There is one true church, there is one true christianity. ORTHODOX CHRISTIANITY. Anyone who study about christianity and history knows it very well. I hope one day catholics and protestand and other fake christan religions understand it and come with us again
@@Cyprus_Is_Greek Christ Jesus Sabbath keeping church has never been part of The Ecclesiastical Christendom , even though some of his children have come out of That sun worshiping Mystery Religion. . . www.sabbathtruth.com/portals/20/documents/truth_triumphant.pdf HOW HER RIVALS IN RELIGION COUNTERFEITED THE PROPHECIES Apostolic Christianity, as a religion supremely superior to paganism, caused widespread upheavals in the world. So strong were her prospects of success that Jesus and His apostles were fearful of the great deceptions that would come because of imitations and counterfeits. To make a clear cut distinction between these counterfeits and genuine Christianity, new light from heaven was needed. Such revelations were provided in the last books of the New Testament. All the troth's needed to chart the future course of gospel believers were to be found in the messages from the apostles. There is little point in claiming that a certain church or doctrine came down from the days of the apostles. Sin came down from the days of the apostles, and the devil also was active at that time and before. It is not so much what came down from the days of the apostles, as what came down from the apostles themselves. Even in his day the apostle Paul wrote: “The mystery of iniquity doth already work.” The growth and final form of the mystery of iniquity which was already operating before Paul’s death is seen more clearly in the stow of the Church in the Wilderness. THE APOSTOLIC ORIGINS OF THE CHURCH IN THE WILDERNESS The rise of Christianity and the spread of the Church in Syria was startling in its rapidity. IN CONTRAST with the four hundred years of silence between Malachi and Matthew, the coming of the great Redeemer brought to the world a powerful, stimulating message and introduced a marvelous new era. None of the prophets before Him had been permitted to change the bases of the dispensation introduced by Moses. Jesus Christ, however, was that Prophet predicted by Moses who was to usher in a new dispensation. He gave to man a new revelation from Jehovah. The twelve apostles, going forth to promulgate the teachings of Jesus, formed the charter membership of the apostolic church which flourished for about five hundred years. Then gradually the combined heretical sects seized the power of the nations and drove the true church into the wilderness. Paul was willing to risk his life by performing the required ceremonies in the central sanctuary of Israel if only he might avert a rupture between Gentile and Jewish Christianity. He knew that the Gentile believers had received only a meager training in the profound truths of the gospel. Is it for this reason that practically all his epistles are written to the young, inexperienced Gentile churches? Moreover, in vision he foresaw the crushing opposition which would grow into an apostate church and which would PURSUE THE TRUE CHURCH FOR 1260 years, and therefore, he yearned to link the new Gentile churches to an experienced Judaism which had turned to Christ. Pagan Judah South Daily Papal USA 677------------------------508 --------------1260--------------1798 (2520) T.O.E SL Raphia Panion 1989 9/11 2014 2019 2021 I_______I_______I________I_________I Line of The Priests 9/11 2014 2019 20201 SL I_______I________I________I________I Line of The Levites 2014 2019 2021 SL C.O.P I_______I_________I_______I________I Line of The Nethenims Paul planted the gospel in the midst of the people who spoke the Greek language, that medium through which God was pleased to transmit to the world the most exalted of all literature, the Greek New Testament. The first revelations given to the gospel church were written in Greek. In later days a deep hatred sprang up between Greek and Latin churches, and Greek and Latin ecclesiastics hurled bitter words at one another. These theological controversies arose because both churches had grown ambitious and had allied themselves with kings and emperors. At length, in 1054, the Greek and Latin churches separated. Long before this the Latin state church feared the effect of the accumulated stores of Greek literature. Latin was made the ecclesiastical language of Western Europe. THE GREEK LANGUAGE, WITH ITS LITERATURE, WAS CONDEMNED BY ROMAN ECCLESIASTICISM, ITS STUDY FORBIDDEN, AND ITS WRITINGS ANATHEMATIZED. Ireland’s Celtic church in the medieval ages remained a center for instruction in Greek long after it had virtually disappeared elsewhere in Western Christendom. The knowledge of Greek was declared in the universities of the Latin hierarchy to be full of daggers and poison. For more than one thousand years it ceased to exist in the Teutonic kingdoms of Europe, except in the bosom of Greek and Celtic Christianity, and with those evangelical bodies which looked to the Scriptures as their only authority. The repulse of the Greek church by the Latin hierarchy left the former as a buffer between the astounding activities of Christianity in the East and the victorious sword of the papal kingdoms of Western Europe.
Some 'details' you forgot that are not details for us orthodox christians : Humbert de Moyenmoutier was the main reformist during the gregorian reformation of the roman church that took place in 1050, 4 years before he went to Constantinople. The gregorian reformation is the true reason of the schism as it founded the papal monarchy, using as model the roman and german empires. It gave to the pope the insignia of the emperor such as the red garnment and the sovereignty over the kings in the west. It created cardinals who have the role and insignia (purple) of the roman senate. It gave to the new state a chancellor who was no other that cardinal Humbert de Moyenmoutier. This was a great scandal for the Greeks, since it contradicted directly the inscructions of Jesus to the apostles when they asked who will be the first among them. Jesus replied "The kings of the nations rule over them and call themselves benefactors. Let not it be this way among you." For the Greeks it also fullfilled the vision of Saint John in the book of Revelation when the wife (jesus' wife =Church) corrupts herself with all the kings and becomes the Greate Prostitute, the one whit a corrupted chalice (doctrine).
My friend who was a Catholic, baptized into Orthodoxy, told me that when the schism originally happened, it was expected that the east and west would smooth things out within a decade or two; at the time, no one thought it would be an eternal thing.
You left out the fact that that the Pope shut down the Greek churches in southern Italy and Sicily unless they used the Latin rite, which is why the Patriarch shut down all Latin churches in Constantinople as a response, it was an outrage to them. Plus it was decreed that only Ecumenical councils could alter the creed, which is why the Papacy changing the creed was an outrage.
I'm sure it seemed existential to the players in the day. But now it seems sort of obscure. And yet these two faith traditions that follow Jesus Christ intimately are divided. Not sure that's what Christ wants. And why it exists today is beyond me. The wide variety of Catholics and the wonderful Orthodox people that I know seem very much the same. Is this now about two hierarchies retaining tradition? Perhaps Christianity writ large is stronger with two traditions. When one errs, the other can present a faithful meaningful critique. Competition for the improvement rather than complacency?
@@lawrenceralph7481 it's a lot more complicated now since we've established our own dogmas and traditions, like in the West they adopted Thomism while we adopted Palamism. On the surface it looks the same, but we have different soteriology, concepts of Mary, the Trinity, concepts of the afterlife, etc. I made this post because in the video he's trying to imply that the Schism is entirely the Orthodox's fault, when in reality that simply isn't true.
@@orthodoxtheosis I wasn't trying to do that. The schism happened. My question is why it still exists when the reasons that I was aware of no longer seem relevant. It seems these obscure (but important?) differences pale when thinking of Christ's own command (suggestion/desire?) for church unity. Do the current schismatic differences between Orthodoxy or Western Catholicism do a substantially better job of aiding followers to a good life and salvation when so few can explain the points you presented? Do their well known similarities aid the faithful more? I do no know the answer. Today the division seems a more about the traditions of the men in the pointy caps than serving Christ and the salvation of the members. But truly you do know more about this than I do, so I defer with respect. The reasons must be sound and important, at a level beyond the ken of the faithful.
@@lawrenceralph7481 the original reasons are still there, the filioque and Papal Supremecy are still major obstacles to unity The problem with church unity is corruption of dogma and tradition, as many have their own idea of it. There's a right way to do it, we believe in the teachings of the early church fathers and 7 ecumenical councils, but the Catholic Church has the Pope determine tradition, so it changes on a whim. Your third question won't have a clear cut answer because you have to establish what a good life is and what salvation is. We have our own ideas, but you have to decide for yourself what that is, so it's kind of difficult to answer that question. Yes, we both believe in salvation and serving Christ, but how to do that is where the differences start. You'll have to be more specific to what you want to know, so go ahead ask me whatever you want.
Speaking for myself - a non-native English speaker - it's a bit hard to understand all the specific names of the events and people, I would be so glad if you add subtitles to your already awesome videos! Thanks mate and stay awesome ;)
If you are not at liberty to say the name of Jesus around others then place your phone far enough away and go to an isolated place and say His name. Now read this carefully... "For by grace are ye saved through faith..." - Ephesians (Bible) (we need to figure out what having FAITH physiologically feels like) "God resists the proud, But gives grace to the humble." - James (Bible) (If you humble yourself before God he is more likely to give you grace, which is unmerited favour: God can help people to have faith if they humble themselves before him: often praising Jesus takes humility: people with good emotional intelligence might be able to detect when they have more faith or less faith: but you must worship God in spirit and in truth i.e. with sincerity) "He that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." - Hebrews (believe that God will reward you - therefore God is good - this is why bitterness against God is dangerous when it comes to salvation) "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?" - Romans (Call on the name of Jesus in faith. It can take years to learn to pray in faith for salvation because of fear of not being saved: fear for salvation opposes faith for salvation). Praying for someone you sincerely care about can help deal with fear and may help to say the name of Jesus in faith. Read Lee Strobel's "Case for Christ" or watch these summaries on RUclips: ruclips.net/video/zDlgWC49iqA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/67uj2qvQi_k/видео.html Link to a video about the shroud of Turin - it changed my life ruclips.net/video/LLnCIp3OVmE/видео.html
"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations and then shall the end come." - Matthew Mobile phones are in every nation on earth so the gospel has probably reached every nation by now by the internet. Chances are that the end is soon, according to Jesus.
Martin Luther....I will destroy God's God's Church and splinter it into 40,000 "denominations."... If Luther wanted to "reform" why didn't he work with the Church instead of vehemently denying it!? (He had plenty of time and options) Luther HATED Jews...Hitler actually used Luther's views to initiate the Holocaust.
@@chrisoleary9876 He tried to work with the church. The complete break was not his idea but the rulers of the principalities of Germany. Furthermore, he was not more antisemitic than most Christians at the time so that statement is just ignorant. Furthermore, Hitler Did Not Use Luther's views to initiate the holocaust... That is over the top ignorant and shows clearly that your understanding of history is sub par to say the least. Half of Germany was catholic so why would they care about Luther? Hitler was not from a protestant family either...There were antisemitic sentiments in German before Hitler and Hitlers argument for exterminating Jews were primarily based on two things: 1: the conspiracy-theory that the Jews was the reason for Germany losing in the first world war which was an idea spread by many but probably originated with General Ludendorff. 2: So called Race-hygiene and the idea that the German people should be "purified" of people from non-European decent. Also: Hitler believed that Jews wanted to "corrupt" what he called "Aryan"-people because he thought they wanted to "dominate the world". He was an idiot.
@@chrisoleary9876 That's only if you believe the Church of Rome to be the true church which of course the Orthodox Church denies due to the fact that Rome has added many things to the faith that the Orthodox reject like the Filioque or Purgatory to name a couple.
Pope: "Wait a minute, you can't excommunicate me! You're excommunicated!" Patriarch: "Awww...wait a minute, I am the Patriarch! You can't excommunicate me, you're excommunicated!" Pope: "Awww...wait a minute, I am the Pope! You can't excommunicate me, you're excommunicated!" Patriarch: "Awww...wait a minute, I am the Patriarch! You can't excommunicate me, you're excommunicated!" Pope: "Awww...wait a minute, I am the Pope! You can't excommunicate me, you're excommunicated!" Patriarch: "Awww...wait a minute, I am the Patriarch! You can't excommunicate me, you're excommunicated!"
The Great Schism of 1054, in my historical analysis, was one of the most catastrophic events for medieval Christianity (and for Christian history as a whole). Note: The Great Schism of 1054 was catastrophic not only within the religious aspect, but it was also catastrophic militarily and politically. In my historical analysis, the Schism was catastrophic due to three main factors (which are interconnected): • 1) The division of the Latin and Greek churches only reinforced the rivalry and disagreements between Constantinople and Rome. • 2) The Schism of 1054 directly led to the Latin invasion of Constantinople in 1204. Had it not been for the religious division between Latins and Greeks, Enrico Dandolo's Venice would never have sacked Constantinople during the Fourth Crusade (1202-1204). The 4th Crusade, in turn, led to the fall of Constantinople in 1453. • 3) The Fall of Constantinople itself. The Fall of Constantinople (Άλωσις της Κωνσταντινουπόλεως), undoubtedly, was a direct consequence of the 4th Crusade. Note (2): In my historical analysis, the destruction of the Byzantine Empire was completely "decreed" in 1204, not in 1453. The 4th Crusade simply destroyed all the efforts made during the so-called Komnenian Restoration (1081-1180), which was carried out by the emperors Alexios I Komnenos (1081-1118), John II Komnenos (1118-1143) and Manuel I Komnenos (1143-1180). Moreover, the 4th Crusade further weakened the city that once represented the "pride of the Christians" ("Η υπερηφάνεια των Χριστιανών"), the "shield of Christianity" ("Η ασπίδα/ προστασία του Χριστιανισμού"), the "queen of the cities" ("Η βασίλισσα των πόλεων") and the "queen of the east" ("Η βασίλισσα της Ανατολής"): Constantinople! After the fall of Constantinople, therefore, all of Medieval Europe Christian world was threatened. The "shield" that Constantinople represented was "broken". The Schism of 1054, therefore, indirectly contributed for the expansion of the Ottoman Empire.
The wars between East and West were caused by geopolitical and economical reasons - Romans against Greece/Macedonians, Venice against cities on its way. Enrico Dandolo just used the opportunity to take Roman Catholic cities at Dalmatian coast and to weaken all competition at Mediterranean.
@@darwinism14 nope. Faith differences was only the facade in any conflict. The real reasons stay the same as always and mostly they are linked with greed for wealth and power.
Can you Imagine,living at the borders, Antemuralis Christianitates Greatings from Croatia 🇭🇷 From the 15 century dieing for surviving from the beast coming from the east, Ottomans,orthodonks as serbs,communists.5 centuries literally not leaving weapons from our hands.
@@Andre-river The Orthodox Serbs manned the military frontier against the Ottomans for 500 years keeping the Croatian Catholics safe well behind the front line . Then in 1912 the Serbs in the Ottoman Empire who had kept their Christan faith while under Muslim occupation liberated themselves with no help from the Western Christians . Then in 1918 the Serbs liberated the Croats from Austro-Hungarian occupation and instead of creating a Greater Serbia which the allies would have gladly given them they instead entered a union with their Slavic brothers. As soon as possible ie 1941 the Croats sided with the monster Hitler and exterminated the Serbs in their short lived puppet state . In 1995 they completed the job in the biggest ethnic cleansing operation of the wars of the 90s. The best Communists were the Croats and the monster and mass murderer Tito himself is best example of that.
I'm a traditional, rigid Catholic. I will go to my grave Catholic. I have deep love and reverence for my Orthodox brothers and sisters. I pray that the historical wounds, though deep in some areas, may heal. I pray for unity. I pray that we may be one again. The Church must breath with both of it's lungs; eastern and western. Even if total unification is unlikely before the Second Coming we will be one again. Pax Vobis.
And I, an orthodox, have the same love for all my catholic and protestant brothers, we are all one in christ even if a thousand schisms would happen between who call themselves spiritual leaders.
As a Protestant, I see the universal church as all who follow the Nicean Creed, proclaiming Jesus as our Lord and Savior. As long as you do that, acknowledge that He died and was raised again, and that He is God, you're a brother/sister of mine.
Lee Strobel was an award winning investigative journalist who became a Christian after trying to discredit the historical Jesus. Lee Strobel admitted it would take more faith to maintain his atheism than to become a Christian after Lee looked at the evidence. Lee Strobel's "Case for Christ" is a very interesting book that can be summarized by two links I have shared below: ruclips.net/video/zDlgWC49iqA/видео.html ruclips.net/video/67uj2qvQi_k/видео.html
Romans 10:13-15 King James Version (KJV) "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?" According to the Bible, you have to call on the name of Jesus and it must be in belief (faith) in order to be saved. But it is impossible to pray in faith while being scared about your own salvation. Try calling on Jesus while praying for others and that may help your faith. But you cannot be saved if you have the smallest amount of doubt. Interpreting scripture can lead to these conclusions if one accepts scripture as true.
Don’t think Jesus was God more like Gods son or if you have a bible plz read revelation 3 v 14 reads he is the beginning of the creation of God stick to the scriptures not what man says the pagan world has come into the Christian church it was the Catholic pagan church that the trinity was formed and sadly millions of people belive it sadly
That is the first time I have ever heard someone pronounce Nicea as Nikea... EDIT - I think the debate below sums up the schism quite well! You'd think we were arguing about whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father... or the Father and The Son.. ;-)
@@duranduran3804 Nah, it makes more sense to pronounce it “kwe” because Latin has only v and no u or w, resulting in v being able to make both of those sounds. Thus, writing in correct Latin, putting -qve would sound like “kwe”,combining a q (which makes the same sound as c and k) with v (making a w sound)
Because Pope wanted to be first of all bishops instead of primus inter paris and frankish kings wanted to be called roman kings. The arrogancy of both was mutually fullfilled.
@@elvisa.c140 The schism is very painful. Latins have put bishops in the 4 patriarchates. But orthodox never put anyone as bishop of Rome. Why? Because we wait his return.
@@ΑνίκητοςΧριστοφορίδης Well you might want to fix Wikipedia since it lists the Roman Catholics as not putting anyone as bishop of Constantinople. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentarchy
Alex...and the Catholics have illegitimate children all over...the Decameron has a story about some nuns whom people were thinking are saintly and mostly celibate - they were all but celibate!
@Радован Кубурић I am not sure, as far as I know in Serbian Orthodox church priest must marry. But I think that in some other Orthodox churches you even have monks as priests but not as a rule, and I think that priest can be in celibate.
Tracy M the Catholic church & Eastern Orthodox churches are aware of the other religions. They actually study them. Its the other Christian denominations that dont pay any attention to the other religions of the world.
@@pavelrazamazov2672 The Pope welcomes the LGBTQ Community into the Catholic Church, you call that the true church? The Orthodox Church is the true Catholic Church.
@@pavelrazamazov2672 Comments like that are why the Protestant Reformation happened. The Bible says how you are saved, not any human decrees or authorities.
When the Ottomans were about to conquer Istanbul, the Byzantine Empire was in a poor state. The Europeans said they would help only if Byzantines converted to Catholicism. But the Byzantine Empire was the head of Orthodoxy, so could not obey the Pope. Immense hostility existed between the two branches of Christianity for various historical reasons. Even so, on 12 December 1452, a ceremony was directed by Cardinal Isidore, sent by the Pope. Byzantine leader, the Great Duke Notaras, interpreted his people's feelings with this famous saying: " I would rather see the Turk's turbans in Byzantium than Latin's hats. "
@Santiago Suárez And now turks preserve Orthodox Churches but burn Catholic churches to the ground. Islam derives from Orthodoxy and Orthodox holy relics and places are Islamic holy relics and places.
The Greek Orthodox church served the Ottomans very well and basically helped the Ottomans rule the Rayah and contributed greatly to the Islamisation and loss of Christian lands.
@@charlesramirez587 Austria largely failed to protect the Catholic faith and mostly just managed to retain it withing their own country. France and Portugal have certaintly spread it quite a bit yes, though not as much as Spain. The Italians have done nothing at all to spread Catholicism, they have merely retained it within their own area. Same for Western Slavs. I don't know anything about Bavarian Catholics but there are indeed a fair amount of Catholics in America.
@@someonesilence3731 the great migration for the non-Imperial or rather non naval-imperial peoples to the new world. As well as against soviet and orthodox powers ruling over them.
I legit stopped the video because I kept getting distracted by the "different" pronunciation If you want people to watch your stuff, you have to use the common tongue
@AndyWitmyer Amen to that. Mispronunciation of basic terms and some of the most important words renders the entire effort amateurish. Why is AI necessary? Are we to have faith explained to us by a machine?
Nikaia (Nicea) Greek word/name pronounced "Ni ke a" , derivative of Greek word/name NIKH (NIKE in english) which means "Victory", the Ancient Greek Godess of Nike.
@@sandramitic8948 Sve ti je besplatno, a nema reklama. Čak možeš slušati nešto preko RUclips Vanced-a ili YT Vanced Music-a i kada izađeš iz aplikacije ili ugasiš ekran.
most of the time you'll only hear Ecclesiastical Catholic's version of the events (who always refer to themselves and the true church) its always been hard to find objective sources or Orthodox side sources. its nice to see an earnest attempt
@Eric The Christian In Islam god is not like any being. So Islam cannot be a pagan religion. In Pagan religions gods are represented as some living beings we see in our world. In Islam God is one and it is not like anything. If you have realized, I used it for represent god. God is not he. God is not lord. In Islam God is just one. Unlike Christianity, Islam is not pagan.
I talked to a bi-ritual Catholic priest when I was in high school. The way he explained it to me was that the Roman's added it for a clarification, as in Latin it could be interpreted as denying the Trinity. Thinking that way, it's more about the how it was done, which ties into papal supremacy, than what was actually done. Sort of like the non-Chalcedon (i.e. Oriental) miaphysite/monophysite issue: professing the same thing, just in different words that fit the language used.
7:30 IMPORTANT: The First Council of Constantinople was a council of Christian bishops convened in Constantinople in AD 381 by the Roman Emperor Theodosius I. This second ecumenical council, an effort to attain consensus in the church through an assembly representing all of Christendom, except for the Western Church, confirmed the Nicene Creed, expanding the doctrine thereof to produce the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, and dealt with sundry other matters. It met from May to July 381 in the Church of Hagia Irene and WAS AFFIRMED as ecumenical in 451 at the Council of Chalcedon.
As a Catholic this is something that I often think about, that is, how any part of The Bible is translated over the years. Adding in changes made by various Popes over the years further clouds the meaning as originally inspired. Small(?) bit of trivia: the Hagia Sophia started out as a Christian church but was subsequently " converted " by Muslims into a mosque. It was eventually re-purposed as a national treasure and a museum of sorts. The current ruler in Turkey has subsequently brought it back into use as a mosque.
Most of the absurd stories are more likely a fake story and thrown into the dust bin, there's a full documentary of the canonization and one of the criteria is it should be of apostolic origin this is followed by a chain of letter from early church fathers.
@Greg Moore and back then if a Jewish court would convict to death more than one person every 70 years that court would be known as a bloody court. If the people are happy they will happily follow the laws they agree to; apparently that is true because there are still Jews to this very day 3500 years later keeping the very same law all over the world. 😂 Get your christian bigotry tf outta here.
Byzantine the greatest? Are you Greek by chance? Because only in Greece you study this fake history. Byzantine empire never existed, it was the Roman empire and the Eastern part was way far to be as great as the Roman Empire before the split
@@keyos1955 where are you from i am from amsterdam they fought everyone arabs vikings nomads muslims ottomans seljuks vandals so many intrestring stories greek fire Iconoclasm nika riots battle of kleidon 1453 last stand you name it
@@TartarusPyro And in Holland you don't study Roman history properly? Because if you do, you should know that the Byzantine Empire was the Eastern Roman empire (so the Roman empire) and that it achieved 1/10 of the Roman empire before the split. Anyway I'm from Italy
Yet there were ex-Catholic Christians in Catholic countries before Martin Luther.. What religion were they? Not Protestant, just ex Catholic, and Christian. Their descendants joined the Protestant movement but the original Waldenses were simply ex Catholic Christians long before such a thing as Protestantism existed. Their descendants were expelled from the Catholic world alongside the Jews and were taken in by Lutheran Germans and Reformed Dutch. Yet their ancestors had been Christians and ex Catholics since the 12th century...
The ex Catholic movement, the Protestant movement, and the Anglican are completely separate for separate reasons. The English were Roman Catholics until recently in history with the disagreement between the King & Pope. The Waldenses were the first ex Catholic movement, dating back to the 11th century. The true Protestants of the Reformation were mostly based in communities Germans and Dutch and Scandinavians.
In English we pronounce them with a soft c, but there was no such thing in Greek, only k and s. I'm guessing that Nicea was named after the Greek god of victory, Nike.
I like how you essentially blamed the Eastern Orthodox Church for the great schism. Didn't mention the coronation of Charlemagne either, interesting choice.
@@joseph-k7l2v Because the Church rose out of the Roman Empire, and it was explicitly tied into the State. The office of Pontifex Maximus (Pope) predates Christianity by around 500 years. The High Bishop of Rome was only one of the five churches elevated in the Bible. When the Western* Roman Empire collapsed the Church of Rome was left in the hands of Barbarians, and Pope Leo coronated Charlemagne as the Holy Roman Emperor, despite the fact that a legitimate Roman Emperor was still ruling the Roman Empire from Constantinople. The situation was made worse when the West sacked Constantinople during the Third Crusade. Basically all the major fuck ups and breakdowns in relations came from the incompetence and poor decision making from the East. *Edit
@@mitchtherevolution the western Roman Empire collapsed first not the east, plus the office of Pontifex Maximus was still taken by the emperor in the early church, the Emperor was considered the head of the church and in the eastern Roman Empire he was the head of the church until the end of the empire
@@dewd9327 I actually don't know why I said Eastern Roman Empire instead of Western. The first Augustus to decline Pontifex Maximus was in 381 shortly after the Empire was officially Christianized, my main point on that was to show how deeply connected Christianity was to the Roman Empire and Roman Government. I would still contend that Western decisions by the Bishops of Rome (Pope) bear the most responsibility for the great schizm though.
I was curious if he was actually pronouncing Nicea with the “s” sound intentionally since a lot of Hellenic words (Macedonia) are actually more correctly pronounced with the “k” sound
1:54 190 Pope Victor I seeks to excommunicate 2:34 1st Council of Nicea. The Nicean Creed is established by The Church. 3:28 The Filioque Clause added by The Roman Catholic Church. 5:42 The 1st Council of Nicea 325 AD 6:03 The Council of Constantinople in 381 AD 6:35 The Council of Ethesus in 431 AD 8:05 Leavened Orthodox Bread vs Unleavened Roman Catholic Bread. 8:27 Orthodox Married Priests vs Roman Catholic Celibate Unmarried Priests. 9:10 The Orthodox Apostolic Succession vs Roman Catholic Papal King. 10:14 The Great Schism.
The whole problem was the elites in Rome were panicked by the collapse of Rome the city & were grasping at whatever straws they could find to recover lost glory. Unfortunately, that included The Church. Under no circumstance was the bishop in Rome above any other. It was all politics & money.
Actually , he is. Jesus gave him the Keys to the Kingdom. The Kingdom of the House of David had a royal steward who had keys to the kingdom, his authority was second to the King if he was not in the kingdom. Much like a Prime minister is given authority to govern the Monarch's subjects. The problem I think is with God modelling the Church like the old Davidic kingdom and not like a democracy.
First of all, it must be emphasized that all the texts of the New Testament were first written in Greek. Therefore, it is logical for the Greeks to fully understand the meaning of the scriptures without any traslation. In the scriptures, and specifically in Greek, it writes "I also tell you this; that you are Peter and on this stone of your confession I will build my Church unscathed". Meaning, Christ is not going to build his church on Peter, but on Peter's confession that Jesus is the Son of God. Also, the Apostles were equal apostles among themselves. No one was superior to the other. Also Pope John VIII also participated in the 8th Ecumenical Council. It was there that filioque was convicted for the first time. Obviously the Papal Church thinks that dogma is food and you can add salt whenever you feel it is tasteless.
That's not entirely true. There likely lost Aramaic sources for the gospels. Most modern translations have origins in Greek sources, but that is not the same as saying all original sources were Greek.
@@NuncNuncNuncNuncat least is more on the east side is the one who understands because the bible is wrote in Greek and mixed middle east language..... than the latin speaking people
So baiscly it's pointless banter made by humans because they disagreed on some things we don't fully know to be true anyway as bible was written hundreds years later and passed on.
Totally agree with you on paskha, but it is quite possible that back then Nycea was pronounced Nikeya, especially in the eastern parts of the Christendom. On the other hand it seems likely he is simply reading the words without bothering to check the proper (current) pronunciation.
1:54 it's already an anachronism to talk about "Pope Victor I" as this reinforces the idea that the ecclesiastical model of the Roman Catholic Church was already in force back then. There was no papacy in the 2nd century. The term "pope" comes from pappas in greek, meaning father. It was used for the first time in the third century to refer to the patriarch of Alexandria, and was commonly used to refer to any bishop, not just the bishop of Rome. The papacy is a development throughout the millenium leading up to the schism, and a big part of the schism is whether or not that development is either Orthodox or a heresy.
Mispronunciations aside, I was possibly misinformed by a story involving a opportunistic Norman conqueror, (named Robert “the weasel” Guiscard), kidnapping the pope after the Byzantines assured military protection from the Normans, the pope awarded part of southern Italian kingdom to his kidnapper, enraging the eastern church...I was told this event, was the worst of the various rifts, & tensions between them, leading to the breakup....
that is not enitrely true that is only the colorful story, the real story behind it was that the pope actually wanted a divided italian pensinsula fragmented and not united under a central power because it was much easier to exploit it and for the pope to survive as a temporal ruler for 1500 years the popes tried with all thier effort to undermine and prevent any kind of complete pensinsular power slowing down the process of national unification and creation of national powers that in other states was already complete in 1500-1600 while in italy would come to an end only during the late industrial revolution period and near the beginning of the last century when the normans invaded southern italy the pope recognized their conquest and by that act created the kingdom of sicily, a kingdom that with many denomination(neaples, 2 sicilies) and rulers (germans emperors, aragonian french and spanish kings, ausburgs emperors), will only come to an end in 1860 during italy unifications wars that is also true from a territorial gain perspective because with the catholics normans kings the enitre sothern italy would become a latin territory reducing greek and orthodox influence in the peninsula
@@tripleh327 part of that is due to the fact orthodox in the East ended up under the control of the emperor. It resulted in certain changes and policies by the emperor that influenced the faith. See Caesaripapism.
The early celtic Church in Wales can be seen as Orthodox as it said that St David was made Bishop and Arch Bishop of Wales by the Paitriarc of Jerusalem as was St. Dieniol of Bangor made Bishop by the Paitriarc and other Welsh Bishop's and not the Pope of Rome and did not come under the authority of Rome until 1054 at the time of the Great Schism but others say that it was after the fall of Jerusalem to the Moore's
To me, the whole Great Schism thing simply reeks of extreme arrogance on the part of Rome. One single patriarch/bishop (the one of Rome) arrogating supremacy for himself, and arrogating the authority to dictate to the others what is right and wrong, without any discussion. That is the attitude of a dictator; not a charitable, Christian attitude. I'm not surprised that the people in the East at a certain point lost patience with Rome.
Great explanation. I just read an article on how the mandatory fasting that the Roman Church enforced in Sabbath was an additional factor towards schism, particularly in the Eastern Churches which in a while continued to recognise the Seventh-day Sabbath as a day of joy and feasting along biblical lines.
Luke 20:46 “Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts.”
@@tommark3015 Tom, The Catholic Church does not congregate nor worship at a synagogue. What you are reading refers to the Jews. So you get the right understanding, Scribes, were well-known legal experts that could interpret and regulate Jewish laws, but they did not interfere with or assume any role in the guidance of the people. Such "legal role" has never been the job of a Catholic Priest who deals in New Testament faith, morality, sacraments and guidance.Therefore your discernment is biased and false.. May God bless your discernment.
The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit. The Earth is Hell in the future. It gets hit by an asteroid and pushed toward the sun. Isaiah 13:13, 2 Peter 3, and Revelation 9.After death is defeated Jesus returns the kingdom back to God. 1 Corinthians 15 This is the beginning of the kingdom of God. Then and asteroid will strike the Earth Revelation 9. It will open up the bottomless pit and knock the Earth out of its orbit toward the sun. The Earth is Hell is the future. The only escape is in the New Jerusalem. It will take the best of humanity and the glory of the nations to a new Earth. This is the beginning of the kingdom of heaven. Peter was given authority over who goes and stays by Jesus. Protestants are antichrist according to 1 John 2:18-19 ...for they went out from us showing that they were not of us, for if they were of us they would have stayed with us...There is one type of person who will avoid tasting the second death. Those who are killed for the word of God and bear the testimony of Jesus Christ which is prophecy. They will reign with Christ for 1000 years and after the 1000 years the rest of the dead will be raised into incorruptible bodies and judged by the Catholic saints. Those who are left behind on the Earth will eternally suffer. Their worm does not die and the flames are not quenched.
Much love to our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters who, while misguided, remain close to us in many respects and give due honor to our Holy Traditions. God bless ☦️
@@MKHLX Because the Roman church schismed from the Orthodox Catholic Church in the 11th Century, owing to heretical views which festered at that time and still persist today. Actually, the Roman church is worse today than it was then, and I know many, many from among your ranks would agree with that statement, too. You are no longer part of the unbroken, unchanged Church founded by Christ in 33AD. The Gates of Hell have not prevailed against the Orthodox Church (our traditions are the same as they were in 33AD), but all others have fallen in some form or another.
Got to love the enormous failure in attention to detail it takes to have scandinavia marked as part of the western church when talking about events in the three hundreds
I am a Muslim and and I always was asking why those differences between arthodox and katholiek so thanks for this video and too bad there is no subtitles cus I can't understand everything u said
The Great Schism came about due to a complex mix of religious disagreements and political conflicts. One of the many religious disagreements between the western (Roman) and eastern (Byzantine) branches of the church had to do with whether or not it was acceptable to use unleavened bread for the sacrament of communion. (The west supported the practice, while the east did not.) Other objects of religious dispute include the exact wording of the Nicene Creed and the Western belief that clerics should remain celibate. These religious disagreements were made worse by a variety of political conflicts, particularly regarding the power of Rome. Rome believed that the pope-the religious leader of the western church-should have authority over the patriarch-the religious authority of the eastern church. Constantinople disagreed. Each church recognized their own leaders, and when the western church eventually excommunicated Michael Cerularius and the entire eastern church. The eastern church retaliated by excommunicating the Roman pope Leo III and the Roman church with him. While the two churches have never reunited, over a thousand years after their split, the western and eastern branches of Christianity came to more peaceable terms. In 1965, Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras I lifted the longstanding mutual excommunication decrees made by their respective churches. Today, the two branches of Christianity remain distinct expressions of a similar faith. Roman Catholicism is the single largest Christian denomination, with more than a billion followers around the world. Eastern Orthodoxy is the second-largest Christian denomination, with more than 260 million followers. Eastern Orthodoxy includes national churches, such as the Greek Orthodox Church and Russian Orthodox Church.
in Islam, I was wondering why Mohammad called black Ethiopians raisin heads? Also, why Mohammad was killed by a Jewish slave that he had by poisoning? allah is not allah it is AL' AH the god.
@@histruth3157 he didn't call Ethiopians raisin heads the Ethiopian king became a Muslim how would he insult his biggest allys people he was killed by a jew from poisoning because he had already finished his job with the conquering of makkah infact he was poisoned 2 years before that and its believed that God made his death later so he could conquer makkah then die
What I find interesting is that the actions that the Eastern Orthodox Church accuses the Catholic Church of doing are the very same they committed against the Orient Orthodox Churches and the Church of the East. I myself am a member of an Antiochene Church (Maronite), and we have many stories about how the Church of Constantinople tried to impose their form of worship, who was going to govern over us, etc. Including requiring that our Divine Liturgy be said in Greek instead of Syriac-Aramaic, that the Patriarch of Constantinople appoints the Patriarchs of Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem instead of the local clergy electing them. The Byzantine's where so oppressive the Christian Communities of the Middle East and Egypt invited the Muslims to take over since it was felt that the Muslims could be no worse than the Byzantines in their treatment of non-Byzantine Christians. Also, while the Roman Church was not a picture of innocence, they had reasons for acting as they did like the closing of all Latin Churches and murder of the Latin Community in Constantinople numerous times. The disagreements between the Pope and the Patriarch was not over who is the head of the Church (the Ecumenical Councils settled that, but what authority and powers that office has.
You are biased and a liar. The Pope first closed the Greek orthodox churches in the West unless they only used Latin….. the Orthodox responded. Your church is in bed with the Roman Catholic Church …. And has had more conflict with non-orthodox eastern churches than the Orthodox Church …
its the doctrinal differences between the east and the west that causes problems between them .One listens to the bible and one does not .,One is in contact with God and the other is not .
---- > The doctrinal disagreement was about the deity of Christ. Muslims didn't solve that problem, they made it worse. They eliminated the original scripture and wrote their own book.
The patriarchs never raised armies to rape and murder their way across the middle east while blaspheming the name of God, like the catholics did. Orthodox have their name for a reason, they are in line with Christ andthe church fathers, the heterodox are not.
The Byzantine were so oppressive that Christians of ME and Egypt invited muslim, that's totally false you may find one or two traitors everywhere if it was really so oppressive how after Islamic invasion the Coptic Christian's lead multiple brutual revolts in Egypt which the leader of Syria Christian didn't supported to scape Islamic rulers wrath
Im Greek but an atheist. The biggest difference of the two is how the head of the church should be treated. Catholics see the pope as an emperor and go to the Vatican just to see him not the churches. In Greece you will be respected if you are a patriarch but everyone just sees you as the man who runs the orthodoxy nothing more
@@nikosvagiakos8510 no he doesn't not a emperor he just the head of religion .And because they had a agreement and its a holy place.I don't understand you obviously you have something against a old man .
@@o-o2399i am pretty confident that catholics believe that the pope is infallible(that does seem like a characteristic of medieval emperors), that is not accepted in the east. the orthodox church does not accept that any man could ever be flawless.
I was raised a protestant, even though I have some Catholic family members and I’ve attended my ass and it’s beautiful. However, once I got in my 30s, I started studying deeply into the different religions, including all different, protestant churches, and Anglicanism, and the difference between Anglicans and Episcopalians, and the orthodox Christian religion was interesting, but I didn’t realize how it made me feel until I started watching this RUclips video. This bishop is phenomenal and everything he said is something they come straight from the Bible and he says it every time I listen to him and he’s not gonna paint rose colored glasses, like catholic mass well with this beautiful ceremony, but he just simply tells it just like it is.. he’s is blunt as some of the Southern Baptist preachers from the 1970s, but he speaks directly from the Bible and the way he talks is very Eastern Orthodox. Bishop Mari. I’m not sure but I think he’s Christian orthodox because he crosses himself like an eastern orthodox Christian but somebody told me he is some kind of old a Syrian Christian or maybe Armenian
Bishop Mari Emmanuel is not orthodox. He's essentially a protestant who runs his own independent church - unaffiliated with any mainline orthodox church.
The Protestant movement began in 1517 by Martin Luther in Germany, this schism that preceded it shows us how East and West became the two hemispheres we see today.
You cannot discuss "Filioque" without first addressing the Trinitarian question, which plagued Church Councils since the very first Council. The nature of God, the relationship between the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit's involvement in this was far from clear or agreed for almost a thousand years. The Eastern church was more heavily influenced by Judaism, which was strictly monotheistic and the concept of a Triune deity would have been anathema. The concept is not explicit in the New Testament. The Western Church was much more heavily influenced by philosophical thought and read much of it into scripture and oral Christian tradition. The first Council's creed was by no means expressing a Triune deity and it took several hundred years before any agreement on the structure (if any) of the Trinity began to express itself into the Creed. Even then, the Eastern Church preferred a hierarchical Trinity, whereas the Western Church preferred a Trinity that was fully co-equal, co-eternal and co-substantial. Hence the "Filioque" disagreement. "Filoque" means "and from the Son", which is an expression around the provenance of the Holy Spirit. According to the Eastern Church, the Spirit proceeds only from the Father. The Western Church would have it proceed also from the Son. Of course, the political differences and power games between the bishops of the East and West went far beyond doctrinal issues, but the disagreement over the nature of the deity provided sufficient basis for the final schism.
"God" is a trinity because the Sun is a Trinity: The sun itself, the light brought by the Sun and its Heat. - The heat comes from the light (the Son) or from the Sun itself?
@@tenborck kindly explain the doctrinal relationship between the sun and the Christian God. Why is the sun a doctrinal parallel? Why not the moon or Beltegueze for instance? Also, is there a citation anywhere in the Christian seminal texts making this comparison valid?
Latin Empire(Catholics), 1204-1261. The Latin conquest of Constantinople was a disaster for both the Greeks and ultimately, for the Western Europeans. The former unified territory of the empire was fragmented into several competing states, some ruled by Byzantine princes, other by Latin feudal lords. Warfare among these small competing states became constant- the only beneficiaries were the Muslim Turks in Anatolia, who used the feuding of the Christians to extend their domain to the shores of the Aegean Sea. It again appeared that the empire was on the verge of extinction. However, a military savior arose to rally the last vestiges of Byzantine power. Michael Palaeologus (1259-1282), the emperor in exile at Nicaea, managed to reconquer Constantinople from Latins in 1261, establishing the last Byzantine imperial dynasty.
That part always bothered me; The Catholics claimed they were going to support or liberate Constantinople but in reality, all they did was rape and pillage in the name of God. From what I remember from books, when they came into Constantinople, they put a prostitute on the throne of the king, as the ultimate show of audacity and wickedness.
So much is missed. For example, the fact that the Balkan tribes insisted on using local language so they could understand the liturgy during mass. This was supported by Methodius and St. Grgur (Gregory) of Nin. You can see his 9.5 meter statue in Split. Made by sculptor Mestrovic, who has sculptures in parks of Ohio, and built Atlas statue that sits in front of the United Nations in New York City.
Who cares???? That is irrelevant in this context. You’re talking about something that happened after schisms. The conversions of the godless Slavic people
Well... with the Latin church’s interpretation of how God functions and how our religion is, there was a large problem during those times as the Latin church believed (and later, this became the standard belief for Protestants and Orthodox Christians) that the Holy Spirit and the Son were not an extension of the Father, but equal persons (the former belief that God is the Father and the Son and Holy Spirit are extensions with distinct roles under God the Father, this belief was displaced by the belief of “three equal persons” under a God-head). It’s interesting as questions are raised, such as: “Why are there three Gods in Christianity?” (The mistake coming from three -Equal- persons under a God-head). Jesus said himself that God “taught” Him (the root word in Greek being “to impart knowledge” and/or “to instruct”), implying there was a time when God the Father knew more than Jesus. If God the Father knew more than Jesus, how is Jesus equal to the Father? Also, why would Jesus sit at the right of God the Father? Why would the Bible describe it that way instead of equalising the positions? The language would be “Jesus and God sit together” if that were the case, not Jesus having an important role but God the Father clearly having a more “senior” position (if you will). The point I am trying to make is that God the Father is ‘God’ with Jesus and the Holy Spirit as His extensions, still the same “material” or “substance” that is God but distinct and UNDER God the Father. They are still divine, but God the Father is ‘The God’ and Jesus is his ‘son’. I am not trying to say that “Jesus is nothing, he is not God” merely that He is not God the Father whom is above all things including Jesus. I’m not sure if I explained it well enough...
It's exactly why institutions shouldn't be based of any formal biases that impede change. Holy ghost the father and the son is the best way to personify change in time in ascension or descension depending on ones future outlook progression of present ideals.
I think that you have explained it quite well!--Thank you! The Son comes from the Father and the Holy Spirit exists with them---Whenever any two are gathered together in my name, there am I also! So too with Man and Woman--they shall become one (with the Holy Spirit--if they are gathered together in God's name)--This is a great mystery and a Grace of God!---And when they have become One, they with children, if also gathered in God's name, exist with the Holy Spirit! Similarly, God, as the One (Holy Trinity) creates man so that together, gathered in the name of God, the Holy Spirit exists with them!
You mean the Pope not wanting to listen to his peers in the East? For Constantinople patriarch was just one of several Eastern leaders, who were united on the question with him. So it was one Pope (basically just one of the apostolic origin bishops), against other bishops of apostolic origin - Patriarchs.
@@adrianlima2776 So? Other bishops that were installed not by apostles but by the Pope or his authority. I am talking about bishops with direct Apostlolic origins. Those who we today call Patriarchs, Popes, etc. The Pope wanted to usurp the ultimate authority on what was right or wrong. Eastern churches said that only an ecumenical assembly could have such final and definitive authority. The Pope decided to go his own way, using the fact that by the time the West grew stronger while the East got weaker, being constantly under pressure from the “global south” of those times. As usual, the betrayal was, is, and will ultimately get punished. Don’t cry now about Arabs and Turks on European streets. Remember when Eastern Rome asked for help and the West ransacked, burned and destroyed Constantinople. The riches they got, hard to imagine. But, the winter came for House Fray. The winter is coming for the West. Fasten your seat belts.
I do not think so. The two church's are so far apart on major area's. The Russian government has given the Orthodox church a central role in the family and holding families together. The Catholic church has lost family values. (I think they even support abortion)
@@joeblow5178 I never said Russia, the Patriarch of Constantinople said unification is a current goal and is working with the Pope. Moscow and Constantinople have strained relations and they have current schism among themselves. Moscow and Constantinople aren't in communion with each other.
I thought maybe it was a regional thing or something. Then I hear you say Byzantine and diocese completely wrong and it makes me wonder if you have only read these words and never actually heard them in conversation. Great video but some of these enunciations drive me crazy.
Your story is a testament to the transformative power of faith. Through the grace of Jesus, you've risen above challenges to find a home, a wife, a daughter, and the beautiful identity of a child of God. Hallelujah for the remarkable journey towards a life filled with love and purpose! 🏡💖🌈
I would say, that the turning point was when Pope became the ruler of the Church State in 751AD. It took three hundred years to make Schism complete. Filioque was more than mistranslation. "And" applies to the same one verb that describes Father as the source, in EVERY language.
The latter was a similarly drawn out affair. It really started in 449 (there were antecedent events earlier which set the stage) with the second council of Ephesus and the deposing and exile of the Patriarch of Constantinople, and wasn't really complete until the final division of the patriarchates in 536.
"I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” John 14:6 / If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about Me” John 5:46 etc. He said it all the time. Not without humbleness, just the truth.
@@DafterthoughtHe was'nt bragging and impossing His authority. Only those who would believe and follow. Unlike some so- called religious leaders of today.
It took me a minute to know what he was talking about when he said “Nakian” aka Nicaean. Never heard it pronounced like that. Sometimes I think he mispronounces things just to get people to comment.
He was actually pronouncing it correctly according to classical Latin pronunciation and I believe for Greek as well. Both the Romans and the Greeks would treat "c" as a hard k sound. "ae" together in classical Latin would create an "i" sound like in the word "blind". So it may sound strange or unheard of to you, but he seems to have done his research when it comes to pronunciation of Nicaea
@@HerculesMays But the language he speaks sounds a lot like English to me. Why does pronunciation of c in Latin matter for the pronunciation in English?
As a non-christian, i still dont get it who is the son, who the father and who is the spirit... and who made who at what time, or all made each other, or are they all the same one, so then why mention all of them... nope too confusing. But i find it wierd that people can choose on how to believe on something that is strict and god choose. Islam for example is also split, but not for how all of them believe about its religion at the core, but who should be the leader of the religion (the heir)
@@dioritbajrami8283 But the thing is, muslims are starting to realize that the seperation is dumb, and are starting to unite, not sunni, not shia, just muslim.
@@dioritbajrami8283 god is father time. All things happen in time, so he's the highest god. The trinity is the past present and future. The holy spirit is the present.
@@dioritbajrami8283 If you are interested in trinity concept(s) I recommend search up the neo-platonic principles or the hermetic text about alchemy. It's very likely they influenced the early Christian theology.
Awesome video as always. My graphic novel is a bit before the years of the split. I hope I could have shown in more detail Phokas’ interactions with Liutprand. They were the best representation of the enmity between the western and eastern culture!
@Byantine Tales 1st Corinthians 15:24- reads, 24 Next, the end, when he hands over the Kingdom to his God and Father, when he has brought to nothing all government and all authority and power.e 25 For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet.f 26 And the last enemy, death, is to be brought to nothing.g 27 For God “subjected all things under his feet.”h But when he says that ‘all things have been subjected,’i it is evident that this does not include the One who subjected all things to him.j 28 But when all things will have been subjected to him, then the Son himself will also subject himself to the One who subjected all things to him,k that God may be all things to everyone.l There was never, originally, any concept of a trinitarian godhead until The Council of Nicaea. Constantine invented this trinity from the Babylonians to cement his empire of "Christians" and pagans. Since then, Protestant Christianity, by 1500 years of tradition, has enslaved its members to believe the unbelievable.
@@pikamonketchumlol1237 if he is.... Then we don't need the Bible anymore 😂 just hear what pope says...... Pope is only For people who are lazy to read their own holy bible .... That's how it would be easy for you to get lied by a liar
Main reason was that Pope thought himself as a superior of all patriarchs, But churches were independent and they have own leaders like Alexandria, Antioch,Constantinopole,Jerusalem etc.Patriarchs.The council rules the eastern church, not a one man.
Interesting explanation but ... unconvincing. The split was the result of a power struggle between Rome and the emerging city , Constantinople, the doctrinal differences are only an expression of the political, economical and cultural rivalry between the two great cities . A new religious identity always follows the emergence of a new center of power ; it’s the case with the Umayyad and Islam or the North of Europe and Protestantism , for example.
The church split because the decline of Roman empire. Before the decline, the western and eastern church was connected by Pax Romana and the authority rested to the patriarch at Byzantine No matter what kind of schism between Rome and Byzantine, the Roman empire could force and mold them. After the decline, there was a wide area between eastern and western church, which until High Middle Ages was populated by pagan tribes, i.e. the Balkans. Not to mention that "barbarians" invaded Rome several times, reducing its population to less than 50,000 (from its height of 1 million). Separated from their main source of support, the western church had to manage to survive by themselves, including creating their own version of Roman Empire. The result of that was the sense of authority to challenge the patriarch in Byzantine.
Great explanation and for us in the Philippines 🇵🇭 doesn't know this. Just following the Spaniards that brought this religion in the Pacific. No divorce and celibacy remains with the Priest. My Nephew tried to reach out to me before his Ordination. He said he needs guidance and another opinion before graduating in the seminary. I told him your best guidance is just right there within you. The holy spirit that guides you and tell you what to do. He's starting to give the Mass now but I feel his pain. These Priests and those that serves in the church are already sacrificing ang giving their whole self to serve God and the people why prohibit them to marry and find someone that can help them to maintain the church and continue the work of Jesus and God? My ancestors don't believe in this religion before. They were Animest but I remember my father always want us to respect and be polite on every living organisms we meet or touch. Until now it's still being observed even the country is majority catholics. I still see people believe in the spirits by offering something if you touch a thing or a plant that made you sick. There's many more superstitious beliefs from the old days that is out of the Christian world. Again thank you for explaining it to us who are blind following the blind. God bless.
In what bible did Jesus ever ordain any Church, be it Orthodox or Catholic? That is why PROTESTANT came into being! It is also why Islam recognises no earthy authority. Myself? My conciense is my sovoveriegn authority. Religion demands obedience with bribes and fear, and the prospect of salvation which is not theirs to give!
Yeah we had Religion subjects in the Philippines but none of these were ever taught. I only found out about Protestants and Orthodox Christianity AFTER I graduated college. It's really sad that I learned these basic things AFTER my schooling.
Mathew 19:10-12 10His disciples spoke up and said, “If this is the standard, then it seems better to never get married.” 11“Not everyone is meant to remain single-only those whom God gives grace to be unmarried. 12For some are born to celibacy; others have been made eunuchs by others. And there are some who have chosen to live in celibacy for the sacred purpose of heaven’s kingdom realm. Let those who can, accept this truth for themselves.” Jesus.
Ok ok everyone knows that it's getting annoying. He knows everybody does, he does it for simplicity sake. And let's be real Rman Empire and Byzantine empire sound cooler than East, West Roman empire. The same would be if it was called West/East Byzantine empire. Don't worry your head with this small inaccuracies.
If I’m not mistaken the Johannine comma debate between Protestants and Catholics also further consolidated the belief of Orthodox Patriarchs that the Western church was willing to change scripture and divinely inspired texts all Willy nilly. Which also reinforced their belief that it was the West who was responsible for breaking from the Nicean creed and allowing the pope to decide what was canon rather than the text itself or the early Wurms.
There are several mistakes in this video. One of them is that Filoque would be a mistranslation. False. It appeared in the Visigoth kingdom of Spain, in order to fight the Arianism of the Visigoths, that dated back from the times of Valens, emporor of Constantinople, who converted the Goths from mainstram Christianity to Arianism. Filioque was placed in the spanish creed to fight Arianism. It worked, somewhat at lest. The Franks, the northen neighours of the Visigoths, took this and added to the Creed, in order to get poltiical and cultural independence from Constantinople. Charlemagne is considered the political artisan of this. Saint Photios of Constantinople denounced very clearly the heresy and the lack of ecclesiology. In the Eastern Orthodox church, in order to a teching to be accepted as truth, I needs to be accepted by the Fullness (Pleroma) of the Church, that includes all Orthodox Christians who have the true faith and have the true Baptism. Ecumenical Councils are manifestations of the Pleroma and they are accepted by the Pleroma as real Ecumenical Councils, not false ones. The Church as the real, mystical Body of Christ, is through whom God speaks without mistake, so there is infailibility. Any member of the Church, no matter if layman, monk or clergy is not infailable and can be wrong, but the Church in Pleroma. Western Christianity renounced this understanding of the Pleroma gradualy and turned into what we now call the Roman Catholic church. In there, the authority of the Pleroma was replaced by the authority of the Pope. The final part of the Schism is considered the 1204 conquest of Constantinople by the crusaders.
No, God is EVERYWHERE and it depends on how you define "church". The words; Church, Religion, Catholic etc... now have negative programmed emotional responses that are dishonest - created by years of tribe control of media.
Orthodox church remain unchange same how Isus Hristos left as that's why miracles happen every second in our church God bless everybody and open eyes to everyone to see the truth
In which of orthodox churches happen so many miracles? What do you think happens in Orthodox Church convicted of genocide, whose believers flee from it in terror?
To think the orthodox church has not under went change and modernism is wishful thinking. Why is it the russian orthodox church allows abortion and contraception? The EO are in schosm within themselves. Because they refuse to recognize the primacy of peter, something present in the early church.
I have heard scholars with doctorates discuss the "filioque" controversy, but have never heard a single one pronounce the word, "filly-ock". I've always heard it, "filly-OH-kway", which I think is closer to the correct latin pronunciation. Whoever made this video wasn't even trying.
If they can't even pronounce the words correctly then we might wonder how serious their research was. Was it really most of the eastern part of the Church which broke away from Rome or vice versa?
Pope: Hey! You're deposed. The Other Pope: Aw...wait a minute! I'm the pope! You can't depose me, you're deposed! Pope: Aw...wait a minute! I'm the pope! You can't depose me, you're deposed!
Signup for your FREE trial to The Great Courses Plus here: ow.ly/LQxj30rkCOb
I’m sorry but it is Nicene as in Bill (Nye) has (seen)
Nye seen
Otherwise awesome video
There is one true church, there is one true christianity. ORTHODOX CHRISTIANITY. Anyone who study about christianity and history knows it very well. I hope one day catholics and protestand and other fake christan religions understand it and come with us again
Have you looked into doing a video on the council of Carthage and the church of Carthage with its own holy sea that would be very interesting.
@@Cyprus_Is_Greek Christ Jesus Sabbath keeping church has never been part of The Ecclesiastical Christendom , even though some of his children have come out of That sun worshiping Mystery Religion. . . www.sabbathtruth.com/portals/20/documents/truth_triumphant.pdf
HOW HER RIVALS IN RELIGION COUNTERFEITED THE PROPHECIES
Apostolic Christianity, as a religion supremely superior to paganism, caused widespread upheavals in the world. So strong were her prospects of success that Jesus and His apostles were fearful of the great deceptions that would come because of imitations and counterfeits. To make a clear cut distinction between these counterfeits and genuine Christianity, new light from heaven was needed. Such revelations were provided in the last books of the New Testament. All the troth's needed to chart the future course of gospel believers were to be found in the messages from the apostles.
There is little point in claiming that a certain church or doctrine came down from the days of the apostles. Sin came down from the days of the apostles, and the devil also was active at that time and before. It is not so much what came down from the days of the apostles, as what came down from the apostles themselves. Even in his day the apostle Paul wrote: “The mystery of iniquity doth already work.” The growth and final form of the mystery of iniquity which was already operating before Paul’s death is seen more clearly in the stow of the Church in the Wilderness.
THE APOSTOLIC ORIGINS OF THE CHURCH IN THE WILDERNESS
The rise of Christianity and the spread of the Church in Syria was startling in its rapidity. IN CONTRAST with the four hundred years of silence between Malachi and Matthew, the coming of the great Redeemer brought to the world a powerful, stimulating message and introduced a marvelous new era. None of the prophets before Him had been permitted to change the bases of the dispensation introduced by Moses. Jesus Christ, however, was that Prophet predicted by Moses who was to usher in a new dispensation. He gave to man a new revelation from Jehovah. The twelve apostles, going forth to promulgate the teachings of Jesus, formed the charter membership of the apostolic church which flourished for about five hundred years. Then gradually the combined heretical sects seized the power of the nations and drove the true church into the wilderness.
Paul was willing to risk his life by performing the required ceremonies in the central sanctuary of Israel if only he might avert a rupture between Gentile and Jewish Christianity. He knew that the Gentile believers had received only a meager training in the profound truths of the gospel. Is it for this reason that practically all his epistles are written to the young, inexperienced Gentile churches? Moreover, in vision he foresaw the crushing opposition which would grow into an apostate church and which would PURSUE THE TRUE CHURCH FOR 1260 years, and therefore, he yearned to link the new Gentile churches to an experienced Judaism which had turned to Christ.
Pagan
Judah South Daily Papal USA
677------------------------508 --------------1260--------------1798 (2520)
T.O.E SL Raphia Panion
1989 9/11 2014 2019 2021
I_______I_______I________I_________I Line of The Priests
9/11 2014 2019 20201 SL
I_______I________I________I________I Line of The Levites
2014 2019 2021 SL C.O.P
I_______I_________I_______I________I Line of The Nethenims
Paul planted the gospel in the midst of the people who spoke the Greek language, that medium through which God was pleased to transmit to the world the most exalted of all literature, the Greek New Testament. The first revelations given to the gospel church were written in Greek.
In later days a deep hatred sprang up between Greek and Latin churches, and Greek and Latin ecclesiastics hurled bitter words at one another. These theological controversies arose because both churches had grown ambitious and had allied themselves with kings and emperors. At length, in 1054, the Greek and Latin churches separated. Long before this the Latin state church feared the effect of the accumulated stores of Greek literature. Latin was made the ecclesiastical language of Western Europe. THE GREEK LANGUAGE, WITH ITS LITERATURE, WAS CONDEMNED BY ROMAN ECCLESIASTICISM, ITS STUDY FORBIDDEN, AND ITS WRITINGS ANATHEMATIZED. Ireland’s Celtic church in the medieval ages remained a center for instruction in Greek long after it had virtually disappeared elsewhere in Western Christendom. The knowledge of Greek was declared in the universities of the Latin hierarchy to be full of daggers and poison. For more than one thousand years it ceased to exist in the Teutonic kingdoms of Europe, except in the bosom of Greek and Celtic Christianity, and with those evangelical bodies which looked to the Scriptures as their only authority.
The repulse of the Greek church by the Latin hierarchy left the former as a buffer between the astounding activities of Christianity in the East and the victorious sword of the papal kingdoms of Western Europe.
Some 'details' you forgot that are not details for us orthodox christians :
Humbert de Moyenmoutier was the main reformist during the gregorian reformation of the roman church that took place in 1050, 4 years before he went to Constantinople.
The gregorian reformation is the true reason of the schism as it founded the papal monarchy, using as model the roman and german empires.
It gave to the pope the insignia of the emperor such as the red garnment and the sovereignty over the kings in the west.
It created cardinals who have the role and insignia (purple) of the roman senate.
It gave to the new state a chancellor who was no other that cardinal Humbert de Moyenmoutier.
This was a great scandal for the Greeks, since it contradicted directly the inscructions of Jesus to the apostles when they asked who will be the first among them. Jesus replied "The kings of the nations rule over them and call themselves benefactors. Let not it be this way among you."
For the Greeks it also fullfilled the vision of Saint John in the book of Revelation when the wife (jesus' wife =Church) corrupts herself with all the kings and becomes the Greate Prostitute, the one whit a corrupted chalice (doctrine).
My friend who was a Catholic, baptized into Orthodoxy, told me that when the schism originally happened, it was expected that the east and west would smooth things out within a decade or two; at the time, no one thought it would be an eternal thing.
Who gave orthodoxy power to excommunicate? If Rome was the aggressor we know what David did under the aggression from Saul, he didn't turn on Saul.
makes no sense
Who says it will be eternal...and who says it will be a blessing?
What a friend you've got. He is probably very old, was born before 1054, or possesses extraordinary powers to maintain communication with the dead.
The catholic guy has the power to leave Catholicism and become orthodox. There needs to be no power given
You left out the fact that that the Pope shut down the Greek churches in southern Italy and Sicily unless they used the Latin rite, which is why the Patriarch shut down all Latin churches in Constantinople as a response, it was an outrage to them. Plus it was decreed that only Ecumenical councils could alter the creed, which is why the Papacy changing the creed was an outrage.
I'm sure it seemed existential to the players in the day. But now it seems sort of obscure. And yet these two faith traditions that follow Jesus Christ intimately are divided. Not sure that's what Christ wants.
And why it exists today is beyond me. The wide variety of Catholics and the wonderful Orthodox people that I know seem very much the same. Is this now about two hierarchies retaining tradition?
Perhaps Christianity writ large is stronger with two traditions. When one errs, the other can present a faithful meaningful critique. Competition for the improvement rather than complacency?
@@lawrenceralph7481 it's a lot more complicated now since we've established our own dogmas and traditions, like in the West they adopted Thomism while we adopted Palamism. On the surface it looks the same, but we have different soteriology, concepts of Mary, the Trinity, concepts of the afterlife, etc.
I made this post because in the video he's trying to imply that the Schism is entirely the Orthodox's fault, when in reality that simply isn't true.
@@orthodoxtheosis I wasn't trying to do that. The schism happened. My question is why it still exists when the reasons that I was aware of no longer seem relevant.
It seems these obscure (but important?) differences pale when thinking of Christ's own command (suggestion/desire?) for church unity.
Do the current schismatic differences between Orthodoxy or Western Catholicism do a substantially better job of aiding followers to a good life and salvation when so few can explain the points you presented? Do their well known similarities aid the faithful more? I do no know the answer.
Today the division seems a more about the traditions of the men in the pointy caps than serving Christ and the salvation of the members.
But truly you do know more about this than I do, so I defer with respect. The reasons must be sound and important, at a level beyond the ken of the faithful.
@@lawrenceralph7481 the original reasons are still there, the filioque and Papal Supremecy are still major obstacles to unity
The problem with church unity is corruption of dogma and tradition, as many have their own idea of it. There's a right way to do it, we believe in the teachings of the early church fathers and 7 ecumenical councils, but the Catholic Church has the Pope determine tradition, so it changes on a whim.
Your third question won't have a clear cut answer because you have to establish what a good life is and what salvation is. We have our own ideas, but you have to decide for yourself what that is, so it's kind of difficult to answer that question.
Yes, we both believe in salvation and serving Christ, but how to do that is where the differences start. You'll have to be more specific to what you want to know, so go ahead ask me whatever you want.
@@orthodoxtheosis I think you've answered my inquiry well. Thank you.
We wish all of our brothers well.
Catholics: Our church is better!
Orthodox: Our church is better!
Protestants: Well actually...
Catholics and Orthodox: *NO*
Hey look for once catholics and orthodox agree!
This is so true (I’m an Orthodox)
Protestantism is the best hope that Catholics and Orthodox have to reunite as now we have a common enemy.
@@strive4252 which enemy?
I like all denominations and I am a Christian!
Speaking for myself - a non-native English speaker - it's a bit hard to understand all the specific names of the events and people, I would be so glad if you add subtitles to your already awesome videos!
Thanks mate and stay awesome ;)
He also mispronounced some of the important words/events.
If you are not at liberty to say the name of Jesus around others then place your phone far enough away and go to an isolated place and say His name. Now read this carefully... "For by grace are ye saved through faith..." - Ephesians (Bible) (we need to figure out what having FAITH physiologically feels like)
"God resists the proud, But gives grace to the humble." - James (Bible) (If you humble yourself before God he is more likely to give you grace, which is unmerited favour: God can help people to have faith if they humble themselves before him: often praising Jesus takes humility: people with good emotional intelligence might be able to detect when they have more faith or less faith: but you must worship God in spirit and in truth i.e. with sincerity)
"He that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." - Hebrews (believe that God will reward you - therefore God is good - this is why bitterness against God is dangerous when it comes to salvation)
"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?" - Romans (Call on the name of Jesus in faith. It can take years to learn to pray in faith for salvation because of fear of not being saved: fear for salvation opposes faith for salvation). Praying for someone you sincerely care about can help deal with fear and may help to say the name of Jesus in faith.
Read Lee Strobel's "Case for Christ" or watch these summaries on RUclips:
ruclips.net/video/zDlgWC49iqA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/67uj2qvQi_k/видео.html
Link to a video about the shroud of Turin - it changed my life
ruclips.net/video/LLnCIp3OVmE/видео.html
"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations and then shall the end come." - Matthew
Mobile phones are in every nation on earth so the gospel has probably reached every nation by now by the internet. Chances are that the end is soon, according to Jesus.
@AndyWitmyerare you a native AI speaker?
@@filowanderer9734 right like filioque and nicene
Martin Luther : Wait for me guys
Haha
Martin Luther....I will destroy God's God's Church and splinter it into 40,000 "denominations."... If Luther wanted to "reform" why didn't he work with the Church instead of vehemently denying it!? (He had plenty of time and options) Luther HATED Jews...Hitler actually used Luther's views to initiate the Holocaust.
@@chrisoleary9876 He tried to work with the church. The complete break was not his idea but the rulers of the principalities of Germany. Furthermore, he was not more antisemitic than most Christians at the time so that statement is just ignorant. Furthermore, Hitler Did Not Use Luther's views to initiate the holocaust... That is over the top ignorant and shows clearly that your understanding of history is sub par to say the least. Half of Germany was catholic so why would they care about Luther? Hitler was not from a protestant family either...There were antisemitic sentiments in German before Hitler and Hitlers argument for exterminating Jews were primarily based on two things: 1: the conspiracy-theory that the Jews was the reason for Germany losing in the first world war which was an idea spread by many but probably originated with General Ludendorff. 2: So called Race-hygiene and the idea that the German people should be "purified" of people from non-European decent. Also: Hitler believed that Jews wanted to "corrupt" what he called "Aryan"-people because he thought they wanted to "dominate the world". He was an idiot.
@@chrisoleary9876 lots of Catholics hated Jews too my dude. The Jews were blamed by many to have killed Jesus.
@@chrisoleary9876 That's only if you believe the Church of Rome to be the true church which of course the Orthodox Church denies due to the fact that Rome has added many things to the faith that the Orthodox reject like the Filioque or Purgatory to name a couple.
Pope: I excommunicate you
Patriarch: No, u
The Great Schism in a nutshell
👉 If you are interested in history & mysteries then my last video is for you ✨👌
Pope: "Wait a minute, you can't excommunicate me! You're excommunicated!"
Patriarch: "Awww...wait a minute, I am the Patriarch! You can't excommunicate me, you're excommunicated!"
Pope: "Awww...wait a minute, I am the Pope! You can't excommunicate me, you're excommunicated!"
Patriarch: "Awww...wait a minute, I am the Patriarch! You can't excommunicate me, you're excommunicated!"
Pope: "Awww...wait a minute, I am the Pope! You can't excommunicate me, you're excommunicated!"
Patriarch: "Awww...wait a minute, I am the Patriarch! You can't excommunicate me, you're excommunicated!"
@@hemidas stealing from oversimplified how original
@@joema5515 boo hoo.
1 patriarch: i excommunicate you
4 patriarchs: no, we excommunicate you
The Great Schism of 1054, in my historical analysis, was one of the most catastrophic events for medieval Christianity (and for Christian history as a whole).
Note: The Great Schism of 1054 was catastrophic not only within the religious aspect, but it was also catastrophic militarily and politically. In my historical analysis, the Schism was catastrophic due to three main factors (which are interconnected):
• 1) The division of the Latin and Greek churches only reinforced the rivalry and disagreements between Constantinople and Rome.
• 2) The Schism of 1054 directly led to the Latin invasion of Constantinople in 1204. Had it not been for the religious division between Latins and Greeks, Enrico Dandolo's Venice would never have sacked Constantinople during the Fourth Crusade (1202-1204). The 4th Crusade, in turn, led to the fall of Constantinople in 1453.
• 3) The Fall of Constantinople itself. The Fall of Constantinople (Άλωσις της Κωνσταντινουπόλεως), undoubtedly, was a direct consequence of the 4th Crusade.
Note (2): In my historical analysis, the destruction of the Byzantine Empire was completely "decreed" in 1204, not in 1453. The 4th Crusade simply destroyed all the efforts made during the so-called Komnenian Restoration (1081-1180), which was carried out by the emperors Alexios I Komnenos (1081-1118), John II Komnenos (1118-1143) and Manuel I Komnenos (1143-1180). Moreover, the 4th Crusade further weakened the city that once represented the "pride of the Christians" ("Η υπερηφάνεια των Χριστιανών"), the "shield of Christianity" ("Η ασπίδα/ προστασία του Χριστιανισμού"), the "queen of the cities" ("Η βασίλισσα των πόλεων") and the "queen of the east" ("Η βασίλισσα της Ανατολής"): Constantinople! After the fall of Constantinople, therefore, all of Medieval Europe Christian world was threatened. The "shield" that Constantinople represented was "broken".
The Schism of 1054, therefore, indirectly contributed for the expansion of the Ottoman Empire.
The wars between East and West were caused by geopolitical and economical reasons - Romans against Greece/Macedonians, Venice against cities on its way. Enrico Dandolo just used the opportunity to take Roman Catholic cities at Dalmatian coast and to weaken all competition at Mediterranean.
@@darwinism14 nope. Faith differences was only the facade in any conflict. The real reasons stay the same as always and mostly they are linked with greed for wealth and power.
Can you Imagine,living at the borders,
Antemuralis Christianitates
Greatings from Croatia 🇭🇷
From the 15 century dieing for surviving from the beast coming from the east,
Ottomans,orthodonks as serbs,communists.5 centuries literally not leaving weapons from our hands.
@@Andre-river
The Orthodox Serbs manned the military frontier against the Ottomans for 500 years keeping the Croatian Catholics safe well behind the front line . Then in 1912 the Serbs in the Ottoman Empire who had kept their Christan faith while under Muslim occupation liberated themselves with no help from the Western Christians . Then in 1918 the Serbs liberated the Croats from Austro-Hungarian occupation and instead of creating a Greater Serbia which the allies would have gladly given them they instead entered a union with their Slavic brothers. As soon as possible ie 1941 the Croats sided with the monster Hitler and exterminated the Serbs in their short lived puppet state . In 1995 they completed the job in the biggest ethnic cleansing operation of the wars of the 90s. The best Communists were the Croats and the monster and mass murderer Tito himself is best example of that.
One could say that the Ottoman Empire was used as a pawn to finish the job no?
I'm a traditional, rigid Catholic. I will go to my grave Catholic. I have deep love and reverence for my Orthodox brothers and sisters. I pray that the historical wounds, though deep in some areas, may heal. I pray for unity. I pray that we may be one again. The Church must breath with both of it's lungs; eastern and western. Even if total unification is unlikely before the Second Coming we will be one again. Pax Vobis.
And I, an orthodox, have the same love for all my catholic and protestant brothers, we are all one in christ even if a thousand schisms would happen between who call themselves spiritual leaders.
As a Protestant, I see the universal church as all who follow the Nicean Creed, proclaiming Jesus as our Lord and Savior.
As long as you do that, acknowledge that He died and was raised again, and that He is God, you're a brother/sister of mine.
Lee Strobel was an award winning investigative journalist who became a Christian after trying to discredit the historical Jesus. Lee Strobel admitted it would take more faith to maintain his atheism than to become a Christian after Lee looked at the evidence. Lee Strobel's "Case for Christ" is a very interesting book that can be summarized by two links I have shared below:
ruclips.net/video/zDlgWC49iqA/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/67uj2qvQi_k/видео.html
Romans 10:13-15 King James Version (KJV) "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?" According to the Bible, you have to call on the name of Jesus and it must be in belief (faith) in order to be saved. But it is impossible to pray in faith while being scared about your own salvation. Try calling on Jesus while praying for others and that may help your faith. But you cannot be saved if you have the smallest amount of doubt. Interpreting scripture can lead to these conclusions if one accepts scripture as true.
Don’t think Jesus was God more like Gods son or if you have a bible plz read revelation 3 v 14 reads he is the beginning of the creation of God stick to the scriptures not what man says the pagan world has come into the Christian church it was the Catholic pagan church that the trinity was formed and sadly millions of people belive it sadly
That is the first time I have ever heard someone pronounce Nicea as Nikea...
EDIT - I think the debate below sums up the schism quite well! You'd think we were arguing about whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father... or the Father and The Son.. ;-)
finally
yet he read Latin with Italian pronunciation
It frustrated me the whole time.
@@MatthewBaxter2010 Same here. Especially since he claims to be a student of history.
He's misused the phrase "begging the question" too.
I'm not a religious person but for some reason this part of history fascinates me. Thanks for the video.
Same here honestly. You should also look at why Islam got split up. Thats how I landed on this video
GOD IS REAL LOVE GOD AND EVERYONE☦❤🙏
@@xeither289 I BID THEE EXCOMMUNICATED!
@Wuxxy Because they like to hate, as they preach that religion is bad?
@@nwofoe2866 Bizarre, contradictory statement but ok...
This video misses the part where the pope crowns Charlemagne as "Roman Emperor", that was the true moment of the political/church schism.
That's a good point. The Byzantine myth really makes us forget that they really were the Romans.
@Vive L'Empereur As a Basileus, not as a Basileus of the Romans.
@Vive L'Empereur I think the reason is because the bible states Rome is the last Great empire.
That's exactly what i'd like to mention. Nice job!
@Vive L'Empereur as king .Not as Emperor.
99% of comments complaining about the pronunciation of Nicaea
And thus started the Christian RUclipsr schism of 2024.
Well I’m pretty sure he pronounced it correctly
@@RabidLeech1 But he struck out on filioque.
It is not pronounced filee-ok
@@duranduran3804 Nah, it makes more sense to pronounce it “kwe” because Latin has only v and no u or w, resulting in v being able to make both of those sounds. Thus, writing in correct Latin, putting -qve would sound like “kwe”,combining a q (which makes the same sound as c and k) with v (making a w sound)
@@duranduran3804 Dang I didn’t realize how nerdy that comment is.
Because Pope wanted to be first of all bishops instead of primus inter paris and frankish kings wanted to be called roman kings. The arrogancy of both was mutually fullfilled.
Where are you from?
He's greek. Judging by the name
@@sebastiannikkolas8497 Ι am greek-speaking roman. From Greece.
@@elvisa.c140 The schism is very painful. Latins have put bishops in the 4 patriarchates. But orthodox never put anyone as bishop of Rome. Why? Because we wait his return.
@@ΑνίκητοςΧριστοφορίδης Well you might want to fix Wikipedia since it lists the Roman Catholics as not putting anyone as bishop of Constantinople. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentarchy
Those that could grew cool beards and those that were jealous, this is why the split happened. Plain and simple.
Also Orthodox priests can get married 😉
Alex...and the Catholics have illegitimate children all over...the Decameron has a story about some nuns whom people were thinking are saintly and mostly celibate - they were all but celibate!
@Радован Кубурић I am not sure, as far as I know in Serbian Orthodox church priest must marry. But I think that in some other Orthodox churches you even have monks as priests but not as a rule, and I think that priest can be in celibate.
@@alexk5442
Mormon Classic: "Catholics say no wife for priests, orthodox says one...act now and you can have as many wives as you want."
Barba non facit philosophum.
Protestants: you call that a divide? Hold my wine & Watch this..... (broke down into hundreds of churches)
Hundred of congregations**
*evangelicals enter the room*
Which is why we have trouble understanding other religions. We can't keep up with the many divisions of protestantism. Brain overload.
Tracy M the Catholic church & Eastern Orthodox churches are aware of the other religions. They actually study them. Its the other Christian denominations that dont pay any attention to the other religions of the world.
@@faanengaaw7357 That's what I meant.
I’m Catholic but the more I learn about the Eastern Orthodox Church the more I’m thinking that they are the correct Church.
Go further into orthodoxy, it's an incredible truth filled Christianity
You can’t be saved, if you reject the Catholic faith. Lumen Gentium, Vatican 2.
@@pavelrazamazov2672 The Pope welcomes the LGBTQ Community into the Catholic Church, you call that the true church? The Orthodox Church is the true Catholic Church.
@@pavelrazamazov2672 You can be saved only if you have Jesus for your saviour and be Born again. No religion and man made rules can save you 😊
@@pavelrazamazov2672 Comments like that are why the Protestant Reformation happened. The Bible says how you are saved, not any human decrees or authorities.
If only they learned from The Great Courses Plus
@supremeleader Ayo fam hook me up with a subscription
YOU ARE EVERYWHERE
Kim!! How yoo bean?
Help us get rid off lockdowns please, it will create famine. Oh wait... 👀
Supreme leader are you a Catholic or Orthodox?
When the Ottomans were about to conquer Istanbul, the Byzantine Empire was in a poor state. The Europeans said they would help only if Byzantines converted to Catholicism. But the Byzantine Empire was the head of Orthodoxy, so could not obey the Pope. Immense hostility existed between the two branches of Christianity for various historical reasons. Even so, on 12 December 1452, a ceremony was directed by Cardinal Isidore, sent by the Pope. Byzantine leader, the Great Duke Notaras, interpreted his people's feelings with this famous saying: " I would rather see the Turk's turbans in Byzantium than Latin's hats. "
Greeks : Its Constatinople >:(
@Nazbol Jedi lol, accept the fact that it is now istanbul
@Santiago Suárez And now turks preserve Orthodox Churches but burn Catholic churches to the ground. Islam derives from Orthodoxy and Orthodox holy relics and places are Islamic holy relics and places.
except... byzantine and it's ruler obeyed pope in the end and converted. Last byzantine ruler died a catholic.
The Greek Orthodox church served the Ottomans very well and basically helped the Ottomans rule the Rayah and contributed greatly to the Islamisation and loss of Christian lands.
Eu4 Catholism: *I have a good idea! Lets break down into more religions*
Same with IRL Catholicism and somehow it's still the biggest branch of christianity
@@raptor4840 That's because of Spain.
@@someonesilence3731 and Austria, France, Portugal, Italians, western Slavs and not to mention Bavarian Catholics that moved to the American midwest.
@@charlesramirez587 Austria largely failed to protect the Catholic faith and mostly just managed to retain it withing their own country. France and Portugal have certaintly spread it quite a bit yes, though not as much as Spain. The Italians have done nothing at all to spread Catholicism, they have merely retained it within their own area. Same for Western Slavs. I don't know anything about Bavarian Catholics but there are indeed a fair amount of Catholics in America.
@@someonesilence3731 the great migration for the non-Imperial or rather non naval-imperial peoples to the new world. As well as against soviet and orthodox powers ruling over them.
I love how the schism is being repaired through the narrators' pronunciations. /S Jokes asside this is a really good break down of the schism.
You say Ni SEE YAH, I SAY nI kay Yah. Nike Kee Yah, Nice Say Ya
It's the Nicene Creed, and the city where the council sat was Nicaea, pronounced Nye-See-A. The "cae" in Nicaea is pronounced as in Caesar.
Caesar is pronounced Kye-zar
@@austinlittke7688 Not in English :-). There are other languages in which that's true.
Yea, his pronunciation of Nicaea was driving me crazy, glad someone commented the correct spelling.
I legit stopped the video because I kept getting distracted by the "different" pronunciation
If you want people to watch your stuff, you have to use the common tongue
@AndyWitmyer Amen to that. Mispronunciation of basic terms and some of the most important words renders the entire effort amateurish. Why is AI necessary? Are we to have faith explained to us by a machine?
Thanks to the council of Ikea everything was brought together by inserting tab A into slot B.
No! You're reading the instructions wrong!
@@adamwarlock1
adamwarlock1 explains 1000 years of history.
Maybe someday they'll realise they've got the instructions upside down. 👍
hi
Which brand would you like?
Roman Catholic: Mine's better!
Eastern Orthodox: Mine's better!
wassup
No thank you,
I would like to continue my customership of Hinduism
@derren rafafarendio Protestantism is a Joke
@@vincenzorutigliano5435 Catholic and Orthodox Gang
@@asianlifter May God bring us back together one day.
Nikaia (Nicea) Greek word/name pronounced "Ni ke a" , derivative of Greek word/name NIKH (NIKE in english) which means "Victory", the Ancient Greek Godess of Nike.
You're excommunicated!"
"Yeah? Well, you're excommunicated too!"
God said its my time to excommunicate
🤣🤣🤣
Me about to go to sleep
Knowlegia:why did the schism happened
Me: I need no sleep I need answers
Its 1:40 in the morning and I have school tomorrow but I also need answers.
Don't worry, just know that you were correct lol
me rn lmao
I'm so glad I'm not alone..
Not just this channel, but all kinds of answers from all kinds of sources..
Islam is the truth we Somalia accepted Islam with no fighting but Christianity was forced on us
Great video, but that’s a boatload of ads for a 12-minute video!😭
I'm using RUclips Vanced. No ads for me. And it's all for free.
@@jovanmalic9259 kakoooo?
@@sandramitic8948 Sve ti je besplatno, a nema reklama. Čak možeš slušati nešto preko RUclips Vanced-a ili YT Vanced Music-a i kada izađeš iz aplikacije ili ugasiš ekran.
@@jovanmalic9259 nema neka caka iza coska neka losa strana?0
RUclips premium is a god send in these situations
most of the time you'll only hear Ecclesiastical Catholic's version of the events (who always refer to themselves and the true church) its always been hard to find objective sources or Orthodox side sources. its nice to see an earnest attempt
everybody gangsta until Arianism start speaking german
that's the reformation and Protestantism.
@Eric The Christian and what is Judaism in your mind?
@Eric The Christian Bruh Sam Shamoun would destroy you prots. All non trinitarian prots are heretics
@Eric The Christian In Islam god is not like any being. So Islam cannot be a pagan religion. In Pagan religions gods are represented as some living beings we see in our world. In Islam God is one and it is not like anything. If you have realized, I used it for represent god. God is not he. God is not lord. In Islam God is just one. Unlike Christianity, Islam is not pagan.
@Eric The Christian Excuse me but fuck christ. A god who has son cannot be god. God cannot be human like. If it is human like can we be a God ?
This is true. The narrator said "Jesus would like..." Ad break....Google home invasion device or whatever they call it.
I talked to a bi-ritual Catholic priest when I was in high school. The way he explained it to me was that the Roman's added it for a clarification, as in Latin it could be interpreted as denying the Trinity. Thinking that way, it's more about the how it was done, which ties into papal supremacy, than what was actually done. Sort of like the non-Chalcedon (i.e. Oriental) miaphysite/monophysite issue: professing the same thing, just in different words that fit the language used.
ruclips.net/video/SLLpNQRPbbw/видео.html
Yes I have heard that too.The Latins did in fact add it for clarification but then they began adding things which were heretic.
7:30 IMPORTANT:
The First Council of Constantinople was a council of Christian bishops convened in Constantinople in AD 381 by the Roman Emperor Theodosius I.
This second ecumenical council, an effort to attain consensus in the church through an assembly representing all of Christendom, except for the Western Church, confirmed the Nicene Creed, expanding the doctrine thereof to produce the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, and dealt with sundry other matters. It met from May to July 381 in the Church of Hagia Irene and WAS AFFIRMED as ecumenical in 451 at the Council of Chalcedon.
Good catch
As a Catholic this is something that I often think about, that is, how any part of The Bible is translated over the years. Adding in changes made by various Popes over the years further clouds the meaning as originally inspired.
Small(?) bit of trivia: the Hagia Sophia started out as a Christian church but was subsequently " converted " by Muslims into a mosque. It was eventually re-purposed as a national treasure and a museum of sorts. The current ruler in Turkey has subsequently brought it back into use as a mosque.
@Greg Moore I believe the older the version the more correct it is.
@Greg Moore ....and despicable followers!
Most of the absurd stories are more likely a fake story and thrown into the dust bin, there's a full documentary of the canonization and one of the criteria is it should be of apostolic origin this is followed by a chain of letter from early church fathers.
@Greg Moore and back then if a Jewish court would convict to death more than one person every 70 years that court would be known as a bloody court.
If the people are happy they will happily follow the laws they agree to; apparently that is true because there are still Jews to this very day 3500 years later keeping the very same law all over the world. 😂
Get your christian bigotry tf outta here.
@Greg Moore
You forgot the part where the Catholic church was infiltrated by evil doers.
Also depends on which country and diocese!
ahh byzantine empire the greastest empire of them all and still no movies about the longest lived empire and the empire that was one vs all sad tbh
Byzantine the greatest? Are you Greek by chance? Because only in Greece you study this fake history. Byzantine empire never existed, it was the Roman empire and the Eastern part was way far to be as great as the Roman Empire before the split
@@keyos1955 where are you from i am from amsterdam they fought everyone arabs vikings nomads muslims ottomans seljuks vandals so many intrestring stories greek fire Iconoclasm nika riots battle of kleidon 1453 last stand you name it
@@TartarusPyro And in Holland you don't study Roman history properly? Because if you do, you should know that the Byzantine Empire was the Eastern Roman empire (so the Roman empire) and that it achieved 1/10 of the Roman empire before the split. Anyway I'm from Italy
@@keyos1955 "what are you saying bro, USSR isn't Russia, its just that Russia controls it and has the main influence"
@@keyos1955 And stop saying Holland, Holland is just a part of the Netherlands.
I can understand why people get upset by language and how it’s interpreted. Just the way the narrator pronounces the word nicene is infuriating.
It also makes me distrust this video. Doesn't know something this basic.
I almost screamed everytime he mispronounced it. This should be Christianity 101 for everyone 🤦🏿♂️
For those playing at home who also don't know, it's like "Nice Ian"
Literally thought I was the wrong one lol. My Nun teacher taught us that it’s pronounced as “Nayseian”
The actual pronounciation of the city was Nikea [nikεa] (or Nikaia before that) indeed.
So the naɪˈsiːə spelling was not correct.
As for Protestants there are about 500 different sects. Choose the one you fancy. There are more different Protestants sects than ice cream .flavors .
Yet there were ex-Catholic Christians in Catholic countries before Martin Luther.. What religion were they? Not Protestant, just ex Catholic, and Christian. Their descendants joined the Protestant movement but the original Waldenses were simply ex Catholic Christians long before such a thing as Protestantism existed. Their descendants were expelled from the Catholic world alongside the Jews and were taken in by Lutheran Germans and Reformed Dutch. Yet their ancestors had been Christians and ex Catholics since the 12th century...
The ex Catholic movement, the Protestant movement, and the Anglican are completely separate for separate reasons. The English were Roman Catholics until recently in history with the disagreement between the King & Pope. The Waldenses were the first ex Catholic movement, dating back to the 11th century. The true Protestants of the Reformation were mostly based in communities Germans and Dutch and Scandinavians.
There are around 35 000 registered protestant denomination
Nicean creed and the city of Nicea is pronounced with a soft ‘c’, ni-see-uh and ni-see-an.
I agree but that is a hard capital C not a soft c which sounds more like the c in car.
Nice to see ya? Lol
He's actually mispronouncing multiple words... "Pas-ka", "fil-ee-OH-kwe", etc. It's tough with non-phonetic English spellings!
#facepalm #cringe
In English we pronounce them with a soft c, but there was no such thing in Greek, only k and s. I'm guessing that Nicea was named after the Greek god of victory, Nike.
I like how you essentially blamed the Eastern Orthodox Church for the great schism.
Didn't mention the coronation of Charlemagne either, interesting choice.
LMAOOOOOO
How did he?
@@joseph-k7l2v
Because the Church rose out of the Roman Empire, and it was explicitly tied into the State.
The office of Pontifex Maximus (Pope) predates Christianity by around 500 years.
The High Bishop of Rome was only one of the five churches elevated in the Bible.
When the Western* Roman Empire collapsed the Church of Rome was left in the hands of Barbarians, and Pope Leo coronated Charlemagne as the Holy Roman Emperor, despite the fact that a legitimate Roman Emperor was still ruling the Roman Empire from Constantinople.
The situation was made worse when the West sacked Constantinople during the Third Crusade.
Basically all the major fuck ups and breakdowns in relations came from the incompetence and poor decision making from the East.
*Edit
@@mitchtherevolution the western Roman Empire collapsed first not the east, plus the office of Pontifex Maximus was still taken by the emperor in the early church, the Emperor was considered the head of the church and in the eastern Roman Empire he was the head of the church until the end of the empire
@@dewd9327
I actually don't know why I said Eastern Roman Empire instead of Western.
The first Augustus to decline Pontifex Maximus was in 381 shortly after the Empire was officially Christianized, my main point on that was to show how deeply connected Christianity was to the Roman Empire and Roman Government.
I would still contend that Western decisions by the Bishops of Rome (Pope) bear the most responsibility for the great schizm though.
I was curious if he was actually pronouncing Nicea with the “s” sound intentionally since a lot of Hellenic words (Macedonia) are actually more correctly pronounced with the “k” sound
Ryan, I wondered the same thing. I've never heard it pronounced the way he does.
He did use the K sound didn't he? At least at 6:58.
@@nbwall56 You have never heard someone pronounce something the way its spelled?
In Italian and Ecclesisatical Latin is Nicea with the “ch” sound (“Nichea”)
I've also heard it with the S. Not like this.
1:54 190 Pope Victor I seeks to excommunicate
2:34 1st Council of Nicea. The Nicean Creed is established by The Church.
3:28 The Filioque Clause added by The Roman Catholic Church.
5:42 The 1st Council of Nicea 325 AD
6:03 The Council of Constantinople in 381 AD
6:35 The Council of Ethesus in 431 AD
8:05 Leavened Orthodox Bread vs Unleavened Roman Catholic Bread.
8:27 Orthodox Married Priests vs Roman Catholic Celibate Unmarried Priests.
9:10 The Orthodox Apostolic Succession vs Roman Catholic Papal King.
10:14 The Great Schism.
The whole problem was the elites in Rome were panicked by the collapse of Rome the city & were grasping at whatever straws they could find to recover lost glory. Unfortunately, that included The Church. Under no circumstance was the bishop in Rome above any other. It was all politics & money.
Actually , he is. Jesus gave him the Keys to the Kingdom. The Kingdom of the House of David had a royal steward who had keys to the kingdom, his authority was second to the King if he was not in the kingdom. Much like a Prime minister is given authority to govern the Monarch's subjects. The problem I think is with God modelling the Church like the old Davidic kingdom and not like a democracy.
And it's still about politics and money.
First of all, it must be emphasized that all the texts of the New Testament were first written in Greek. Therefore, it is logical for the Greeks to fully understand the meaning of the scriptures without any traslation. In the scriptures, and specifically in Greek, it writes "I also tell you this; that you are Peter and on this stone of your confession I will build my Church unscathed". Meaning, Christ is not going to build his church on Peter, but on Peter's confession that Jesus is the Son of God. Also, the Apostles were equal apostles among themselves. No one was superior to the other. Also Pope John VIII also participated in the 8th Ecumenical Council. It was there that filioque was convicted for the first time. Obviously the Papal Church thinks that dogma is food and you can add salt whenever you feel it is tasteless.
Pride ddnt change😳😳
That's not entirely true. There likely lost Aramaic sources for the gospels. Most modern translations have origins in Greek sources, but that is not the same as saying all original sources were Greek.
@@NuncNuncNuncNuncat least is more on the east side is the one who understands because the bible is wrote in Greek and mixed middle east language..... than the latin speaking people
So baiscly it's pointless banter made by humans because they disagreed on some things we don't fully know to be true anyway as bible was written hundreds years later and passed on.
Pascha= pass-kah
Nicean= nye-cee-ann
Nicea= nye-cee-ah
Philioque= phil-ee-oh-quay
*PAHSS-hha, Nee-CHAY-ahn, Nee-CHAY-ah, fee-lee-OH-quay
Totally agree with you on paskha, but it is quite possible that back then Nycea was pronounced Nikeya, especially in the eastern parts of the Christendom. On the other hand it seems likely he is simply reading the words without bothering to check the proper (current) pronunciation.
Hotel=Trivago
@@JimTDF In Romanian (latin language) it is written Nicea and pronounced as you said, with emphasis on the first syllable, "ni".
@@clausclau2940 Thanks! I still think he is simply reading the names as they are written, without paying much attention to the proper pronunciation...
1:54 it's already an anachronism to talk about "Pope Victor I" as this reinforces the idea that the ecclesiastical model of the Roman Catholic Church was already in force back then. There was no papacy in the 2nd century. The term "pope" comes from pappas in greek, meaning father. It was used for the first time in the third century to refer to the patriarch of Alexandria, and was commonly used to refer to any bishop, not just the bishop of Rome. The papacy is a development throughout the millenium leading up to the schism, and a big part of the schism is whether or not that development is either Orthodox or a heresy.
Mispronunciations aside, I was possibly misinformed by a story involving a opportunistic Norman conqueror, (named Robert “the weasel” Guiscard), kidnapping the pope after the Byzantines assured military protection from the Normans, the pope awarded part of southern Italian kingdom to his kidnapper, enraging the eastern church...I was told this event, was the worst of the various rifts, & tensions between them, leading to the breakup....
that is not enitrely true
that is only the colorful story,
the real story behind it was that
the pope actually wanted a divided italian pensinsula fragmented and not united under a central power because it was much easier to exploit it and for the pope to survive as a temporal ruler
for 1500 years the popes tried with all thier effort to undermine and prevent any kind of complete pensinsular power slowing down the process of national unification and creation of national powers that in other states was already complete in 1500-1600 while in italy would come to an end only during the late industrial revolution period and near the beginning of the last century
when the normans invaded southern italy the pope recognized their conquest and by that act created the kingdom of sicily, a kingdom that with many denomination(neaples, 2 sicilies) and rulers (germans emperors, aragonian french and spanish kings, ausburgs emperors), will only come to an end in 1860 during italy unifications wars
that is also true from a territorial gain perspective because with the catholics normans kings the enitre sothern italy would become a latin territory reducing greek and orthodox influence in the peninsula
@@tripleh327 part of that is due to the fact orthodox in the East ended up under the control of the emperor. It resulted in certain changes and policies by the emperor that influenced the faith. See Caesaripapism.
@@28Decimocorrect east roman empire devil 😂
The early celtic Church in Wales can be seen as Orthodox as it said that St David was made Bishop and Arch Bishop of Wales by the Paitriarc of Jerusalem as was St. Dieniol of Bangor made Bishop by the Paitriarc and other Welsh Bishop's and not the Pope of Rome and did not come under the authority of Rome until 1054 at the time of the Great Schism but others say that it was after the fall of Jerusalem to the Moore's
To me, the whole Great Schism thing simply reeks of extreme arrogance on the part of Rome. One single patriarch/bishop (the one of Rome) arrogating supremacy for himself, and arrogating the authority to dictate to the others what is right and wrong, without any discussion. That is the attitude of a dictator; not a charitable, Christian attitude. I'm not surprised that the people in the East at a certain point lost patience with Rome.
Great explanation. I just read an article on how the mandatory fasting that the Roman Church enforced in Sabbath was an additional factor towards schism, particularly in the Eastern Churches which in a while continued to recognise the Seventh-day Sabbath as a day of joy and feasting along biblical lines.
Luke 20:46 “Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts.”
Describes Catholics and orthodox perfectly
@@tommark3015 and Anglicans, Dalai Lama, Hindus, Muftis…
@@tommark3015
Tom,
The Catholic Church does not congregate nor worship at a synagogue. What you are reading refers to the Jews.
So you get the right understanding, Scribes, were well-known legal experts that could interpret and regulate Jewish laws, but they did not interfere with or assume any role in the guidance of the people.
Such "legal role" has never been the job of a Catholic Priest who deals in New Testament faith, morality, sacraments and guidance.Therefore your discernment is biased and false..
May God bless your discernment.
The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit.
The Earth is Hell in the future. It gets hit by an asteroid and pushed toward the sun. Isaiah 13:13, 2 Peter 3, and Revelation 9.After death is defeated Jesus returns the kingdom back to God. 1 Corinthians 15 This is the beginning of the kingdom of God.
Then and asteroid will strike the Earth Revelation 9. It will open up the bottomless pit and knock the Earth out of its orbit toward the sun. The Earth is Hell is the future. The only escape is in the New Jerusalem. It will take the best of humanity and the glory of the nations to a new Earth. This is the beginning of the kingdom of heaven. Peter was given authority over who goes and stays by Jesus. Protestants are antichrist according to 1 John 2:18-19 ...for they went out from us showing that they were not of us, for if they were of us they would have stayed with us...There is one type of person who will avoid tasting the second death. Those who are killed for the word of God and bear the testimony of Jesus Christ which is prophecy. They will reign with Christ for 1000 years and after the 1000 years the rest of the dead will be raised into incorruptible bodies and judged by the Catholic saints. Those who are left behind on the Earth will eternally suffer. Their worm does not die and the flames are not quenched.
Protestant Reddit Moment
Much love to our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters who, while misguided, remain close to us in many respects and give due honor to our Holy Traditions. God bless ☦️
Deum benedict traditionem! ✟ Respect 🙏
How we are misguided if its the Church founded by Jesus since 33 AD. God bless you brother
@@MKHLX Because the Roman church schismed from the Orthodox Catholic Church in the 11th Century, owing to heretical views which festered at that time and still persist today. Actually, the Roman church is worse today than it was then, and I know many, many from among your ranks would agree with that statement, too. You are no longer part of the unbroken, unchanged Church founded by Christ in 33AD. The Gates of Hell have not prevailed against the Orthodox Church (our traditions are the same as they were in 33AD), but all others have fallen in some form or another.
@@MKHLX the orthodox church was founded in 33 ad. The roman catholic chuch was founded in 1054.
@@SimonSlPl its the otherway around brother
Got to love the enormous failure in attention to detail it takes to have scandinavia marked as part of the western church when talking about events in the three hundreds
Thanks!
Thank you as well!
I am a Muslim and and I always was asking why those differences between arthodox and katholiek so thanks for this video and too bad there is no subtitles cus I can't understand everything u said
The Great Schism came about due to a complex mix of religious disagreements and political conflicts. One of the many religious disagreements between the western (Roman) and eastern (Byzantine) branches of the church had to do with whether or not it was acceptable to use unleavened bread for the sacrament of communion. (The west supported the practice, while the east did not.) Other objects of religious dispute include the exact wording of the Nicene Creed and the Western belief that clerics should remain celibate.
These religious disagreements were made worse by a variety of political conflicts, particularly regarding the power of Rome. Rome believed that the pope-the religious leader of the western church-should have authority over the patriarch-the religious authority of the eastern church. Constantinople disagreed. Each church recognized their own leaders, and when the western church eventually excommunicated Michael Cerularius and the entire eastern church. The eastern church retaliated by excommunicating the Roman pope Leo III and the Roman church with him.
While the two churches have never reunited, over a thousand years after their split, the western and eastern branches of Christianity came to more peaceable terms. In 1965, Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras I lifted the longstanding mutual excommunication decrees made by their respective churches.
Today, the two branches of Christianity remain distinct expressions of a similar faith. Roman Catholicism is the single largest Christian denomination, with more than a billion followers around the world. Eastern Orthodoxy is the second-largest Christian denomination, with more than 260 million followers. Eastern Orthodoxy includes national churches, such as the Greek Orthodox Church and Russian Orthodox Church.
Catholic's heretics NATO Nazis. Genocides Rape Political chrchy. Orthodox = son of God Jesus. Criste
in Islam, I was wondering why Mohammad called black Ethiopians raisin heads? Also, why Mohammad was killed by a Jewish slave that he had by poisoning? allah is not allah it is AL' AH the god.
@@histruth3157 bro what the heck this never happened please check your sources
@@histruth3157 he didn't call Ethiopians raisin heads the Ethiopian king became a Muslim how would he insult his biggest allys people he was killed by a jew from poisoning because he had already finished his job with the conquering of makkah infact he was poisoned 2 years before that and its believed that God made his death later so he could conquer makkah then die
What I find interesting is that the actions that the Eastern Orthodox Church accuses the Catholic Church of doing are the very same they committed against the Orient Orthodox Churches and the Church of the East. I myself am a member of an Antiochene Church (Maronite), and we have many stories about how the Church of Constantinople tried to impose their form of worship, who was going to govern over us, etc. Including requiring that our Divine Liturgy be said in Greek instead of Syriac-Aramaic, that the Patriarch of Constantinople appoints the Patriarchs of Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem instead of the local clergy electing them. The Byzantine's where so oppressive the Christian Communities of the Middle East and Egypt invited the Muslims to take over since it was felt that the Muslims could be no worse than the Byzantines in their treatment of non-Byzantine Christians. Also, while the Roman Church was not a picture of innocence, they had reasons for acting as they did like the closing of all Latin Churches and murder of the Latin Community in Constantinople numerous times.
The disagreements between the Pope and the Patriarch was not over who is the head of the Church (the Ecumenical Councils settled that, but what authority and powers that office has.
You are biased and a liar. The Pope first closed the Greek orthodox churches in the West unless they only used Latin….. the Orthodox responded.
Your church is in bed with the Roman Catholic Church …. And has had more conflict with non-orthodox eastern churches than the Orthodox Church …
its the doctrinal differences between the east and the west that causes problems between them .One listens to the bible and one does not .,One is in contact with God and the other is not .
---- > The doctrinal disagreement was about the deity of Christ. Muslims didn't solve that problem, they made it worse. They eliminated the original scripture and wrote their own book.
The patriarchs never raised armies to rape and murder their way across the middle east while blaspheming the name of God, like the catholics did. Orthodox have their name for a reason, they are in line with Christ andthe church fathers, the heterodox are not.
The Byzantine were so oppressive that Christians of ME and Egypt invited muslim, that's totally false you may find one or two traitors everywhere if it was really so oppressive how after Islamic invasion the Coptic Christian's lead multiple brutual revolts in Egypt which the leader of Syria Christian didn't supported to scape Islamic rulers wrath
Im Greek but an atheist. The biggest difference of the two is how the head of the church should be treated. Catholics see the pope as an emperor and go to the Vatican just to see him not the churches. In Greece you will be respected if you are a patriarch but everyone just sees you as the man who runs the orthodoxy nothing more
The later could be partly blamed on the fact the Pope inherented the emperor's cult mandate from Rome and then his own Mini kingdom.
Your definitely biased lol no they don't worship him like a emperor your 500 years in the past
Oisin if that’s true then why doesn’t Italy annex the Vatican, he’s literally getting treated as an emperor, he even has his own nation lol
@@nikosvagiakos8510 no he doesn't not a emperor he just the head of religion .And because they had a agreement and its a holy place.I don't understand you obviously you have something against a old man .
@@o-o2399i am pretty confident that catholics believe that the pope is infallible(that does seem like a characteristic of medieval emperors), that is not accepted in the east. the orthodox church does not accept that any man could ever be flawless.
I was raised a protestant, even though I have some Catholic family members and I’ve attended my ass and it’s beautiful. However, once I got in my 30s, I started studying deeply into the different religions, including all different, protestant churches, and Anglicanism, and the difference between Anglicans and Episcopalians, and the orthodox Christian religion was interesting, but I didn’t realize how it made me feel until I started watching this RUclips video. This bishop is phenomenal and everything he said is something they come straight from the Bible and he says it every time I listen to him and he’s not gonna paint rose colored glasses, like catholic mass well with this beautiful ceremony, but he just simply tells it just like it is.. he’s is blunt as some of the Southern Baptist preachers from the 1970s, but he speaks directly from the Bible and the way he talks is very Eastern Orthodox. Bishop Mari. I’m not sure but I think he’s Christian orthodox because he crosses himself like an eastern orthodox Christian but somebody told me he is some kind of old a Syrian Christian or maybe Armenian
Bishop Mari Emmanuel is not orthodox. He's essentially a protestant who runs his own independent church - unaffiliated with any mainline orthodox church.
@@SanctusPaulus1962So, Nestorian isn’t?
The Protestant movement began in 1517 by Martin Luther in Germany, this schism that preceded it shows us how East and West became the two hemispheres we see today.
You may want to proofread your comments before posting…
You cannot discuss "Filioque" without first addressing the Trinitarian question, which plagued Church Councils since the very first Council. The nature of God, the relationship between the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit's involvement in this was far from clear or agreed for almost a thousand years. The Eastern church was more heavily influenced by Judaism, which was strictly monotheistic and the concept of a Triune deity would have been anathema. The concept is not explicit in the New Testament.
The Western Church was much more heavily influenced by philosophical thought and read much of it into scripture and oral Christian tradition. The first Council's creed was by no means expressing a Triune deity and it took several hundred years before any agreement on the structure (if any) of the Trinity began to express itself into the Creed. Even then, the Eastern Church preferred a hierarchical Trinity, whereas the Western Church preferred a Trinity that was fully co-equal, co-eternal and co-substantial. Hence the "Filioque" disagreement. "Filoque" means "and from the Son", which is an expression around the provenance of the Holy Spirit. According to the Eastern Church, the Spirit proceeds only from the Father. The Western Church would have it proceed also from the Son.
Of course, the political differences and power games between the bishops of the East and West went far beyond doctrinal issues, but the disagreement over the nature of the deity provided sufficient basis for the final schism.
"God" is a trinity because the Sun is a Trinity: The sun itself, the light brought by the Sun and its Heat. - The heat comes from the light (the Son) or from the Sun itself?
@@tenborck kindly explain the doctrinal relationship between the sun and the Christian God. Why is the sun a doctrinal parallel? Why not the moon or Beltegueze for instance? Also, is there a citation anywhere in the Christian seminal texts making this comparison valid?
@@christosmak.6741 Islam is your answer
@@tenborck John 17:3, who is the only true God according Jesus pbuh?
Latin Empire(Catholics), 1204-1261.
The Latin conquest of Constantinople was a disaster for both the Greeks and ultimately, for the Western Europeans. The former unified territory of the empire was fragmented into several competing states, some ruled by Byzantine princes, other by Latin feudal lords. Warfare among these small competing states became constant- the only beneficiaries were the Muslim Turks in Anatolia, who used the feuding of the Christians to extend their domain to the shores of the Aegean Sea. It again appeared that the empire was on the verge of extinction.
However, a military savior arose to rally the last vestiges of Byzantine power. Michael Palaeologus (1259-1282), the emperor in exile at Nicaea, managed to reconquer Constantinople from Latins in 1261, establishing the last Byzantine imperial dynasty.
That part always bothered me; The Catholics claimed they were going to support or liberate Constantinople but in reality, all they did was rape and pillage in the name of God. From what I remember from books, when they came into Constantinople, they put a prostitute on the throne of the king, as the ultimate show of audacity and wickedness.
So much is missed. For example, the fact that the Balkan tribes insisted on using local language so they could understand the liturgy during mass. This was supported by Methodius and St. Grgur (Gregory) of Nin. You can see his 9.5 meter statue in Split. Made by sculptor Mestrovic, who has sculptures in parks of Ohio, and built Atlas statue that sits in front of the United Nations in New York City.
Who cares???? That is irrelevant in this context. You’re talking about something that happened after schisms. The conversions of the godless Slavic people
Minute 5:22 : Must give a accourete description of the Crucificcion. It missing The Title I.N.R.I
Well... with the Latin church’s interpretation of how God functions and how our religion is, there was a large problem during those times as the Latin church believed (and later, this became the standard belief for Protestants and Orthodox Christians) that the Holy Spirit and the Son were not an extension of the Father, but equal persons (the former belief that God is the Father and the Son and Holy Spirit are extensions with distinct roles under God the Father, this belief was displaced by the belief of “three equal persons” under a God-head).
It’s interesting as questions are raised, such as: “Why are there three Gods in Christianity?” (The mistake coming from three -Equal- persons under a God-head). Jesus said himself that God “taught” Him (the root word in Greek being “to impart knowledge” and/or “to instruct”), implying there was a time when God the Father knew more than Jesus. If God the Father knew more than Jesus, how is Jesus equal to the Father?
Also, why would Jesus sit at the right of God the Father? Why would the Bible describe it that way instead of equalising the positions? The language would be “Jesus and God sit together” if that were the case, not Jesus having an important role but God the Father clearly having a more “senior” position (if you will).
The point I am trying to make is that God the Father is ‘God’ with Jesus and the Holy Spirit as His extensions, still the same “material” or “substance” that is God but distinct and UNDER God the Father. They are still divine, but God the Father is ‘The God’ and Jesus is his ‘son’.
I am not trying to say that “Jesus is nothing, he is not God” merely that He is not God the Father whom is above all things including Jesus.
I’m not sure if I explained it well enough...
It's exactly why institutions shouldn't be based of any formal biases that impede change. Holy ghost the father and the son is the best way to personify change in time in ascension or descension depending on ones future outlook progression of present ideals.
That makes no sense
I agree that Jesus while being God is indeed subordinate to God the Father. Most churches today see them as absolute equals which is not scriptural.
I think that you have explained it quite well!--Thank you!
The Son comes from the Father and the Holy Spirit exists with them---Whenever any two are gathered together in my name, there am I also!
So too with Man and Woman--they shall become one (with the Holy Spirit--if they are gathered together in God's name)--This is a great mystery and a Grace of God!---And when they have become One, they with children, if also gathered in God's name, exist with the Holy Spirit!
Similarly, God, as the One (Holy Trinity) creates man so that together, gathered in the name of God, the Holy Spirit exists with them!
No no, that is not correct, the Latin church did not believe that before the eastern church.
Thanks. The theological reasons for the schism seem obscure and archaic today. But one leader not wanting to bend the knee is timeless.
You mean the Pope not wanting to listen to his peers in the East? For Constantinople patriarch was just one of several Eastern leaders, who were united on the question with him. So it was one Pope (basically just one of the apostolic origin bishops), against other bishops of apostolic origin - Patriarchs.
This is like Game of Thrones: Church Edition!
no it was the bishops of the west PLUS the Pope which is the ultimate authority, against the bishops of the east @@dimatrue
@@adrianlima2776 So? Other bishops that were installed not by apostles but by the Pope or his authority. I am talking about bishops with direct Apostlolic origins. Those who we today call Patriarchs, Popes, etc. The Pope wanted to usurp the ultimate authority on what was right or wrong. Eastern churches said that only an ecumenical assembly could have such final and definitive authority. The Pope decided to go his own way, using the fact that by the time the West grew stronger while the East got weaker, being constantly under pressure from the “global south” of those times. As usual, the betrayal was, is, and will ultimately get punished. Don’t cry now about Arabs and Turks on European streets. Remember when Eastern Rome asked for help and the West ransacked, burned and destroyed Constantinople. The riches they got, hard to imagine. But, the winter came for House Fray. The winter is coming for the West. Fasten your seat belts.
Both the Pope and Patriarch of Constantinople said reunification is inevitable. Many think it may happen within the century .
I do not think so. The two church's are so far apart on major area's. The Russian government has given the Orthodox church a central role in the family and holding families together.
The Catholic church has lost family values. (I think they even support abortion)
@@joeblow5178 I never said Russia, the Patriarch of Constantinople said unification is a current goal and is working with the Pope. Moscow and Constantinople have strained relations and they have current schism among themselves. Moscow and Constantinople aren't in communion with each other.
It's inevitable in the sense that the one true church will always prevail. I don't think it means that a real unification will happen soon.
Recently the US foreign minister visited the patriarch. I wonder what they talked about
Only if God is on top and not mortal Pope.
Man, you enunciate Nicene Creed so much differently than how I've ever heard it.
I thought maybe it was a regional thing or something. Then I hear you say Byzantine and diocese completely wrong and it makes me wonder if you have only read these words and never actually heard them in conversation.
Great video but some of these enunciations drive me crazy.
It took me a minute or two to figure out that it was Nicene Creed, but I’m Baptist so…
The actual pronounciation of the city was Nikea [nikεa] (or Nikaia before that) indeed.
So the naɪˈsiːə spelling was not correct.
Wow I had never heard of this until about an hour ago and I searched RUclips and stumbled upon this video right after it was uploaded! Nice
ok that mutual excommunication gave me a good laugh😂
Orthodox cross in a video actually is Russian orthodox cross. Every Orthodox country has its own unique styling of the cross
Your story is a testament to the transformative power of faith. Through the grace of Jesus, you've risen above challenges to find a home, a wife, a daughter, and the beautiful identity of a child of God. Hallelujah for the remarkable journey towards a life filled with love and purpose! 🏡💖🌈
I would say, that the turning point was when Pope became the ruler of the Church State in 751AD. It took three hundred years to make Schism complete.
Filioque was more than mistranslation. "And" applies to the same one verb that describes Father as the source, in EVERY language.
Dude very good video i loved that you showed Hagia Sofia as it was back then without the Islamic towers that it has now
Sad for you😂
It’s called minaret
Cry about it
Western Church: your excommunicated
Eastern Church oh yeah your also excommunicated
Me: Outstanding move
You can't excommunicate me if I excommunicate you first .... 😂
@@mir3877 of course i can when i consider you a heretic
*You're* Your spelling should be excommunicated!
Thank you so much for uploading this video. It is helping me get through the pandemic!
Dude was STRUGGLING with these pronunciations 😂😂😂😂
Text bubble at 10:00 should say 'Lets not ally with Rome.'; regardless, a great video.
I would like to see a video Nestorius and the schism with the Church of the East in 431 as well as the schism with the Oriental Orthodox in 451
So who created God, before the Jews did, that is . . . ?!?
The latter was a similarly drawn out affair. It really started in 449 (there were antecedent events earlier which set the stage) with the second council of Ephesus and the deposing and exile of the Patriarch of Constantinople, and wasn't really complete until the final division of the patriarchates in 536.
On the map visual, what does the strange Gray spot on Wales representat?
Jesus never pretended to be a supreme leader but taught with humility.
"I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” John 14:6 / If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about Me” John 5:46 etc. He said it all the time. Not without humbleness, just the truth.
@@DafterthoughtHe was'nt bragging and impossing His authority. Only those who would believe and follow. Unlike some so- called religious leaders of today.
@@renatodemavibas3367 also my point. I agree.
lmao imagine thinking these sects care about what Jesus, Moses, Mohammed supposedly taught us
Right: he never claimed to be a supreme leader. Rather, he claimed to be GOD HIMSELF.
It took me a minute to know what he was talking about when he said “Nakian” aka Nicaean. Never heard it pronounced like that. Sometimes I think he mispronounces things just to get people to comment.
No, the "c" in latin is pronounced as a k sound.
@@ΓιάννηςΚανελλόπουλος-ν8υ in classic latin, but in ecclesiastical it can be a "ch" or a "s"
He was actually pronouncing it correctly according to classical Latin pronunciation and I believe for Greek as well.
Both the Romans and the Greeks would treat "c" as a hard k sound.
"ae" together in classical Latin would create an "i" sound like in the word "blind".
So it may sound strange or unheard of to you, but he seems to have done his research when it comes to pronunciation of Nicaea
I didn't realize Nikea and Nicene were the same thing
@@HerculesMays But the language he speaks sounds a lot like English to me. Why does pronunciation of c in Latin matter for the pronunciation in English?
The “Son of the Father” was the wedge. And the Orthodoxy was.correct.
As a non-christian, i still dont get it who is the son, who the father and who is the spirit... and who made who at what time, or all made each other, or are they all the same one, so then why mention all of them... nope too confusing. But i find it wierd that people can choose on how to believe on something that is strict and god choose. Islam for example is also split, but not for how all of them believe about its religion at the core, but who should be the leader of the religion (the heir)
@@dioritbajrami8283 But the thing is, muslims are starting to realize that the seperation is dumb, and are starting to unite, not sunni, not shia, just muslim.
@@dioritbajrami8283 god is father time. All things happen in time, so he's the highest god. The trinity is the past present and future. The holy spirit is the present.
@@dioritbajrami8283
If you are interested in trinity concept(s) I recommend search up the neo-platonic principles or the hermetic text about alchemy.
It's very likely they influenced the early Christian theology.
Awesome video. What’s the piece in the background?
Awesome video as always. My graphic novel is a bit before the years of the split. I hope I could have shown in more detail Phokas’ interactions with Liutprand. They were the best representation of the enmity between the western and eastern culture!
@Byantine Tales 1st Corinthians 15:24- reads, 24 Next, the end, when he hands over the Kingdom to his God and Father, when he has brought to nothing all government and all authority and power.e 25 For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet.f 26 And the last enemy, death, is to be brought to nothing.g 27 For God “subjected all things under his feet.”h But when he says that ‘all things have been subjected,’i it is evident that this does not include the One who subjected all things to him.j 28 But when all things will have been subjected to him, then the Son himself will also subject himself to the One who subjected all things to him,k that God may be all things to everyone.l There was never, originally, any concept of a trinitarian godhead until The Council of Nicaea. Constantine invented this trinity from the Babylonians to cement his empire of "Christians" and pagans. Since then, Protestant Christianity, by 1500 years of tradition, has enslaved its members to believe the unbelievable.
You celebrate Easter on a day other that Sunday?!? That’s sin! You’re excommunicated. - a pope, probably.
Who the hell is pope..... Is he God ?
@@danielg1680 he is basically the one who tells what God wants to say
@@pikamonketchumlol1237 if he is....
Then we don't need the Bible anymore 😂 just hear what pope says......
Pope is only For people who are lazy to read their own holy bible ....
That's how it would be easy for you to get lied by a liar
Neither Jesus nor the Disciples celebrated Easter nor did they hide and seek Easter eggs either.
@@hendrickmagnaye2328 Really? The pope can't contradict the bible? Then why is pope Francis endorsing LGBT people and Hinduism?
Main reason was that Pope thought himself as a superior of all patriarchs, But churches were independent and they have own leaders like Alexandria, Antioch,Constantinopole,Jerusalem etc.Patriarchs.The council rules the eastern church, not a one man.
“Then i excommunicate you too”
“Wait, that’s illegal”
😂🤣
Interesting explanation but ... unconvincing. The split was the result of a power struggle between Rome and the emerging city , Constantinople, the doctrinal differences are only an expression of the political, economical and cultural rivalry between the two great cities . A new religious identity always follows the emergence of a new center of power ; it’s the case with the Umayyad and Islam or the North of Europe and Protestantism , for example.
The church split because the decline of Roman empire.
Before the decline, the western and eastern church was connected by Pax Romana and the authority rested to the patriarch at Byzantine No matter what kind of schism between Rome and Byzantine, the Roman empire could force and mold them.
After the decline, there was a wide area between eastern and western church, which until High Middle Ages was populated by pagan tribes, i.e. the Balkans. Not to mention that "barbarians" invaded Rome several times, reducing its population to less than 50,000 (from its height of 1 million). Separated from their main source of support, the western church had to manage to survive by themselves, including creating their own version of Roman Empire. The result of that was the sense of authority to challenge the patriarch in Byzantine.
do u read quran mikel
The same as it was in the 451 split between Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians.
Great explanation and for us in the Philippines 🇵🇭 doesn't know this. Just following the Spaniards that brought this religion in the Pacific. No divorce and celibacy remains with the Priest. My Nephew tried to reach out to me before his Ordination. He said he needs guidance and another opinion before graduating in the seminary. I told him your best guidance is just right there within you. The holy spirit that guides you and tell you what to do. He's starting to give the Mass now but I feel his pain. These Priests and those that serves in the church are already sacrificing ang giving their whole self to serve God and the people why prohibit them to marry and find someone that can help them to maintain the church and continue the work of Jesus and God? My ancestors don't believe in this religion before. They were Animest but I remember my father always want us to respect and be polite on every living organisms we meet or touch. Until now it's still being observed even the country is majority catholics. I still see people believe in the spirits by offering something if you touch a thing or a plant that made you sick. There's many more superstitious beliefs from the old days that is out of the Christian world. Again thank you for explaining it to us who are blind following the blind. God bless.
In what bible did Jesus ever ordain any Church, be it Orthodox or Catholic? That is why PROTESTANT came into being! It is also why Islam recognises no earthy authority. Myself? My conciense is my sovoveriegn authority. Religion demands obedience with bribes and fear, and the prospect of salvation which is not theirs to give!
@@khankrum1 no one asked but ok.
Yeah we had Religion subjects in the Philippines but none of these were ever taught. I only found out about Protestants and Orthodox Christianity AFTER I graduated college. It's really sad that I learned these basic things AFTER my schooling.
Mathew 19:10-12
10His disciples spoke up and said, “If this is the standard, then it seems better to never get married.”
11“Not everyone is meant to remain single-only those whom God gives grace to be unmarried. 12For some are born to celibacy; others have been made eunuchs by others. And there are some who have chosen to live in celibacy for the sacred purpose of heaven’s kingdom realm. Let those who can, accept this truth for themselves.”
Jesus.
@@One.Zero.One101 In the old curriculum (BEC2002), the Great Schism was taught in Second Year High School under Araling Panlipunan.
9:52 Why did you call the Roman Empire "Byzantine Empire" and the HRE "Roman Empire"?
Ok ok everyone knows that it's getting annoying. He knows everybody does, he does it for simplicity sake. And let's be real Rman Empire and Byzantine empire sound cooler than East, West Roman empire. The same would be if it was called West/East Byzantine empire. Don't worry your head with this small inaccuracies.
If I’m not mistaken the Johannine comma debate between Protestants and Catholics also further consolidated the belief of Orthodox Patriarchs that the Western church was willing to change scripture and divinely inspired texts all Willy nilly. Which also reinforced their belief that it was the West who was responsible for breaking from the Nicean creed and allowing the pope to decide what was canon rather than the text itself or the early Wurms.
There are several mistakes in this video. One of them is that Filoque would be a mistranslation. False. It appeared in the Visigoth kingdom of Spain, in order to fight the Arianism of the Visigoths, that dated back from the times of Valens, emporor of Constantinople, who converted the Goths from mainstram Christianity to Arianism. Filioque was placed in the spanish creed to fight Arianism. It worked, somewhat at lest. The Franks, the northen neighours of the Visigoths, took this and added to the Creed, in order to get poltiical and cultural independence from Constantinople. Charlemagne is considered the political artisan of this. Saint Photios of Constantinople denounced very clearly the heresy and the lack of ecclesiology. In the Eastern Orthodox church, in order to a teching to be accepted as truth, I needs to be accepted by the Fullness (Pleroma) of the Church, that includes all Orthodox Christians who have the true faith and have the true Baptism. Ecumenical Councils are manifestations of the Pleroma and they are accepted by the Pleroma as real Ecumenical Councils, not false ones. The Church as the real, mystical Body of Christ, is through whom God speaks without mistake, so there is infailibility. Any member of the Church, no matter if layman, monk or clergy is not infailable and can be wrong, but the Church in Pleroma. Western Christianity renounced this understanding of the Pleroma gradualy and turned into what we now call the Roman Catholic church. In there, the authority of the Pleroma was replaced by the authority of the Pope. The final part of the Schism is considered the 1204 conquest of Constantinople by the crusaders.
The Catholics, as I understand it, got their relics, even the Shroud of Turin, from the Crusaders' sac of Constantinople in 1204.
I don't know if that "Let's don't" was on purpose or not 10:03 (should be "let's not") :thinkemoji:
commenting for algorithm
When was the second collection added?
Money,power,and ego. God nowhere to be seen in the church,you can find him outside of the walls.
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No, God is EVERYWHERE and it depends on how you define "church". The words; Church, Religion, Catholic etc... now have negative programmed emotional responses that are dishonest - created by years of tribe control of media.
Orthodox church remain unchange same how Isus Hristos left as that's why miracles happen every second in our church God bless everybody and open eyes to everyone to see the truth
In which of orthodox churches happen so many miracles?
What do you think happens in Orthodox Church convicted of genocide, whose believers flee from it in terror?
To think the orthodox church has not under went change and modernism is wishful thinking. Why is it the russian orthodox church allows abortion and contraception? The EO are in schosm within themselves. Because they refuse to recognize the primacy of peter, something present in the early church.
I have heard scholars with doctorates discuss the "filioque" controversy, but have never heard a single one pronounce the word, "filly-ock". I've always heard it, "filly-OH-kway", which I think is closer to the correct latin pronunciation. Whoever made this video wasn't even trying.
3:02 Heard two things mispronounced already. Makes me question your actual knowledge in this
Exactly what I thought
Or it could be AI. I heard that a lot of these videos are voiced by AI and they often mispronounce words
If they can't even pronounce the words correctly then we might wonder how serious their research was. Was it really most of the eastern part of the Church which broke away from Rome or vice versa?
Because Papa wanted power.
And little kids.
Pope: Hey! You're deposed.
The Other Pope: Aw...wait a minute! I'm the pope! You can't depose me, you're deposed!
Pope: Aw...wait a minute! I'm the pope! You can't depose me, you're deposed!
And god went in to punish them severely
God sent Karl Marx
Making an oversimplified joke........
There's a tax for that