1 00:00:00,200 --> 00:00:53,679 The the the the the people, the people, the people, the people, 2 00:00:53,960 --> 00:02:00,280 the people, the the the the the the douting to the boy the 3 00:02:15,240 --> 00:03:52,639 the the people do the the the people do? All right, what's up? 4 00:03:53,240 --> 00:03:57,800 Welcome everybody? Uh, we are live. Hopefully you can hear me. 5 00:03:57,919 --> 00:04:02,479 Okay, and this sounds good with Luigi, Christian Mario, Christian Luigi, 6 00:04:02,520 --> 00:04:05,240 we got it all. We got. Next up, we got Christian 7 00:04:05,400 --> 00:04:10,960 Peach, Christian Toadstool. I'll be Toadstool. I'm the best. Is that? 8 00:04:12,159 --> 00:04:16,399 Yes, good job on the debate. Man. We're gonna be reviewing 9 00:04:16,399 --> 00:04:20,040 it today. We're gonna get deep into the conversation. I've got it pulled 10 00:04:20,120 --> 00:04:26,399 up here. I'll give you my initial assessment. I thought that it went 11 00:04:26,480 --> 00:04:30,839 pretty good on both sides in the sense of it being a good civil informative 12 00:04:30,839 --> 00:04:38,160 debate. Both sides brought I guess, probably better versions of this argument then 13 00:04:38,199 --> 00:04:41,600 we typically hear on a lot of apologetic channels. I mean, I think 14 00:04:41,639 --> 00:04:46,720 that the orthodox side usually wins this debate unless there's somebody that I haven't seen 15 00:04:46,839 --> 00:04:53,399 is like really low tier or something. But yeah, I think that the 16 00:04:53,600 --> 00:04:57,720 Rocky Balboa voice, Dude, he tried his best. I mean, I 17 00:04:57,759 --> 00:05:00,519 think that if he's new to all this, I don't know how long he's 18 00:05:00,560 --> 00:05:03,120 been studying this, you know, he's doing good for being a new guy. 19 00:05:03,160 --> 00:05:08,160 I guess. I think you are relatively new, which I think is 20 00:05:08,199 --> 00:05:12,160 pretty impressive because you did really well in this debate. So thanks for joining 21 00:05:12,199 --> 00:05:15,120 me. Where do you want to kick it off again? I think overall 22 00:05:15,199 --> 00:05:21,959 it was a lot of the typical quote minds, and even though I said 23 00:05:21,959 --> 00:05:25,040 that it was a good debate, even though it's using a lot of the 24 00:05:25,040 --> 00:05:29,519 same old quote minds, I think that this debate handled the context of the 25 00:05:29,600 --> 00:05:31,319 quote minds very well, because a lot of times what happens in this debate 26 00:05:31,879 --> 00:05:35,720 is that the machine gun quote minds are spit out and nobody ever gets to 27 00:05:35,759 --> 00:05:39,879 deal with the context. And I think you, guys, at least not 28 00:05:39,920 --> 00:05:42,879 in every passage that he threw out there at the beginning, but in many 29 00:05:42,920 --> 00:05:46,040 of the passages, you actually got to go into the context and to show 30 00:05:46,079 --> 00:05:48,120 the Roman Catholic audience that, hey, wait a minute, a lot of 31 00:05:48,160 --> 00:05:53,000 these things that you think are kind of like kill shots, there's more context 32 00:05:53,079 --> 00:05:57,800 to this, and it's a lot deeper, more charitably nuanced. When we 33 00:05:57,839 --> 00:06:00,720 get deep into it. So welcome, Luigi, I appreciate it, thanks 34 00:06:00,720 --> 00:06:04,480 for having me on. Yeah, I would agree with your assessment that I 35 00:06:04,519 --> 00:06:11,160 think in many ways their strategy is to just machine gun fire as many points 36 00:06:11,160 --> 00:06:14,759 of papal primacy as they can, so that I you know, that we 37 00:06:14,759 --> 00:06:17,120 don't have an opportunity to actually look into the context. And that's why I 38 00:06:17,199 --> 00:06:24,959 started my opening statement very intentionally with clarifying what our position is and what their 39 00:06:25,000 --> 00:06:29,879 position is. Because his burden of proof, as per the actual title of 40 00:06:29,959 --> 00:06:33,519 debate was Vatican one, right, and so that's why I read the definition 41 00:06:34,040 --> 00:06:38,639 well, this was this was a huge mistake at the beginning on his side. 42 00:06:39,680 --> 00:06:44,439 I couldn't believe that he didn't actually read the definition or define the PayPal 43 00:06:44,519 --> 00:06:48,160 view all oft Vatican One. He immediately went into the proof text and as 44 00:06:48,199 --> 00:06:51,120 I recall, I read in my notes, where did he actually give the 45 00:06:51,160 --> 00:06:56,920 definition of what Vatican one says it is? And in my view this is 46 00:06:56,959 --> 00:07:00,480 typically because most Roman Catholics don't actually go read the text about it, and 47 00:07:00,519 --> 00:07:03,839 one they don't actually know what it is. I'm not saying that Alex doesn't 48 00:07:03,879 --> 00:07:06,720 know what maybe he does, but he should have included that in his in 49 00:07:06,759 --> 00:07:12,319 his opening statement, Yeah, and you know, I think a lot of 50 00:07:12,319 --> 00:07:15,920 times what I see, especially on Twitter and you know, other various debates 51 00:07:15,959 --> 00:07:19,920 with kind of low tier is people are convinced of the Roman Catholic position because 52 00:07:19,920 --> 00:07:25,720 they don't understand the Eastern Orthodox position. They think that these quotations by Saint 53 00:07:25,720 --> 00:07:30,519 iron Ais that talk about the significance of the Roman See, that this somehow 54 00:07:30,560 --> 00:07:33,120 proves the Roman Catholic position. And that's why I was clarifying right off the 55 00:07:33,160 --> 00:07:39,920 bat with my opening statement that we our position perfectly allows for these statements of 56 00:07:39,959 --> 00:07:44,160 honor towards Rome. And then I've demonstrated how a lot of these quotes are 57 00:07:44,160 --> 00:07:47,360 applied to Constantinople, they're applied to the emperor, and so we have to 58 00:07:47,399 --> 00:07:51,480 be consistent with this type of language. We can't just only apply it literally 59 00:07:51,680 --> 00:07:57,360 to the Roman See and then not apply it literally to the emperor or to 60 00:07:57,519 --> 00:08:01,120 content. Yeah. I thought that there were men examples that you use that 61 00:08:01,199 --> 00:08:03,240 came up. I've got some of my own pulled up where we see this 62 00:08:05,000 --> 00:08:07,839 that doesn't fit the Roman Catholic model. So I think that the key point 63 00:08:07,920 --> 00:08:11,519 at the beginning here that you're making I totally agree with is that a lot 64 00:08:11,519 --> 00:08:16,879 of the quotations can be understood in either model, so they don't necessarily prove 65 00:08:18,120 --> 00:08:22,639 either paradigm. We're gonna need more than just this or that quote. You 66 00:08:22,639 --> 00:08:26,040 know, Rome has a Peter spoke through Leo that can be interpreted in either 67 00:08:26,079 --> 00:08:30,120 system. It's not a knockdown kill shot. You know, a lot of 68 00:08:30,120 --> 00:08:35,120 these older proof texts just don't really work like they used to now that people 69 00:08:35,159 --> 00:08:39,360 are digging into the material. But another thing I would say is that the 70 00:08:39,399 --> 00:08:45,919 recentch essentially book that's come out that's really good Orthodoxy, the papacy in the 71 00:08:46,000 --> 00:08:52,080 Orthodox He has a great chapter, I think it's chapter three four. Chapter 72 00:08:52,120 --> 00:08:56,519 four is all about the Roman Church in the first seven centuries and what that 73 00:08:56,679 --> 00:09:01,320 role is. And he actually works through a lot of these classic quote proof 74 00:09:01,360 --> 00:09:05,919 texts and points out that some of these that were used by Lofton, Luigi 75 00:09:05,960 --> 00:09:11,840 and not Luigia Lofton and Voice of Reason and others, they're not even used 76 00:09:11,840 --> 00:09:16,679 anymore. In fact, he mentions like the Clement text. Clement hasn't been 77 00:09:16,799 --> 00:09:20,960 used as a proof text for Vatican One in the scholar literary literature. According 78 00:09:20,960 --> 00:09:24,320 to Scrushinski, since the nineteen sixties, and we're going to look at the 79 00:09:24,360 --> 00:09:30,159 Alexandria document as well to point out that the updated Vatican approved Alexandria Document and 80 00:09:30,159 --> 00:09:35,879 the Chiady Document of a few years before that really also undercut most of the 81 00:09:35,080 --> 00:09:39,200 or many at least of the proof texts that he relied so heavily on. 82 00:09:39,440 --> 00:09:43,639 So in his opening statement, you know, he starts out, we'll get 83 00:09:43,679 --> 00:09:52,799 into this. He talks about the Richard Price text, and so'll if you 84 00:09:52,840 --> 00:09:54,399 want to comment on that, you can. But my first thought when you 85 00:09:54,440 --> 00:09:58,440 mentioned this was, well, actually, if you remember, they had Richard 86 00:09:58,519 --> 00:10:01,679 Price on and I think that I'm not positive, but they might have actually 87 00:10:01,720 --> 00:10:05,360 taken this interview down. Maybe it's still up. I don't really follow that 88 00:10:05,399 --> 00:10:09,679 channel. I don't know, but they were kind of embarrassed when they interviewed 89 00:10:09,759 --> 00:10:15,879 Richard Price on this very question that Alex raised in the debate. Have you 90 00:10:15,879 --> 00:10:20,360 seen this clip, Yeah, the one where he admits that the East didn't 91 00:10:20,399 --> 00:10:26,639 recognize the supreme authority coming from the Paples. He I mean, he just 92 00:10:26,639 --> 00:10:31,279 blatantly admits it, and you can see walking in the part. Yeah, 93 00:10:31,360 --> 00:10:33,399 let me play that. It's a real brief clip. And then I'll let 94 00:10:33,440 --> 00:10:37,480 you comment on whatever you saw in his opening statement that you first wanted to 95 00:10:37,559 --> 00:10:41,840 go after. Why did the bishops and calcid On feel they needed to judge 96 00:10:41,919 --> 00:10:54,480 Theodora if Leo had already reinsated, Well, they didn't. They didn't recognize 97 00:10:56,200 --> 00:11:07,320 jistic So uh, there is saying that has been made in the East? 98 00:11:15,200 --> 00:11:26,799 Okay? Uh? When the anyway? So it wasn't recognized in the East. 99 00:11:26,799 --> 00:11:31,080 And why might he say that? Well, one reason he might say 100 00:11:31,120 --> 00:11:39,120 that is the last statement in uh where I've got it pulled up here, 101 00:11:39,279 --> 00:11:41,159 I've got so many tabs up and it takes me a second to find it. 102 00:11:43,799 --> 00:11:48,240 The last statement in the Sartica one, by the way, is great 103 00:11:48,320 --> 00:11:56,559 on So yeah, let's go ahead. And because he hinged a lot or 104 00:11:56,559 --> 00:12:00,840 attempted to hande a lot on Sartika as Mbara does. Which is surprising to 105 00:12:00,879 --> 00:12:03,360 me that Bora. I don't have his book, but I mean, has 106 00:12:03,399 --> 00:12:07,799 he even read any of the responses on Sartika from his own team. The 107 00:12:07,919 --> 00:12:13,279 Vatican website for Eastern Affairs put out this document. It says, over the 108 00:12:13,279 --> 00:12:16,720 centuries, a number of appeals were made to the Bishop of Rome from the 109 00:12:16,720 --> 00:12:20,879 East indisciplinary matters, such as the deposition of a bishop. An attempt was 110 00:12:20,879 --> 00:12:24,679 made to the Senat of Sartka in three forty three to establish rules for this 111 00:12:24,759 --> 00:12:28,600 procedure. Sartika was received at the Council of Trello in six po ninety two. 112 00:12:28,679 --> 00:12:31,559 The Canons of Sartika determined that a bishop who had been condemned could appeal 113 00:12:31,600 --> 00:12:35,080 to the Bishop of Rome, and that the latter, if he deemed appropriate, 114 00:12:35,240 --> 00:12:41,480 might order a retrial to be conducted by the bishops in the province neighboring 115 00:12:41,519 --> 00:12:46,600 the bishop's own. Appeals regarding disciplinary matters were also made to the Sea of 116 00:12:46,639 --> 00:12:50,720 Constantinople and to other seas. This is a point that I made in my 117 00:12:50,799 --> 00:12:54,720 original Bara debate, and here now Rome admits it. Such appeals were made 118 00:12:54,759 --> 00:12:56,919 to major seas and always treated in a synoutical way, so not in a 119 00:12:58,120 --> 00:13:01,639 unilateral papalway. In a note away, appeals to the best of Rum from 120 00:13:01,639 --> 00:13:05,360 the East express the community of the church, but the Bishop of Rome did 121 00:13:05,360 --> 00:13:11,080 not exercise canonical authority over the churches of the East. This is a papal 122 00:13:11,080 --> 00:13:16,320 he approved ecumenical document from Francis, admitting the very point that Luigi was arguing 123 00:13:16,639 --> 00:13:20,240 contrary to alex in the debate, was that the Alexandrin or the Kietie. 124 00:13:20,759 --> 00:13:24,840 This is Chiadi. It's the last paragraph to the Katie. Yeah, and 125 00:13:24,879 --> 00:13:28,200 then there's similar quotations in the Yeah, we're gonna go to Alexander henmantute another 126 00:13:28,480 --> 00:13:31,360 point, you know, And I brought this up in my rebuttal, and 127 00:13:31,480 --> 00:13:37,519 I hope people caught it, because there's significance whenever the tone of Leo is 128 00:13:37,519 --> 00:13:39,720 brought up. I mean, follow Richard Price does them no favors when it 129 00:13:39,720 --> 00:13:45,000 comes to the tone of Leo. I mean, he specifically says, and 130 00:13:45,039 --> 00:13:48,000 this is the quotation that that I think is significant me. He says that 131 00:13:48,039 --> 00:13:52,000 nothing could be more indicative of the mood of the council than the fact that 132 00:13:52,039 --> 00:13:56,360 even Theodoric had to defend the tone of Leo by appealing to the authority of 133 00:13:56,480 --> 00:14:00,679 Cyril. And I read the entire quotation in my in my rebuttal. But 134 00:14:00,720 --> 00:14:07,240 it's demonstrating that the tone of Leo was under scrutiny. I mean they took 135 00:14:07,399 --> 00:14:09,759 days. Yeah, this was actually this was by the way, this was 136 00:14:09,840 --> 00:14:15,559 in the Denny book. So Denny a long time ago had made this thesis 137 00:14:15,840 --> 00:14:18,240 Roman Catholics that would attack that, by the way, and now here's price 138 00:14:18,360 --> 00:14:24,480 backing up the very thing that Denny argued. Yeah, and another point there. 139 00:14:24,519 --> 00:14:28,120 So they took days to place the Tone of Leo under scrutiny. They 140 00:14:28,159 --> 00:14:33,200 paused the council. I think it was Attaicus who requested that the council be 141 00:14:33,279 --> 00:14:37,799 paused so that they could review the Tone of Leo to make sure it was 142 00:14:37,919 --> 00:14:41,679 orthodox. And actually this is a quote from the Acts as well. It 143 00:14:41,720 --> 00:14:45,320 says Ucbs, the most about bishop, said, I judged the letter of 144 00:14:45,360 --> 00:14:50,519 the most Holy Leo, Archbishop of Senior Rome, to accord with the definition 145 00:14:50,600 --> 00:14:52,080 of the three hundred and eighteen who assembled that nicea with the council of one 146 00:14:52,120 --> 00:14:56,480 hundred and fifty assembled in the great city of Constantinople, and with the council 147 00:14:56,519 --> 00:15:00,240 that took place at Ephesus under Blessed Cyril. And thus I have signed did 148 00:15:00,679 --> 00:15:05,120 so. And there's quotations by almost everyone that signed the document at the council 149 00:15:05,320 --> 00:15:09,519 stating the reason why it's orthodox is because it's aligned with these other councils that 150 00:15:09,559 --> 00:15:13,480 we've already had that that that say the same thing. Yeah, the councils 151 00:15:13,480 --> 00:15:16,720 actually begin that way too, right, The councils when they if you read 152 00:15:16,759 --> 00:15:20,840 the canons for example, they'll often later councils will oftentimes appeal and say we 153 00:15:22,000 --> 00:15:26,159 in accord with the previous councils and canons. They don't say we in accord 154 00:15:26,200 --> 00:15:35,120 with the Roman Sea and its judgments. Yeah, anyway, did you? 155 00:15:35,320 --> 00:15:39,879 So? That was my first point of attack there. A response was the 156 00:15:39,960 --> 00:15:43,440 accusation that Richard Price, again, like you said, would afford him any 157 00:15:43,639 --> 00:15:50,279 any real meet Another point there, kind of backing up two years to ephesis 158 00:15:50,320 --> 00:15:56,840 four forty nine. What's interesting is the tone of Leo was available and was 159 00:15:56,879 --> 00:16:02,960 distributed prior to Ephesis four forty nine, and yet that council, now obviously 160 00:16:02,960 --> 00:16:07,600 it's a robber council. I mean, it's an obvious robber council. Patriar 161 00:16:07,600 --> 00:16:14,440 of Constantinople was basically murdered at that council. But that council didn't even talk 162 00:16:14,480 --> 00:16:18,840 about the tome of Leo. In fact, Leo writes to that council encouraging 163 00:16:18,879 --> 00:16:23,639 them to meet. He encouraged that that council occur. But wait a minute, 164 00:16:23,720 --> 00:16:30,080 if the tone of Leo was the papal document that has already determined this. 165 00:16:30,639 --> 00:16:34,679 Then why is he advocating for a council. It doesn't make sense. 166 00:16:34,679 --> 00:16:37,440 And then that's what fo Yeah, this is exactly, and this is a 167 00:16:37,440 --> 00:16:41,120 mirror to what we're going to see with latter in six forty nine and the 168 00:16:41,120 --> 00:16:47,960 way that Constantinople three and six point eighty one handles what Pope Martin had said 169 00:16:48,039 --> 00:16:52,360 and what St. Maximus had said prior to that. And you'll notice it's 170 00:16:52,399 --> 00:16:55,200 not Martin. By the way, this is another point I meant to mention 171 00:16:55,240 --> 00:16:59,240 you before we went on air. I want to mention now before I forget 172 00:16:59,240 --> 00:17:03,919 it. If you read concept and Noble three, I mean, the the 173 00:17:03,919 --> 00:17:10,599 theologians of the Council are Sant Sophronius, Uh and Maximus. I mean, 174 00:17:10,640 --> 00:17:12,720 and there's I'm sure there's others as well, but the confession of Saint Sophronius, 175 00:17:12,720 --> 00:17:17,119 for example, is accepted at the Council as an Orthodox confession of faith. 176 00:17:17,559 --> 00:17:22,440 The theological writings of Saint Maximus condemning perists and monol Thelites, that's the 177 00:17:22,440 --> 00:17:26,039 theology of that council. It's not like the Council just said all we gotta 178 00:17:26,079 --> 00:17:32,000 do is fact check what we believed, you know, forty fifty years ago 179 00:17:32,759 --> 00:17:37,599 via Pope Martin. You know what I mean, which had they've had the 180 00:17:37,680 --> 00:17:41,960 Vatican One mindset, that's exactly the modus operandi they would have had. Right. 181 00:17:42,039 --> 00:17:48,160 And the significant point here is not only not only with Constantinople three, 182 00:17:48,880 --> 00:17:52,559 not not just looking at it as affirming what Pope Martin had determined, but 183 00:17:52,559 --> 00:17:57,720 it I don't see any evidence they even acknowledge it, like they don't aren't 184 00:17:57,759 --> 00:18:03,359 even acknowledging what Pope Pope Martin supposedly determined. Well, I'm going for memory 185 00:18:03,359 --> 00:18:07,759 here, and the more that I thought about this after you mentioned it before 186 00:18:07,799 --> 00:18:11,359 the show, I want to say that maybe there is in Denzinger or somewhere 187 00:18:11,359 --> 00:18:17,799 there is a mentioning of Martin, but it's not treated like our pious predecessor, 188 00:18:18,440 --> 00:18:23,359 you know, settled the issue. It's treated as one of many attestations. 189 00:18:23,440 --> 00:18:27,559 And it's not like Martin is that theologian of the Council. It's Maximus 190 00:18:29,039 --> 00:18:33,119 are that. But I'm talking about that Constantinople three. Yeah, I mean 191 00:18:33,160 --> 00:18:37,119 too, That's what I'm saying. Okay, I'm saying that I think that 192 00:18:37,279 --> 00:18:38,839 I'm thinking back, I do think, for example, in Denzinger, I 193 00:18:38,880 --> 00:18:42,559 think there's a place I'm not positive, I think there is a place where 194 00:18:42,640 --> 00:18:48,279 reference is made in constant double three to our predecessor Martin, but it is 195 00:18:48,319 --> 00:18:52,480 not treated like it's a definitive statement. In fact, as Denny or not 196 00:18:52,559 --> 00:19:00,680 Denny, As as Denny argues, the Council investigates the letter of Agatho to 197 00:19:00,799 --> 00:19:07,079 see if it matches up with prior concilier teaching. So that right there, 198 00:19:07,160 --> 00:19:11,319 investigating is the same model of investigating Leo's ton against Cyril, the same model 199 00:19:11,400 --> 00:19:17,559 that I think Denny says they spent like a week or two investigating Agatha's letter 200 00:19:17,680 --> 00:19:21,960 to see if it matches up. Investigating to test the orthodox of the Roman 201 00:19:22,000 --> 00:19:23,599 Sea is not the model of Vatican One. It's the opposite of it. 202 00:19:26,839 --> 00:19:30,839 Yeah, And I mean, like you said earlier as well, I mean, 203 00:19:30,039 --> 00:19:34,599 even if there is a quotation that's acknowledging Martin the fact that the intention 204 00:19:34,960 --> 00:19:38,880 was for latter in six forty nine to be ecumenical, but it's not recognized 205 00:19:38,880 --> 00:19:44,119 exactly as by contest Noble three, or by any Roman Catholic for that matter. 206 00:19:44,279 --> 00:19:45,680 Yeah, and that was the question that you raised to him and his 207 00:19:45,799 --> 00:19:49,559 response was, well, conceptin noble three mentions Martin. Yeh, but so 208 00:19:49,599 --> 00:19:53,039 what that that? The point is not does it mention him? Does anybody 209 00:19:53,079 --> 00:19:59,559 consider him orthodox? Because Maximus went to Pope Saint Martin in the latter in 210 00:19:59,640 --> 00:20:02,640 Sina Laer and Basilica. And by the way, if you go latter and 211 00:20:02,640 --> 00:20:07,440 Basilica, which we went a few weeks ago, the up front of the 212 00:20:07,519 --> 00:20:11,759 church is two people put up there equally in giant statues. Can you guess 213 00:20:11,759 --> 00:20:19,759 who those two equal up there are quiz question? Two equal people Emperor and 214 00:20:19,839 --> 00:20:30,400 Pope. Who would Rome have traditionally considered the two equal apostles founding of Peter 215 00:20:30,559 --> 00:20:33,680 and Paul exactly? So the latter in Basilica, prior to Vatican One, 216 00:20:33,839 --> 00:20:38,359 when it was renovated, still retained the traditional architecture. I think it was 217 00:20:38,400 --> 00:20:42,480 renovating the seventeen hundreds, So prior to Vatican One, they were still putting 218 00:20:42,559 --> 00:20:48,359 up at the front at the by the the you know, the altar of 219 00:20:48,440 --> 00:20:52,680 the Basilica, the ancient altar in the ancient area, Peter and Paul. 220 00:20:52,319 --> 00:20:55,640 So in other words, the tradition is still that it's Peter and Paul. 221 00:20:55,720 --> 00:20:56,960 I'm getting off track. I'm not trying to change the subject. But anyway, 222 00:20:57,000 --> 00:21:02,440 the point is just that, so Maximus would be appealing. Maximus goes 223 00:21:02,480 --> 00:21:08,440 to Martin because he wants to secure the preeminent sea. And this is the 224 00:21:08,480 --> 00:21:11,000 modus operandi of a lot of people in the in churches, right, you 225 00:21:11,000 --> 00:21:15,000 want to get Rome on your side. For example, Basil when he writes 226 00:21:15,079 --> 00:21:21,079 letters I think sixty eight nine, seventy seventy one, seventy two, he's 227 00:21:21,079 --> 00:21:23,559 writing to Athanasius and he's saying, Hey, we need to write to Rome 228 00:21:23,720 --> 00:21:30,319 to get Rome on our side to help solve the problems here with these Aryans 229 00:21:30,359 --> 00:21:34,119 and the Monomaki and so forth, right, And he complains in that series 230 00:21:34,160 --> 00:21:38,720 of letters that Rome is a complete disaster. They failed, They're of no 231 00:21:38,920 --> 00:21:44,000 use in saving the Orthodox Faith. So literally, no Vatican one mindset in 232 00:21:44,000 --> 00:21:48,359 any of those letters of Basil. It's a great proof text for the attitude 233 00:21:48,400 --> 00:21:51,519 of the East, which vindicates what we just saw in the Chiady document. 234 00:21:51,559 --> 00:21:55,319 But also on top of that, to mention that flowery language that you brought 235 00:21:55,359 --> 00:21:59,599 up quite a bit, Basil says that, you know, I think he's 236 00:21:59,599 --> 00:22:03,880 talking about Melidias. I'm going from memory says he's the head of the churches. 237 00:22:03,960 --> 00:22:06,480 The whole body descends from him, right. He uses this kind of 238 00:22:06,559 --> 00:22:10,039 language. So I guess the patriarch of Antioch now is the you know, 239 00:22:10,079 --> 00:22:12,640 the Pope of Rome. And so this flowery language is used quite often, 240 00:22:12,960 --> 00:22:18,240 and it doesn't always necessitate, as you pointed out, the claims of Vatican 241 00:22:18,279 --> 00:22:21,119 One, and my next critique, to get back on track, I sorry 242 00:22:21,119 --> 00:22:23,440 I went so far offield, but to get back on track with you know, 243 00:22:23,480 --> 00:22:26,279 the early quotes, because he kind of starts with Clement, and he 244 00:22:26,359 --> 00:22:33,079 moves up from Clement after mentioning Richard Price, and he goes into Iran Ais 245 00:22:33,119 --> 00:22:36,480 and he tries to give these examples of that we always hear the Roman Catholic 246 00:22:36,680 --> 00:22:41,680 apologists giving. What I noticed was that there's kind of a lack of update 247 00:22:41,720 --> 00:22:45,440 on the scholarship, because if you read the Sashinsky book, he points out 248 00:22:45,480 --> 00:22:51,359 that recent scholarship, both Orthodox and Catholic, is now kind of saying, 249 00:22:51,400 --> 00:22:53,599 look, there's a lot that we don't know about the Letter of Clement, 250 00:22:53,720 --> 00:22:59,759 and it's not used anymore as a proof for Vatican one style papalism. In 251 00:22:59,759 --> 00:23:03,200 fact, he says it hasn't been used for that in like fifty sixty years, 252 00:23:03,640 --> 00:23:08,759 because it just doesn't demonstrate what it's supposed to demonstrate. And it's entirely 253 00:23:08,839 --> 00:23:15,319 possible that it can also be read in both models, And a lot of 254 00:23:15,359 --> 00:23:18,200 these quotes can be read in both models. And I think that Sastiniki makes 255 00:23:18,240 --> 00:23:22,880 this great point in a lot of these you know, classic proof text, 256 00:23:22,920 --> 00:23:26,240 for example, Ignatius saying that the Church presides in love, the Roman Church 257 00:23:26,319 --> 00:23:32,720 presides in love. That used to be translated to mean this sort of top 258 00:23:32,799 --> 00:23:37,720 down, autocratic presiding, but now they translated differently. Oh, now it's 259 00:23:37,759 --> 00:23:48,039 translated as like a just a charity based relationship. And so one see writing 260 00:23:48,079 --> 00:23:52,839 across to corinth or something like that, right, the Letters of the Corinthians, 261 00:23:52,839 --> 00:23:56,920 like that doesn't necessitate or demonstrate anything to do with the Vatican, one 262 00:23:56,960 --> 00:24:02,039 claims, because as Sashinsky points out, there's not there's no appeal in Clement's 263 00:24:02,079 --> 00:24:06,000 letter to anything Matthew sixteen or Patrine, there's not. There's not there. 264 00:24:06,640 --> 00:24:11,200 So in a lot of these quotes, it's like one sentence the Church of 265 00:24:11,240 --> 00:24:15,039 Rome that presides in love, or you know, the Church of the Glorious 266 00:24:15,119 --> 00:24:18,559 Church of the apostles Peter and Paul like, so these quotes are then kind 267 00:24:18,559 --> 00:24:23,440 of given this Vatican one Isigesus when it's not actually there in the text. 268 00:24:25,039 --> 00:24:29,200 So does that make sense? Yeah, for sure. And I would also 269 00:24:29,359 --> 00:24:33,680 point out like Saint Ignatius writes letters to other churches too, so does this 270 00:24:33,799 --> 00:24:38,319 prove that he had jurisdiction. That's a great point. From the jurisdiction over 271 00:24:38,359 --> 00:24:44,160 these other churches the great point. And also, like Ibarra points out in 272 00:24:44,319 --> 00:24:49,279 his book, I think it's page like eight on his book The Papacy that 273 00:24:49,440 --> 00:24:56,599 the the quotation that you're referencing by Clement, Saint Clement is not an argument 274 00:24:56,960 --> 00:25:02,000 for the Catholic concept of the papacy. He specifically itsmits that, and well 275 00:25:02,039 --> 00:25:06,079 then he's more up to date with a scholarship than his body there, right. 276 00:25:07,559 --> 00:25:11,279 Yeah, had to me to cut you off. Go ahead, Oh, 277 00:25:11,319 --> 00:25:12,720 I mean that was mostly what I had to say about that. I 278 00:25:12,759 --> 00:25:17,920 mean, people will focus on whether or not, you know, they'll they'll 279 00:25:17,960 --> 00:25:21,400 bring up the fact that, you know, the Apostle John was still alive 280 00:25:21,440 --> 00:25:26,279 at the time. Obviously there's debate over that. It's likely if he was 281 00:25:26,319 --> 00:25:29,640 alive, he was in exile at the time. But I don't see, 282 00:25:29,880 --> 00:25:37,079 like you're pointing out, I don't see how Corinth appealing to Rome is an 283 00:25:37,119 --> 00:25:41,680 issue even if John is still alive. Yeah, because Corinth, as far 284 00:25:41,720 --> 00:25:45,799 as I know, I know there's debate over this too, was within the 285 00:25:45,880 --> 00:25:52,799 jurisdiction of Rome. I mean, it's like there was there was Corinth legates 286 00:25:52,920 --> 00:25:57,079 of the Roman see that were bishops of Corinth that represent actumenical councils. So 287 00:25:57,720 --> 00:26:03,160 I don't see why corn appealing to Rome is even like, even if John 288 00:26:03,200 --> 00:26:06,640 is still alive, even if we were to grant that, I don't see 289 00:26:06,640 --> 00:26:10,359 how that proves the people claims. Yeah, I agree, it doesn't seem 290 00:26:10,400 --> 00:26:14,119 to be. It seems again a non sequitor. And a lot of the 291 00:26:14,160 --> 00:26:17,680 moves that your opponent made in the debate, I felt like many of them 292 00:26:17,680 --> 00:26:22,680 were non sequiturs. Sasunski makes a great point too, which is something that 293 00:26:22,839 --> 00:26:27,640 I've argued that I think that the Roman Catholic opponents have not typically understood when 294 00:26:27,640 --> 00:26:33,400 we make this point, because they'll often say, as Alex said in this 295 00:26:33,480 --> 00:26:40,000 debate many times, hey, if a bishop of Rome does something unilateral and 296 00:26:40,200 --> 00:26:45,119 your church accepts him as a saint that proves Vatican one. I think that's 297 00:26:45,119 --> 00:26:49,039 a totally fallacious move, because number one, it's assuming the position, first 298 00:26:49,039 --> 00:26:55,400 of all, because I can just as well interpret that as him exceeding his 299 00:26:55,759 --> 00:27:00,599 limitations and not necessarily becoming a heretic. Saint Augustine made many theological mistakes, 300 00:27:00,799 --> 00:27:06,160 doesn't make him a heretic. We have bishops at time failing and making mistakes. 301 00:27:07,359 --> 00:27:12,240 One of the early bishops of Rome, right becomes with Stapoloitis was an 302 00:27:12,279 --> 00:27:18,400 anti pope, and then he repents of this right. We have who is 303 00:27:18,400 --> 00:27:22,160 it put Virgilius signing not vigilious, signing the Arian creed under durest and then 304 00:27:22,200 --> 00:27:30,200 repenting of that right. So you have these these papal errors, people making 305 00:27:30,240 --> 00:27:36,559 mistakes and still being saints. Okay, So the mere fact that bishops of 306 00:27:36,640 --> 00:27:41,759 Rome in the first thousand years makes certain unilateral moves, we we can fit 307 00:27:41,799 --> 00:27:45,680 that into an unorthodox model without necessarily saying, oh, they're antichrist, right, 308 00:27:45,720 --> 00:27:49,440 Because, as Tashinski points out, which is the very thing I argued 309 00:27:49,519 --> 00:27:56,880 to Ibarra in our debate years ago, the Roman position is a thing that 310 00:27:56,519 --> 00:28:02,200 develops, it evolves. It's not like there's just this one, you know, 311 00:28:02,400 --> 00:28:04,759 unilateral move. And then from that point on all the bisterms Rome continued 312 00:28:04,799 --> 00:28:08,720 that unilateral tradition, you get kind of a push pull move. They'll try 313 00:28:08,799 --> 00:28:12,160 things, they back off, as we see with the next example that he 314 00:28:12,240 --> 00:28:18,279 gave, which is Pope Victor and the attempt to excommunicate the East in terms 315 00:28:18,279 --> 00:28:21,519 of the quarter of esseemn Aarian controversy. And we know, and I'm glad 316 00:28:21,519 --> 00:28:23,519 you brought it up that and you actually called him out very well in this 317 00:28:23,720 --> 00:28:26,240 in the in the discussion, because he says, at one point in the 318 00:28:26,240 --> 00:28:30,519 debate, and I wrote the note down that nobody opposed it. They all 319 00:28:30,559 --> 00:28:33,240 just everyone in the church acted as if he had the ability to do this. 320 00:28:33,640 --> 00:28:36,400 That is not true. Saint aaron As rebukes him for doing this, 321 00:28:36,720 --> 00:28:41,559 and he backs down. So the idea that just because the pope acts unilaterally 322 00:28:41,119 --> 00:28:45,960 is not itself a proof of Vatican one. Yeah. One. So you 323 00:28:47,079 --> 00:28:52,079 brought up the Arian confession or profession of faith. That was Pope Liberius Liberius, 324 00:28:52,119 --> 00:28:56,119 That's what I've been to say, Felix. The second though, was 325 00:28:56,160 --> 00:29:00,279 an actual Arian. So Pope Liberius was obviously under duress at the time, 326 00:29:00,279 --> 00:29:06,799 and even Saint Athanasius says like he shouldn't be discredited because he was under dress 327 00:29:06,839 --> 00:29:08,680 at the time. But Pope Felix, the second who I brought up, 328 00:29:10,400 --> 00:29:15,039 is a like was a legitimate arian, and they'll try to say he's a 329 00:29:15,160 --> 00:29:18,680 he's an anti pope. But what's interesting about when they make claims about anti 330 00:29:18,759 --> 00:29:25,839 popes is that there is no canonized list of popes. There's a document in 331 00:29:25,920 --> 00:29:33,039 Ouario Pontifico that is is compiled by scholarship, but it's not canonized. It 332 00:29:33,119 --> 00:29:37,400 is not a dogmatic document in the Catholic Church. So they don't have a 333 00:29:37,440 --> 00:29:40,759 real list. How can you say someone's an anti pope if you don't even 334 00:29:40,799 --> 00:29:44,559 have a list of who were legitimate popes. And a major issue that you 335 00:29:44,599 --> 00:29:48,440 brought up many times is the avenue on papacy where we don't even know who 336 00:29:48,440 --> 00:29:52,839 the true pope was. You got three people, now we had an acumenical 337 00:29:52,880 --> 00:29:56,680 council decide who the pope was, which is not Vatican want by the way, 338 00:29:56,119 --> 00:30:00,960 but yeah, exactly, And and there's a lot of these kind I 339 00:30:02,000 --> 00:30:07,519 remember if you get the not Henry Chadwick Jan dy Kelly's book Oxford History of 340 00:30:07,519 --> 00:30:12,079 the pope. He'll list in that book the anti popes, and I think 341 00:30:12,079 --> 00:30:17,559 it's even admitted in there that there's dispute over some of the status of some 342 00:30:17,599 --> 00:30:21,720 of these. So you're absolutely right, because we don't have all the historical 343 00:30:21,759 --> 00:30:26,279 documents and attestations that we might like in these early centuries, so there's some 344 00:30:26,319 --> 00:30:30,279 dispute about these things. In fact, Sosinski brings us up about Clement's letters 345 00:30:30,319 --> 00:30:33,720 that we don't know exactly what was going on as to the reason why he 346 00:30:33,759 --> 00:30:37,880 wrote the letter to the Corinthians. There's a lot of scholarly debate and speculation. 347 00:30:40,079 --> 00:30:48,519 There's scholarly debate about to what degree Rome accepted Trollo and its decrees. 348 00:30:48,359 --> 00:30:52,079 I know you talked about in the debate that's been brought up. There's a 349 00:30:52,119 --> 00:30:53,680 lot of books, in debates and scholarship on this. I do think that 350 00:30:55,279 --> 00:30:59,319 who is a Hadrian? I think eventually accepted Trilo when it's read at and 351 00:30:59,359 --> 00:31:03,519 I see it too, and a lot of Roal mccallays forget that Trollo affirms 352 00:31:03,119 --> 00:31:07,000 if I recall the way it works as Trolo affirms Carthage, and then Trello 353 00:31:07,119 --> 00:31:12,279 is read and accepted at Nicea too, and then you get after that papal 354 00:31:12,359 --> 00:31:15,480 reversal and say no, no, we don't accept this, this, this, 355 00:31:15,480 --> 00:31:21,240 this this in in trollo. So that's my understanding of how that goes 356 00:31:21,279 --> 00:31:22,240 down. To know you, I know y'all got into that. We'll get 357 00:31:22,279 --> 00:31:26,160 into that a little bit. But did you have anything else you wanted to 358 00:31:26,160 --> 00:31:30,039 say on the Pope Saint Victor Irenaeus issue, because I felt like he was 359 00:31:30,079 --> 00:31:34,960 really lagging behind on that one, not even aware of the fact that you 360 00:31:36,000 --> 00:31:38,720 know, Santa Ornais famously opposed him on this. Well, yeah, and 361 00:31:38,759 --> 00:31:42,359 not only did Senor in Aus oppose him, but like I bring up the 362 00:31:42,839 --> 00:31:51,240 pope prior to Victor, and to see this on the same issue was was 363 00:31:51,240 --> 00:31:56,319 was confronted by Polycarp and he backs down, which is evidence to my point 364 00:31:56,359 --> 00:32:00,880 that and this is actually what sat iron Ais writes about. He writes about 365 00:32:00,920 --> 00:32:08,000 the Apostolic seas having a higher authority than the other seas, which is which 366 00:32:08,039 --> 00:32:13,960 is why when Polycarp, who comes from an Apostolic line directly from Saint John, 367 00:32:14,400 --> 00:32:17,759 he was literally disciple of Saint John, and ass backs down when Polycar 368 00:32:17,839 --> 00:32:22,079 confronts him. So that how does that fit into a Vatican One model. 369 00:32:23,880 --> 00:32:29,480 Yeah, that's a great point. And the other thing too is that you 370 00:32:29,519 --> 00:32:31,039 know, uh uh, you know, I feel like he was really in 371 00:32:31,119 --> 00:32:37,480 a between a rock and a hard place defending the idea that the Vatican One 372 00:32:37,559 --> 00:32:43,160 system was always there, which is again something always point out that most Roman 373 00:32:43,200 --> 00:32:46,599 Catholic apologists in the academic world don't defend that thesis, even though that's pretty 374 00:32:46,640 --> 00:32:52,680 much what I think status called edom and a pastor attornis Vatican One say is 375 00:32:52,720 --> 00:32:57,039 that it was always there. Yet when a lot of questions are raised, 376 00:32:57,039 --> 00:33:00,319 we'll often see them shift over into the well, it was a sea thing 377 00:33:00,319 --> 00:33:05,039 that developed the Newman thesis. Right. What's interesting is that we basically have 378 00:33:05,160 --> 00:33:08,400 Sashchensky is saying that the norm now in the scholarship is, and we see 379 00:33:08,400 --> 00:33:12,839 this in the Chiady documents and in the ex Alexander document is that no, 380 00:33:12,920 --> 00:33:15,839 this is a thing that develops. Okay, because the excuse that we've heard 381 00:33:15,839 --> 00:33:21,759 from Obara and from your opponent the other day that well, they always have 382 00:33:21,920 --> 00:33:25,319 this power, but they chose not to exercise it except in a few rare 383 00:33:25,319 --> 00:33:30,279 instances where they end up getting rebuked by the half of the Church. So 384 00:33:30,319 --> 00:33:35,119 wait a minute. So this power is there to guide the church to settle 385 00:33:35,200 --> 00:33:39,440 disputes, and then they fail for centuries to appropriate it, to utilize it, 386 00:33:39,480 --> 00:33:44,240 to execute it at the most opportune times, and so we only have 387 00:33:44,400 --> 00:33:51,079 these scant, weird examples that are proof texts that are actually hugely contentious examples. 388 00:33:51,319 --> 00:33:54,160 So to me, this is just super duper stretch, right. I 389 00:33:54,160 --> 00:33:59,839 mean, he has this power to guide and protect the church, but does 390 00:33:59,839 --> 00:34:06,000 it exercise it except for scant ridiculous examples that are basically big scandals. But 391 00:34:06,119 --> 00:34:09,599 it's there to ground the church and protect it makes no sense. Yeah, 392 00:34:09,639 --> 00:34:16,039 And I would say that in regards to them making claims of Vatican One being 393 00:34:16,119 --> 00:34:21,039 exercised in the first millennium, they'll usually point to like the tone of Leo 394 00:34:21,920 --> 00:34:29,079 or Agatho's letter at Constantinople III, or the first version of the Libellus of 395 00:34:29,199 --> 00:34:36,039 Ormistos. But what's really interesting is in Bishop gasser interpretation of pastor Eturnals. 396 00:34:36,119 --> 00:34:42,440 Bishop Gasser was literally the bishop assigned by the Vatican to interpret pastor eturnos. 397 00:34:42,719 --> 00:34:47,639 He was the official interpretation of pastor eturnals, and he writes the only documented 398 00:34:47,679 --> 00:34:55,519 first millennium example of a pope exercising infallible autocratic authority that he points to is 399 00:34:55,559 --> 00:35:00,360 the second version of the Libellus of Forrmistas, not the first version, which 400 00:35:00,400 --> 00:35:02,760 is the one they always quote that Roman Catholics always use in their argumentation. 401 00:35:04,599 --> 00:35:07,559 The only one he lists is the second version, and so that what he's 402 00:35:07,599 --> 00:35:14,559 saying is that in Pastor e Turnos he's literally saying that all these examples that 403 00:35:14,599 --> 00:35:17,840 you guys are using tom of Leo, it's not an example, it's not 404 00:35:17,880 --> 00:35:23,079 an example of infallible authority, and mentioned that Gasser's reladio is the official reading 405 00:35:23,119 --> 00:35:28,039 of Pastor Turners. Correct, Yes, exactly. Yeah, and you see 406 00:35:28,039 --> 00:35:30,960 there on the screen, I've got Ubi's essay where he explicitly makes the point 407 00:35:31,000 --> 00:35:37,639 that Luigi just made right, which is that the original only lends itself to 408 00:35:37,639 --> 00:35:42,719 a pro Vatican one understanding if you start from the presupposition of a vaticand one 409 00:35:42,800 --> 00:35:47,559 being true, and it has not been traditionally seen as a proof of infallibility. 410 00:35:47,559 --> 00:35:54,320 In fact, that Gasser makes this very point. Now you did get 411 00:35:54,320 --> 00:36:00,360 into the two versions. Did you have any other comments on that, because 412 00:36:00,719 --> 00:36:02,280 a lot of people in the ID that they might not be familiar with this. 413 00:36:02,320 --> 00:36:06,039 Could did you want to go into any detail about explaining what this is? 414 00:36:07,280 --> 00:36:08,800 Sure? What I can just say is this right. So, in 415 00:36:09,000 --> 00:36:12,599 the first version of the one that's usually referenced, and the reason why they 416 00:36:12,639 --> 00:36:17,039 reference it is because it's signed by the patriarch of Constantinople. Now the picture 417 00:36:17,039 --> 00:36:24,199 of Constantinople signs it with the caveat that Constantinople is with Rome alongside Rome in 418 00:36:24,280 --> 00:36:28,880 authority. So that's the only reason why the patriarch of Constantinople signs it, 419 00:36:28,920 --> 00:36:31,880 but none of the other three patriarchs sign it. And then in the second 420 00:36:31,960 --> 00:36:36,800 version, none of the patriarchs sign it, not one, Not even the 421 00:36:36,800 --> 00:36:40,719 patriarch of Constantinople signs the second version, So that was even less right. 422 00:36:40,840 --> 00:36:45,360 So if this is the only example that Roman Catholics can point to as an 423 00:36:45,599 --> 00:36:52,800 infallible decree, why is it that not one of the other patriarchs accepted it? 424 00:36:52,519 --> 00:36:55,559 Yeah, I think, yeah, great point. If you went with 425 00:36:55,599 --> 00:36:59,920 the first version, it's only the patriarch of Constantinople that accepted the other three 426 00:37:00,199 --> 00:37:05,360 not Yeah, and I think you had some good So basically we've got the 427 00:37:05,440 --> 00:37:09,480 move they try to make with Sartica. We pointed out a second ago here 428 00:37:09,679 --> 00:37:16,920 that if we look at the way that the gad document explains Sartica, it 429 00:37:16,960 --> 00:37:24,280 points out the appeals process is not for a unilateral final word from the pope, 430 00:37:24,360 --> 00:37:29,559 it's for an appeal for a retrial. It's a snodal move. And 431 00:37:29,559 --> 00:37:35,400 then Rome even admits here that the Bishop of Rome was not exercising canonical authority 432 00:37:35,440 --> 00:37:37,519 over the churches of the East. So, in other words, the Sartica 433 00:37:39,320 --> 00:37:45,480 of apple It structure is not a proof for universal supremacy and jurisdiction according to 434 00:37:45,559 --> 00:37:51,440 Rome. Yeah, what, let me just need this quote here on the 435 00:37:51,679 --> 00:37:55,039 topic of the formula, because this again the first version is the one they 436 00:37:55,039 --> 00:37:58,119 always will go to, even though, like I just pointed out, that's 437 00:37:58,159 --> 00:38:01,320 not acknowledged by the Roman Catholic Church as an example of infallible decree. But 438 00:38:01,440 --> 00:38:05,559 I want to read. This is from Edward Denny's Papalism. It says the 439 00:38:05,599 --> 00:38:09,119 Greek found in the Acts of the Fourth Council of Constantinople omits the greater part 440 00:38:09,360 --> 00:38:14,400 of the references to the Roman see running as follows, the chief means of 441 00:38:14,400 --> 00:38:16,840 salvation is that we should keep the rule of right faith and in no way 442 00:38:16,880 --> 00:38:21,480 deviate from the decrees of God and the Fathers. Then are omitted all the 443 00:38:21,480 --> 00:38:25,000 remaining words down to following in all things the ordinance of the Fathers, and 444 00:38:25,039 --> 00:38:31,119 the document proceeds at once with the Anathmas and concludes concerning the most reverent patriarch, 445 00:38:31,159 --> 00:38:36,440 ignacious, and those who think with him, whatever the authority the Apostolic 446 00:38:36,440 --> 00:38:38,760 throne has decreed, we embrace with our whole mind this profession of faith. 447 00:38:39,679 --> 00:38:45,719 So basically it's saying that the Greek, the Greek actually omits a large portion 448 00:38:45,400 --> 00:38:51,239 of what their whole argument is about the Formula Formanistas, which is the universal 449 00:38:51,280 --> 00:38:55,320 authority that it includes, and it's completely omitted in the Greek. That's a 450 00:38:55,320 --> 00:38:59,719 really important part. And maybe we could if you don't want to go to 451 00:38:59,719 --> 00:39:04,599 this with don't have to, But so much of this hinges on Sartika, 452 00:39:04,760 --> 00:39:07,440 it might be good if we just get the rest of Sartaka out of the 453 00:39:07,440 --> 00:39:14,280 way. Because he talked about what canon's like three four five or something. 454 00:39:14,840 --> 00:39:17,800 You went to No, he said three seven and eight. You went to 455 00:39:19,519 --> 00:39:24,000 a couple of the canons and then talked about what turn to remember the point 456 00:39:24,039 --> 00:39:28,320 you made I've got it in my later notes, but I talk about Canons 457 00:39:28,400 --> 00:39:30,880 three and nine. That's it I have right here. OK, go ahead, 458 00:39:31,960 --> 00:39:37,360 Yeah, So tell us first what he was arguing, Sartika wise, 459 00:39:37,480 --> 00:39:42,199 and then your response is from these cannons, right he was, So, 460 00:39:42,280 --> 00:39:47,960 he was pointing out in Canons four and five that Rome was being acknowledged as 461 00:39:49,000 --> 00:39:52,960 the first seed. That's really what is occurring here at Sartica. Is there 462 00:39:52,960 --> 00:39:54,800 being acknowledged is the first seed, the first among equals, which is the 463 00:39:54,840 --> 00:39:59,840 Eastern Orthodox position. So it doesn't prove anything in regards to our position. 464 00:40:00,440 --> 00:40:04,559 But he was arguing that this demonstrates that there was a supreme authority of the 465 00:40:04,679 --> 00:40:07,679 Roman See. And then I pointed out that in Canons three and nine, 466 00:40:08,679 --> 00:40:15,639 what it describes is what you already have pointed out that at Cannons three and 467 00:40:15,800 --> 00:40:22,039 nine, it specifically says that the Roman See can be appealed to if neighboring 468 00:40:22,119 --> 00:40:28,000 bishops have already made a decision and you decide you don't like that decision, 469 00:40:28,480 --> 00:40:32,159 you can appeal to the roman See. But the roman See only decides whether 470 00:40:32,360 --> 00:40:36,960 or not there will be a retrial, and then if he determines there is 471 00:40:37,000 --> 00:40:40,559 a retrial. He sends the case to a neighboring province, and he doesn't 472 00:40:40,599 --> 00:40:45,840 even get to attend it. Specifically says he can send legates, but he 473 00:40:45,920 --> 00:40:52,000 can't even attend the final appeal. So all he's doing is reviewing this appeal 474 00:40:52,800 --> 00:40:59,519 that already had a neighboring bishop make a decision on. He's determining whether or 475 00:40:59,519 --> 00:41:01,920 not Desert deserves a retrial, and then he's sending it to retrial. He 476 00:41:02,480 --> 00:41:07,960 so, like you're pointing out, it's anod, it's a model. It's 477 00:41:07,000 --> 00:41:13,519 not a it's not a universal immediate authority that's being exercised here. It's a 478 00:41:13,679 --> 00:41:19,360 it's a conciliar model that's occurring with accountability with the neighboring province. And I 479 00:41:19,360 --> 00:41:20,880 can do you want me to just read the guy? I can read. 480 00:41:20,960 --> 00:41:22,760 Wow, I've got it pulled up on the screen, but you can ahead 481 00:41:22,760 --> 00:41:27,440 and read it. Yeah, so canon free. But if perchance sentence be 482 00:41:27,519 --> 00:41:30,400 given against the bishop in any matter, and he supposes his case to be 483 00:41:30,480 --> 00:41:34,840 not unsound but good, in order that the question may be reopened, let 484 00:41:34,920 --> 00:41:37,360 us, if it seemed good to your charity, honor the memory of Peter 485 00:41:37,400 --> 00:41:42,880 the Apostle, and let those who gave judgment right to Julius, the Bishop 486 00:41:42,920 --> 00:41:45,280 of Rome, so that, if necessary, the case may be retried. 487 00:41:45,760 --> 00:41:51,760 Wait a minute, if necessary, the case may be retried by the bishops 488 00:41:51,920 --> 00:41:57,000 of the neighboring province. And let him appoint arbiters if it can be not 489 00:41:57,199 --> 00:42:00,320 if it cannot be shown that his case is of such a sort as to 490 00:42:00,360 --> 00:42:02,599 need a new trial, let the judgment once be given, not be annulled, 491 00:42:02,760 --> 00:42:07,679 but stand as good as before. So, in other words, the 492 00:42:07,760 --> 00:42:12,119 pope can stick with the original decision. That's what it's saying at the end 493 00:42:12,159 --> 00:42:15,159 there. If he chooses he can. He can decide that this case doesn't 494 00:42:15,159 --> 00:42:20,679 need a retrial. The bishops of your province got this right. But if 495 00:42:20,719 --> 00:42:23,199 he decides, no, I think they may have gotten wrong, then he 496 00:42:23,239 --> 00:42:27,360 can send it to a neighboring province. And like it says, he can 497 00:42:27,400 --> 00:42:30,599 send arbiters, but he cannot attend. And then Canon nine is similar. 498 00:42:30,639 --> 00:42:34,159 It says, but those who come to Rome ought, as I said before, 499 00:42:34,159 --> 00:42:37,440 to deliver our beloved brother and fellow, Bishop Julius, the petitions which 500 00:42:37,480 --> 00:42:58,119 they have to give, and and so give his own advocing care, shall 501 00:42:58,440 --> 00:43:12,400 send them to the court. So that's canine, that last part on nine. 502 00:43:12,440 --> 00:43:19,480 Can you repeat that because you robot it for a second. Oh yeah, 503 00:43:19,559 --> 00:43:22,599 I'll just read it's short. But those who come to Rome, as 504 00:43:22,599 --> 00:43:24,800 I said before, to deliver to our beloved brother and fellow, Bishop Julius, 505 00:43:24,840 --> 00:43:29,199 the petitions which they have to give, in order that he may first 506 00:43:29,199 --> 00:43:34,159 examine them, lest some of them should be improper, and so, giving 507 00:43:34,199 --> 00:43:40,400 them his own advocacy and care, shall send them to the court, which 508 00:43:40,440 --> 00:43:45,079 is a counsel. Yeah. So, in other words, not the autocratic 509 00:43:45,239 --> 00:43:51,519 model here. Yes, that's great. So yeah, I think Sartaca was 510 00:43:51,960 --> 00:43:54,360 a big uh. I think he really thought that was going to be a 511 00:43:54,440 --> 00:43:58,400 kind of a kill shot and ended up I think shooting him in the foot. 512 00:43:59,119 --> 00:44:00,320 Is there anything else you want mentioned on Sartica net? There was one 513 00:44:00,360 --> 00:44:08,400 other point you did make about that canon thirty five of the Apostolic Canons, 514 00:44:09,360 --> 00:44:15,079 right, excuse me, thirty four to thirty five. The bishops of every 515 00:44:15,119 --> 00:44:17,599 nation must acknowledge him who is first among them, and account him as their 516 00:44:17,639 --> 00:44:22,639 head, and do nothing of consequence without his consent. But each may do 517 00:44:22,679 --> 00:44:25,920 those things only which concern his own parish and the country places which belonged to 518 00:44:25,960 --> 00:44:30,800 it, but neither let him who is the first, do anything without the 519 00:44:30,840 --> 00:44:34,920 consent of all. For so there is unanimity. And that's of course the 520 00:44:35,039 --> 00:44:42,559 Concilier model. And then you tied this into also the Canons of Sartica and 521 00:44:42,599 --> 00:44:45,719 then being accepted at Trello. So you were making the point that Trollo and 522 00:44:45,719 --> 00:44:51,360 then back and then Nicee, it too is affirming this sonodal model. Correct, 523 00:44:52,960 --> 00:44:58,239 Yeah, and then sorry, I guess my my batteries getting low. 524 00:44:58,280 --> 00:45:00,840 That's why it I was plugged in. We're good, and that's why it 525 00:45:00,000 --> 00:45:07,000 was lagging. But anyways, Ibarra in his review tried to say that this 526 00:45:07,079 --> 00:45:13,639 isn't that cannon Abosol Canon thirty four is only in reference to the first of 527 00:45:13,679 --> 00:45:16,639 the Metropolitan so like in this context it would have been like similar to like 528 00:45:16,639 --> 00:45:22,360 a patriarch, even though this was before the patriarch. And what I find 529 00:45:22,400 --> 00:45:27,800 ironic is so even if we were to grant that you're reading, you're you're 530 00:45:27,840 --> 00:45:31,599 going to assume now that this doesn't apply to the first among the patriarchs. 531 00:45:32,039 --> 00:45:37,400 What so if it applies to the first bishop in the metropolitan, why wouldn't 532 00:45:37,400 --> 00:45:39,760 it apply to the first of the patriarchs easy, well, I mean, 533 00:45:39,880 --> 00:45:45,000 but Alex made the very same type of move when he said that if a 534 00:45:45,039 --> 00:45:51,840 patriarch, if a bishop has privileges within a synod, and a patriarch has 535 00:45:51,880 --> 00:45:55,960 privileges within his jurisdiction, then there has to be a super patriarch with privileges 536 00:45:57,000 --> 00:46:00,639 above all the patriarchs, right, which is a fallacious move to begin with, 537 00:46:00,719 --> 00:46:04,840 because that it doesn't follow that because a patriarch has privileges, that there 538 00:46:04,840 --> 00:46:08,039 happen to be a super patriarch with super privileges. Yeah, the first, 539 00:46:08,239 --> 00:46:13,039 the first among equals is not a super bishop, which is which is what 540 00:46:13,199 --> 00:46:19,000 my entire point in my opening statement was especially highlighting obviously the case of Vigilius 541 00:46:19,039 --> 00:46:21,079 and this, like you know, we're going to get into this, but 542 00:46:21,159 --> 00:46:24,039 this is a point that you had alluded to earlier that is really important is 543 00:46:24,079 --> 00:46:29,480 there were popes that thought they had more authority than they did exactly. And 544 00:46:29,519 --> 00:46:31,599 so of course you might be able to find a quote from a pope, 545 00:46:32,400 --> 00:46:36,000 you know, implying that he has that authority. What you need to look 546 00:46:36,039 --> 00:46:39,199 at is how did the church react to that quote? Not the quote I'm 547 00:46:39,800 --> 00:46:45,559 well, yeah, and not just that, but also all of the all 548 00:46:45,559 --> 00:46:51,760 of the canons in every acumenical council, right and Trollo as well, which 549 00:46:52,320 --> 00:46:55,800 isn't exactly ecumenical, but it's it's received that and I see it too every 550 00:46:55,840 --> 00:46:59,880 council. As we pointed out for many years, this is a classic article 551 00:47:00,400 --> 00:47:02,360 written by one of our old school mods who went on to become a deacon. 552 00:47:02,920 --> 00:47:07,920 He might be becoming a priest, I'm not sure, but saraph Armaud 553 00:47:07,800 --> 00:47:12,159 years ago twenty eighteen or nineteen, he made this big list of all the 554 00:47:12,199 --> 00:47:16,519 canons in the councils that actually conflict with the Vatican One mindset. And as 555 00:47:16,559 --> 00:47:21,159 we know, the response to the Roman Catholics, as Alex said many times 556 00:47:21,199 --> 00:47:23,840 in the debate, well I don't care about all the canons, because the 557 00:47:23,840 --> 00:47:30,079 popes above the canons. But the point is that the canons demonstrate the mindset 558 00:47:30,159 --> 00:47:35,039 of the entire church. So unless you just want to assume the Vatican One 559 00:47:35,079 --> 00:47:38,239 papal mindset and that the only thing that matters is the Roman bishop, well 560 00:47:38,320 --> 00:47:43,960 maybe if the model is to nodal, then that's going to shift to Now 561 00:47:44,000 --> 00:47:49,119 we're concerned with the mindset of everybody, and if everybody's mindset at the councils 562 00:47:49,239 --> 00:47:52,880 is enacting all these canons that conflict with Vatican One in every academical council, 563 00:47:53,480 --> 00:47:59,039 Then maybe Vatican one is not the mindset of the ancient church. Maybe Vatican 564 00:47:59,079 --> 00:48:02,599 one is a temptation mindset of the Roman bishop at times. You see, 565 00:48:02,800 --> 00:48:07,440 that's two different models. Yeah, and he for some reason he asked me 566 00:48:07,559 --> 00:48:14,320 for a canon an ecmenical council that shows Constantinople had applate authority. And I 567 00:48:14,440 --> 00:48:19,239 was kind of like shocked at this question because Canon's nine and seventeen I said 568 00:48:19,239 --> 00:48:22,679 of Constantinople one, I was wrong. It's Ken's ninety seventeen of Chalcedon. 569 00:48:22,719 --> 00:48:30,000 I misspoke. But they grant Constantinople appleed authority, and he and then he 570 00:48:30,079 --> 00:48:34,519 was trying to say that he was asking me if it What it meant was 571 00:48:34,519 --> 00:48:37,719 that the authority was the same as as Rome. Well Canon twenty and that's 572 00:48:37,719 --> 00:48:42,840 when we started talking about Canon twenty eight. Canon twenty eight says it uses 573 00:48:42,840 --> 00:48:46,320 the word privileges. It says all the privileges that apply to Rome applied to 574 00:48:46,440 --> 00:48:52,880 New Rome. And then in his refutation of Canon twenty eight, he was 575 00:48:52,559 --> 00:48:58,480 he was desperately trying to prove papal supremacy, and what he The point that 576 00:48:58,519 --> 00:49:02,280 he made was that Leo rejected calconon Canon twenty eight, but then another pope 577 00:49:02,360 --> 00:49:07,440 later on accepted it. So in his desperate attempt to try to prove people 578 00:49:07,519 --> 00:49:13,800 supremacy, he just refuted their whole talking point that a pope can't change sacred 579 00:49:13,800 --> 00:49:19,639 tradition. Let's say, well, but then he backtracked on what countsils sacred 580 00:49:19,639 --> 00:49:23,440 tradition by appealing to the ambiguous terminology of quote faith and morals, which, 581 00:49:23,519 --> 00:49:30,239 accordingly to him, only applies to divine revelation. So, first of all, 582 00:49:30,840 --> 00:49:36,320 what's binding is not restricted to quote just faith and morals. You're also 583 00:49:36,480 --> 00:49:40,119 bound by the decisions of the Roman See and the Roman Congregation, whether you 584 00:49:40,239 --> 00:49:43,920 deem them to be faith and morals or not. So you're bound by much 585 00:49:44,000 --> 00:49:46,800 more than just some ambiguous thing of quote faith and morals. You're bound by, 586 00:49:46,840 --> 00:49:52,320 asvatikan One says, all the extraordinary and universal ordinary and the ordinary teaching, 587 00:49:52,519 --> 00:49:55,039 which, even though it might be fallible, you must submit to with 588 00:49:55,199 --> 00:50:00,320 docility. So you're bound by a lot more than just a generic idea of 589 00:50:00,360 --> 00:50:02,239 faith and morals. Because that allowed him, as you're pointing out in the 590 00:50:02,239 --> 00:50:06,519 debate, to say, well, the pope can just sort of toss out 591 00:50:06,960 --> 00:50:09,800 and then retroactively go back and say, well, that council that canon is 592 00:50:09,800 --> 00:50:14,840 good now, and then by eight sixty nine or whatever, they can say, 593 00:50:14,880 --> 00:50:19,159 okay, now we do accept Constantinople as new Rome. So the very 594 00:50:19,199 --> 00:50:22,719 thing that he was saying that Leo was rejecting Canon twenty eight of Calcidon because 595 00:50:22,719 --> 00:50:27,719 of papalism, that's not even the reason that Leo rejects it. Leo rejects 596 00:50:27,800 --> 00:50:31,400 it because he thinks it does violence to the canonical structure of Canon six of 597 00:50:31,480 --> 00:50:36,199 Nicea, and he explicitly says that it's not an appeal to papalism. He 598 00:50:36,199 --> 00:50:40,320 says it's not fair to Alexandria to move constant Noble ahead of it. So 599 00:50:42,119 --> 00:50:45,280 but it doesn't matter because eventually, by what like eight sixty nine or somewhere 600 00:50:45,320 --> 00:50:50,840 in there right the Roman Catholic version of the eighth Acamenical Council, they do 601 00:50:50,920 --> 00:50:54,519 accept it. Well, And that's what I'm getting at is, so if 602 00:50:54,519 --> 00:50:59,760 a pope can change a canon of an ectomenical council, I don't even know 603 00:50:59,800 --> 00:51:04,119 what Roman Catholics mean when they say that a pope can't change sacred tradition. 604 00:51:04,400 --> 00:51:10,039 There's nothing more sacred about There's nothing more sacred in tradition than an ecumenical canon, 605 00:51:10,360 --> 00:51:15,760 except for scripture itself. That's the most sacred tradition other than maybe the 606 00:51:15,800 --> 00:51:20,760 liturgy, which he also changes. So I don't even know what Roman Catholics 607 00:51:20,880 --> 00:51:22,320 mean when they, Well, I think that what they end up meaning by 608 00:51:22,360 --> 00:51:28,559 that is that really tradition is the pope, and the Pope is the tradition. 609 00:51:28,679 --> 00:51:31,400 And that's what Vatican That's that's what Dolinger said, Vatican one would do 610 00:51:31,519 --> 00:51:35,440 to the Roman callity Church. That's exactly what it does. I mean, 611 00:51:35,480 --> 00:51:39,039 Pope Pius the ninth explicitly says I am tradition, I am the Church. 612 00:51:39,239 --> 00:51:44,719 So I mean, like so this this, it's it's just a meaningless talking 613 00:51:44,719 --> 00:51:47,840 point when they say that a pope can't change sacred tradition. Yeah, well 614 00:51:49,000 --> 00:51:51,719 I have a clip I want to play on that because and of course, 615 00:51:51,800 --> 00:51:54,360 uh you know, Tim's our friend. But I think that what Tim said 616 00:51:54,360 --> 00:52:00,519 in this new popular documentary, particularly at this point right here Ill straits at 617 00:52:00,559 --> 00:52:04,800 the very point that Luigi just made so let's listen to what Tim says as 618 00:52:04,840 --> 00:52:09,719 the Roman Catholics in this documentary are struggling with whether Francis has the authority to 619 00:52:09,840 --> 00:52:15,360 change the right to change the liturgy? Can he update the Latin Mass to 620 00:52:15,400 --> 00:52:19,119 be the nova sorto vernacular, et cetera, et cetera, under two kinds 621 00:52:19,159 --> 00:52:22,599 receiving? You know, can he do that? Well, first a bishop 622 00:52:22,639 --> 00:52:23,639 comes on and so let's see what he thinks, and then we'll see what 623 00:52:23,679 --> 00:52:29,199 Tim Gordon says about what the nature and extent of papal supremacy is, and 624 00:52:29,239 --> 00:52:32,920 that supreme authority is subordinated to the Word of God's pure tradition, including liturgical 625 00:52:32,920 --> 00:52:37,880 tradition. Do you think the pope can say the Latin Mass is completely forbidden? 626 00:52:39,360 --> 00:52:44,199 Well, I don't know. I love that that bishop is like, 627 00:52:45,119 --> 00:52:46,320 I don't know. I think he can't do that. I mean, I 628 00:52:46,400 --> 00:52:50,159 think, you know, as the extreme pontiff, I think he has the 629 00:52:50,239 --> 00:52:58,599 power to do that all over the world because unnecessary harm. Vatican won it 630 00:52:58,880 --> 00:53:04,519 says some clear things about papal authority, but I don't know what it means 631 00:53:05,119 --> 00:53:10,519 to be supreme and yet not unlimited until you give me hypos to test cases 632 00:53:10,559 --> 00:53:14,199 to say, oh, can the Pope say four persons in the Trinity? 633 00:53:14,480 --> 00:53:16,800 Well, then how come Vatican one didn't give all the hypothetical test cases? 634 00:53:17,000 --> 00:53:21,760 Like why is Vatican one not good enough? I thought the point of dogmatic 635 00:53:21,800 --> 00:53:25,519 definitions was to make it clear what the thing in question really was, to 636 00:53:25,519 --> 00:53:30,159 settle the issue. But now, basically, and that's not really clear. 637 00:53:30,199 --> 00:53:34,519 We're got to have all these hypotheticals to know. Can Francis tell us that 638 00:53:35,079 --> 00:53:37,119 I have to sell my backyard to the Vatican? Can Francis tell me that 639 00:53:37,199 --> 00:53:39,480 I have to believe in four persons in the Trinity? Right? It becomes 640 00:53:39,519 --> 00:53:45,679 all these Basically, the definition is then useless because now it's not telling me 641 00:53:45,719 --> 00:53:50,599 anything unless I have an infinite series of hypotheticals to apply to it. Can 642 00:53:50,599 --> 00:53:54,800 the Pope say that every practicing Catholic must attend at least two NBA games per 643 00:53:54,840 --> 00:54:00,880 season? Folks need to get hit to the idea that already has not been 644 00:54:00,960 --> 00:54:06,239 laid out yet. But I thought Vatican One laid it out, Like, 645 00:54:06,320 --> 00:54:08,559 what what do you mean? This is? I mean, I love tim 646 00:54:08,599 --> 00:54:14,679 but this is I just don't get that anyway. Yeah, well, I 647 00:54:14,760 --> 00:54:21,000 was gonna say I think that We are often criticized in each Orthodox Church for 648 00:54:21,280 --> 00:54:27,079 not having all these little doctrines worked out, like why isn't there why isn't 649 00:54:27,079 --> 00:54:31,639 there a magic sium that that's established our doctrine on contraduction? Yeah, you 650 00:54:31,679 --> 00:54:35,920 know, and this is you know, this is what's often criticizing the Orthodox 651 00:54:36,039 --> 00:54:38,800 Church. But then what ends up happening is in the Roman Catholic Church, 652 00:54:38,840 --> 00:54:43,039 you have all these documents that just end up contradicting one another. I mean, 653 00:54:43,079 --> 00:54:46,639 there is no there is no way to reconcile Vatican two with Florence. 654 00:54:46,840 --> 00:54:52,920 There is no way, no shot. And so that's what occurs. That's 655 00:54:52,920 --> 00:54:58,519 what occurs when you attempt to define every little thing and put it in the 656 00:54:58,599 --> 00:55:02,760 document, is end up contradicting yourself. Well, and there's a noticeable transition 657 00:55:02,920 --> 00:55:07,920 to I think, you know I mentioned earlier Dictatus Pope, because Dictatus Pope 658 00:55:08,119 --> 00:55:14,079 comes in the eleventh century right when we get this crucial shift in what the 659 00:55:14,159 --> 00:55:16,840 church understands itself to be between East and West. So right when the schism's 660 00:55:16,880 --> 00:55:22,599 happening, right before the schism, we're already seeing two divergent models and understandings 661 00:55:23,079 --> 00:55:28,280 of what the church is, what ecclesiology is and part of it is due 662 00:55:28,280 --> 00:55:30,400 to what we're talking about tonight, which is that it is a think of 663 00:55:30,480 --> 00:55:36,199 seed. It's a seed that's growing in the Latin Church. Unfortunately that's turning 664 00:55:36,239 --> 00:55:40,559 into a worldly, geopolitical organization. And the Nude Papadacus Mayandorf book is great 665 00:55:40,639 --> 00:55:46,639 on that because it's treating specifically this period of ten seventy one to fourteen fifty 666 00:55:46,679 --> 00:55:52,119 three and how the two East and West, the two sides so to speak, 667 00:55:52,119 --> 00:55:57,000 of the Church, how they there diverge. And it's in the West 668 00:55:57,000 --> 00:56:00,840 that you start getting at this very points Pope, all the outlandish claims, 669 00:56:00,880 --> 00:56:05,800 all of the new ecclesiology, where if you look at the canons here you'll 670 00:56:05,840 --> 00:56:09,880 notice the Canon's talk about let a bishop be ordained by two or three bishops. 671 00:56:12,519 --> 00:56:15,480 It doesn't say the Bishop of Rome confirms every bishop in the world. 672 00:56:15,760 --> 00:56:20,000 Yet by the time of the Gregorian reforms and after we get the new model 673 00:56:20,039 --> 00:56:24,239 of ecclesiology, which is a revolution. Eastern Catholics call it a revolution. 674 00:56:24,960 --> 00:56:30,280 Congar he's not Eastern Catholic, he's Dominican. But in his book Nine ordw 675 00:56:30,320 --> 00:56:32,559 Years to Gather he he talks about a revolution. Focian schism adorn it calls 676 00:56:32,559 --> 00:56:39,199 it a revolution. Any any treatise of the Gregorian period calls it an ecclesiological 677 00:56:39,239 --> 00:56:45,000 revolution. Why because the seeds of what Luigi's talking about are coming to fruition. 678 00:56:45,199 --> 00:56:50,079 So I actually do think it is an evolving doctrine. Newman is correct, 679 00:56:50,199 --> 00:56:52,719 and that's really the only way to make sense of this. It's certainly 680 00:56:52,760 --> 00:56:57,000 not the case all that it's always there from the earliest days. I'll you 681 00:56:57,000 --> 00:57:01,000 know, Leo, the thirteenth well and male priests was in seed form with 682 00:57:01,039 --> 00:57:05,800 all those female deaconesses, you know, that were baptizing people. So that 683 00:57:05,880 --> 00:57:08,239 was in seed form. So now we can now we just have female priests 684 00:57:08,239 --> 00:57:10,320 because there. Yeah, it's weird, but yeah, this is a great 685 00:57:10,360 --> 00:57:14,960 point because I remember when I was a trad cat, I always felt like 686 00:57:15,800 --> 00:57:21,880 the papacy was the bastion of tradition, the conservative institution that would protect tradition. 687 00:57:22,400 --> 00:57:25,960 And then I started realizing that maybe the papacy all llah the critique of 688 00:57:25,960 --> 00:57:34,679 Papadoccus, Welton mayandorph and others. What if it's the revolutionary institution that innovates 689 00:57:35,000 --> 00:57:38,840 that then prepares for revolutions. That don't have to go in a conservative direction. 690 00:57:39,159 --> 00:57:43,400 In other words, can the seed not grow into a liberal form? 691 00:57:43,960 --> 00:57:45,760 As the point, which is the point you're making. I mean, there's 692 00:57:45,800 --> 00:57:50,119 nothing about this that necessitates that it's only going to be a seed that grows 693 00:57:50,119 --> 00:57:52,559 into some trad thing. Why can't this, yeah, exactly, why can't 694 00:57:52,639 --> 00:57:59,400 deaconess has become the seed for female priests? Ambiops, yeah, exactly, 695 00:58:00,119 --> 00:58:01,639 all right, I'm sorry, I got way of course there. Let's get 696 00:58:01,639 --> 00:58:07,519 back to the debate. So let's say we covered uh, gastros latia, 697 00:58:07,559 --> 00:58:12,599 we covered uh, the formula for business. The next thing I noticed that 698 00:58:12,639 --> 00:58:15,719 he was doing was, uh, he hinted the whole argument on the tone. 699 00:58:16,119 --> 00:58:21,199 There's a lot of papal letters written with a tone of authority and magisterial. 700 00:58:21,239 --> 00:58:24,360 Wee, okay, so what doesn't prove Vatican one? Many people at 701 00:58:24,360 --> 00:58:30,159 this time wrote in a flowery uh pros prose that you know, might suggest 702 00:58:30,760 --> 00:58:34,480 all kinds of things, but it doesn't prove Vatican one. So a lot 703 00:58:34,519 --> 00:58:38,320 of moves were made that you know, it's it's always a stretch. It's 704 00:58:38,360 --> 00:58:44,800 like it's like, let me pull together all these stretchy things and stretch them 705 00:58:44,840 --> 00:58:47,199 into this, and man, can you kind of see a little bit of 706 00:58:47,400 --> 00:58:51,440 Vatican one in there? To me, that just is just a big fail. 707 00:58:53,599 --> 00:58:59,360 Yeah, And I mean I point this out in in my rebuttals. 708 00:58:59,440 --> 00:59:05,519 I think I I went too fast through it. But Saint Cyril distributes his 709 00:59:05,679 --> 00:59:10,679 five tones against Nastorius before ever even talking to the See of Rome. So 710 00:59:10,719 --> 00:59:14,480 they love to go to they love to go to his letter where he writes 711 00:59:14,840 --> 00:59:21,119 to the See of Rome regarding excommunication. Before he does that, he distributes 712 00:59:21,159 --> 00:59:25,239 his five tones telling the stories he's a heretic, so he didn't need to 713 00:59:25,400 --> 00:59:28,920 he didn't need to write to the See of Rome to do that. He 714 00:59:29,000 --> 00:59:32,119 knew that the Stories was a heretic, and he distributes those tones to the 715 00:59:32,199 --> 00:59:44,440 churches. Yes, sorry about that. I was trying to I was trying 716 00:59:44,440 --> 00:59:47,800 to unmute. I had to click over to unmute. Yeah, did you 717 00:59:47,920 --> 00:59:52,719 Is there anything you wanted to say about Prose eight language or the tone the 718 00:59:52,800 --> 00:59:55,119 quote, the tone argument. I also noted that at that point he said 719 00:59:55,119 --> 00:59:59,960 something like ex cited two sources and it was like two Roman Roman Catholic, 720 01:00:00,679 --> 01:00:02,440 like I imagine going to if we were debating it, you know, and 721 01:00:02,480 --> 01:00:06,440 all we were doing, was citing like Orthodox sources. I mean, to 722 01:00:06,480 --> 01:00:09,119 be fair, he did pull in I think schmeiman So they always go to 723 01:00:09,159 --> 01:00:13,599 like one Orthodox source. It's always Schmeimann or Warer. That's like the only 724 01:00:14,079 --> 01:00:16,519 Orthodox people they look to. But guys, you guys should read some I 725 01:00:16,559 --> 01:00:20,719 mean, I take that back. Oh, I remember now Sashensky. He 726 01:00:20,760 --> 01:00:25,199 did cite Shasensky and it's about Leo. And that's important because there's something that 727 01:00:25,280 --> 01:00:30,400 was missing here because when he cited Leo or no, I'm sorry, it 728 01:00:30,480 --> 01:00:36,159 was about Gregory. Yes, so here's the quote that he gave about Pope 729 01:00:36,320 --> 01:00:43,239 Saint Gregory. He says, Gregory provides a model modern wait. Gregory thus 730 01:00:43,519 --> 01:00:47,320 provides modern ecumenical discussion on the papacy with a two edged sword. For on 731 01:00:47,360 --> 01:00:52,360 the one hand, there's no doubt that he defined the premiacy of Rome vigorously 732 01:00:52,800 --> 01:00:58,559 and grounded the pre eminence in it sees patrine origin rather than any concilier decisions. 733 01:00:58,920 --> 01:01:02,719 So he stopped the quote there, giving the impression that Pope saying Gregory 734 01:01:02,760 --> 01:01:07,599 the Great taught quote Vatican one ideas. However, if you read on, 735 01:01:07,840 --> 01:01:13,880 it notes that first of all, premacy doesn't equal Vatican one. So the 736 01:01:13,920 --> 01:01:17,039 premiacy can be in both models. Okay, So just stopping the quote where 737 01:01:17,039 --> 01:01:23,320 it says by a Bias Sushensky that Gregory the Great believed in quote Roman premascy. 738 01:01:23,599 --> 01:01:28,320 That doesn't mean Vatican one. That's the thing that's in question. And 739 01:01:28,400 --> 01:01:31,039 if you go on, he says, quote, although he recognized the Canons 740 01:01:31,039 --> 01:01:38,079 of Constantinople, Oops, and even admitted the existence of the Pentarchy. Oops, 741 01:01:39,119 --> 01:01:44,000 he didn't appeal to it as an authority. So there's an admission of 742 01:01:44,039 --> 01:01:47,880 that structure as well, even though Gregory's not appealing to it. But that 743 01:01:47,920 --> 01:01:53,480 doesn't prove Vatican one, I mean, is probably the last quote that a 744 01:01:53,559 --> 01:01:57,599 Roman Catholic wants to quote. Yeah, and we're gonna go to the let 745 01:01:57,639 --> 01:02:00,079 me give one more quote because the net he he didn't read the rest of 746 01:02:00,119 --> 01:02:05,159 the paragraph, because the next paragraph says, According to Mindorff, however, 747 01:02:05,719 --> 01:02:12,400 Gregory stressed the petrine episcopal power, did not consider this power was communicated through 748 01:02:12,639 --> 01:02:16,559 Rome only. He is therefore a major witness to what's called an ecclesiology of 749 01:02:16,679 --> 01:02:22,639 communion, which kept East and West together in the first millennium of Christian history. 750 01:02:22,880 --> 01:02:28,199 His writings against the title of universal patriarch affirmed the rights of all the 751 01:02:28,199 --> 01:02:34,119 individual bishops against a singular universalist claim, even of the Bishop of Rome. 752 01:02:34,400 --> 01:02:37,559 So had he read on, he would have realized that, no, the 753 01:02:37,599 --> 01:02:42,480 full context of that quote is not admitting that Gregory the Great Slovatican One proponent, 754 01:02:42,639 --> 01:02:46,239 the full context of the quote admits that he's not that. Yeah, 755 01:02:46,280 --> 01:02:51,039 I mean, this is straight from Gregory the Great, and he writes in 756 01:02:51,079 --> 01:02:54,440 book five he says, for he himself, Peter exalted the sea in which 757 01:02:54,480 --> 01:03:00,639 he designed reigned even to rest in the present life Rome, he himself adorned 758 01:03:00,679 --> 01:03:06,519 the sea to which he said his disciple as evangelist Alexandria, he himself established 759 01:03:06,519 --> 01:03:08,239 the sea in which, though he was to leave it, he sat for 760 01:03:08,280 --> 01:03:13,440 seven years Antioch. Since then it is the sea of one and one sea 761 01:03:13,880 --> 01:03:17,480 over which, by divine authority three bishops now preside. Whatever good I hear 762 01:03:17,519 --> 01:03:23,239 of you, this I amp to myself. So this is the last person 763 01:03:23,320 --> 01:03:27,480 that Yeah, that's a great point. And I have it on screen because 764 01:03:27,599 --> 01:03:32,400 of course that's the famous three patrin cees quote from Gray the Great. You 765 01:03:32,440 --> 01:03:37,599 can see it source there in Father John's article. And then I'll link it 766 01:03:37,880 --> 01:03:39,320 in the chat for you guys right there if you want to go read the 767 01:03:39,920 --> 01:03:46,800 rest of it to see we're not making it up. And then Roman Cathoch 768 01:03:46,840 --> 01:03:51,559 quote counter this and say that, well, Peter died in Rome, and 769 01:03:51,599 --> 01:03:54,400 it's like, okay, why is that? Why is that significant? Like, 770 01:03:54,440 --> 01:03:58,320 can you tell me why? Just the fact that he died in Rome 771 01:03:58,719 --> 01:04:00,760 is that that's what makes it Signif okay, he found an Antioch person, 772 01:04:01,119 --> 01:04:03,880 I could equally say that he found an Antioch first, yeah, and they'll 773 01:04:03,920 --> 01:04:06,440 say, well, but he consecrated it with his blood and his martyrdom. 774 01:04:06,480 --> 01:04:11,360 And it's like, okay, but where does anybody appeal to that? How 775 01:04:11,400 --> 01:04:14,119 early do we get that appeal? Right? In other words, if that's 776 01:04:14,159 --> 01:04:19,679 what makes the Roman see unique contra Alexandria or Antioch, why is that a 777 01:04:19,800 --> 01:04:27,280 very late appeal? Right? But yeah, I just again I encourage people, 778 01:04:27,320 --> 01:04:30,880 if you do want to get the Sashinsky book, I highly recommend it 779 01:04:30,920 --> 01:04:34,400 because even though he did cite one sentence from it, probably getting it from 780 01:04:34,920 --> 01:04:44,119 Ibarra, the whole chapter on Rome in the First seven hundred Years, chapter 781 01:04:44,159 --> 01:04:47,840 four, it doesn't back up the Vatican One view at all. There's nothing 782 01:04:47,840 --> 01:04:50,519 in the backs of the Vatican One view. In fact, everything in that 783 01:04:50,599 --> 01:04:56,800 chapter is basically admitting that, you know, look can't. A lot of 784 01:04:56,800 --> 01:05:00,280 these classic proof texts just don't work and their bad argument. So it's a 785 01:05:00,280 --> 01:05:03,559 great book to make that point. In fact, where do you want to 786 01:05:03,599 --> 01:05:12,920 go next? I'm not sure, so let's see here and pull my notes. 787 01:05:15,000 --> 01:05:18,599 Did you want to mention anything about you mentioned something. I don't rember 788 01:05:18,639 --> 01:05:26,719 how you phrased it, but you were talking about head uh pre eminent I 789 01:05:26,760 --> 01:05:32,760 think, oh, yes, yeah, So they were in their review they 790 01:05:32,760 --> 01:05:42,039 were saying that I miss I misused the term inviolable, and I find that 791 01:05:42,119 --> 01:05:45,239 interesting. So I actually try to reach out to Father Richard Price on this 792 01:05:45,400 --> 01:05:53,079 because he actually missed quotes in uh in Acts of Epicists. And I was 793 01:05:53,159 --> 01:05:56,679 talking with Ubi Petris about this as well, because we were trying to figure 794 01:05:56,679 --> 01:06:04,760 out the Greek word used here for inviolable, but he actually misquotes in his 795 01:06:04,840 --> 01:06:08,719 citation, so we tried to reach out to him to figure out what the 796 01:06:08,719 --> 01:06:12,960 Greek word used for inviable was here. But I mean, the definition of 797 01:06:13,000 --> 01:06:17,840 inviable is never to be broken or infringed, like what that's and that's what 798 01:06:17,880 --> 01:06:21,880 I said, I said, will never air, will never air, the 799 01:06:21,960 --> 01:06:27,320 seat of the the seat of the emperor will that is invilable. That's what 800 01:06:27,320 --> 01:06:30,440 the quotation says. I can read the actual quotation here, let me find 801 01:06:30,440 --> 01:06:35,679 it. But I found it interesting that in their review that they were that 802 01:06:35,719 --> 01:06:42,400 they were going after going after my use of that word, as if I 803 01:06:42,480 --> 01:06:46,000 used it erroneously. What do you I mean invilable? That's what inviable means, 804 01:06:46,639 --> 01:06:50,519 is it not? Yeah, I mean there are several examples like this 805 01:06:50,880 --> 01:06:57,599 where termino words and phrases are used. I thought you had some good ones. 806 01:06:57,639 --> 01:07:00,599 I didn't know that. I had not heard that quote about the Holy 807 01:07:00,639 --> 01:07:05,039 Spirit has dictated to the Imperial pen a no edamanut. So now is the 808 01:07:05,079 --> 01:07:13,920 emperor inspired and infallible? In the Romancallou view, the use of Matthew sixteen 809 01:07:14,199 --> 01:07:18,599 for Constantinople, that was something I had not heard that. So do you 810 01:07:18,639 --> 01:07:20,960 want to go into some of those things and then we'll get into the I 811 01:07:20,960 --> 01:07:26,760 thought your Vigilius points on the Constitutum, the two versions of the Constitutum were 812 01:07:26,800 --> 01:07:29,800 really strong points as well. Yes, yeah, so, I mean this 813 01:07:29,920 --> 01:07:34,679 is the quotation here where the emperor is called the divine in inviable Head. 814 01:07:36,119 --> 01:07:41,920 This is from Prices Acts of Ephicis, page three oh eight, which again 815 01:07:42,039 --> 01:07:45,840 citation is wrong, but he's quoting the council. Nor does my devotion suppose 816 01:07:45,920 --> 01:07:50,400 that any of the most about bishops are unaware that not merely once or twice, 817 01:07:50,599 --> 01:07:55,840 but even more frequently on the matter for the instructions from the divine and 818 01:07:55,960 --> 01:08:00,920 inviolable Head. So that's in reference to them. So when they when they 819 01:08:00,920 --> 01:08:08,360 pull a quote about the papalc being referred to as the head, it's not 820 01:08:08,400 --> 01:08:12,760 an issue like we like, it's amazing how many Roman Catholics haven't even heard 821 01:08:12,760 --> 01:08:18,680 of the Byzantine two headed Eagle of the vote, like and so uh yeah, 822 01:08:18,720 --> 01:08:25,600 And then you brought up my quotation from Matthew sixteen being applied to the 823 01:08:26,119 --> 01:08:30,119 Empire of Constantine. And so this is my issue with with all of their 824 01:08:31,560 --> 01:08:34,960 with all of their talking points, they boil down to these quotations have to 825 01:08:34,960 --> 01:08:41,159 be taken literally and they have to mean the same thing from now until the 826 01:08:41,239 --> 01:08:45,079 end of ages. They only mean the Vatican One support is basically what it 827 01:08:45,079 --> 01:08:49,920 amounts to. So it's it's a selective use of the tax to fit the 828 01:08:49,960 --> 01:08:58,439 Vatican one model retroactive. It's a revisionist move. Let's get to the vigilious 829 01:08:58,479 --> 01:09:00,720 examples. Explain what's going on at the Fifth Council. By the way, 830 01:09:00,840 --> 01:09:05,000 Sashinski has a great treatment of Virgilias the Fifth Council as well in chapter four. 831 01:09:05,319 --> 01:09:08,640 So tell us kind of what's going on here, how he is kind 832 01:09:08,640 --> 01:09:12,279 of forced to kind of to bend to the will the Emperor and the council. 833 01:09:12,359 --> 01:09:15,880 And we have why we have two versions of this this letter from him. 834 01:09:15,880 --> 01:09:19,520 Yeah, real quick, I just want to read this quote here. 835 01:09:19,560 --> 01:09:26,720 Oh yeah, sure. This is on page fifty of the book Papal Primacy. 836 01:09:28,800 --> 01:09:32,960 This is the one that you referenced where the emperor is Matthew sixteen is 837 01:09:32,960 --> 01:09:35,479 applied to the emperor. But yeah, it says, and with the Almighty 838 01:09:35,479 --> 01:09:41,199 who rules with you, a most devout emperor, you decide because you are 839 01:09:41,239 --> 01:09:45,800 appointed by God. Rejoice, O city of Zion, Zummat of the worth 840 01:09:45,960 --> 01:09:50,439 the world, and the Empire Constantine ornamented you with purple and crowned you with 841 01:09:50,560 --> 01:09:56,680 faith, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against your Orthodox empire. 842 01:09:57,359 --> 01:10:01,119 I mean that's literally like exactly the type of quote that they use to support 843 01:10:01,520 --> 01:10:06,920 Pope Agatho's letter. Yeah, and I can't believe that he thought you were 844 01:10:06,960 --> 01:10:11,119 actually arguing that the emperor was infallible. I mean, that was so silly, 845 01:10:11,199 --> 01:10:15,119 Like obviously that's not what he's arguing. He's making the point that these 846 01:10:15,159 --> 01:10:20,840 phrases and this this prosaic, flowery language doesn't always lend to the easy, 847 01:10:21,319 --> 01:10:25,399 you know, knockdown proof text that we might want it to be because the 848 01:10:25,439 --> 01:10:30,000 context, the reference, the the limitations on the use of this kind of 849 01:10:30,039 --> 01:10:34,479 stuff, and the and the common usage of these kinds of things at that 850 01:10:34,600 --> 01:10:39,920 time. Again, it's just it doesn't work because there's so many examples of 851 01:10:39,960 --> 01:10:43,960 this, right, So in other words, it's inconsistent. So again, 852 01:10:43,960 --> 01:10:46,960 it's like Basil when he says that melidiosas the head of the churches, and 853 01:10:47,000 --> 01:10:50,720 the whole body descends from the head. It's like, oh, does that 854 01:10:50,760 --> 01:10:54,560 mean he's the pope now he's oh, but no, but he's not Rome. 855 01:10:54,760 --> 01:11:01,840 Yeah, exactly so. But it's so it's a selective. It's a 856 01:11:01,960 --> 01:11:06,600 double standard, is what I'm trying to say, where it only works when 857 01:11:06,640 --> 01:11:13,840 it works to prove the Vatican One view. Any contrary evidence doesn't count. 858 01:11:13,960 --> 01:11:17,239 It's exact same thing that Muslims do when you talk about the contradictions in the 859 01:11:17,319 --> 01:11:23,000 Koran appealing to prior revelation, and yet prior revelation is full of contradictions, 860 01:11:23,039 --> 01:11:26,720 and you ask the Muslim okay, but what's the principle by which I know 861 01:11:27,439 --> 01:11:30,680 the prior revelations to be true and false? Well, it's the ones that 862 01:11:30,720 --> 01:11:33,199 agree with the Koran. But the Qoran tells me to check the Koran against 863 01:11:33,279 --> 01:11:38,119 prior revelation. But now you're saying that prior revelation is contradictory. Yeah, 864 01:11:38,159 --> 01:11:40,800 but it's not contradictory when you read it in the light of the Koran. 865 01:11:41,600 --> 01:11:45,800 They're doing the exact same move. Vatican one is proven via proof text that 866 01:11:45,880 --> 01:11:48,640 I find in Church history that support Vatican one, the same model, the 867 01:11:48,720 --> 01:11:54,399 same move. When it's not conducive to Vatican one, we throw that one 868 01:11:54,439 --> 01:12:01,520 out. It doesn't count. It's arbitrary. Yeah. You asked about Constantinople 869 01:12:01,560 --> 01:12:05,199 two, So, uh, you asked me to explain constant Oble two. 870 01:12:05,279 --> 01:12:13,239 Yeah, So essentially what kind of triggered Constantinople two was Pope Virgilius had released 871 01:12:13,279 --> 01:12:15,319 what's called the Judicatum, which, by the way, in the debate he 872 01:12:15,439 --> 01:12:21,079 kept he kept using the wrong term. So there was three total documents that 873 01:12:21,119 --> 01:12:26,039 were released. The first one was called the Judicatum, which was two years 874 01:12:26,079 --> 01:12:30,600 prior to Constantinople two. And what this did is it sort of, uh 875 01:12:30,760 --> 01:12:35,960 subtly condemned the authors of what's called the three Chapters, which had historian tendencies. 876 01:12:38,720 --> 01:12:43,039 It subtly condemned them. But then two years later, after he releases 877 01:12:43,039 --> 01:12:45,920 the Judicatum, he retracts it. And this is what triggers the council. 878 01:12:46,199 --> 01:12:53,720 Emperor Justinian then calls the council, and Vigilius was fine with a council occurring, 879 01:12:53,960 --> 01:12:57,119 but he wanted it to occur in the West, and so because it 880 01:12:57,119 --> 01:13:00,319 didn't occur in the West, it occurred in Constantinople. He didn't even tended. 881 01:13:00,000 --> 01:13:08,680 Instead, he wrote what's called the Constitution is first constitutum. Constitututum just 882 01:13:08,720 --> 01:13:13,359 means constitution. He wrote his first version of it, and in this version 883 01:13:13,399 --> 01:13:17,560 of it, he accepts that the authors of the three Chapters were Orthodox. 884 01:13:18,800 --> 01:13:26,119 So he's he's first, he's subtly condemned in the Judicatum. Then he retracts 885 01:13:26,119 --> 01:13:30,199 it. Then he comes forward and he says, actually, uh, not 886 01:13:30,279 --> 01:13:33,520 only was I wrong by that judicatum, but these authors are actually Orthodox. 887 01:13:34,520 --> 01:13:39,600 And then at the end of that first constitutum, he says, this we 888 01:13:39,800 --> 01:13:44,039 ordain and decree that it be permitted to no one to write or bring forth 889 01:13:44,119 --> 01:13:48,800 anything contradictory to the contents of this constitutum, or after this declaration begin a 890 01:13:48,840 --> 01:13:53,880 new controversy about them. And if anything has already been done in contradiction of 891 01:13:53,920 --> 01:13:59,359 this our ordinance, this we declare void by the authority of the Apostolic See. 892 01:14:00,199 --> 01:14:03,920 So he gives the council his constitutum and he says, this is the 893 01:14:03,920 --> 01:14:08,800 papal decree. I mean, it couldn't be more clear. He literally says, 894 01:14:09,000 --> 01:14:13,560 it's by the authority of the Apostolic seat. And then the point that 895 01:14:13,840 --> 01:14:16,279 I really needed alex to I needed to hear it out of his mouth, 896 01:14:16,800 --> 01:14:23,920 because the council responds, they say there's no other way to resolve conflict, 897 01:14:24,359 --> 01:14:30,319 resolve questions of faith and morals than in a council. And it specifically says 898 01:14:30,560 --> 01:14:35,920 in their letter back to Pope Vigilius that even the Apostles, even though all 899 01:14:35,960 --> 01:14:41,239 the apostles were infallible. It says they had to meet in a council in 900 01:14:41,319 --> 01:14:45,279 Acts fifteen. It references Acts fifteen, and it says you do not have 901 01:14:45,319 --> 01:14:51,760 the authority to assert this apostolic see over us, because the council is how 902 01:14:51,760 --> 01:14:56,840 these things are determined. That's literally what they say in their letter back to 903 01:14:56,920 --> 01:15:01,039 me. So this is again conciliarism all the way back from the earliest days 904 01:15:01,079 --> 01:15:06,199 of the church. You mentioned canons from early antioch Sine of Antioch. We 905 01:15:06,199 --> 01:15:11,439 see it in the Apostolic Canons thirty four thirty slash thirty five. We fast 906 01:15:11,520 --> 01:15:15,800 forward through the canons of the councils up to the fifth Ecumenical Council. A 907 01:15:15,840 --> 01:15:18,800 few people know about this, and you're pointing out that their letter back to 908 01:15:18,920 --> 01:15:25,079 him is that we don't accept the unilateral autocratic model. The only way that 909 01:15:25,119 --> 01:15:30,239 we understand the acceptance or see me the resolution to these issues is tonally right. 910 01:15:30,600 --> 01:15:34,800 And then I asked him, so everyone that's watching this, you the 911 01:15:34,880 --> 01:15:42,039 Roman Catholic position is that the bishops were wrong about that that when they say 912 01:15:42,399 --> 01:15:45,920 there's no other way that the truth can be man manifest except for any conciliar 913 01:15:46,000 --> 01:15:50,119 model. That's what the bishops say, back to Vigilius, and you need 914 01:15:50,159 --> 01:15:56,239 to make the Roman Catholic say the bishops of this Ecumenical Council in their final 915 01:15:57,079 --> 01:16:00,680 declaration were wrong. You have to make that come out of amount. And 916 01:16:00,720 --> 01:16:04,000 I did it in the debate. And this is me, At what point 917 01:16:04,079 --> 01:16:08,279 are you just not the Church of the first millennium? Yeah, exactly, 918 01:16:08,319 --> 01:16:11,680 And that was what the debate was, right. The preminist was is the 919 01:16:11,760 --> 01:16:16,319 Church of the first thousand years the Vatican one papal model or the Orthodox synodal 920 01:16:16,840 --> 01:16:24,199 conciliar model. Yeah. So so then after the council, which by the 921 01:16:24,239 --> 01:16:30,319 way, as far as all the evidence is concerned, was received as ecumenical. 922 01:16:30,920 --> 01:16:34,279 In fact, when Nicea two and I read this full quotations in the 923 01:16:34,279 --> 01:16:36,359 debate, I can do it now if you want me to. But in 924 01:16:36,479 --> 01:16:45,199 Nicea two they reference Constantinople two and they say it was ecumenical, and they 925 01:16:45,359 --> 01:16:49,279 say it was by the affirmation of the four Patriarchs. They don't even mention 926 01:16:49,439 --> 01:16:56,279 Vigilia's. So it was seen as fully valid, as fully ecumenical with the 927 01:16:56,680 --> 01:17:02,359 with their affirmation of the four patriarchs. And then finally two years later, 928 01:17:02,560 --> 01:17:09,399 after the council, Vigilius submits to the council and he agrees that the writers 929 01:17:09,439 --> 01:17:14,159 of the three chapters were indeed heretics. So and we see this again and 930 01:17:14,199 --> 01:17:17,640 again, and this is my question for a Roman Catholic if you is there 931 01:17:17,640 --> 01:17:24,640 any example where there was a conflict between the consent of the church and the 932 01:17:24,720 --> 01:17:30,039 Roman See and the Roman See came out on top. Is there any example 933 01:17:30,079 --> 01:17:32,520 where the entire consent of the church said, we're wrong, We're going to 934 01:17:32,560 --> 01:17:36,439 submit to you, the Roman See. Because I just showed you an example, 935 01:17:38,000 --> 01:17:42,800 and there's many examples like this where the pope tries to assert his authority 936 01:17:42,840 --> 01:17:45,159 as the Roman See, as the Apostolic See, and what ends up happening 937 01:17:45,600 --> 01:17:51,039 is he submits to the consent of the church. Which is why the Orthodox 938 01:17:51,079 --> 01:17:57,279 position is stronger because our evidence is what actually happened, not some quote mine 939 01:17:57,600 --> 01:18:01,720 of Pope Agatho's letter. We have an ad actual how it actually went down. 940 01:18:01,840 --> 01:18:05,720 Demonstrates that the consent of the church is a higher authority than a papal 941 01:18:05,760 --> 01:18:12,600 decree. Yeah, exactly, And I mean I want to look and see 942 01:18:12,640 --> 01:18:17,520 if if this quote is still there on their on their channel or not. 943 01:18:17,840 --> 01:18:24,079 So I've saved it. So again, let's remember remember that feel they needed 944 01:18:24,079 --> 01:18:34,840 to judge Theodora if Leo had already reinstated him. Well they didn't. They 945 01:18:34,880 --> 01:18:42,920 didn't recognize Roman jordistiction in the provinces. There you go. So uh, 946 01:18:43,000 --> 01:18:45,880 I just wanted to play that again. Yeah, that's great, thank you. 947 01:18:45,920 --> 01:18:49,760 That's really a really strong point there on Virgilius in the Fifth Council. 948 01:18:51,640 --> 01:18:55,600 Do you want to move on or stay? Anything else you want to say 949 01:18:55,640 --> 01:19:00,520 on that. I'm looking at Sardikan canon as we've done that now. One 950 01:19:00,520 --> 01:19:03,640 thing he knew. One thing he knew he said that I noticed is that 951 01:19:03,800 --> 01:19:13,239 if you go to Sartica, he says seven and eight prove papalism, or 952 01:19:13,279 --> 01:19:15,760 he said something like that. But when you go and read seven and eight, 953 01:19:15,800 --> 01:19:17,439 I don't know where he's he didn't flesh out this this point. He 954 01:19:17,520 --> 01:19:21,279 just kind of set it in passing. I don't know what he's talking about 955 01:19:21,279 --> 01:19:26,479 in seven and eight proving papalism, because when I read seven and eight, 956 01:19:27,399 --> 01:19:32,920 like it talks about what shall be granted by the Emperor in Candidate of Sartica. 957 01:19:32,960 --> 01:19:36,000 So I don't know what he's talking about that this proves papalism that I 958 01:19:36,039 --> 01:19:42,640 didn't get that. Yeah, well, and who was on content able to 959 01:19:42,840 --> 01:19:46,079 just real quick before we move on, Yeah, he missing my point about 960 01:19:46,079 --> 01:19:51,760 the about the contents of the Constitutum. He was trying to focus on the 961 01:19:51,800 --> 01:19:57,279 fact that he was trying to argue that the contents of the Constitutum we were 962 01:19:57,399 --> 01:20:00,159 orthodoxy in both cases, which I think I demonstrate it was not true because 963 01:20:00,199 --> 01:20:03,640 in one case he affirms the orthodoxy of the three writers and the other case 964 01:20:03,680 --> 01:20:09,760 he doesn't. So that's a contradiction. But he's missing my The overarching point 965 01:20:09,760 --> 01:20:15,119 about Constantinople too is that the bishops in their response, are saying there's no 966 01:20:15,239 --> 01:20:21,640 other way to resolve matters of faith. So whether or not the Constitutum is 967 01:20:21,800 --> 01:20:25,920 orthodox, which I demonstrate it's not, but let's say I grant that it 968 01:20:25,960 --> 01:20:30,520 is. Their response back to him saying that you can't assert this authority over 969 01:20:30,600 --> 01:20:35,239 us is is the is the stronger point here that I was trying to make 970 01:20:35,720 --> 01:20:40,479 with with Constantinople too, And I think that kind of I don't know if 971 01:20:40,479 --> 01:20:42,439 we were talking past each other with that, but I think that kind of 972 01:20:42,479 --> 01:20:47,640 went over his head a little bit. Yeah, and I don't want to 973 01:20:47,800 --> 01:20:51,279 get off track apologize. I just didn't understand what he was trying to argue 974 01:20:51,319 --> 01:20:56,560 with kenon seven and eight of Sorry, because in the by the time you're 975 01:20:56,560 --> 01:21:00,960 getting into the cross examinations, it starts to get into these you guys kind 976 01:21:00,960 --> 01:21:04,920 of are firing back and forth on different points. He says something about, 977 01:21:05,000 --> 01:21:12,319 well, I think you misunderstood seven and eight of Sartka actually prove papacy. 978 01:21:12,399 --> 01:21:15,279 But then when we look at seven and eight, it talks about that the 979 01:21:15,319 --> 01:21:19,159 bishops. We don't want bishops going to the secular court, even if the 980 01:21:19,159 --> 01:21:24,920 emperor summons them. I mean, it's nothing here to do with papalism. 981 01:21:24,960 --> 01:21:26,720 I don't I don't get it. Do you know what he was trying to 982 01:21:26,800 --> 01:21:30,439 argue. I have no clue. No, I mean he didn't flesh it 983 01:21:30,479 --> 01:21:33,960 out. He mentioned it. He said to you, well, Sartka seven 984 01:21:33,960 --> 01:21:38,000 and eight proved my view, and then I'm reading it. I'm like, 985 01:21:38,039 --> 01:21:40,439 I don't see where he's getting any of that. Yeah, I mean, 986 01:21:40,439 --> 01:21:46,600 even Ina is just Rome as a review court, you know, for appeals 987 01:21:46,600 --> 01:21:49,520 that are being made. So I'm not really sure why. I mean, 988 01:21:49,760 --> 01:21:56,239 I don't think educated Roman Catholics argue from startaka as far as I know exactly. 989 01:21:56,520 --> 01:22:08,119 And the next big mistake was where he says, I liked your question 990 01:22:08,199 --> 01:22:13,960 about the forgeries, and I thought he had a huge failure if we think 991 01:22:14,000 --> 01:22:17,880 about it, because he basically argued that the Church is not infallible in terms 992 01:22:17,880 --> 01:22:23,159 of quote facts, but it is infallible in terms of faith and morals. 993 01:22:23,520 --> 01:22:27,520 He says, so even if the Church cited a forgery to back up something 994 01:22:27,560 --> 01:22:31,880 in a decree or dogma, the dogma is protected, even if it cites 995 01:22:31,960 --> 01:22:36,479 a false fact. I mean, this is crazy, This blows my mind 996 01:22:36,520 --> 01:22:42,479 because now, basically the papacy is the living embodiment of epistemological truth itself. 997 01:22:42,880 --> 01:22:49,039 So basically, if the papacy utilizes false forgery facts, the facts can be 998 01:22:49,079 --> 01:22:53,680 wrong, but the truth is still protected by the Holy Spirit. He says 999 01:22:53,720 --> 01:22:57,119 that papalism is proven prior to the forgeries. Well, first of all, 1000 01:22:57,159 --> 01:23:01,079 he didn't demonstrate yet that Vatican One actually is prior to the forgeries, and 1001 01:23:01,159 --> 01:23:05,359 the Catechism of Council Trent, for example, still relied on forgeries to prop 1002 01:23:05,439 --> 01:23:11,439 up papacy. I mean, I think Rome is no one Judges of the 1003 01:23:11,479 --> 01:23:14,479 First Sea is still in Roman Cathic cant law, and that's based on a 1004 01:23:14,520 --> 01:23:19,680 forgery. So just this idea that the dogmas protect it even though it's citing 1005 01:23:19,760 --> 01:23:25,000 or referencing a forgery, and a fact can be a fact can be wrong, 1006 01:23:25,039 --> 01:23:27,600 but the dogma can still be true. That's to me, that's crazy, 1007 01:23:27,640 --> 01:23:30,279 that's ridiculous. And by the way, these are actually not as clear 1008 01:23:30,319 --> 01:23:33,159 cut as I think he wants them to be, because he wanted there to 1009 01:23:33,159 --> 01:23:40,319 be this really clear cut distinction between something that's faith and morals and dogma versus 1010 01:23:40,359 --> 01:23:45,560 things that are facts or quote human traditions. He said, now, where 1011 01:23:45,600 --> 01:23:50,720 in Roman Catholic dogma do we actually have the list of the things that are 1012 01:23:51,119 --> 01:23:56,239 faith and morals and are not. Well, there's not one. There's criteria 1013 01:23:56,359 --> 01:24:00,399 that every individual Catholic has to then suss out supposedly what goes into what ben 1014 01:24:00,760 --> 01:24:05,640 But now the epistemological problem, the criterion problem, it's all still there because 1015 01:24:05,680 --> 01:24:09,960 we don't actually know if we're doing it right. How do I know just 1016 01:24:10,039 --> 01:24:13,439 on the base of generic criteria that well, that's what the Church is always 1017 01:24:13,439 --> 01:24:15,279 taught and it's what the Roman see has dogmatically taught. Well, how do 1018 01:24:15,359 --> 01:24:18,920 I know that in these mountains of pable documents, I'm actually sussing out and 1019 01:24:18,960 --> 01:24:24,800 putting things in the right ben And so every time they appeal to faith and 1020 01:24:24,880 --> 01:24:29,359 morals and not to human traditions, and the faith and morals is super broad. 1021 01:24:29,720 --> 01:24:31,920 Okay, And as you pointed out, yeah, well, I mean, 1022 01:24:32,000 --> 01:24:36,000 why would Canon twenty eight not in some way relate to faith and morals? 1023 01:24:36,720 --> 01:24:43,199 Why would liturgical rights and disciplines not relate to faith and morals? Saying 1024 01:24:43,239 --> 01:24:47,640 faith and morals could literally encompass anything potentially, do you see what I'm saying? 1025 01:24:47,680 --> 01:24:55,319 Like these these basic super elastic terms, that the pope is only infallible 1026 01:24:55,319 --> 01:25:00,079 in faith and morals allows them the elasticity to bend and stress and throw out 1027 01:25:00,159 --> 01:25:04,079 when it doesn't work. So if something seems to contradict, it's not it's 1028 01:25:04,119 --> 01:25:08,640 not invaluable, not faith and morals. Now, wait a minute, isn't 1029 01:25:08,680 --> 01:25:12,640 death penalty related to faith and morals? Seems like morals to me? It's 1030 01:25:12,680 --> 01:25:16,479 an ethical moral question as to whether we have the death penalty right blessing a 1031 01:25:16,520 --> 01:25:20,479 homosexual union. To me, that seems like it's a moral question. So 1032 01:25:20,520 --> 01:25:26,600 how and and so there's a there's no clear divide between faith and morals. 1033 01:25:26,640 --> 01:25:30,560 And I'm not saying that there might not be distinctions between things that are faith 1034 01:25:30,560 --> 01:25:31,800 and morals and things that are not. But what I'm saying is that they 1035 01:25:31,840 --> 01:25:40,520 don't give an actual clear epistemic criteria to know when it's what. Yeah, 1036 01:25:40,680 --> 01:25:45,479 So as far as your point about referencing my question on the forgeries, I 1037 01:25:45,760 --> 01:25:50,199 really just think it's it's it's ironic. You know that on the eve of 1038 01:25:50,199 --> 01:25:57,439 the Schism, like the document that was used to justify this Supreme authority in 1039 01:25:57,479 --> 01:26:03,600 regards to the use of leaven bread was the forgery. So the Pope isn't 1040 01:26:03,680 --> 01:26:09,920 referencing Agatho's letter, he's not referencing a quotation by Saint Maximus talking about how 1041 01:26:09,960 --> 01:26:13,279 you have to be in convenient with Rome. He's referencing the donation of Constantine, 1042 01:26:13,800 --> 01:26:17,000 a forgery. There's irony there, right, There's an irony that at 1043 01:26:17,039 --> 01:26:23,399 the schism, that's the document that got that was referenced as justification for the 1044 01:26:23,439 --> 01:26:27,079 Supreme Authority, which I point this out, and I think that kind of 1045 01:26:27,079 --> 01:26:30,199 went over his head during my questioning on this. Well, let's keep in 1046 01:26:30,239 --> 01:26:34,359 mind that not too long after the schism, we immediately get the infamous Dictatus 1047 01:26:34,439 --> 01:26:42,079 Pope of Pope Gregory the sebventh, and this is listed in his register. 1048 01:26:42,279 --> 01:26:45,640 It's also it's mentioned by mind or if it's mentioned in the Sashinsky book. 1049 01:26:45,960 --> 01:26:49,880 The scholarship basically says, yes, this is a real papal teaching in real 1050 01:26:49,880 --> 01:26:57,000 papal documents, not fake. I mean they're using the forgeries. This is 1051 01:26:57,039 --> 01:27:01,359 not a forgery, and it has all these outlandish claims which nobody in the 1052 01:27:01,399 --> 01:27:05,920 first thousand years of Christianity who is serious at all would believe or think that 1053 01:27:06,159 --> 01:27:11,960 these outlandish claims have any basis in the first millennium, I mean, they're 1054 01:27:11,960 --> 01:27:15,760 just outlandish. And we've referenced the dictatus probably a million times. But I'm 1055 01:27:15,760 --> 01:27:19,000 just pointing it out because there's a whole section in the Skashinski book. There's 1056 01:27:19,000 --> 01:27:24,039 a whole section of the Papadacus book. There you can see all the infamous 1057 01:27:24,079 --> 01:27:30,199 claims of Dictatus Pape. And this is again right after, so we're talking 1058 01:27:30,279 --> 01:27:36,119 right after the schism what the authors call the scholars called the revolution and ecclesiology. 1059 01:27:36,439 --> 01:27:40,840 This is it right here, and this is relying in some of these 1060 01:27:41,800 --> 01:27:48,239 propositions on forgeries, so it's not just forgeries to back up the papal claims, 1061 01:27:48,279 --> 01:27:51,880 which he argued, well, there's already proofs of the papal claims we 1062 01:27:51,880 --> 01:27:56,560 didn't really need. Then why did you need the forgeries if there's already proofs 1063 01:27:56,760 --> 01:27:58,920 He said, there was already proofs. Okay, then why do we need 1064 01:27:58,960 --> 01:28:01,239 the forgeries? Well, were mistakes and people were cropped or something like that. 1065 01:28:01,279 --> 01:28:04,279 But the positions are fil true. Oh really, the positions. So 1066 01:28:04,359 --> 01:28:09,680 the positions of Tetatus pawfare are so true where it says that the pope is 1067 01:28:09,760 --> 01:28:13,399 the quisosaiderak, the god emperor of old universe, I mean literally, it's 1068 01:28:13,439 --> 01:28:17,600 what it says. It's like the craziest outlandish claims for a cleric. And 1069 01:28:17,960 --> 01:28:23,079 I mean anybody's read the Canons of the Councils. I mean we just read 1070 01:28:23,279 --> 01:28:28,319 which which was one of these talking about how bishops shouldn't have anything to do 1071 01:28:29,000 --> 01:28:34,479 with secular courts because they'll come under the censorship of the canons, Like how 1072 01:28:34,680 --> 01:28:39,479 bishops are not supposed to be involved in secular affairs. Oh but wait a 1073 01:28:39,520 --> 01:28:43,920 minute, Actually, the pope is the supreme king of all secular affairs. 1074 01:28:44,399 --> 01:28:48,880 Okay, this violates canons even back to Calstone and Calcone has canons at about 1075 01:28:48,920 --> 01:28:55,760 how clerics cannot be involved in affairs of state, at least they're not supposed 1076 01:28:55,760 --> 01:28:59,399 to. And has that been abused Yeah, I'm sure that was abused in 1077 01:28:59,439 --> 01:29:01,840 the East as well. I'm sure people didn't follow that canon. But the 1078 01:29:01,920 --> 01:29:06,760 point is that how can the head of the church change all of that to 1079 01:29:06,840 --> 01:29:12,600 then take on a geopolitical role, which the canons that we just saw in 1080 01:29:12,680 --> 01:29:16,520 Sartka mentioned censorship for it's crazy. So wait a minute, are sartak and 1081 01:29:16,600 --> 01:29:19,600 Canon's good or not? All? Right? So I mean if the Kansas 1082 01:29:19,680 --> 01:29:25,399 Articas said that you shouldn't be involved in secular affairs and now Dictatus Pope says 1083 01:29:25,439 --> 01:29:29,720 you're the queisaattarac, I mean this is a contradiction, right, And I 1084 01:29:29,760 --> 01:29:33,720 would say Dictatus Pope, I mean it's mini Vatican One for many people that 1085 01:29:33,760 --> 01:29:38,239 aren't like familiar with the document. It's a lot of the same concepts that 1086 01:29:38,279 --> 01:29:43,880 we see at Vatican One in pastor returnos. But what I find interesting about 1087 01:29:43,920 --> 01:29:49,840 dicta is Pope is in Vatican One is there's no way to reconcile that with 1088 01:29:50,079 --> 01:29:56,000 apostol Canon thirty four. So if we look at like the earliest attestation right 1089 01:29:56,479 --> 01:30:03,880 to how eclesial logical matters are to be handled is consent. The first he 1090 01:30:04,399 --> 01:30:11,760 must get the consent of all. This is the polar opposite of what Vatican 1091 01:30:11,840 --> 01:30:17,239 One states. It's the literal inverse. It literally says the authority is irreformable 1092 01:30:17,319 --> 01:30:23,000 of itself and not from the consent of the church. It's the inverse of 1093 01:30:23,479 --> 01:30:29,199 Apostolic Canon thirty four, the oldest atta station we have to ecclesiological matters. 1094 01:30:30,039 --> 01:30:31,399 So people ask, why is this such a big deal. You know, 1095 01:30:31,520 --> 01:30:36,520 what did Rome do that was so bad? Read dictate his pape after reading 1096 01:30:36,520 --> 01:30:41,920 the Apostolic cannons, and there's actually significant right And by the way, for 1097 01:30:41,960 --> 01:30:45,159 everybody that's super lazy, I put both of them on the screen for you 1098 01:30:45,159 --> 01:30:48,159 so you don't even have to go read. Then there's the canon right there, 1099 01:30:48,840 --> 01:30:53,239 and I just had Dictatus Pope up for you for the last like ten 1100 01:30:53,319 --> 01:30:57,720 minutes, So there you go go ahead. I lost my train of thought 1101 01:30:57,800 --> 01:31:00,359 now I'm sorry. Oh no, wait, I remember, I remember, 1102 01:31:00,439 --> 01:31:06,079 I remember. Uh, it's so so Swan Sona we'll argue for apostolic succession, 1103 01:31:06,520 --> 01:31:13,159 and he'll point out that the priesthood, the levitical priesthood, would be 1104 01:31:14,640 --> 01:31:20,399 ordained by two or three priests, which is exactly what the Apostolic canon say. 1105 01:31:20,880 --> 01:31:26,720 It's exactly what Nicia one says about how a bishop is to be ordained. 1106 01:31:26,960 --> 01:31:29,960 And you made this point earlier, but guess what what does two or 1107 01:31:30,000 --> 01:31:33,840 three sound like? Well, it's trinitarian. Yeah, that's that's like the 1108 01:31:33,960 --> 01:31:40,880 Trinity is is literally a model for how we conduct things in the church. 1109 01:31:41,920 --> 01:31:45,800 And so when we see two or three witnesses that are ordaining the priest in 1110 01:31:45,840 --> 01:31:50,119 the levitical priesthood, and then we see the same thing being echoed in uh 1111 01:31:50,560 --> 01:31:56,319 the church, there's continuity there with the levitical priesthood, and it's a trinitarian 1112 01:31:56,399 --> 01:32:01,960 model of ordaining a bishop. So yeah, it's a great point. And 1113 01:32:02,439 --> 01:32:08,960 I do have on the screen Canon one that you can see there where it 1114 01:32:09,039 --> 01:32:14,000 says, let a bishop be ordained by two or three bishops. No contemporary 1115 01:32:14,119 --> 01:32:16,159 Roman Catholic teaching is that the pope is to be ordained. It's sorta in 1116 01:32:16,199 --> 01:32:24,800 all bishops. Bishops are to be confined to their jurisdictions. Bishops must acknowledge 1117 01:32:24,800 --> 01:32:28,760 who is first. That's Canon thirty four. There let a bishop not go 1118 01:32:28,880 --> 01:32:33,479 beyond his limits Canon thirty five. Right, No bishops are to be ordained 1119 01:32:33,479 --> 01:32:38,439 within their jurisdiction. There's no exemptions. There's no exceptions ever made for the 1120 01:32:38,479 --> 01:32:41,319 Pope and Obara and all these people that always say, well, it's an 1121 01:32:41,439 --> 01:32:45,439 argument from silence. They all knew it, so they didn't have to talk 1122 01:32:45,479 --> 01:32:48,239 about it because everybody understood it. Oh, everybody understood it. But they're 1123 01:32:48,279 --> 01:32:51,840 also enacting all these canons that contradict it. So which one is it? 1124 01:32:51,920 --> 01:32:57,920 They understood it and they were silent on it, or they were contradicting people 1125 01:32:57,960 --> 01:33:01,359 authority by pushing all these canons addicted throughout all these centuries. I mean's just 1126 01:33:01,520 --> 01:33:06,079 constantly flip flop on what their explanations are, which their explanations contradict is the 1127 01:33:06,159 --> 01:33:14,920 point. So did you want to move on to anything else that you thought 1128 01:33:14,960 --> 01:33:17,640 really stood out? I think the big the biggest error that he made was 1129 01:33:17,760 --> 01:33:23,119 when he said, and I did save the clip. I can pull it 1130 01:33:23,199 --> 01:33:26,039 up in a second, but he says that Nestorius is not a heretic. 1131 01:33:26,119 --> 01:33:29,920 I thought this was crazy. And if you've read the mcguckan book, if 1132 01:33:29,920 --> 01:33:32,560 you've read Cyril extensively, for if you're familiar with the teaching of emphasis, 1133 01:33:33,199 --> 01:33:39,159 then you know that this is just a huge red flag. I mean, 1134 01:33:39,199 --> 01:33:50,199 this is just sad. Documents are so protected, only protected, only infallible 1135 01:33:53,279 --> 01:33:58,840 in the way emphasis. Uh. And then the rith we don't know. 1136 01:34:04,800 --> 01:34:11,159 So he doesn't even understand that it's not like Ephesus stands alone because subsequent ecumenical 1137 01:34:11,239 --> 01:34:16,159 councils also reaffirm all the condemnations of the heretics prior. So later ecumenical councils 1138 01:34:16,199 --> 01:34:21,359 and their confessions will say, we condemn Nestorius, that God hated Nestorius, 1139 01:34:21,399 --> 01:34:26,880 we condemn Arius. Right, They'll repeat the previous condemnations, and you get 1140 01:34:27,000 --> 01:34:30,159 He says after this that Honorius also wasn't a hairtake, but he doesn't seem 1141 01:34:30,199 --> 01:34:34,720 to be aware that three ecamenical councils reaffirmed that Honorius was a heretic. It's 1142 01:34:34,800 --> 01:34:40,159 not just the sixth, it's the sixth, the seventh, and then it's 1143 01:34:40,239 --> 01:34:45,960 restated again in the Sonatical in later councils as well. So you've got reaffirmations 1144 01:34:46,279 --> 01:34:51,880 of heretics being condemned. There is no, absolutely no. I don't know 1145 01:34:51,960 --> 01:34:57,520 where they get this other than the Acumenists move that the papacy's done to now 1146 01:34:57,720 --> 01:35:01,119 say that you can do the liturgy of Marno Storius and you can you can 1147 01:35:01,439 --> 01:35:04,800 reverence Nestorius. This is a complete rejection of ephesis. I mean, this 1148 01:35:04,920 --> 01:35:09,720 is just crazy to me. It's mind blowing. I mean that this alone 1149 01:35:09,760 --> 01:35:13,840 should be enough to tell people that this is not the true church. They 1150 01:35:13,880 --> 01:35:17,600 will literally rewrite history for the sake of the papacy. The papacy is the 1151 01:35:17,680 --> 01:35:23,840 epistemic principle of truth, of metaphysics, of reality. It changes the past. 1152 01:35:24,079 --> 01:35:34,800 Now this is crazy. I'm done with my rant. I don't got 1153 01:35:34,840 --> 01:35:38,720 nothing else to add to that. I mean, do you agree or don't 1154 01:35:38,720 --> 01:35:41,439 you think it's crazy to say that Nistoria is not a heretic. I mean 1155 01:35:42,159 --> 01:35:45,399 I cleeded out after kind of a little jab. I was like, uh, 1156 01:35:46,079 --> 01:35:51,039 you know, part one of stayings that shouldn't be controversial, but apparently 1157 01:35:51,119 --> 01:35:57,199 are Nestorius was a heretic. I mean, it's like it's just insane to 1158 01:35:57,279 --> 01:35:59,520 me, Like he could have gone to other examples, like I think he 1159 01:35:59,560 --> 01:36:01,039 should have gone on straight to Enorous, and we could talk about Onorious, 1160 01:36:01,079 --> 01:36:04,840 but saying that Nestorius isn't the heretic. I mean if you read his anathemas 1161 01:36:05,600 --> 01:36:11,840 of Saint Cyril, like he literally anathematizes the use of the of the term 1162 01:36:12,680 --> 01:36:15,560 of course. Absolutely. Yeah, everybody, every orthodox person knows Theotokos is 1163 01:36:15,600 --> 01:36:19,159 like orthodoxy one on one. So they're basically saying, as Roman Catholics, 1164 01:36:19,479 --> 01:36:23,000 we don't really care about orthodoxy one on one. Yeah. Well, that's 1165 01:36:23,039 --> 01:36:26,079 exactly what we knew all along, That's what we've been saying. All right. 1166 01:36:26,119 --> 01:36:29,239 So I've got that's all my notes. Do you have anything else you 1167 01:36:29,279 --> 01:36:30,600 want to get to before we move to super chats? And I've got your 1168 01:36:31,199 --> 01:36:33,600 uh Twitter is linked. I thought you did great in the debate. I 1169 01:36:33,640 --> 01:36:38,079 think it was a clear win. What do you want to do, anything 1170 01:36:38,119 --> 01:36:42,720 you want to leave with or things that we missed? I will do. 1171 01:36:42,960 --> 01:36:45,760 Yeah. One one final thing sure, because this wasn't addressed by by him 1172 01:36:45,840 --> 01:36:49,840 in the in the debate, was the I brought up the Malasian Schism multiple 1173 01:36:49,920 --> 01:36:57,359 times. And what the Malaysian Schism demonstrates is that you can be in communion 1174 01:36:57,439 --> 01:37:00,840 with Rome or with the True Church without being communion with Rome, and what 1175 01:37:00,960 --> 01:37:08,560 happened in the Malaysian schism. The Roman Catholics will always focus on Malaysius and 1176 01:37:08,600 --> 01:37:11,960 they'll say, well, Malaysius was brought into communion with Rome. But the 1177 01:37:12,039 --> 01:37:21,199 issue is constantinople I appoints Flavian as Malaysius's successor, and the Roman Church doesn't 1178 01:37:21,319 --> 01:37:29,359 accept Flavian as the true patriarch until almost twenty years later. And so for 1179 01:37:29,520 --> 01:37:33,279 those eighteen nineteen years, the entire rest of the Church was in communion with 1180 01:37:33,319 --> 01:37:41,760 Flavian, and Rome didn't recognize Flavian until they finally submit to the Church's decision 1181 01:37:41,920 --> 01:37:45,000 from contentinople On. I think it was like three ninety nine when they finally 1182 01:37:45,279 --> 01:37:49,119 submit to the Church's decision the papal see. So for all those years, 1183 01:37:49,720 --> 01:37:54,479 all those years, Flavian was in communion with the true Church, but not 1184 01:37:54,640 --> 01:38:00,520 in communion with Rome. And Rome finally submits to the Church's decision. So 1185 01:38:00,960 --> 01:38:02,640 all these quotes about how you you know you have to be in convenient with 1186 01:38:02,760 --> 01:38:06,840 Rome they quote min in Saint Jerome, which isn't even the context of what 1187 01:38:06,920 --> 01:38:13,319 he was saying. Well, those quotes don't matter if we can point to 1188 01:38:13,399 --> 01:38:16,479 an example where somebody was inconvenient with the True Church but not in commune with 1189 01:38:16,560 --> 01:38:20,920 Rome single handedly refuted that whole talking point. Yeah, it does, and 1190 01:38:21,800 --> 01:38:26,319 I'm glad you brought that up. Now we've got BMX. He sent fifteen 1191 01:38:26,359 --> 01:38:28,399 dollars the other day. I can't remeer if I got to that or not 1192 01:38:28,520 --> 01:38:32,479 thinking. Thank you'd BMX cataclysm five dollars. Very good, very good discussion. 1193 01:38:32,600 --> 01:38:36,920 Luigi loved to see it. I feel that it was coming for Lofton 1194 01:38:38,000 --> 01:38:43,640 to choose an inquirer to debate and represent orthodoxy. So it looked to me 1195 01:38:43,880 --> 01:38:47,439 like at one point, I can't prove this, but he he was mouthing 1196 01:38:47,600 --> 01:38:51,159 as the microphone was turned off. It's like he was talking to somebody. 1197 01:38:51,199 --> 01:38:56,239 So I don't know if somebody was sending him arguments or what, but so 1198 01:38:56,359 --> 01:39:00,279 it was a little odd that he was talking so much with the volume off. 1199 01:39:00,319 --> 01:39:01,119 Maybe he was talking to his wife or something. I don't know. 1200 01:39:01,159 --> 01:39:05,000 Brett sales twenty dollars. This is killer content. It's not moon Beaver, 1201 01:39:05,119 --> 01:39:08,760 but it's still killer content, none the less capal. Yeah, thank you 1202 01:39:08,840 --> 01:39:14,119 so much. We'll have to revisit our Seeds of Gaya dude, that's the 1203 01:39:14,960 --> 01:39:18,720 moon Beaver consciousness guy cataclosing five dollars ps. We're ready for the Jake Debate 1204 01:39:18,800 --> 01:39:24,520 review. Yeah, we're just waiting on Lewis and Kai and Doctor Bow to 1205 01:39:25,439 --> 01:39:29,600 find the time when everybody's not busy to be able to do the Doctor Bow 1206 01:39:29,880 --> 01:39:32,960 or show me the Jake Debate review. Guys, if you would be sure 1207 01:39:32,960 --> 01:39:39,479 and follow Luigi, I've got his channel or shoe me his Twitter linked. 1208 01:39:39,520 --> 01:39:43,159 I'll add his Instagram as well because he's got a lot of Instagram content that's 1209 01:39:43,159 --> 01:39:47,119 pretty funny. Popular people like his his jokes and his quips. They're good 1210 01:39:47,239 --> 01:39:51,520 over on ig. There is his Twitter in the chat if you want to 1211 01:39:51,560 --> 01:39:55,920 follow him. There anything you want to leave us with before before we close 1212 01:39:55,960 --> 01:40:00,399 it out. I mean, I appreciate you having me on you know. 1213 01:40:00,520 --> 01:40:05,359 I I just want to say I got an overwhelming amount of welcoming messages from 1214 01:40:05,439 --> 01:40:11,760 from Orthodox people during following the debate. I had people that said that they 1215 01:40:12,560 --> 01:40:15,960 they that my debate was kind of like the last straw for them, like 1216 01:40:15,159 --> 01:40:19,960 for leaving the Roman Catholic Church. And then one person in particular, when 1217 01:40:20,039 --> 01:40:26,079 his priest asked uh for a reason, he just sent he sent his priest 1218 01:40:26,239 --> 01:40:30,119 the debate, so I thought that was kind of fun. Nice, But 1219 01:40:30,399 --> 01:40:32,199 yeah, I just want to say that the Orthodox community, you guys are 1220 01:40:32,239 --> 01:40:35,439 phenomenal. You know. I'm excited to I just got I was just on 1221 01:40:35,640 --> 01:40:40,399 Orthodox Kyle. He's releasing that video soon. I'm going on Orthodox being Squad 1222 01:40:40,399 --> 01:40:43,640 in a couple of weeks. So yeah, you guys have been awesome, 1223 01:40:43,880 --> 01:40:46,920 super welcoming. So I'm excited to be here and pretty excited about the future. 1224 01:40:47,159 --> 01:40:49,960 So awesome. Yeah, absolutely, you did great. It was a 1225 01:40:50,319 --> 01:40:56,039 phenomenal first outing. So we're looking forward to, you know, some some 1226 01:40:56,319 --> 01:41:00,479 excellent future debates. So everybody be sure and follow Louis E. G Over 1227 01:41:00,600 --> 01:41:03,039 on his outlets, and I will see you guys very soon.