismatics so they too can see how cringe they are for: 1: rejecting the Pope's full authority 2: following cringe theology
Does either version of the Creed change the fact we believe the Holy Spirit is also God? Seems like such an idiotic argument to split a Church over. The West seems much more forgiving on the issue and allows Eastern Catholics to not recite it. But the Orthodox make it like you believe in an entirely different Trinity.
@@t.d6379 The Romans are the one that brought up this invention when the "same church" prohibited the modification of the creed centuries earlier ? The Early Church was guided by the Holy Spirit through Ecumenical Councils so why would they make the Creed, perfecting it, prohibit changes of the Creed, just to change everything up centuries later ?
@@eliasAbouda-z4s The may very well be valid for such a nuanced, simple in principle, but complex in practice argument. Having said that, overall if a person should choose based solely on early history/tradition, Orthodoxy is still valid. Because for how right he may be on this ONE topic, it doesn't mean he's right about everything else afterwards.
@@eliasAbouda-z4s ahahaha youre so węįrd dude, i was laughing at your comment because its funny go outside, take in some fresh air, touch grass you desperately need it if you think someone laughing at a comment you made is a personal attack
I think you should reach out to Lofton and do a collab. He has a way bigger following and both of you can gain from it. He gets to refute orthos and you get exposure.
One side opion is worthless. Dona real debate. I have left the roman chirch because i seen roman catholism destroyed time and time again thriugh debates.
Why doesn't the 'wide' acceptance of the athanasian creed be reflected to the theology of the ecumenical councils? I think its not that clear perhaps that all were filioquists or it wouldnt have been said in chalcedon that the present creed perfectly depicts the relation of the father son and the holy spirit.
St. Cyril of Alexandria’s Ninth Anathema and the Explanation given at the Council of Ephesus Anathematism 9. If anyone says that the One Lord Jesus Christ was glorified by the Spirit, using the power that came through Him as if it were foreign to Himself, and receiving from Him the power to work against unclean spirits and to accomplish divine signs for men, and does not rather say that the Spirit is His very own, through whom He also worked the divine signs, let him be anathema. Explanation 9. When the Only Begotten Word of God became man, He remained, even so, God, having absolutely all that the Father has with the sole exception of being the Father. He had as His very own the Holy Spirit which is from Him and within Him essentially and so He brought about divine signs, and even when He became man He remained God and accomplished miracles in His very own power through the Spirit. Those who say that He was glorified by the power of the Holy Spirit as a man like any one of us, or rather like one of the saints, but that He did not make use of His own power in a God-befitting manner, but instead used an external power and received His assumption to heaven from the Holy Spirit as a grace, then these rightly fall under the force of this anathematism.
I think the quickest way to do that is point to Session 3 of the Council of Ephesus (which every apostolic church except the Nestorians accept) where it teaches Papal Indefectibility. Today both Greek and Ethiopian Orthodox deny that teaching yet it was upheld by their own Council.
@@phylocybe_ it’s actually Catholicism and the Synagogue of Satan aka Rabbinic Judaism (based on Talmud & Kabbalah). Gnosticism is just an early offshoot while modern day Freemasonry is the Gentile arm of the Kabbalist. But no one in the public sphere is talking about it. Start by looking up where the so-called “Star of David” comes from.
@@HreodrichSimilarly to Islam world is dirty and bad, Therfore God cannot enter creation duty to His majesty etc. Same in heaven you won't see essence of God, you'll be kind of in 'different room' away from God
Yes. Nicely done
Just got your book on this topic Erick, hoping it’s jam packed with information and cross examination of history from both sides of East and West as all your books are jam packed 👍 keep up the great work
so still won't debate anyone and just slandering the other position and dosing yourself on cheese burgers huh?
I love the editing style of the new videos. The only thing that would make them better is Subway Surfers gameplay and Family Guy clips in the background.
I shattered Luigi's newfound worldview on his IG when he posted about how wrong the Filioque is.
He posted an example of how the Holy Spirit actually proceeds. It sounded familiar to me and sure enough it was an almost direct lift from the Catechism.
So I cut and pasted the Catechism but took the paragraphs numbers out. I asked if that was a good way of understanding it. He enthusiastically agreed. So I naturally reposted it with the paragraphs and said "Congratulations, you're Catholic."
No response.
😂😂😂 their arguments are so weak
Catholicism vindicated. Eastern "Orthodox" devastated.
Sounds like a Dimond Bros video title
I'm Literally on Fire LOL! I can't imagine being so low-brow.
@@Wilantonjakov you got the reference
@@glassman7961 they're so meme-able, I love them
Easy to do from a one side debate, you can make every one believe nonsense that way
Filioque bros cannot stop winning. Still waiting for any EO to debunk a single argument we have put forth.
Ur a W
Cope brother
@@garrettbar2212 recite the arguments and refute them then.
@@garrettbar2212 the guy who is racking up constant W’s has no need to cope. I think it’s you projecting your cope onto others, son. It’s obvious and is pure desperation.
Do you guys apply this sort of zeal against Vatican II and the antipopes?
Pray for the repentance of the disuniate and Photian churches
Owning the schismatic Photians: my favorite topic
Do you have Discord or Twitter Kai? I want to share something with you
If they wanna be real based Photeans, they should do like Photeus and reconcile with Rome.
Hey Kais. Are you on Discord?
@voxpopuli8132 I mean, sure. Internet larpers could at least get baptised, confirmed, and go to mass before they play-pretend at being byzantine and slavic zealots.
@@dwong9289 yes my @ is kai_stoss
Losing all of my respect for EOs. Comment section is full of cope and made up historical narratives that belong in a fiction novel rather than serious discussion. But there's no serious discussion possible since both east and west believed in Filioque.
Shaved clergy insults Jesus only and by living this way , their punishment is coming , their repentance to Orthodoxy only saves , this is what they need to know.
@@georgiosgerontas760bro can’t even right a proper statement and wants me to believe in Eastern Orthodox
@@Akhmatceila777 You literally couldn't even write the word "write".
as a Catholic Chadwagner supporter, your comment was a nice get back at that guy, we gotta give the Orthobros a win in this sub comment section, nice job, nice job, very good of comedic irony
@@georgiosgerontas760The Ukraine war is yet another chastisement for your errors
Christian B. Chadner
Keep coming back this video especially for the section on the creed. So concise, one of the best videos on the Filioque
Bro has high rizzability in this video.
Tf is that comment 😭
@@Hedgehogz856 lot of limp wrists in the Latin world.
Time-stamp
9:42 - Not all procession is hypostatic procession.
11:06 - Use of the Athanasian Creed
12:02, 12:35 - What type of Filioque?
14:45 - Is this about the economy, or what the Holy Spirit is hypostatically?
So glad this channel exists
This is splitting hairs.
Do you think Christ will be deciding the eternal fate of people based on their view of the filioque?
Both sides are just striving to be right and win a point.
It is childish.
if some people are so entrenched in this , that they would prefer to not live with the filioque , they could end up in hell , heresy doesn't save
@@planteruines5619 The filioque was added to the creed in the 9th century, so everyone, up until that point, who believed they were in Christ but never thought about or declared "and the Son" are now in hell?
@@thenowchurch6419 you're , first of all , confusing doctrinal developpement and heresy , to say that would also mean Abraham Isaac and Jacob would not have eternal life because they didn't know all of the doctrines , that's not how it works , it's a willful rejection of a true doctrine even if you get corrected by God himself, secondly , the filioque, while not on the creed , was accepted by the latin fathers and the eastern fathers , the creed could be modified (expanded , not a change of doctrine ) in order to exterminate the heresy , this is what happened in the west
@@planteruines5619 Not exactly.
Abraham,Isaac and Jacob all put their faith in Yahweh and His sacrificial Lamb, to come, so their ignorance about the Passion and Crucifixion in all details would not place them in heresy.
The Roman Catholic insistence that the filioque is a doctrine essential for salvation would damn all professed Christians who either never heard of it or simply did not comprehend its details.
I believe that if qualification for heresy is "wilful rejection" then neither those Christians nor the majority of professed Christians today are in danger of hellfire for ignorance about that doctrine.
@@thenowchurch6419 exactly , i speak only about those who have seen that the filioque is true but decided to reject it
Another extremely common Latin win
Extremely common. 🤝🫡🇻🇦
What's most damaging is people like Jay dyer teach that all uniquely catholic dogmas descend from the filioque. If we're right on the filioque then we're also right on Everything else
Being right on one topic /= Being right on every successive topic
Well if you are right on the Filioque you change the second person from. The son in to another Father which is blasphemy
WE CONFIRMING THE TRUTH WITH THIS ONE‼️🗣️
im not sure between EO and RC but im much more pulled to EO i keep praying for guidnace but seem like God isnt guiding me
Sspx is not in schism but in irregular position btw, but you should Go to a fssp, just remember to understand many people need different rites
Have you attended an Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox or Roman Catholic service before?
@@GregorasProject yes i attend a greek orthodox church but i also went to a RC for a while
i dont like how in rc saints have claimed to have holy orgasms and claimed to have sex with Jesus
Have you read their diaries for yourself? I would be skeptical of anything people simply tell you online (as much of that has been exposed by people who have studied the topic).
Hi Wagner, i have a question. Could you make a video on the thomistic position on the arguments brought forth by Blessed Duns Scotus on the filioque not being a necessity for the distinction of the Son and the Spirit? I see Scotus heavily lean on Disparate relations as a way of distinguishing them. I know you’ve answered this in some of your vids but would it be possible to make an actual video focusing on this issue and showing that the thomistic position is the correct one?
I wonder why the Latins at Florence refused to accept St. Maximus’ letter as a starting place for reconciliation 🤔
They articulated Maxmus' letter as presented in this video, but they simply questioned whether the letter was authentic (which many scholars still do to this day).
Why would we accept it as a formula of reunion? Us Catholics and the EOs both have interpretations of the Letter to Marinus that are contradictory. How can a document with contradictory interpretations be the document for unity in faith?
@@dwong9289 St. Mark of Ephesus wanted both parties to affirm St. Maximus’ letter but the Latins refused to do so. Since Florence was an attempt at reunion, it would make sense to start from a place of at least verbal agreement, no?
@@garrett2514 No. A verbal agreement without actually agreeing on concepts means nothing.
@@dwong9289 the Latins said they agreed with the Greeks present though. The Latins believed they believed the same thing. Yet, they were unwilling to reconcile with the Greeks if the Greeks confessed St. Maximus’ letter.
"It seems to me" that Wagner takes another W.
Luigi? More like
Wagner is thinner. Luigi gets to him.
Well Filioque make sense when we read revelations 22:1 where the River of life,ie, Holy Spirit flows from the Throne of God And Of the Lamb 😂😂
Filioquechads, we won...
so true
actually at 9:04 he errs cuase
@@setos8 I haventz watched the video yet hehe
@@krkenheimer shut up kraken
@@setos8 what the chungus?
@@krkenheimer has chungus made it to confession?
Whenever you challenge orthobros to delve into the texts and prove why it's wrong to interpret the Eastern and Western Fathers as teaching the Filioque they start recommending Siecienski' book as some defeater - but they themselves probably didn't read it XD
So TRVE
What *do* they read? They get all their info from podcasts.
Great video, I always appreciate your Filioque videos
How is primordial source different than saying principle?
Affirming the consequent is crazy.
Nobody could of said it nicer than you. Masterful presentation of the orthodox dilemma and tactics
Orthodox kyle about to use domain expansion
Yeah, indefectability that's more Michael Lofton's wealhouse, and it involves something like his "charism of safety" (I'd prefer something more like "charism of Sureity," "charism of assurance").
Shouldn't you be asking the pope first for clarification
Just like you ask your imams I mean bishops
Get a bishop from each patriachy that agree to who is a heretic and who isnt and we can talk, maybe that talk leads to another schism, it would be how many schisms in the last 5 years? 2 or 3?
It's a question of whether or not the Holy Ghost proceeds _in essence_ from two sources.
The answer would be no. He proceeds from the Father in essence, He proceeds from the Son in His energies.
A very real person cannot proceed from two sources. He was sent by the Father in the name of the son upon the ascent of the son into heaven.
Fake
Repeating that same tired trope over and over again does not magically make it true.
Real. Athanasian creed was talking about hypostatic origin in the first half of the sentence and switched to energy without any indication or explanation in the second half. Few will grasp the mystery of this.
@@dianekamer8341
It's not a trope. The essence and energies distinction is the perfect explanation of faith. Despite being separate from God in his essence, we know of him through his energies.
Scripture backs this up, the holy Ghost proceeds in essence from the Father, and in his energies from the son
Did the Apostles receive the holy Ghost twice, both in John and in Acts upon the descent?
Or did they encounter the energies in John and receive the essence in Acts?
@@MilitantThomist
Well, hot dang. I suppose that settles it, then.
Please be careful how and where you use the word resurrection.
We need to stop focusing on only pwning prots and take the pwning to the schismatics so they too can see how cringe they are for:
1: rejecting the Pope's full authority
2: following cringe theology
Based
Does either version of the Creed change the fact we believe the Holy Spirit is also God? Seems like such an idiotic argument to split a Church over. The West seems much more forgiving on the issue and allows Eastern Catholics to not recite it. But the Orthodox make it like you believe in an entirely different Trinity.
They're schismatics. What do you expect?!
@@t.d6379 The Romans are the one that brought up this invention when the "same church" prohibited the modification of the creed centuries earlier ? The Early Church was guided by the Holy Spirit through Ecumenical Councils so why would they make the Creed, perfecting it, prohibit changes of the Creed, just to change everything up centuries later ?
@@alexmoreau2581this argument has been addressed.
Not reciting it isn’t the same as not believing it.
@@ronanjm and reciting it doesn’t mean you know what you’re saying either.
Common Catholic W
Pinesap W
losing members every day, common W!
In your fever dreams. 🤣
@@stewie4467The truth shall always prevail
@@stewie4467lmao were by far the biggest church
St Hilary 👍
Clinton
Good job son
roman catholism fell apart and their beliefs when faced with the real Catholic church
What do you think about his arguments
@@eliasAbouda-z4s The may very well be valid for such a nuanced, simple in principle, but complex in practice argument. Having said that, overall if a person should choose based solely on early history/tradition, Orthodoxy is still valid. Because for how right he may be on this ONE topic, it doesn't mean he's right about everything else afterwards.
@alexanderuser1282 Yea that's where I'm at. I lean towards Filioque with the Catholics but I'mhleaning towards EO with the papacy
@@eliasAbouda-z4sthis sounds like you’d be catholic if the pope was extremely based
Are you deleting comments?
No. The reason why you see no comments from EO is because he completely destroyed it and no EO can answer
@@eliasAbouda-z4s😂😂😂
@@lament22 Cope heretic
@@eliasAbouda-z4s ahahaha youre so węįrd dude, i was laughing at your comment because its funny
go outside, take in some fresh air, touch grass
you desperately need it if you think someone laughing at a comment you made is a personal attack
@@lament22 Submit to Rome
I think you should reach out to Lofton and do a collab. He has a way bigger following and both of you can gain from it. He gets to refute orthos and you get exposure.
This is true ecumenism
Michael Lofton is a goofus
*Shaved clergy😈🌈 insults Jesus only and by living this way , repentance to Orthodoxy☦ only saves🌞 , this is what we need to know🌼.*
wat
Shaved or non-shaved clergy is entirely irrelevant to the truth. It's nothing more than superficial nonsense.
One side opion is worthless. Dona real debate. I have left the roman chirch because i seen roman catholism destroyed time and time again thriugh debates.
Delusional.
Repent
@@christophersalinas2722 glad you are repenting
@@christophersalinas2722glad you are repenting
@@dianekamer8341yes this video is delusional
this guy is a gigglechad
Good stuff
Great video!
Luigi cooked Pinesap bro, it’s over
Delusional.
@@dianekamer8341 The legend herself 🔥
Why doesn't the 'wide' acceptance of the athanasian creed be reflected to the theology of the ecumenical councils? I think its not that clear perhaps that all were filioquists or it wouldnt have been said in chalcedon that the present creed perfectly depicts the relation of the father son and the holy spirit.
@@Piranesi-gc8gn There was no one questioning the filioque at the time.
@@namapalsu2364 Chalcedon session V
St. Cyril of Alexandria’s Ninth Anathema and the Explanation given at the Council of Ephesus
Anathematism 9. If anyone says that the One Lord Jesus Christ was glorified by the Spirit, using the power that came through Him as if it were foreign to Himself, and receiving from Him the power to work against unclean spirits and to accomplish divine signs for men, and does not rather say that the Spirit is His very own, through whom He also worked the divine signs, let him be anathema.
Explanation 9. When the Only Begotten Word of God became man, He remained, even so, God, having absolutely all that the Father has with the sole exception of being the Father. He had as His very own the Holy Spirit which is from Him and within Him essentially and so He brought about divine signs, and even when He became man He remained God and accomplished miracles in His very own power through the Spirit. Those who say that He was glorified by the power of the Holy Spirit as a man like any one of us, or rather like one of the saints, but that He did not make use of His own power in a God-befitting manner, but instead used an external power and received His assumption to heaven from the Holy Spirit as a grace, then these rightly fall under the force of this anathematism.
Why doesn’t this guy debate EO on this?
I already did…twice
@@MilitantThomistdid you win tho?
Yes.
@@Hedgehogz856
@@Hedgehogz856he did
Like, cool story Orthobros !
Hey wagner can you please refute ethiopian Orthodoxy
I think the quickest way to do that is point to Session 3 of the Council of Ephesus (which every apostolic church except the Nestorians accept) where it teaches Papal Indefectibility. Today both Greek and Ethiopian Orthodox deny that teaching yet it was upheld by their own Council.
I see that image of the athanasian creed is from Ad Crucem. Lutherans stay winning!
BuT bUt...EnErGiEs AnD eSsEnCe...waaa
Gnostic af…gateway drug to Kabbalah prolly
@@coil8906makes sense, there’s basically only two religions, Catholicism and Gnosticism.
@@phylocybe_ it’s actually Catholicism and the Synagogue of Satan aka Rabbinic Judaism (based on Talmud & Kabbalah). Gnosticism is just an early offshoot while modern day Freemasonry is the Gentile arm of the Kabbalist.
But no one in the public sphere is talking about it.
Start by looking up where the so-called “Star of David” comes from.
@@coil8906curious how essence/energies is Gnosticism?
@@HreodrichSimilarly to Islam world is dirty and bad, Therfore God cannot enter creation duty to His majesty etc. Same in heaven you won't see essence of God, you'll be kind of in 'different room' away from God
Debate Sam Shouman or trent horn and stop whining
Why would he debate Trent Horn? They’re both Catholics.
@@Fortes_in_UnitateAnd Sam is very friendly toward Catholics.
The "Debate Me, Bros" are off their rockers.
@@dianekamer8341they are just another version of protestants 🫠
@@dianekamer8341Sam is literally catholic according to his own words.
Sam Shamoun believes in the Filioque and he is catholic.