I apologize if you have been doing apologetics for a long time, but you have quickly become my new favorite since the channel started. Not even as a “dunk on protestants” guy but even just learning about Christian history and the faith. God bless you and everything you are doing. Keep up the hard work!!
@@brittoncain5090 actually, one if the strongest reasons for me is that James the brother of Jesus was the head of the early church in Jerusalem followed by Jude. So if one were inclined to equate legitimacy with succession then one should follow the Bishop of Jerusalem in the line of Jesus, James, Jude, etc. Also, Christ will return to and reign from Jerusalem and not Rome. So…..
@@kevinvong6912 Yes, James was the head of the Church in Jerusalem, but Peter was the head of the Church Universal (Catholic), the authority resides with him and his successors. Also, Jesus is reigning now from heaven, not an earthly city.
Hi Joshua, many thanks for this engaging content. Could you please do a video going into detail on apologetics and polemics used against arianism, so we can see how dangerous it really was and how it was orthodox for a time. So we see how enspired church fathers argued against it. We see Roman arian emperors persecuting and purging anti-Arians eg Constantius and Valens. Many Jehovah Witnesses argue that persecutions agains heretics like Tyndale is proof that Christemdom ( Trinity based Christianity ). How did arianism become Unitarianism and do we know where it was during the periods of eary to late medieval periods? I've seen that it was main stream with the Germanic tribes like the Goths / Vandalss, and they even had a bible translation by Ulfilias. But then there is nothing until the Socinians from italy to Poland, and some English guys like Biddle and Assheton. So nothing from about 600 to 1500's ?😅 May God continue to bless your work to his glory and not ours.
In the latin text it says 'tamen auctoritate quoque potiore'. It would translate as 'more preferrable authority' or in your best wish 'stronger authority'. This isn't anything new. We knew the pope had the highest primacy, and in this sense was the head of the church. But this doesn't prove papal infallibility nor supremacy. Au contraire, we see the necessity for local synods to be held, but the church of Rome did not submit to the Arian controversy. Anyways, Pope Francis has been doing a great job with synodality and with the new document 'The bishop of Rome', hopefully Vatican I will be reinterpreted, as previous councils like Florence have been.
It’s a snapshot. Not a comprehensive treatment. Many, many more coming. I didn’t claim this one snapshot proves the entirety of papal theology. None of that was in my conclusion. So you are arguing a straw man.
@@joshuatcharles I'm sorry if I'm strawmanning your argument. What I want to point out is that it's irrelevant on an Orthodox position. Maybe it opens an eye on protestants
@@kianoghuz1033Thank you. Since I am hoping to convince non-Catholics, and both EO and protestants are non-Catholic, some episodes will be more relevant to some than to others. I don’t think this papal snapshot is irrelevant to the EO position. I think it makes much more sense in the Catholic paradigm. But yes, I would agree with you that it is MORE relevant to protestants.
I can appreciate a piece of evidence I've never heard of before but seems wiser to go with pre-Constantine sources. Perhaps this piece of evidence would hold more sway with Eastern Orthodox than Protestants.
not really a sway for orthodox christians, it has always been known for the orthodox that the pope had higher authority. This by no means meant he was supreme or infallible
@@kianoghuz1033 I said "more sway" compared to Protestants, not an absolute overpowering sway. So you still believe the Pope today has higher authority than the other patriarchs? Erick Ybarra tends to have the most even-handed and persuasive arguments against Eastern Orthodoxy. To make the case for the Vatican 1 papacy, he points to the ecumenical councils first and foremost and also to the testimony of the shared saints/fathers between East and West.
@@tonyl3762 I've seen Erick's arguments for the papacy and it still isn't solid enough. Erick is well intended but many have gone through his works and don't arrive to the same conclusions, like Barrel Aged Faith. Now let's forget for a moment about the magical references made from the old testament to the papacy, the classic Matthew 16. If the papacy is truly the rock, the unity of the catholic church referencing Saint Cyprian, then why is it the most dividing aspect of the catholic church? Let us not be naive, if there is power and unity in the catholic church, it's because of it's influence on politics and money and not the other way around. But when it comes to faith, everyone is divided on issues provoked by the papacy. What is infallible? Gay blessings but not really? Destruction of the latin mass turning to a more worldly version of it? Jews and Muslims do worship the true god? Every christian is in a partial communion to the papacy? SSPX, Eastern saints who rejected the pope and what not. I do not see any unity on faith. And when it comes to dogmatics, Catholicism evolves and changes. The council of florence was reinterpreted and so will vatican I be
@@kianoghuz1033Have you read the Tome of St. Leo? Have you ever wondered why the Oriental Orthodox always call Chalcedon a “papal council”? You’ll be surprised.
Again, Joshua Charles cites no authorities after the Patristics period. Why? What’s the agenda? In the Becoming Catholic section of the Eternal Christendom website, there’s not a single quote or reference to any Doctor of the Church, saint, pope or theologian after the Patristic period. I understand that Joshua converted after reading the Fathers, but this is a case of arrested development. I looked eagerly at the Development of Doctrine link in that section, hoping at least to see something from St. John Henry Newman, or just a reference to him. Total absence. Just St. Vincent of Lerins. Of course. What’s going on here? Why spend years creating “masterpieces” when this work has been done already by others in the Church? Is it so that Joshua can create a brand, solicit donations (including people’s stocks, as he so helpfully suggests at the beginning of this video), and stamp his brand on the result? I suspect it is. That’s a shame.
This pagan didn’t care about “papal” authority. This is politics. Look at the writings and letters of Julian The Apostate who was (A PAGAN) emperor after Constantius and see how much he cares about the bishop in Rome. Not much. Based on your logic here The true authority of the church was in Alexandria or Constantinople a few years later..
@@kianoghuz1033 Unless I'm mistaken, this still cuts against the modern Orthodox definition of Primacy, since the "first" of any ecclesiastical scale in Orthodoxy still does not have the authority to act unilaterally apart from a synod. But here, Constantius is demanding Liberius' unilateral condemnation of St. Athanasius. Maybe I'm wrong that this alone would be a problem?
@@CedrusLibani31 hmmmm no. A pope today can depose a patriarch now without a synod. A pope couldn't just depose a patriarch without a council (photios). And to be fair with constantinople, the patriarch did use authority and power to depose the eventual first melkite patriarch and reestablished a new antiochian patriarch. So even if the pope did have more power than today's bartholomew, there are still examples of constantinople using its primacy in the same way
![Megan Thee Stallion - Bigger In Texas [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QxTkZTLWdo4/mqdefault.jpg)
These videos are a treasure. Thank you. God bless and protect you and yours.
I apologize if you have been doing apologetics for a long time, but you have quickly become my new favorite since the channel started. Not even as a “dunk on protestants” guy but even just learning about Christian history and the faith. God bless you and everything you are doing. Keep up the hard work!!
Thank you so much. I followed your account on Facebook. You really helped me and I joined the church this year in the Pentecost vigil mass. God bless!
Amazingly good news! Thank you for sharing. I am humbled. All glory to God. Welcome Home!
We’re so back
Thank you
Thanks Joshua, amazing
I am very excited for these Papal snapshots. Do you have any good scholarly resources for an in depth investigation of this topic? Thanks.
Amazing! Another great episode! Keep going, this is Gods work!
Thank you. I look forward to becoming a Patron.
Thank you Joshua. Quite revealing.
Awesome 😎
Good job love listening to your new podcast .
For Acts 15, I would've thought it better to show that Peter declares what we as Christians believe and the rest kept silent (settled the debate).
That’s coming…
Didn’t Paul, who was not sent out by the twelve, correct Peter?
@@kevinvong6912Would that somehow disprove Papal authority?
@@brittoncain5090 actually, one if the strongest reasons for me is that James the brother of Jesus was the head of the early church in Jerusalem followed by Jude. So if one were inclined to equate legitimacy with succession then one should follow the Bishop of Jerusalem in the line of Jesus, James, Jude, etc.
Also, Christ will return to and reign from Jerusalem and not Rome. So…..
@@kevinvong6912 Yes, James was the head of the Church in Jerusalem, but Peter was the head of the Church Universal (Catholic), the authority resides with him and his successors. Also, Jesus is reigning now from heaven, not an earthly city.
You don’t argue with history.
Championships are won on Mondays!!!
Hi Joshua, many thanks for this engaging content.
Could you please do a video going into detail on apologetics and polemics used against arianism, so we can see how dangerous it really was and how it was orthodox for a time. So we see how enspired church fathers argued against it.
We see Roman arian emperors persecuting and purging anti-Arians eg Constantius and Valens.
Many Jehovah Witnesses argue that persecutions agains heretics like Tyndale is proof that Christemdom ( Trinity based Christianity ).
How did arianism become Unitarianism and do we know where it was during the periods of eary to late medieval periods?
I've seen that it was main stream with the Germanic tribes like the Goths / Vandalss, and they even had a bible translation by Ulfilias. But then there is nothing until the Socinians from italy to Poland, and some English guys like Biddle and Assheton.
So nothing from about 600 to 1500's ?😅
May God continue to bless your work to his glory and not ours.
In the latin text it says 'tamen auctoritate quoque potiore'. It would translate as 'more preferrable authority' or in your best wish 'stronger authority'. This isn't anything new. We knew the pope had the highest primacy, and in this sense was the head of the church. But this doesn't prove papal infallibility nor supremacy. Au contraire, we see the necessity for local synods to be held, but the church of Rome did not submit to the Arian controversy.
Anyways, Pope Francis has been doing a great job with synodality and with the new document 'The bishop of Rome', hopefully Vatican I will be reinterpreted, as previous councils like Florence have been.
It’s a snapshot. Not a comprehensive treatment. Many, many more coming. I didn’t claim this one snapshot proves the entirety of papal theology. None of that was in my conclusion. So you are arguing a straw man.
@@joshuatcharles I'm sorry if I'm strawmanning your argument. What I want to point out is that it's irrelevant on an Orthodox position. Maybe it opens an eye on protestants
@@joshuatcharlesthe snapshot is more inline with the Orthodox interpretation of first millennium ecclesiology.
@@axioschannelxI would disagree, for various reasons. But we don’t need to unpack that fully here. :)
@@kianoghuz1033Thank you. Since I am hoping to convince non-Catholics, and both EO and protestants are non-Catholic, some episodes will be more relevant to some than to others. I don’t think this papal snapshot is irrelevant to the EO position. I think it makes much more sense in the Catholic paradigm. But yes, I would agree with you that it is MORE relevant to protestants.
me when quote mining and word concept fallacy
I can appreciate a piece of evidence I've never heard of before but seems wiser to go with pre-Constantine sources. Perhaps this piece of evidence would hold more sway with Eastern Orthodox than Protestants.
Only the beginning…
not really a sway for orthodox christians, it has always been known for the orthodox that the pope had higher authority. This by no means meant he was supreme or infallible
@@kianoghuz1033 I said "more sway" compared to Protestants, not an absolute overpowering sway. So you still believe the Pope today has higher authority than the other patriarchs?
Erick Ybarra tends to have the most even-handed and persuasive arguments against Eastern Orthodoxy. To make the case for the Vatican 1 papacy, he points to the ecumenical councils first and foremost and also to the testimony of the shared saints/fathers between East and West.
@@tonyl3762 I've seen Erick's arguments for the papacy and it still isn't solid enough. Erick is well intended but many have gone through his works and don't arrive to the same conclusions, like Barrel Aged Faith.
Now let's forget for a moment about the magical references made from the old testament to the papacy, the classic Matthew 16. If the papacy is truly the rock, the unity of the catholic church referencing Saint Cyprian, then why is it the most dividing aspect of the catholic church? Let us not be naive, if there is power and unity in the catholic church, it's because of it's influence on politics and money and not the other way around. But when it comes to faith, everyone is divided on issues provoked by the papacy. What is infallible? Gay blessings but not really? Destruction of the latin mass turning to a more worldly version of it? Jews and Muslims do worship the true god? Every christian is in a partial communion to the papacy? SSPX, Eastern saints who rejected the pope and what not. I do not see any unity on faith. And when it comes to dogmatics, Catholicism evolves and changes. The council of florence was reinterpreted and so will vatican I be
@@kianoghuz1033Have you read the Tome of St. Leo? Have you ever wondered why the Oriental Orthodox always call Chalcedon a “papal council”? You’ll be surprised.
Josh listen to Dr Jordan Peterson with John rich and the song Revelations. Val's mom. Thanks
🎉❤😊
Again, Joshua Charles cites no authorities after the Patristics period.
Why? What’s the agenda? In the Becoming Catholic section of the Eternal Christendom website, there’s not a single quote or reference to any Doctor of the Church, saint, pope or theologian after the Patristic period. I understand that Joshua converted after reading the Fathers, but this is a case of arrested development.
I looked eagerly at the Development of Doctrine link in that section, hoping at least to see something from St. John Henry Newman, or just a reference to him. Total absence. Just St. Vincent of Lerins. Of course.
What’s going on here? Why spend years creating “masterpieces” when this work has been done already by others in the Church? Is it so that Joshua can create a brand, solicit donations (including people’s stocks, as he so helpfully suggests at the beginning of this video), and stamp his brand on the result? I suspect it is. That’s a shame.
This pagan didn’t care about “papal” authority. This is politics. Look at the writings and letters of Julian The Apostate who was (A PAGAN) emperor after Constantius and see how much he cares about the bishop in Rome. Not much. Based on your logic here The true authority of the church was in Alexandria or Constantinople a few years later..
oops, sorry Protestants and Orthodox, there you go...
this only proves primacy :) nothing new here
@@kianoghuz1033 Unless I'm mistaken, this still cuts against the modern Orthodox definition of Primacy, since the "first" of any ecclesiastical scale in Orthodoxy still does not have the authority to act unilaterally apart from a synod. But here, Constantius is demanding Liberius' unilateral condemnation of St. Athanasius. Maybe I'm wrong that this alone would be a problem?
@@CedrusLibani31 Nestorius had to be condemned at a council, after being condemned by the pope. So yeah
@@kianoghuz1033 ok but this is an entirely different situation from that lol
@@CedrusLibani31 hmmmm no. A pope today can depose a patriarch now without a synod. A pope couldn't just depose a patriarch without a council (photios).
And to be fair with constantinople, the patriarch did use authority and power to depose the eventual first melkite patriarch and reestablished a new antiochian patriarch. So even if the pope did have more power than today's bartholomew, there are still examples of constantinople using its primacy in the same way