WEBVTT

1
00:00:00.840 --> 00:00:03.919
<v Speaker 1>All right, welcome everybody. It's another episode of Jays Analysis.

2
00:00:03.960 --> 00:00:06.240
<v Speaker 1>And you may recall some years back, maybe four or

3
00:00:06.280 --> 00:00:09.640
<v Speaker 1>five years ago, Snack and I had a great guy

4
00:00:09.720 --> 00:00:14.199
<v Speaker 1>on named George, and George was working at that time

5
00:00:14.320 --> 00:00:17.160
<v Speaker 1>on kind of a loose draft of a book that

6
00:00:17.320 --> 00:00:22.920
<v Speaker 1>covered infamous papal forgeries and other forgeries related to the

7
00:00:23.440 --> 00:00:28.399
<v Speaker 1>period of the Early Church, the first six, seven eighth centuries.

8
00:00:28.960 --> 00:00:33.119
<v Speaker 1>George has continued that work. He's busted butt and he's

9
00:00:33.280 --> 00:00:35.799
<v Speaker 1>back on the channel with me because there's a new

10
00:00:35.799 --> 00:00:38.039
<v Speaker 1>book out. It's an uncut Mountain Press and of course

11
00:00:38.079 --> 00:00:41.399
<v Speaker 1>the links to this book are below, and we're gonna

12
00:00:41.399 --> 00:00:43.679
<v Speaker 1>get deep into it. We're gonna get the low down

13
00:00:43.759 --> 00:00:47.560
<v Speaker 1>on it. It's George who rejoins me. Let's get into this. George,

14
00:00:47.560 --> 00:00:50.240
<v Speaker 1>first of all, tell us a little bit about what

15
00:00:50.320 --> 00:00:53.719
<v Speaker 1>drew you to studying the forgeries. It seems like there's

16
00:00:53.719 --> 00:00:56.280
<v Speaker 1>not a lot of good material just on this sort

17
00:00:56.280 --> 00:00:59.359
<v Speaker 1>of topic, and does your book go beyond that into

18
00:00:59.399 --> 00:01:00.600
<v Speaker 1>other theological topic.

19
00:01:01.759 --> 00:01:06.120
<v Speaker 2>Sure. Yeah, thanks Jay for having me on. And yeah,

20
00:01:06.159 --> 00:01:11.840
<v Speaker 2>what interested me is is really reading about the differences

21
00:01:11.879 --> 00:01:15.120
<v Speaker 2>between the Roman Catholics and Orthodox and trying to trace

22
00:01:15.200 --> 00:01:18.680
<v Speaker 2>back what caused all this, and and you know, coming

23
00:01:18.719 --> 00:01:21.560
<v Speaker 2>across the this was maybe ten twelve years ago when

24
00:01:21.560 --> 00:01:25.840
<v Speaker 2>I first got interested in the controversy and coming across

25
00:01:25.840 --> 00:01:29.079
<v Speaker 2>these traditionalist Roman Catholics, you know, making their strong claims

26
00:01:29.079 --> 00:01:31.480
<v Speaker 2>say no Orthodox are not in the church. And then

27
00:01:31.519 --> 00:01:35.079
<v Speaker 2>you see, and I looked into a lot of the

28
00:01:35.879 --> 00:01:40.120
<v Speaker 2>you know, these quotations that they would cite are a

29
00:01:40.120 --> 00:01:44.599
<v Speaker 2>lot of times not reliable or historically we're not reliable documents.

30
00:01:44.599 --> 00:01:49.280
<v Speaker 2>So there's some surprising you know things and history like

31
00:01:49.319 --> 00:01:53.920
<v Speaker 2>Aquinas being so reliant upon forgeries and by the time

32
00:01:53.959 --> 00:01:57.760
<v Speaker 2>of the Sism in ten fifty four, the forgeries then

33
00:01:58.079 --> 00:02:01.400
<v Speaker 2>and then in the time of Saint Photius. So these

34
00:02:01.680 --> 00:02:03.640
<v Speaker 2>stood out to me, so I wanted to compile them.

35
00:02:04.239 --> 00:02:07.159
<v Speaker 2>And it's not just forgeries, but also other differences and

36
00:02:07.319 --> 00:02:11.479
<v Speaker 2>historical changes from the first millennium. So that's the scope of.

37
00:02:11.680 --> 00:02:13.439
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I know that when we first talked about this,

38
00:02:13.520 --> 00:02:16.800
<v Speaker 1>one of the subjects that came up was there were

39
00:02:16.840 --> 00:02:18.719
<v Speaker 1>a couple of the ones that we discussed that were

40
00:02:18.759 --> 00:02:21.719
<v Speaker 1>kind of iffy. We weren't sure whether they were forgeries

41
00:02:21.719 --> 00:02:25.599
<v Speaker 1>that were used or you know, maybe something from cannons

42
00:02:25.599 --> 00:02:27.400
<v Speaker 1>of Nicea. I think was one that came up that

43
00:02:27.479 --> 00:02:29.639
<v Speaker 1>was a little we were a little iffy on do

44
00:02:29.639 --> 00:02:31.000
<v Speaker 1>you want to give a little more insight on that,

45
00:02:31.000 --> 00:02:32.479
<v Speaker 1>because I'm sure you've done a lot more research.

46
00:02:33.199 --> 00:02:36.639
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and it is true I have. Yeah, so there's

47
00:02:36.680 --> 00:02:40.120
<v Speaker 2>been like PDF copies floating around the internet of the book.

48
00:02:40.639 --> 00:02:44.280
<v Speaker 2>But I did get some criticism from Roman Catholic academics.

49
00:02:44.319 --> 00:02:47.960
<v Speaker 2>And yeah, some of the items I said were forgeries

50
00:02:47.960 --> 00:02:51.599
<v Speaker 2>were maybe our only documents of doubtful authenticity, so they're

51
00:02:51.599 --> 00:02:54.360
<v Speaker 2>may be not reliable, but those tended to be more

52
00:02:54.400 --> 00:02:57.639
<v Speaker 2>of the rather less important items, so it's good to

53
00:02:57.680 --> 00:02:58.719
<v Speaker 2>be kind of fair.

54
00:02:58.800 --> 00:03:02.879
<v Speaker 1>And yeah, they weren't the major major issues.

55
00:03:04.039 --> 00:03:06.479
<v Speaker 2>Yes, yeah, I think there's one where in Saint Ambrose

56
00:03:06.479 --> 00:03:08.879
<v Speaker 2>there was there's basically a textual variant in the manuscript

57
00:03:09.199 --> 00:03:15.280
<v Speaker 2>where some manuscripts say he who has not the the

58
00:03:15.319 --> 00:03:18.840
<v Speaker 2>faith of Peter is not in the church. Another variant

59
00:03:18.879 --> 00:03:23.159
<v Speaker 2>said he's not the see of Peter's not in the church.

60
00:03:24.000 --> 00:03:27.000
<v Speaker 2>I forgot the exact quote, but that the gist of

61
00:03:27.000 --> 00:03:30.080
<v Speaker 2>it is in Latin. It's only a single letter said

62
00:03:30.159 --> 00:03:33.680
<v Speaker 2>them versus feed them, and it's with the long ass

63
00:03:34.439 --> 00:03:39.120
<v Speaker 2>I guess two letters. Then it's they're very similar, and yeah,

64
00:03:39.120 --> 00:03:42.159
<v Speaker 2>there's just different manuscripts. So sometimes, yeah, it's not accurate

65
00:03:42.159 --> 00:03:44.439
<v Speaker 2>to say it is a forgery. It's just maybe it's

66
00:03:44.479 --> 00:03:46.520
<v Speaker 2>good to still point it out that Roman Catholic shouldn't

67
00:03:46.599 --> 00:03:49.120
<v Speaker 2>use a quote like that in apologetics if it's uncertain.

68
00:03:50.000 --> 00:03:52.879
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. But yeah, well, let's get back to the big picture,

69
00:03:52.879 --> 00:03:55.560
<v Speaker 1>because I think a lot of people you know, who

70
00:03:56.080 --> 00:03:59.120
<v Speaker 1>listen regularly, they probably don't recall that stream. I'll go

71
00:03:59.159 --> 00:04:01.520
<v Speaker 1>ahead link it below because it was a good conversation

72
00:04:01.639 --> 00:04:05.240
<v Speaker 1>that we had. Let's rewind and do some of that material,

73
00:04:05.280 --> 00:04:06.919
<v Speaker 1>because I know that a lot of people may not

74
00:04:07.000 --> 00:04:11.240
<v Speaker 1>be familiar with this subject and why the papal forgeries

75
00:04:11.319 --> 00:04:13.800
<v Speaker 1>and the other forgeries during this time period were so

76
00:04:14.879 --> 00:04:17.439
<v Speaker 1>or so crucial. For one for I would argue, I'm

77
00:04:17.480 --> 00:04:20.319
<v Speaker 1>sure you would agree partly for the development of the papacy,

78
00:04:20.519 --> 00:04:22.920
<v Speaker 1>So would you agree with that? Maybe you don't, Maybe

79
00:04:22.959 --> 00:04:25.439
<v Speaker 1>you think that's not true. Seems to me like some

80
00:04:25.480 --> 00:04:29.959
<v Speaker 1>of these claims, you know, the Samakian forgeries, things like this,

81
00:04:30.639 --> 00:04:33.160
<v Speaker 1>obviously domination of Constantin probably the most famous one. It

82
00:04:33.160 --> 00:04:37.079
<v Speaker 1>seems like they do they did contribute to the grandiosity

83
00:04:37.279 --> 00:04:40.800
<v Speaker 1>of what the papacy developed into right.

84
00:04:41.000 --> 00:04:44.240
<v Speaker 2>And I know that's also a point of debate of

85
00:04:44.519 --> 00:04:47.920
<v Speaker 2>how influential were the forgeries. I tried to focus simply

86
00:04:48.000 --> 00:04:53.120
<v Speaker 2>on cataloging them, but yeah, I think it it is

87
00:04:53.199 --> 00:04:56.399
<v Speaker 2>rather remarkable that you could say these three great moments

88
00:04:56.560 --> 00:05:01.600
<v Speaker 2>in church history. You have three main forgeries. So to

89
00:05:02.079 --> 00:05:04.920
<v Speaker 2>review the pseudo is adoring the Credles that came up

90
00:05:04.959 --> 00:05:08.399
<v Speaker 2>right at the time of the dispute between Saint Photius

91
00:05:08.439 --> 00:05:12.240
<v Speaker 2>and Pope Nicholas the First of Rome, that was in

92
00:05:12.759 --> 00:05:16.680
<v Speaker 2>the eight hundreds. And I mean these pseudos adoring the Creidels,

93
00:05:17.240 --> 00:05:19.720
<v Speaker 2>they've been much written about. Roman Catholics say, oh, they

94
00:05:19.759 --> 00:05:23.959
<v Speaker 2>didn't change anything, They just reflected how the early Church was.

95
00:05:24.000 --> 00:05:29.920
<v Speaker 2>But they were a really impactful forgery. They've were cited

96
00:05:30.040 --> 00:05:33.120
<v Speaker 2>for about I think about seven hundred years. They weren't

97
00:05:33.160 --> 00:05:37.399
<v Speaker 2>really rejected until the fifteen hundreds. And then secondly, yeah,

98
00:05:37.439 --> 00:05:39.959
<v Speaker 2>the donation of Constantine that was quoted by Pope Leo

99
00:05:40.040 --> 00:05:43.240
<v Speaker 2>the ninth to Patriarch Michael Cerularius right on the eve

100
00:05:43.279 --> 00:05:46.480
<v Speaker 2>of the system in ten fifty four, and that's you know,

101
00:05:46.560 --> 00:05:50.839
<v Speaker 2>it has you know, Emperor Constantine saying the pope is

102
00:05:51.600 --> 00:05:53.759
<v Speaker 2>speaks very highly of the Pope. And then thirdly we

103
00:05:53.879 --> 00:05:57.519
<v Speaker 2>have Thomas Aquinas in his against the Errors of the

104
00:05:57.560 --> 00:06:02.439
<v Speaker 2>Greeks Contra Auroras gray Korum. He it's it's almost sad

105
00:06:02.439 --> 00:06:05.199
<v Speaker 2>how dependent he is on forgeries. It's it's like eighty

106
00:06:05.199 --> 00:06:08.879
<v Speaker 2>percent plus just quotations of forgeries. I mean, he was misled.

107
00:06:09.279 --> 00:06:12.399
<v Speaker 2>It's not he didn't do the forgeries himself, but it's

108
00:06:13.879 --> 00:06:16.439
<v Speaker 2>his book was like the quote mind for about five

109
00:06:16.480 --> 00:06:17.519
<v Speaker 2>hundred years from Yeah.

110
00:06:17.399 --> 00:06:20.120
<v Speaker 1>Exactly, that's why this matters. Was against airs of the Greeks.

111
00:06:20.160 --> 00:06:24.120
<v Speaker 1>And do we know where those actually originated from? These

112
00:06:24.120 --> 00:06:26.199
<v Speaker 1>ones that he was so you know that he was

113
00:06:26.279 --> 00:06:26.959
<v Speaker 1>using so much.

114
00:06:28.319 --> 00:06:32.920
<v Speaker 2>Yes, yeah, that was traced recently too, from the latest scholarship.

115
00:06:32.920 --> 00:06:38.319
<v Speaker 2>It was a certain bishop who had been a missionary

116
00:06:38.319 --> 00:06:43.639
<v Speaker 2>in the East. I think, if I remember right, Nicholas

117
00:06:43.680 --> 00:06:48.759
<v Speaker 2>of Katron. He wrote the Libellus, which he sent to

118
00:06:48.839 --> 00:06:52.040
<v Speaker 2>the pope, and then that was Pope Urban the fourth.

119
00:06:52.079 --> 00:06:54.879
<v Speaker 2>He sent it to a Quinas, and the Quinas used

120
00:06:54.879 --> 00:06:59.079
<v Speaker 2>that work. So he this guy Nicholas of Cotrone was

121
00:06:59.120 --> 00:07:02.240
<v Speaker 2>the said, is apparently the origin of the sources?

122
00:07:02.319 --> 00:07:06.319
<v Speaker 1>Okay, and then you said, so Pseudo isidor Indecruidles is

123
00:07:06.360 --> 00:07:08.720
<v Speaker 1>a key one. And then we had a donation of Constantine.

124
00:07:08.720 --> 00:07:11.839
<v Speaker 1>Tell us some about that the breakdown of that, although again,

125
00:07:12.040 --> 00:07:15.000
<v Speaker 1>you know, I know you're this is old hat for you.

126
00:07:15.120 --> 00:07:16.800
<v Speaker 1>But probably a lot of the people in the audience

127
00:07:17.240 --> 00:07:19.959
<v Speaker 1>maybe they're Protestant, maybe they're Catholic, they're looking at the orthodoxy,

128
00:07:19.959 --> 00:07:21.639
<v Speaker 1>they're not familiar even with this one.

129
00:07:22.639 --> 00:07:27.879
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so I pulled it up here, we could quote

130
00:07:27.879 --> 00:07:30.600
<v Speaker 2>that here. Yeah, the donation of Constantine, so it was forged.

131
00:07:31.279 --> 00:07:36.000
<v Speaker 2>It seems to be around the year seven fifty to

132
00:07:36.040 --> 00:07:40.439
<v Speaker 2>seven eighty. And then there's yeah, I couldn't quote some

133
00:07:40.480 --> 00:07:43.040
<v Speaker 2>parts of it where it says, true, Blessed Peter is

134
00:07:43.079 --> 00:07:45.439
<v Speaker 2>seen to have been constituted vicar of the Son of

135
00:07:45.480 --> 00:07:48.160
<v Speaker 2>God on earth. So the pontiffs, who are the representatives

136
00:07:48.240 --> 00:07:51.079
<v Speaker 2>of that same chief of the Apostles, should obtain from

137
00:07:51.160 --> 00:07:55.360
<v Speaker 2>us in our empire the power of a supremacy greater

138
00:07:55.399 --> 00:07:59.040
<v Speaker 2>than the clemency of our earthly imperial serenity is seen

139
00:07:59.279 --> 00:08:03.439
<v Speaker 2>to have needed to it. So that's Emperor Constantine allegedly

140
00:08:04.240 --> 00:08:08.279
<v Speaker 2>giving a grant or donation to Peter and his successors

141
00:08:08.279 --> 00:08:11.600
<v Speaker 2>in Rome. And it says and we Ordain and decreed

142
00:08:11.639 --> 00:08:14.120
<v Speaker 2>that he shall have the supremacy as well over the

143
00:08:14.160 --> 00:08:18.480
<v Speaker 2>four principal seats Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Constantinople, as also

144
00:08:18.519 --> 00:08:21.079
<v Speaker 2>over all the churches of God and the whole earth.

145
00:08:21.720 --> 00:08:25.040
<v Speaker 2>And it keeps going on in these very strong claims

146
00:08:25.399 --> 00:08:30.160
<v Speaker 2>for the papacy, and it was cited and referred to

147
00:08:30.759 --> 00:08:32.600
<v Speaker 2>as valid by about ten popes.

148
00:08:33.159 --> 00:08:35.240
<v Speaker 1>And yeah, I was gonna say, when's the first time

149
00:08:35.279 --> 00:08:39.080
<v Speaker 1>the papacy begins to cite this one to bolster their claims.

150
00:08:39.240 --> 00:08:43.039
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, what is surprising is and the Catholic Encyclopedia admits this.

151
00:08:43.120 --> 00:08:47.240
<v Speaker 2>It's a rather startling fact that and I quote this here. Yeah,

152
00:08:47.320 --> 00:08:50.000
<v Speaker 2>this is from the Catholic Encyclopedia. It says the first

153
00:08:50.000 --> 00:08:52.720
<v Speaker 2>pope who used it in an official act and relied

154
00:08:52.799 --> 00:08:55.519
<v Speaker 2>upon was Leo the ninth in a letter of ten

155
00:08:55.639 --> 00:08:59.799
<v Speaker 2>fifty four to Michael Cerularius, Patriarch of Constantinople. He cites

156
00:08:59.840 --> 00:09:01.960
<v Speaker 2>the nation to show that the Holy See possessed in

157
00:09:02.039 --> 00:09:06.279
<v Speaker 2>an earthly and heavenly imperium and so on. So it

158
00:09:06.399 --> 00:09:09.159
<v Speaker 2>is almost amazing that, you know, they admit it was

159
00:09:09.440 --> 00:09:11.440
<v Speaker 2>used for the first time with great effect at the

160
00:09:12.320 --> 00:09:14.320
<v Speaker 2>right at that ten point fifty four, you know, crucial

161
00:09:14.399 --> 00:09:19.240
<v Speaker 2>date and it and it was used by many later canonists.

162
00:09:19.279 --> 00:09:22.480
<v Speaker 2>There's even an entire book actually just on artwork in

163
00:09:22.840 --> 00:09:27.919
<v Speaker 2>Italy that shows depicts the donation happening from Emperor.

164
00:09:28.279 --> 00:09:30.080
<v Speaker 1>It's like I want to say, Yeah, I want to say,

165
00:09:30.120 --> 00:09:33.039
<v Speaker 1>when we were in Italy, we were somewhere and we

166
00:09:33.120 --> 00:09:37.200
<v Speaker 1>saw a freeze or a relief or something that showed

167
00:09:38.279 --> 00:09:39.399
<v Speaker 1>one of the versions of this.

168
00:09:39.600 --> 00:09:45.120
<v Speaker 2>I recalled up, Yeah, it is. It is startling I

169
00:09:45.120 --> 00:09:48.480
<v Speaker 2>I'm pulling up Yeah. And this is from a dissertation

170
00:09:49.879 --> 00:09:56.480
<v Speaker 2>by an art student. I said. The over arching argument

171
00:09:56.480 --> 00:09:58.679
<v Speaker 2>of this dissertation is that in the early modern period,

172
00:09:58.679 --> 00:10:01.440
<v Speaker 2>the papacy utilized the vision means both to defend and

173
00:10:01.559 --> 00:10:05.039
<v Speaker 2>to reaffirm the authenticity of the donation. And Yeah, this

174
00:10:05.080 --> 00:10:07.519
<v Speaker 2>dissertation you can find it for free online. It's just

175
00:10:07.559 --> 00:10:12.519
<v Speaker 2>called Political Art of the Papacy and it's it just

176
00:10:12.840 --> 00:10:16.159
<v Speaker 2>gives lots of pictures of those, yeah, of the donation.

177
00:10:16.799 --> 00:10:19.080
<v Speaker 1>One area I've been hitting on pretty hard in terms

178
00:10:19.120 --> 00:10:23.919
<v Speaker 1>of apologetics is the fact of the papacy becoming more

179
00:10:23.919 --> 00:10:27.080
<v Speaker 1>and more of a geopolitical world power, and that that

180
00:10:27.159 --> 00:10:31.639
<v Speaker 1>contradicts earlier canons that were expected to be followed by

181
00:10:31.639 --> 00:10:34.399
<v Speaker 1>all the clergy, including the Bishop of Rome. Did the

182
00:10:34.960 --> 00:10:39.799
<v Speaker 1>donation of Constantine also contribute to this worldly geopolitical power

183
00:10:39.799 --> 00:10:41.000
<v Speaker 1>of the papacy.

184
00:10:42.039 --> 00:10:45.480
<v Speaker 2>I think it did, And and there was, you know,

185
00:10:45.519 --> 00:10:49.320
<v Speaker 2>some hesitation to receive the donation because it seemed to

186
00:10:49.480 --> 00:10:52.200
<v Speaker 2>almost say that the power of the papacy was contingent

187
00:10:52.320 --> 00:10:57.799
<v Speaker 2>upon the emperor's bequeathing of that power. So there had

188
00:10:57.840 --> 00:11:00.960
<v Speaker 2>been some hesitation to use the donation, and it wasn't

189
00:11:01.559 --> 00:11:07.080
<v Speaker 2>really rejected until the mid fourteen hundreds. Lorenzo Valla he

190
00:11:07.159 --> 00:11:09.960
<v Speaker 2>famously wrote an argument against the donation, but it was

191
00:11:10.000 --> 00:11:13.639
<v Speaker 2>still referenced after that. As for the power of the papacy,

192
00:11:14.000 --> 00:11:17.759
<v Speaker 2>I think it was. I mean it was cited for getting,

193
00:11:18.200 --> 00:11:23.440
<v Speaker 2>I believe, for claiming the papal power in the British Isles,

194
00:11:23.480 --> 00:11:30.720
<v Speaker 2>and yeah, so that it did give, yeah, an impetus

195
00:11:30.799 --> 00:11:31.000
<v Speaker 2>to that.

196
00:11:31.200 --> 00:11:35.159
<v Speaker 1>So it was used in a even a geopolitical way. Now,

197
00:11:35.480 --> 00:11:40.559
<v Speaker 1>so we've got the pseudo Isidaurian, we've got donation of Constantine.

198
00:11:41.080 --> 00:11:44.039
<v Speaker 1>Which of these two was probably the most used or cited.

199
00:11:44.720 --> 00:11:48.799
<v Speaker 1>You think that was since the second one was viewed

200
00:11:48.840 --> 00:11:52.240
<v Speaker 1>with some suspicion due to it being so overly reliant

201
00:11:52.240 --> 00:11:55.600
<v Speaker 1>on the emperor. What the Isidorian de cretles more useful

202
00:11:55.600 --> 00:11:57.320
<v Speaker 1>to the papal claims?

203
00:11:57.879 --> 00:12:01.600
<v Speaker 2>Yes, I would I would say that definitely does. Yeah.

204
00:12:01.720 --> 00:12:06.919
<v Speaker 2>Istorian decretals they are more influential, especially because they they

205
00:12:07.840 --> 00:12:11.600
<v Speaker 2>pretend to quote popes from the first three centuries and

206
00:12:11.720 --> 00:12:16.320
<v Speaker 2>those popes have no there's no writings available from those times,

207
00:12:17.120 --> 00:12:22.639
<v Speaker 2>and it has things saying that the Yeah, basically with

208
00:12:22.679 --> 00:12:27.279
<v Speaker 2>the more modern people claims. So it definitely was more influential,

209
00:12:27.600 --> 00:12:31.480
<v Speaker 2>I would say than the donation the nation. Yeah. I

210
00:12:31.480 --> 00:12:35.399
<v Speaker 2>found the reference. He a Bishop John of Salisbury in

211
00:12:35.559 --> 00:12:38.519
<v Speaker 2>the eleven hundreds. He does quote the donation of Constantine

212
00:12:38.559 --> 00:12:41.519
<v Speaker 2>in support of Pope Hadrian the fourth conferring upon King

213
00:12:41.600 --> 00:12:44.919
<v Speaker 2>Henry the second dominion over the island of Ireland.

214
00:12:45.759 --> 00:12:48.559
<v Speaker 1>So the papacy gives even temporal power.

215
00:12:50.200 --> 00:12:53.080
<v Speaker 2>Yes, and you know the the Catholics didn't like that

216
00:12:53.200 --> 00:12:56.279
<v Speaker 2>later when the British throne tried to claim control over Oh.

217
00:12:56.879 --> 00:13:01.919
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, yeah, exactly. Okay, So what's the third of the

218
00:13:02.039 --> 00:13:04.200
<v Speaker 1>of the of the key forgeries?

219
00:13:04.720 --> 00:13:08.000
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, the next major one would be that basically that

220
00:13:08.080 --> 00:13:11.000
<v Speaker 2>quote mine. You could say that Thomas Aquinas used in

221
00:13:11.200 --> 00:13:14.440
<v Speaker 2>against the errors of the Greeks, and the title of

222
00:13:14.440 --> 00:13:18.240
<v Speaker 2>my book is a bit of a it is inspired

223
00:13:18.279 --> 00:13:24.519
<v Speaker 2>by that, so errors of the Latins against that. But yes,

224
00:13:24.600 --> 00:13:30.159
<v Speaker 2>Aquinas did. His works were cited for hundreds of years,

225
00:13:30.159 --> 00:13:33.120
<v Speaker 2>and it has among the strongest claims. Like basically his

226
00:13:33.720 --> 00:13:38.480
<v Speaker 2>quotations were more directly against the Orthodox development of the

227
00:13:38.519 --> 00:13:43.519
<v Speaker 2>Council of Florence, so that it's main issues he addresses

228
00:13:43.559 --> 00:13:48.039
<v Speaker 2>were the filioque, the papacy, purgatory, and leavened bread. So

229
00:13:48.080 --> 00:13:52.200
<v Speaker 2>those four issues were the topics discussed at that time.

230
00:13:52.919 --> 00:13:57.000
<v Speaker 2>And it quotes like Saint Cyril with very strong claims

231
00:13:57.000 --> 00:14:00.000
<v Speaker 2>for the papacy and uh. And for a long time

232
00:14:00.080 --> 00:14:03.080
<v Speaker 2>Roman Catholics kept using them. It wasn't really until the

233
00:14:04.240 --> 00:14:06.840
<v Speaker 2>well into the seventeen hundreds that they weren't used anymore.

234
00:14:06.879 --> 00:14:11.600
<v Speaker 2>It was like five hundred years of continued use by

235
00:14:11.679 --> 00:14:16.200
<v Speaker 2>Roman Catholics, so that I think might be the number

236
00:14:16.240 --> 00:14:19.879
<v Speaker 2>one most like powerful. It was used even by yeah,

237
00:14:19.879 --> 00:14:25.480
<v Speaker 2>against Dostheus, the Bishop of Patriarch of Jerusalem. Roman Catholics

238
00:14:25.519 --> 00:14:29.799
<v Speaker 2>did make a lot of quotations against it in controversy

239
00:14:29.960 --> 00:14:32.360
<v Speaker 2>to say, hey, we have the Church fathers on our side,

240
00:14:33.080 --> 00:14:36.200
<v Speaker 2>so that that is Yeah, that was a big.

241
00:14:36.320 --> 00:14:40.759
<v Speaker 1>And I want to say too, it seems like maybe

242
00:14:40.799 --> 00:14:43.679
<v Speaker 1>even as late as the Council of Trent, I think

243
00:14:43.679 --> 00:14:46.879
<v Speaker 1>in the Catechism of Trent, doesn't it still cite some

244
00:14:46.919 --> 00:14:50.440
<v Speaker 1>of the forged documents, is the Simochian forgeries, that there's

245
00:14:50.480 --> 00:14:51.600
<v Speaker 1>something that's still cited.

246
00:14:52.440 --> 00:14:55.919
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, I do have a chapter on that. In

247
00:14:57.039 --> 00:15:01.320
<v Speaker 2>the Catechism of the Council of Trent. They do cite

248
00:15:01.399 --> 00:15:03.639
<v Speaker 2>the pseudo is adoring is Adoring?

249
00:15:03.679 --> 00:15:06.960
<v Speaker 1>Okay, I know it was one of the two good.

250
00:15:06.360 --> 00:15:10.679
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and a few other inauthentic documents, but it yeah,

251
00:15:10.679 --> 00:15:12.840
<v Speaker 2>it is surprising. But they're not all for the papacy

252
00:15:12.879 --> 00:15:13.399
<v Speaker 2>somewhere for.

253
00:15:14.279 --> 00:15:17.440
<v Speaker 1>Other reasons, yeah yeah, other.

254
00:15:17.840 --> 00:15:23.200
<v Speaker 2>Items like confirmation and other sacraments. But there is one

255
00:15:23.240 --> 00:15:28.639
<v Speaker 2>where they have a pope cided for the papacy. But yeah,

256
00:15:28.679 --> 00:15:31.480
<v Speaker 2>I think how many did I? I counted eleven different

257
00:15:31.519 --> 00:15:33.039
<v Speaker 2>times they cited.

258
00:15:34.039 --> 00:15:36.159
<v Speaker 1>Oh in the category eleven times?

259
00:15:36.879 --> 00:15:41.679
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, oh nice, along with some other in authentic works,

260
00:15:41.679 --> 00:15:46.639
<v Speaker 2>like in authentic clitations of Saint Augustine and of Saint Cyril.

261
00:15:47.559 --> 00:15:53.080
<v Speaker 1>So yeah, now here's a question. I hear this a

262
00:15:53.080 --> 00:15:56.440
<v Speaker 1>lot from Roman Catholics when this subject comes up, and

263
00:15:56.600 --> 00:15:58.639
<v Speaker 1>I'm curious what you would say to this. Not that

264
00:15:58.679 --> 00:16:00.519
<v Speaker 1>I think this is a good argument, but it's something

265
00:16:00.559 --> 00:16:03.879
<v Speaker 1>that they always bring up. Oh, but you Byzantines, They

266
00:16:03.919 --> 00:16:07.320
<v Speaker 1>also at times cited forgeries. What would you say to that.

267
00:16:08.600 --> 00:16:12.200
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and it is something that you hear. I don't

268
00:16:13.000 --> 00:16:17.759
<v Speaker 2>think it's definitely to knowwhere near the degree as in

269
00:16:17.799 --> 00:16:23.000
<v Speaker 2>the Latin East. I mean, from my understanding, there's I know,

270
00:16:23.840 --> 00:16:25.799
<v Speaker 2>you often come across that in controversy saying, oh, the

271
00:16:25.840 --> 00:16:29.440
<v Speaker 2>Greeks are prone to forge documents, and there's really very

272
00:16:29.480 --> 00:16:33.759
<v Speaker 2>few examples. I never found something too significant. I mean

273
00:16:33.799 --> 00:16:39.720
<v Speaker 2>I came across a few in my readings. Sometimes it's

274
00:16:39.759 --> 00:16:42.840
<v Speaker 2>as a result of being less misled by the Roman Catholics,

275
00:16:42.879 --> 00:16:45.679
<v Speaker 2>Like sometimes the Orthox did quote the donation of Constantine.

276
00:16:46.759 --> 00:16:50.120
<v Speaker 2>They thought it was an authentic document, but they said

277
00:16:50.120 --> 00:16:52.159
<v Speaker 2>as that the pope was a hair ticket no longer

278
00:16:52.240 --> 00:16:57.720
<v Speaker 2>applied to the pope. But yeah, I really haven't met

279
00:16:57.720 --> 00:17:03.600
<v Speaker 2>with any serious examples of Orthodox using forgeries against the

280
00:17:03.679 --> 00:17:04.519
<v Speaker 2>Roman Catholics.

281
00:17:05.079 --> 00:17:06.920
<v Speaker 1>What do you make of the argument that many of

282
00:17:06.960 --> 00:17:09.759
<v Speaker 1>us have made for a long time, it's gone around.

283
00:17:09.839 --> 00:17:11.839
<v Speaker 1>I want to know if you still think this holds

284
00:17:11.920 --> 00:17:14.440
<v Speaker 1>up as a strong argument, which is, look, if the

285
00:17:14.440 --> 00:17:18.079
<v Speaker 1>papacy has the goods, why do they need all these

286
00:17:18.119 --> 00:17:21.599
<v Speaker 1>forged documents? Do you think that's still a good argument

287
00:17:21.720 --> 00:17:26.400
<v Speaker 1>or do you think that being charitable and nuanced, maybe

288
00:17:26.400 --> 00:17:29.759
<v Speaker 1>the papacy itself was duped into believing some of these

289
00:17:29.799 --> 00:17:33.640
<v Speaker 1>documents by some clever forger. But that also kind of

290
00:17:33.640 --> 00:17:35.200
<v Speaker 1>begs the question of like, well, where was the Holy

291
00:17:35.240 --> 00:17:39.519
<v Speaker 1>Spirit's discernment in guiding the papacy to not know these were.

292
00:17:39.400 --> 00:17:43.000
<v Speaker 2>Forty Yeah, now I do prefer taking a more charitable

293
00:17:43.079 --> 00:17:46.759
<v Speaker 2>view of this. Maybe that's something in which I've more

294
00:17:46.799 --> 00:17:51.240
<v Speaker 2>moderated my view since I first started the researching the controversy.

295
00:17:52.920 --> 00:17:55.160
<v Speaker 2>It is tough yet to determine the good faith of

296
00:17:57.000 --> 00:18:01.559
<v Speaker 2>historical figures. It's it is tough because, yeah, with the

297
00:18:01.559 --> 00:18:04.599
<v Speaker 2>pseudos during the credles, it's it's tough to say Saint,

298
00:18:04.799 --> 00:18:09.200
<v Speaker 2>I mean Pope Nicholas of Rome, who is considered a

299
00:18:09.200 --> 00:18:12.599
<v Speaker 2>saint by Roman Catholics, it's difficult to believe that he

300
00:18:13.200 --> 00:18:19.160
<v Speaker 2>really thought these documents were authentic because the archives of

301
00:18:19.240 --> 00:18:22.519
<v Speaker 2>Rome were I mean well known to have lots of

302
00:18:22.920 --> 00:18:26.119
<v Speaker 2>ancient documents he should have known that these people pretending

303
00:18:26.160 --> 00:18:29.480
<v Speaker 2>to sit in the throne of Saint Peter were not

304
00:18:30.200 --> 00:18:35.000
<v Speaker 2>actually real popes, and their records they're not authentic documents.

305
00:18:35.839 --> 00:18:37.559
<v Speaker 2>But yeah, I would give a more charitable opinion a

306
00:18:37.599 --> 00:18:40.200
<v Speaker 2>lot of times they were deceived. I know some have

307
00:18:40.279 --> 00:18:44.960
<v Speaker 2>accused the Quinnas of doing the forgeries, some partisans did,

308
00:18:45.000 --> 00:18:47.319
<v Speaker 2>but he, yeah, he wasn't. He was deceived.

309
00:18:47.640 --> 00:18:53.119
<v Speaker 1>And yeah, and one reason I think that you could

310
00:18:53.240 --> 00:18:56.880
<v Speaker 1>argue that is that I remember when I bought a

311
00:18:56.880 --> 00:19:00.720
<v Speaker 1>pretty expensive set years by, which was a Quinas commentary

312
00:19:00.799 --> 00:19:04.119
<v Speaker 1>on the Gospels. I noticed as I was reading through it,

313
00:19:05.599 --> 00:19:08.079
<v Speaker 1>I didn't read all four volumes or six volumes, that

314
00:19:08.240 --> 00:19:10.519
<v Speaker 1>I read two or three volumes of it. I remember

315
00:19:10.559 --> 00:19:14.119
<v Speaker 1>noticing how many times when he would cite Patricia quotations,

316
00:19:14.240 --> 00:19:19.559
<v Speaker 1>it was like pseudo crystalstom, pseudo athanacious. So whoever was

317
00:19:19.720 --> 00:19:24.960
<v Speaker 1>editing the you know, Katina Aurea, you know, was basically

318
00:19:25.000 --> 00:19:30.240
<v Speaker 1>pointing out that there's a significant, very significant usage of

319
00:19:30.400 --> 00:19:35.640
<v Speaker 1>pseudo crystalstom by Aquinas, which means that I being malicious

320
00:19:35.680 --> 00:19:39.319
<v Speaker 1>like it wouldn't There's not really a reason for him

321
00:19:39.359 --> 00:19:43.240
<v Speaker 1>to maliciously use a whole bunch of Ford's quotes for

322
00:19:43.400 --> 00:19:44.920
<v Speaker 1>just commentaries on the Gospel.

323
00:19:45.720 --> 00:19:49.680
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, I mean Roman Catholic scholars. Yeah, those editors

324
00:19:49.720 --> 00:19:53.119
<v Speaker 2>do admit that they'll give the footnotes and they love them.

325
00:19:53.119 --> 00:19:56.599
<v Speaker 2>Are very smart academics, and they've that's who I relied

326
00:19:56.680 --> 00:20:00.039
<v Speaker 2>upon most of the time. Is there looking through and

327
00:20:00.079 --> 00:20:02.039
<v Speaker 2>they're the ones saying, Okay, this is not found in

328
00:20:02.079 --> 00:20:05.880
<v Speaker 2>the original writings, this is missing, or it's a corruption

329
00:20:05.960 --> 00:20:10.039
<v Speaker 2>of the original text. There's been hints that Roman Catholics

330
00:20:10.079 --> 00:20:14.279
<v Speaker 2>have said that Aquinas realized that those against the heirs

331
00:20:14.279 --> 00:20:18.240
<v Speaker 2>of the Greeks those quotations were not authentic, because he

332
00:20:18.279 --> 00:20:21.599
<v Speaker 2>didn't use them too much later. But it's said that

333
00:20:21.799 --> 00:20:24.079
<v Speaker 2>he was carrying that book on the way to the

334
00:20:24.119 --> 00:20:28.839
<v Speaker 2>Council of Lyons when he died. He died carrying that

335
00:20:28.920 --> 00:20:33.240
<v Speaker 2>book against the errors of the Greeks, so it seemed

336
00:20:33.240 --> 00:20:36.240
<v Speaker 2>like he would be He was prepared to reduce them

337
00:20:36.240 --> 00:20:41.759
<v Speaker 2>in controversy against the Orthodox. So that's why I don't

338
00:20:41.759 --> 00:20:45.400
<v Speaker 2>think he ever realized they were inauthentic, and his immediate

339
00:20:45.440 --> 00:20:46.920
<v Speaker 2>successors used them as well.

340
00:20:49.160 --> 00:20:53.240
<v Speaker 1>Now one question, not to play devil's advocate, but just

341
00:20:53.319 --> 00:21:01.119
<v Speaker 1>honest question, because I remember reading Hoffman's book Renaissance Occult

342
00:21:01.200 --> 00:21:03.839
<v Speaker 1>Renaissance Church of Rome, which is a pretty good book.

343
00:21:04.680 --> 00:21:08.119
<v Speaker 1>There's areas where I disagree, but he he has some

344
00:21:08.759 --> 00:21:11.680
<v Speaker 1>not so positive things to say about Lorenzo Vola. Not

345
00:21:11.759 --> 00:21:14.400
<v Speaker 1>that that really matters, because Lorenzo Balla could be a

346
00:21:15.559 --> 00:21:17.839
<v Speaker 1>it could be a sust character and still be correct about,

347
00:21:18.039 --> 00:21:21.160
<v Speaker 1>you know, critiquing some of these documents. Is there any

348
00:21:21.160 --> 00:21:24.680
<v Speaker 1>degree to which we have to be careful with these

349
00:21:24.720 --> 00:21:29.440
<v Speaker 1>sort of Renaissance figures in this in this matter because

350
00:21:29.880 --> 00:21:32.160
<v Speaker 1>I think, for example, Lorenzo Valla, isn't he one of

351
00:21:32.200 --> 00:21:35.400
<v Speaker 1>the key characters arguing that Dionysius is not authentic? And

352
00:21:35.640 --> 00:21:38.920
<v Speaker 1>I think as Orthodox we want to probably not say

353
00:21:38.920 --> 00:21:42.079
<v Speaker 1>that it's all inauthentic with Dionysius.

354
00:21:42.359 --> 00:21:45.480
<v Speaker 2>Right, And that is the difficulty with forgeries in general.

355
00:21:45.640 --> 00:21:51.160
<v Speaker 2>Is it's important, Yeah, to understand the whole context, like heyes,

356
00:21:51.920 --> 00:21:54.920
<v Speaker 2>same with dealing with the question of other inauthentic writings.

357
00:21:55.000 --> 00:21:58.960
<v Speaker 2>It is a challenge with all history, the authenticity of documents.

358
00:21:58.960 --> 00:22:00.680
<v Speaker 2>And yeah, maybe it isn't too far to say why

359
00:22:00.680 --> 00:22:04.759
<v Speaker 2>would they have invented these documents if there wasn't evidence beforehand?

360
00:22:04.920 --> 00:22:10.279
<v Speaker 2>I think it applies to some degree, but they yeah,

361
00:22:10.319 --> 00:22:16.680
<v Speaker 2>because there are other challenges with those documents in the Yeah,

362
00:22:16.799 --> 00:22:18.480
<v Speaker 2>I lost track of your question.

363
00:22:18.359 --> 00:22:20.200
<v Speaker 1>That I guess I was saying, is what do we

364
00:22:20.240 --> 00:22:23.000
<v Speaker 1>think about somebody like Lorenzo Balla? Is it just that not?

365
00:22:23.039 --> 00:22:25.079
<v Speaker 1>It doesn't fit in the good guy bad guy category,

366
00:22:25.240 --> 00:22:27.640
<v Speaker 1>like you know, it's just a case by case basis

367
00:22:27.680 --> 00:22:29.680
<v Speaker 1>of you know, it just depends.

368
00:22:30.039 --> 00:22:33.119
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, I don't know too much about him besides

369
00:22:33.160 --> 00:22:35.359
<v Speaker 2>the fact that he's credited with being the first to

370
00:22:35.960 --> 00:22:40.519
<v Speaker 2>prove the forgery with certainty of the donation of Constantine.

371
00:22:41.640 --> 00:22:43.160
<v Speaker 1>But the only reason I'm bringing up is I think

372
00:22:43.160 --> 00:22:45.960
<v Speaker 1>he's also one of the first to challenge the dynasty

373
00:22:46.000 --> 00:22:46.559
<v Speaker 1>and corpus.

374
00:22:47.400 --> 00:22:51.319
<v Speaker 2>Yes, yeah, that is a yeah, I know that might

375
00:22:51.319 --> 00:22:56.160
<v Speaker 2>be one of the major like open questions in terms

376
00:22:56.160 --> 00:22:59.240
<v Speaker 2>of like what, yeah, the authenticity of churchild I think

377
00:22:59.240 --> 00:23:02.759
<v Speaker 2>he might be like the most like the one of

378
00:23:02.759 --> 00:23:06.400
<v Speaker 2>which there's the most doubt, even among the more like

379
00:23:06.640 --> 00:23:13.519
<v Speaker 2>conservative extra so, but there's been defenses of the originality

380
00:23:13.559 --> 00:23:14.160
<v Speaker 2>of yeah.

381
00:23:14.200 --> 00:23:16.720
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, No, I'm not defending Valla. I'm just saying, like,

382
00:23:17.039 --> 00:23:20.799
<v Speaker 1>you know, I'm anticipating Catholic objections and a Catholic being like, oh, well,

383
00:23:21.359 --> 00:23:24.480
<v Speaker 1>you know, you guys like Dionysius areopagite and you think

384
00:23:24.480 --> 00:23:27.119
<v Speaker 1>he's a saint and so, but you're gonna trust Lorenzo

385
00:23:27.200 --> 00:23:29.319
<v Speaker 1>Valla when he says that. But but I think that

386
00:23:29.920 --> 00:23:32.680
<v Speaker 1>really doesn't even matter about Lorenzovol anymore, because as far

387
00:23:32.680 --> 00:23:36.480
<v Speaker 1>as I'm aware, I mean, the typical Vatican attitude and

388
00:23:36.759 --> 00:23:40.599
<v Speaker 1>scholarship pretty much admits all this stuff nowadays anyway, right.

389
00:23:40.799 --> 00:23:47.039
<v Speaker 2>Yes, those are admitted for those three major forgeries, and

390
00:23:47.559 --> 00:23:49.839
<v Speaker 2>you know many others. I mean, it is very obvious

391
00:23:49.880 --> 00:23:52.839
<v Speaker 2>the donation of Constantine is not by Emperor Constantines from

392
00:23:52.880 --> 00:23:55.480
<v Speaker 2>the first century. It mentions many things that just the

393
00:23:55.599 --> 00:23:59.319
<v Speaker 2>Latin words of things that didn't exist at that time.

394
00:23:59.319 --> 00:24:03.920
<v Speaker 2>They reflect later centuries. There's no evidence of it earlier.

395
00:24:04.119 --> 00:24:06.799
<v Speaker 2>So it's a very hard like clear proof. It's not

396
00:24:06.920 --> 00:24:11.160
<v Speaker 2>like the the more you could say, like liberal academics

397
00:24:11.160 --> 00:24:14.839
<v Speaker 2>putting doubt on let's say, certain books of the Bible.

398
00:24:15.200 --> 00:24:17.799
<v Speaker 2>There's what they what those academics are doing are just

399
00:24:17.839 --> 00:24:21.400
<v Speaker 2>really just casting doubt when there's uncertainty. So yeah, it

400
00:24:21.440 --> 00:24:24.720
<v Speaker 2>is important to see like, yeah, what evidence there is for.

401
00:24:25.880 --> 00:24:29.440
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, this is different than they're being like, you know,

402
00:24:29.599 --> 00:24:33.960
<v Speaker 1>not AUTOGRAPHA that Paul wrote, This is more like, no,

403
00:24:34.039 --> 00:24:38.319
<v Speaker 1>we can definitively show that there's no way that Constantine,

404
00:24:39.039 --> 00:24:41.079
<v Speaker 1>you know, wrote or used that language or spoke this

405
00:24:41.160 --> 00:24:43.759
<v Speaker 1>way or what are some of the key indicators, for example,

406
00:24:43.839 --> 00:24:46.119
<v Speaker 1>in the case of say the donation of Constantine, that

407
00:24:46.119 --> 00:24:48.039
<v Speaker 1>are kind of like dead giveaways.

408
00:24:48.839 --> 00:24:53.160
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, one that says the mind though of the I

409
00:24:53.200 --> 00:24:57.039
<v Speaker 2>know from a Koinas the when he quotes the delegation

410
00:24:57.200 --> 00:25:03.759
<v Speaker 2>of crit to the Bulgarians from Saint John Chrisostom, it's

411
00:25:03.799 --> 00:25:08.200
<v Speaker 2>that was rather anachronistic of Chris as talking is the

412
00:25:08.200 --> 00:25:11.960
<v Speaker 2>Bulgarian delegation, because that that was not a kind of

413
00:25:12.759 --> 00:25:19.279
<v Speaker 2>a political organization that existed in Chrissom's times. Yeah, that's

414
00:25:19.519 --> 00:25:22.920
<v Speaker 2>one for the uh, it's for the donation itself.

415
00:25:23.799 --> 00:25:25.960
<v Speaker 1>So when Saint John Chrystosom wrote his letter to the

416
00:25:26.039 --> 00:25:29.680
<v Speaker 1>US embassy, right, could we question it's authenticity?

417
00:25:31.119 --> 00:25:35.240
<v Speaker 2>Right? Yeah, for the donation, I think it's the there's

418
00:25:35.279 --> 00:25:39.160
<v Speaker 2>the use of certain Latin words that reflected the later

419
00:25:39.519 --> 00:25:45.359
<v Speaker 2>Roman administration. And off the top of my head, I'm

420
00:25:45.359 --> 00:25:48.279
<v Speaker 2>trying to remember the other clear indications. It's really it's

421
00:25:48.319 --> 00:25:53.599
<v Speaker 2>admitted though very clearly by Roman Catholics, it is authentic, inauthentic,

422
00:25:54.519 --> 00:25:58.480
<v Speaker 2>and if they say it's like in disputed that it's false.

423
00:25:58.880 --> 00:26:03.720
<v Speaker 2>And Dante famously mentions it where he says, there's a

424
00:26:03.720 --> 00:26:08.440
<v Speaker 2>famous quote from his Inferno. He says Constantine of how

425
00:26:08.480 --> 00:26:12.240
<v Speaker 2>much ill was caused not by conversion, but those rich

426
00:26:12.319 --> 00:26:15.880
<v Speaker 2>domains that the first wealthy pope received of thee. So

427
00:26:16.680 --> 00:26:19.359
<v Speaker 2>Dante thought it was real and lamented it because he

428
00:26:19.440 --> 00:26:20.519
<v Speaker 2>felt this was bad for.

429
00:26:20.480 --> 00:26:21.799
<v Speaker 1>The papers, corrupting the paper.

430
00:26:21.839 --> 00:26:25.799
<v Speaker 2>So that's right, yes, and many people looked on it

431
00:26:25.880 --> 00:26:32.039
<v Speaker 2>that way. As for the Yeah, the exact reasons why

432
00:26:32.079 --> 00:26:36.519
<v Speaker 2>it's anachronistic, I'm not sure off the top of my head.

433
00:26:37.319 --> 00:26:41.200
<v Speaker 1>That's okay. I mean, so we've got the big three here,

434
00:26:42.000 --> 00:26:46.799
<v Speaker 1>there's others. How many, roughly do you include in the book?

435
00:26:46.839 --> 00:26:48.880
<v Speaker 1>Because I know that when we first did this podcast,

436
00:26:48.920 --> 00:26:51.559
<v Speaker 1>you and I and Snack, we talked about somewhere in

437
00:26:51.599 --> 00:26:55.880
<v Speaker 1>the ballpark of twenty twenty something twenty three or so. Yes,

438
00:26:56.039 --> 00:26:58.359
<v Speaker 1>does the book include all of those or around that

439
00:26:58.400 --> 00:27:02.240
<v Speaker 1>same number? Do you focus at chapter on specific forgeries

440
00:27:02.359 --> 00:27:04.720
<v Speaker 1>or how is the book structured? And what are some

441
00:27:04.759 --> 00:27:06.640
<v Speaker 1>of the other key forgeries we need to think about?

442
00:27:07.480 --> 00:27:11.559
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, there are actually far more, and and some I've

443
00:27:11.559 --> 00:27:15.519
<v Speaker 2>provided more context, like where it was simply a textual variant,

444
00:27:16.039 --> 00:27:18.799
<v Speaker 2>not certain if it's a forgery. Some are disputed, like

445
00:27:18.839 --> 00:27:21.880
<v Speaker 2>you know, the Saint Cyprian's words. There's some that are

446
00:27:21.880 --> 00:27:25.519
<v Speaker 2>more pro petrine in his unity of the church, some aren't,

447
00:27:25.599 --> 00:27:29.359
<v Speaker 2>So it's a disputed point whether he wrote that. So

448
00:27:29.759 --> 00:27:33.200
<v Speaker 2>I try to discuss those items with fairness and balance.

449
00:27:34.160 --> 00:27:37.559
<v Speaker 2>But overall, yeah, I can look at the chapters, how

450
00:27:37.559 --> 00:27:41.440
<v Speaker 2>many I group it in several parts forgeries of the

451
00:27:41.440 --> 00:27:45.160
<v Speaker 2>greatest historic consequence. So that's where I mentioned the you

452
00:27:45.200 --> 00:27:47.799
<v Speaker 2>know Ceo during the Creed big in there or is

453
00:27:47.799 --> 00:27:50.839
<v Speaker 2>that the big three Greek contena? What else I add?

454
00:27:51.279 --> 00:27:54.799
<v Speaker 2>I put the Samaki Simachian forgeries as the fourth I

455
00:27:54.839 --> 00:27:59.079
<v Speaker 2>felt that was quite important as well, and as an

456
00:27:59.079 --> 00:28:02.039
<v Speaker 2>early forgery, and that it contains a quote the Sea

457
00:28:02.079 --> 00:28:03.680
<v Speaker 2>of Rome can be judged by no one.

458
00:28:04.400 --> 00:28:09.400
<v Speaker 1>Oh, that's that famous quote that pops up in Dictatus Pope.

459
00:28:10.279 --> 00:28:13.640
<v Speaker 1>And then if I recall that's still in Roman Catholic

460
00:28:13.640 --> 00:28:14.680
<v Speaker 1>canon law, I think.

461
00:28:15.799 --> 00:28:18.920
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, that did enter Roman Catholic canon law. I'm not

462
00:28:18.920 --> 00:28:22.680
<v Speaker 2>sure if it's still there, but that was the most

463
00:28:22.720 --> 00:28:29.200
<v Speaker 2>significant one let's see, so there's four there I can quickly.

464
00:28:29.240 --> 00:28:32.519
<v Speaker 2>I think there's on the order of maybe around fifty

465
00:28:32.599 --> 00:28:36.319
<v Speaker 2>or sixty. There's somewhere. I have a lot of collections

466
00:28:36.319 --> 00:28:42.839
<v Speaker 2>of small manuscript corruptions, like regarding the Immaculate Conception on

467
00:28:42.920 --> 00:28:46.480
<v Speaker 2>that I put together about let's say twenty eight.

468
00:28:46.799 --> 00:28:49.799
<v Speaker 1>Just to be clear, it is still in the Roman,

469
00:28:51.359 --> 00:28:55.799
<v Speaker 1>the Roman canon law, even the modern nineteen eighty three

470
00:28:55.880 --> 00:29:00.440
<v Speaker 1>canon law of John Paul. The second it's canon fourteen

471
00:29:00.480 --> 00:29:03.160
<v Speaker 1>oh four. The first c is judged by No. One,

472
00:29:03.519 --> 00:29:08.359
<v Speaker 1>which is a variation of this yeah. Yeah, and that

473
00:29:08.440 --> 00:29:11.680
<v Speaker 1>comes from old originally the Simakian forgeries, correct.

474
00:29:13.680 --> 00:29:16.319
<v Speaker 2>I believe that's the origin of that. Now they could

475
00:29:16.319 --> 00:29:18.759
<v Speaker 2>say that that principle follows well.

476
00:29:18.559 --> 00:29:20.759
<v Speaker 1>As far as we know, the phrase is yeah. I

477
00:29:20.759 --> 00:29:22.480
<v Speaker 1>know they're going to say no, it goes back to Peter.

478
00:29:22.799 --> 00:29:27.119
<v Speaker 1>But the phrase, as far as we know, patristically speaking,

479
00:29:27.279 --> 00:29:33.559
<v Speaker 1>is derived you're arguing from the Samakian forgery.

480
00:29:33.279 --> 00:29:38.240
<v Speaker 2>Right, yes, And I think that follows with that question

481
00:29:38.359 --> 00:29:41.279
<v Speaker 2>of how impactful were the forgeries. Well before they could

482
00:29:41.359 --> 00:29:45.119
<v Speaker 2>quote these very direct statements Saint cypri Or, I mean St.

483
00:29:45.119 --> 00:29:51.279
<v Speaker 2>Cyril really forcefully in favor of papal supremacy, but with

484
00:29:51.480 --> 00:29:55.279
<v Speaker 2>those being proven to be false, they they rely upon

485
00:29:55.359 --> 00:29:58.559
<v Speaker 2>some like they make arguments that require a bit more

486
00:29:58.680 --> 00:30:04.200
<v Speaker 2>sort of logical deduction then and our more open to interpretation.

487
00:30:06.319 --> 00:30:09.359
<v Speaker 2>So they used to have a lot more stronger, clearer claims,

488
00:30:09.359 --> 00:30:12.039
<v Speaker 2>and that's what the forgeries helped support. So they kind

489
00:30:12.039 --> 00:30:14.119
<v Speaker 2>of provided that context for interpretation.

490
00:30:14.599 --> 00:30:16.920
<v Speaker 1>Oh interesting, okay, So like in the case let me

491
00:30:16.920 --> 00:30:18.200
<v Speaker 1>ask you this question. In the case of like some

492
00:30:18.240 --> 00:30:21.839
<v Speaker 1>of the patristic quotation forgeries, like this quote out of

493
00:30:21.920 --> 00:30:26.079
<v Speaker 1>Jerome or this quote out of you know, Cyril or whoever,

494
00:30:27.440 --> 00:30:32.000
<v Speaker 1>were these typically just sort of out of context quote

495
00:30:32.039 --> 00:30:35.799
<v Speaker 1>mind fake quotes or their actual like fake works of

496
00:30:35.960 --> 00:30:38.480
<v Speaker 1>Saint Cyril. That's that's like there's a whole treatise of

497
00:30:38.480 --> 00:30:39.440
<v Speaker 1>Saint Cyril that's fake.

498
00:30:41.519 --> 00:30:44.799
<v Speaker 2>Oh well, yeah, it was fake quotes. Yeah. In the

499
00:30:44.839 --> 00:30:49.119
<v Speaker 2>case of Aquinas citing Cyril, they thought for a while

500
00:30:49.279 --> 00:30:52.359
<v Speaker 2>Roman Catholics had hoped some document would come up showing

501
00:30:52.400 --> 00:30:56.359
<v Speaker 2>this to be an authentic work, but nothing came to

502
00:30:56.440 --> 00:31:00.559
<v Speaker 2>light from the latest research, and it's it's simply those

503
00:31:00.559 --> 00:31:02.559
<v Speaker 2>are just that fake collections.

504
00:31:02.640 --> 00:31:05.680
<v Speaker 1>So now when you mentioned Cyril, Saint Cyril's on the unity.

505
00:31:06.000 --> 00:31:09.039
<v Speaker 1>I've seeing Saint Cyprian's on the Unity of Christ in

506
00:31:09.079 --> 00:31:14.000
<v Speaker 1>the Church. Was that an added quote to that classic work?

507
00:31:14.079 --> 00:31:15.079
<v Speaker 1>Is that what we're saying.

508
00:31:16.480 --> 00:31:19.799
<v Speaker 2>For Cyprian? That's the one where there I hesitate for

509
00:31:19.880 --> 00:31:22.039
<v Speaker 2>making a conclusion on that. I would just say there's

510
00:31:22.079 --> 00:31:26.079
<v Speaker 2>textual variations, because there's some texts that have more Petraine,

511
00:31:26.640 --> 00:31:30.480
<v Speaker 2>more like pro I've heard those content, and most scholars

512
00:31:30.519 --> 00:31:33.119
<v Speaker 2>generally hold the view that Syprian was the author of

513
00:31:33.200 --> 00:31:36.279
<v Speaker 2>both versions. That's what has thought. Now they don't know

514
00:31:36.319 --> 00:31:39.960
<v Speaker 2>which version was first. Interesting some say he changed what

515
00:31:40.039 --> 00:31:43.279
<v Speaker 2>he wrote in response to his interactions with Rome.

516
00:31:43.319 --> 00:31:45.240
<v Speaker 1>The Saint Stephen controversy.

517
00:31:46.000 --> 00:31:51.440
<v Speaker 2>Yes, yeah, that rebaptism controversy. So it's a difficult question.

518
00:31:51.720 --> 00:31:54.960
<v Speaker 2>I think I believe they're not authentic works, but many

519
00:31:54.960 --> 00:31:59.319
<v Speaker 2>people interpret them in a non like pro papacy way.

520
00:31:59.480 --> 00:32:02.480
<v Speaker 1>They're just yeah, they could just be yea Peter is

521
00:32:02.519 --> 00:32:06.359
<v Speaker 1>all the bishops, et cetera. Okay, so we got the

522
00:32:06.359 --> 00:32:10.720
<v Speaker 1>Samakian forgeries. Is there anything else in those that's really

523
00:32:10.759 --> 00:32:13.160
<v Speaker 1>important other than the sort of the first he's judged

524
00:32:13.200 --> 00:32:15.000
<v Speaker 1>by no one. Is there more in there that we

525
00:32:15.039 --> 00:32:16.079
<v Speaker 1>need to talk about.

526
00:32:16.960 --> 00:32:21.039
<v Speaker 2>It that one does contain that does misrepresent the Council

527
00:32:21.039 --> 00:32:25.359
<v Speaker 2>of Nicea and makes it appear as if the Pope

528
00:32:25.440 --> 00:32:32.920
<v Speaker 2>Sylvester and some Roman bishops had approved the acts. And

529
00:32:33.279 --> 00:32:36.599
<v Speaker 2>it does, yeah, lead to more misrepresentation.

530
00:32:36.839 --> 00:32:40.960
<v Speaker 1>So basically like a retroactive revision of history that Nicea

531
00:32:41.119 --> 00:32:43.079
<v Speaker 1>wasn't Nicea until the Pope made it Nicia.

532
00:32:44.119 --> 00:32:47.319
<v Speaker 2>Yes, and okay, and I have a quote here, yeah,

533
00:32:47.359 --> 00:32:52.079
<v Speaker 2>from James moynihan. He was a Roman Catholic bishop and scholar.

534
00:32:52.519 --> 00:32:55.319
<v Speaker 2>He says, quote, Thus, it was that the doctrine of

535
00:32:55.359 --> 00:32:59.920
<v Speaker 2>the pope's personal immunity from judgment spread rapidly throughout Western Europe.

536
00:33:00.599 --> 00:33:05.200
<v Speaker 2>That's that's what he says in yeah book he published

537
00:33:05.920 --> 00:33:11.880
<v Speaker 2>in nineteen sixty one. He that's that's in relation to

538
00:33:11.920 --> 00:33:14.400
<v Speaker 2>the pope cannot be judged by any right. So he

539
00:33:14.480 --> 00:33:17.839
<v Speaker 2>said that that caused it to be rapidly spread from

540
00:33:17.880 --> 00:33:20.839
<v Speaker 2>those from those documents.

541
00:33:20.920 --> 00:33:25.400
<v Speaker 1>Right, So what is there more in some Ackian forgeres

542
00:33:25.519 --> 00:33:28.000
<v Speaker 1>or what's the what's the number five on the top

543
00:33:28.000 --> 00:33:28.680
<v Speaker 1>ten forgeries?

544
00:33:30.759 --> 00:33:34.599
<v Speaker 2>Let's see, I had I had included four as the

545
00:33:34.640 --> 00:33:39.319
<v Speaker 2>top as the most soportant, but I could there are

546
00:33:39.359 --> 00:33:43.759
<v Speaker 2>a lot more that are more incidental and.

547
00:33:43.799 --> 00:33:46.480
<v Speaker 1>What about the Galatian de credles is that's that's a

548
00:33:46.480 --> 00:33:47.200
<v Speaker 1>well known one.

549
00:33:49.200 --> 00:33:53.440
<v Speaker 2>Galician decreas is that from Pope Gelasius Galatious.

550
00:33:54.000 --> 00:33:55.799
<v Speaker 1>However, how.

551
00:33:57.400 --> 00:34:00.599
<v Speaker 2>Oh, that's right, Okay, So I did review. There are

552
00:34:01.200 --> 00:34:04.319
<v Speaker 2>and there's a challenge with all of the But that's

553
00:34:04.319 --> 00:34:06.559
<v Speaker 2>what Roman Catholic told me in response when I mentioned

554
00:34:06.599 --> 00:34:14.199
<v Speaker 2>these false documents of Pope Leo and Gelasius. They he said, oh,

555
00:34:14.239 --> 00:34:16.119
<v Speaker 2>there's you know, the difficulty with a lot of the

556
00:34:16.199 --> 00:34:21.079
<v Speaker 2>church fathers finding what's authentic what's not. And but it's

557
00:34:21.280 --> 00:34:25.480
<v Speaker 2>pretty I consider it more significant when it affects documents

558
00:34:25.480 --> 00:34:28.079
<v Speaker 2>from the bishops or popes, especially when they tend to

559
00:34:28.119 --> 00:34:33.039
<v Speaker 2>have more of the pro papacy content. So there are

560
00:34:33.880 --> 00:34:36.920
<v Speaker 2>let's see my notes. Yeah, so I have the chapter

561
00:34:37.000 --> 00:34:39.320
<v Speaker 2>on sparious works of Pope Leo the First and Jelasius.

562
00:34:39.360 --> 00:34:45.039
<v Speaker 2>So Roman Catholic editors do mention that that there are

563
00:34:45.079 --> 00:34:49.239
<v Speaker 2>several works from them that are not authentic, including yeah,

564
00:34:49.280 --> 00:34:53.800
<v Speaker 2>a tractatus to a presentation of the primacy of the

565
00:34:53.840 --> 00:34:57.679
<v Speaker 2>Holy See. It's not the work of Jelasius. That's a

566
00:34:57.760 --> 00:35:04.360
<v Speaker 2>Roman Catholic Monseigneur Elysius Zeigler wrote that, So, yeah, I

567
00:35:04.400 --> 00:35:08.519
<v Speaker 2>love of them, tend to have more of these mistakes,

568
00:35:08.519 --> 00:35:13.960
<v Speaker 2>and sometimes there's different versions of these letters. Let me see, Okay,

569
00:35:14.000 --> 00:35:16.559
<v Speaker 2>So out of forty nine letters the cridles and tracts

570
00:35:16.599 --> 00:35:21.920
<v Speaker 2>attribute to Glesius, nine are thought inauthentic. So that's what

571
00:35:22.000 --> 00:35:23.320
<v Speaker 2>I have for my notes.

572
00:35:23.400 --> 00:35:28.320
<v Speaker 1>So basically there's a few dozen and nine are considered

573
00:35:28.639 --> 00:35:29.800
<v Speaker 1>fake at this stage.

574
00:35:30.880 --> 00:35:34.920
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and then for letters of Leo's collection, there's one

575
00:35:35.000 --> 00:35:37.719
<v Speaker 2>hundred and seventy three letters in Popolio, the first collection.

576
00:35:38.079 --> 00:35:41.199
<v Speaker 2>Out of these, thirteen are thought spurious and nine are

577
00:35:41.239 --> 00:35:42.199
<v Speaker 2>considered suspect.

578
00:35:42.960 --> 00:35:46.679
<v Speaker 1>And I didn't even think about like papal letters. That's

579
00:35:46.719 --> 00:35:48.079
<v Speaker 1>another whole layer of this.

580
00:35:49.559 --> 00:35:52.880
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it's a challenge because these letter collections, I mean

581
00:35:53.239 --> 00:35:57.360
<v Speaker 2>sometimes I wonder just how far, you know, the corruption went,

582
00:35:57.400 --> 00:36:00.960
<v Speaker 2>because many times were reliant upon many scripts of later

583
00:36:01.039 --> 00:36:05.440
<v Speaker 2>centuries and these collections, and sometimes the authors of those

584
00:36:05.440 --> 00:36:11.039
<v Speaker 2>were not reliable and even have some Roman Catholic I mean,

585
00:36:11.079 --> 00:36:13.280
<v Speaker 2>there's the whole idea of is it okay to make

586
00:36:13.360 --> 00:36:18.360
<v Speaker 2>forgeries if it's in defense of the faith, that there's

587
00:36:18.440 --> 00:36:23.119
<v Speaker 2>some kind of discussion if that was I mean, it's

588
00:36:23.239 --> 00:36:27.360
<v Speaker 2>almost an unsaid thing in the Middle Ages that seems

589
00:36:27.400 --> 00:36:31.840
<v Speaker 2>to come up that certain people thought it was okay,

590
00:36:32.559 --> 00:36:34.960
<v Speaker 2>And there's many there are many small forgeries like that

591
00:36:35.000 --> 00:36:38.639
<v Speaker 2>a lot of times though, there's miscellaneous forgeries concerning different

592
00:36:39.639 --> 00:36:45.719
<v Speaker 2>privileges of abbys and monasteries and different small things like

593
00:36:45.800 --> 00:36:51.320
<v Speaker 2>that that were used to gain influence. There's forged indulgences

594
00:36:51.400 --> 00:36:56.719
<v Speaker 2>and things like that. So there's yeah, it wasn't and say,

595
00:36:56.719 --> 00:37:00.679
<v Speaker 2>oh yeah, same in England with the question over which

596
00:37:00.719 --> 00:37:04.039
<v Speaker 2>sea was supreme, was it Canterbury or York. So there

597
00:37:04.079 --> 00:37:06.880
<v Speaker 2>were there's something called the Canterbury forgeries. Now it doesn't

598
00:37:06.920 --> 00:37:11.039
<v Speaker 2>affect orthodoxy, but but there's a lot of rumors that

599
00:37:11.119 --> 00:37:16.599
<v Speaker 2>spread around with different mistakes, and yeah, there's a lot

600
00:37:16.679 --> 00:37:19.000
<v Speaker 2>of these. Yeah. Last time I mentioned the Nag's head fable.

601
00:37:19.119 --> 00:37:22.199
<v Speaker 2>It Roman Catholics made this up saying that these Anglican

602
00:37:22.400 --> 00:37:25.719
<v Speaker 2>bishops were ordained in the tavern with some rather maybe

603
00:37:25.719 --> 00:37:29.320
<v Speaker 2>indecent practices, but there's no evidence of that. But that

604
00:37:29.400 --> 00:37:32.559
<v Speaker 2>still was used from the early sixteen hundreds to the

605
00:37:32.599 --> 00:37:36.159
<v Speaker 2>early eighteen hundreds, so they used that against room. Catholics

606
00:37:36.800 --> 00:37:40.639
<v Speaker 2>mentioned that against Anglicans, and it wasn't really abandoned till

607
00:37:40.920 --> 00:37:45.119
<v Speaker 2>the maybe first quarter of the eighteen hundreds. A lot

608
00:37:45.119 --> 00:37:52.400
<v Speaker 2>of things like that, so they yeah.

609
00:37:50.840 --> 00:37:53.199
<v Speaker 1>Is are there? Are there? I remember one thing that

610
00:37:53.239 --> 00:37:58.039
<v Speaker 1>came up that Roman Catholics often mentioned is the Arabic

611
00:37:58.199 --> 00:38:01.400
<v Speaker 1>canons I think of Is it not of Nicea? Is

612
00:38:01.400 --> 00:38:03.559
<v Speaker 1>that the deck? Did you go into that?

613
00:38:04.639 --> 00:38:06.480
<v Speaker 2>Yes, I do have a chapter on that. I am

614
00:38:06.960 --> 00:38:11.559
<v Speaker 2>rather surprised that that there's a recent book that almost

615
00:38:11.599 --> 00:38:19.880
<v Speaker 2>seems to defend them, by John Kolorafi and someone else.

616
00:38:20.440 --> 00:38:25.760
<v Speaker 2>But they are obviously anachronistic, and I mean the Roman

617
00:38:25.760 --> 00:38:29.880
<v Speaker 2>Catholic scholar and Bishop Heffala. He says that it is

618
00:38:29.920 --> 00:38:31.639
<v Speaker 2>certain that these Arabic cannons are not the work of

619
00:38:31.679 --> 00:38:34.360
<v Speaker 2>the Council of Nicea. Their contents evidently prove a much

620
00:38:34.400 --> 00:38:41.320
<v Speaker 2>more recent origin. That's that's Bishop Heffalo and he he

621
00:38:41.519 --> 00:38:44.360
<v Speaker 2>went in depth into these canons. There's no evidence that

622
00:38:44.400 --> 00:38:48.639
<v Speaker 2>they existed. The only support is that sometimes there's different counts.

623
00:38:48.719 --> 00:38:51.400
<v Speaker 2>Some people say there's a different number of canyons from Nicea,

624
00:38:51.519 --> 00:38:56.199
<v Speaker 2>and different questions on Okay, there's some appendixes, appendices of

625
00:38:56.239 --> 00:39:03.000
<v Speaker 2>these canons, and but they're obviously not original and there

626
00:39:03.039 --> 00:39:08.960
<v Speaker 2>there they're centuries they come from centuries later. So it's yeah,

627
00:39:09.320 --> 00:39:15.639
<v Speaker 2>they're highly of but they make very strong claims for the.

628
00:39:13.880 --> 00:39:17.400
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, well that's why they wanted to be authentic exactly,

629
00:39:18.400 --> 00:39:21.800
<v Speaker 1>and that's why they're Yeah, they're they're a big, you know,

630
00:39:22.159 --> 00:39:26.760
<v Speaker 1>hot button issue. So okay, what else? So we've got

631
00:39:27.320 --> 00:39:30.840
<v Speaker 1>the big ones, You've got more chapters in the book.

632
00:39:30.840 --> 00:39:33.199
<v Speaker 1>I'm sure beyond these big ones, what else is in there?

633
00:39:34.239 --> 00:39:40.440
<v Speaker 2>Yeah? Yeah, I can review. Yeah, one issue we had

634
00:39:40.599 --> 00:39:43.079
<v Speaker 2>also mentioned last time, but I think it's good to

635
00:39:43.079 --> 00:39:45.480
<v Speaker 2>go over it again because it's it's still startles me,

636
00:39:45.880 --> 00:39:51.400
<v Speaker 2>like why Peter Damien didn't know the Council and the

637
00:39:51.800 --> 00:39:58.199
<v Speaker 2>Creed of Nicea that he let me see what I'm

638
00:39:58.239 --> 00:40:08.960
<v Speaker 2>pulling up his exact Oh okay, so he had mentioned that, Okay, yes,

639
00:40:09.079 --> 00:40:11.599
<v Speaker 2>in the letter he wrote in the Creed of the

640
00:40:11.599 --> 00:40:14.599
<v Speaker 2>Council of Nicea. Moreover, it says, we also believe in

641
00:40:14.639 --> 00:40:18.280
<v Speaker 2>the Holy Spirit, who proceeds properly from the Father and

642
00:40:18.400 --> 00:40:20.880
<v Speaker 2>goes on. So then he makes an argument from that

643
00:40:20.960 --> 00:40:24.519
<v Speaker 2>word proceeds properly from the Father to say that the

644
00:40:24.559 --> 00:40:28.239
<v Speaker 2>Holy Spirit can proceeds from the son as well. And

645
00:40:29.119 --> 00:40:32.719
<v Speaker 2>this I was startling. I saw that he did not

646
00:40:33.679 --> 00:40:40.119
<v Speaker 2>know that proper Creed of Nicea. And yes, and he

647
00:40:40.239 --> 00:40:47.280
<v Speaker 2>makes some other inauthentic quotations as well.

648
00:40:48.280 --> 00:40:54.360
<v Speaker 1>So wait a minute, you're saying Peter Damien is even

649
00:40:54.400 --> 00:40:58.920
<v Speaker 1>in his day, which is his years are for those

650
00:40:58.960 --> 00:41:01.920
<v Speaker 1>who don't know, to one thousand seven to ten seventy two,

651
00:41:03.440 --> 00:41:08.519
<v Speaker 1>that even in his day he was already utilizing an

652
00:41:08.559 --> 00:41:11.880
<v Speaker 1>altered later creed that has the philioquy.

653
00:41:14.320 --> 00:41:16.800
<v Speaker 2>Well, he had aside the creed as saying the holy

654
00:41:16.840 --> 00:41:21.000
<v Speaker 2>spirit proceeds properly from the Father. I don't I mean,

655
00:41:21.039 --> 00:41:25.519
<v Speaker 2>the editors say this is from a pseudo Jerome, but

656
00:41:25.639 --> 00:41:28.320
<v Speaker 2>although it's not that that's where the editors found.

657
00:41:28.400 --> 00:41:30.719
<v Speaker 1>So you're saying, we don't know exactly what was in

658
00:41:30.920 --> 00:41:31.960
<v Speaker 1>Peter Damien's mind.

659
00:41:34.639 --> 00:41:36.960
<v Speaker 2>Yes, well, I mean he he thought the Creed of

660
00:41:37.039 --> 00:41:40.880
<v Speaker 2>Nicea says the holy Spirit proceeds properly from the Father.

661
00:41:40.960 --> 00:41:45.840
<v Speaker 2>But that added word properly, whereas the actual creed, uh,

662
00:41:46.039 --> 00:41:48.440
<v Speaker 2>you know, the Nicene contentual Politan creed only says those

663
00:41:48.480 --> 00:41:52.679
<v Speaker 2>spirit proceeds from the Father. So he uses that word

664
00:41:52.719 --> 00:41:53.480
<v Speaker 2>proceeds properly.

665
00:41:53.480 --> 00:41:57.719
<v Speaker 1>For you, if you're saying that he thought it said properly, yes,

666
00:41:58.000 --> 00:41:58.960
<v Speaker 1>Oh wow, Okay.

667
00:41:58.840 --> 00:42:04.320
<v Speaker 2>Yes, and he used that as an argument this word

668
00:42:04.360 --> 00:42:09.039
<v Speaker 2>add the word properly to make a case that there's

669
00:42:09.360 --> 00:42:14.360
<v Speaker 2>the filioque is true and from a mistake.

670
00:42:14.559 --> 00:42:18.039
<v Speaker 1>And this would have been you're saying, because he was

671
00:42:18.159 --> 00:42:22.440
<v Speaker 1>quoting from something that pseudo jerome is that one.

672
00:42:23.400 --> 00:42:26.519
<v Speaker 2>We're not too sure what his sources are, which just

673
00:42:26.559 --> 00:42:30.719
<v Speaker 2>seems to have been negligent in how he quoted. But yeah,

674
00:42:31.000 --> 00:42:34.679
<v Speaker 2>he he does use a pseudo jerome, although there it's

675
00:42:34.760 --> 00:42:40.320
<v Speaker 2>not said to be the Creed, it's I don't remember

676
00:42:40.360 --> 00:42:43.599
<v Speaker 2>what it says there, but yeah, somehow that's the only

677
00:42:43.679 --> 00:42:47.519
<v Speaker 2>reference that we know where he could have gotten that.

678
00:42:51.159 --> 00:42:54.159
<v Speaker 2>So I yeah, that and there's some other ones as well,

679
00:42:54.239 --> 00:42:59.920
<v Speaker 2>other in authentic documents such as or A lot of

680
00:42:59.840 --> 00:43:03.840
<v Speaker 2>times I discussed different items. Sometimes it's outright forgeries. Sometimes

681
00:43:04.000 --> 00:43:08.400
<v Speaker 2>there's false claims by Roman Catholics. Sometimes they accused Orthodox

682
00:43:08.440 --> 00:43:13.440
<v Speaker 2>of forgeries that were not true or of slander.

683
00:43:13.840 --> 00:43:15.800
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, they just made up so that we're lying and

684
00:43:15.840 --> 00:43:17.360
<v Speaker 1>making up forgeries that don't exist.

685
00:43:18.480 --> 00:43:21.199
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. Some some even blame the donation of Constantine on

686
00:43:21.320 --> 00:43:22.800
<v Speaker 2>the Orthodox, which.

687
00:43:22.719 --> 00:43:26.440
<v Speaker 1>Oh, interesting, so like a psyop going on in false

688
00:43:26.480 --> 00:43:27.519
<v Speaker 1>flag forgeries.

689
00:43:29.800 --> 00:43:33.159
<v Speaker 2>I don't I don't know what their intention was with that.

690
00:43:33.280 --> 00:43:38.559
<v Speaker 2>And yeah, but there's some blamed Saint Focus for the

691
00:43:39.239 --> 00:43:45.880
<v Speaker 2>that fraudulent claim of a pope paypests. Uh Joan, you

692
00:43:45.920 --> 00:43:47.079
<v Speaker 2>know that story.

693
00:43:46.800 --> 00:43:48.639
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Pope Jones, Yeah, woman pope.

694
00:43:50.079 --> 00:43:53.079
<v Speaker 2>It is strange. It was one of those fables that

695
00:43:53.280 --> 00:43:56.840
<v Speaker 2>circulated in the Middle Ages, but there was no female pope, right, yeah,

696
00:43:57.199 --> 00:44:01.679
<v Speaker 2>always fascinating, it's the fascinatings. And then Roman Catholics claim

697
00:44:01.719 --> 00:44:06.079
<v Speaker 2>that Saint Potius invented that.

698
00:44:09.199 --> 00:44:16.679
<v Speaker 1>So we've got fake patristic quotes, false flag forgeries. It's

699
00:44:16.719 --> 00:44:18.239
<v Speaker 1>a big book. And what else is in there that

700
00:44:18.280 --> 00:44:19.880
<v Speaker 1>you got to have to there's more in there.

701
00:44:19.800 --> 00:44:23.039
<v Speaker 2>Right yeah, and yeah, it's not just about forgeries. So

702
00:44:23.079 --> 00:44:26.000
<v Speaker 2>there's it's printed in two volumes, so the second volume

703
00:44:26.000 --> 00:44:28.840
<v Speaker 2>mainly goes over the forgeries and the first volume goes

704
00:44:28.840 --> 00:44:35.280
<v Speaker 2>over all these different changes and traditional differences between the

705
00:44:35.320 --> 00:44:39.000
<v Speaker 2>East and West. Now, some are not critical items, and

706
00:44:39.239 --> 00:44:41.679
<v Speaker 2>I've tried to take a balanced approach because there are

707
00:44:41.679 --> 00:44:45.360
<v Speaker 2>some issues that were debated in the past that are

708
00:44:45.559 --> 00:44:48.119
<v Speaker 2>maybe you know, they're not critical now. But the main

709
00:44:48.559 --> 00:44:53.119
<v Speaker 2>audience is to defend Orthodox against the traditionalist Roman Catholics

710
00:44:53.280 --> 00:44:55.440
<v Speaker 2>who are out there who make these strong claims that

711
00:44:55.440 --> 00:44:57.559
<v Speaker 2>the Orthodox are not in the church. So yeah, I

712
00:44:57.599 --> 00:45:00.800
<v Speaker 2>go over each of the sacraments and show innovations as

713
00:45:00.800 --> 00:45:04.800
<v Speaker 2>well as different theological innovations. I could give a very

714
00:45:04.880 --> 00:45:08.440
<v Speaker 2>high level view of that if you if you want.

715
00:45:08.440 --> 00:45:10.599
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, sure, go ahead, go ahead and argue whatever you'd

716
00:45:10.639 --> 00:45:11.079
<v Speaker 1>like to target.

717
00:45:11.639 --> 00:45:17.320
<v Speaker 2>Yes, So for the sacraments. On baptism, the main issue

718
00:45:17.320 --> 00:45:20.280
<v Speaker 2>I talked about is triple immersion. That that is the

719
00:45:21.960 --> 00:45:25.599
<v Speaker 2>that is the traditional and the proper standard mode of baptism. Sure,

720
00:45:25.639 --> 00:45:28.639
<v Speaker 2>and of course there are always exceptions. And from the beginning,

721
00:45:28.800 --> 00:45:34.400
<v Speaker 2>everyone like I saw room Tafolks mentioning the dida K recently, Well, yes,

722
00:45:34.440 --> 00:45:38.599
<v Speaker 2>that's said to be the option if as not the

723
00:45:38.639 --> 00:45:39.280
<v Speaker 2>standard mode.

724
00:45:40.679 --> 00:45:42.719
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, if you have a hard time finding a big

725
00:45:42.760 --> 00:45:44.800
<v Speaker 1>body of water, then this is yeah. And then but

726
00:45:44.840 --> 00:45:46.960
<v Speaker 1>what people always want to make the exception the norm,

727
00:45:47.000 --> 00:45:47.800
<v Speaker 1>which is just weird.

728
00:45:49.000 --> 00:45:54.800
<v Speaker 2>Exactly. You're right, there are standards and those should be upheld. Really,

729
00:45:54.880 --> 00:45:58.280
<v Speaker 2>and I even quote Thomas Aquinas making quite a strong

730
00:45:58.440 --> 00:46:02.559
<v Speaker 2>statement where he says trying immersion is universally used in baptism,

731
00:46:02.960 --> 00:46:07.920
<v Speaker 2>and consequently anyone baptizing otherwise would sin gravely so he

732
00:46:07.960 --> 00:46:13.880
<v Speaker 2>says that in the mid twelve hundreds, and it Yeah,

733
00:46:13.920 --> 00:46:17.920
<v Speaker 2>it's rather one of the more stronger claims. But of

734
00:46:17.920 --> 00:46:22.199
<v Speaker 2>course there's always understood that, Yeah, there's exceptions if you're martyr,

735
00:46:22.280 --> 00:46:26.519
<v Speaker 2>baptized in prison or under confinement, extreme cold weather, or

736
00:46:26.519 --> 00:46:29.559
<v Speaker 2>in the desert, or in danger of death or weakness

737
00:46:29.679 --> 00:46:35.039
<v Speaker 2>or other urgent causes. That's the exceptions and everything. So

738
00:46:35.119 --> 00:46:37.960
<v Speaker 2>I basically the idea with this chapter. I just found

739
00:46:37.960 --> 00:46:41.679
<v Speaker 2>every one in the first six centuries who mentions triple

740
00:46:41.719 --> 00:46:45.800
<v Speaker 2>immersion in baptism, and just it's it is a big

741
00:46:45.880 --> 00:46:49.679
<v Speaker 2>quote mine the book. I try to, but I try

742
00:46:49.719 --> 00:46:52.480
<v Speaker 2>to provide useful and valuable quotes well.

743
00:46:52.480 --> 00:46:58.360
<v Speaker 1>So it says the work is divided into five books, Innovations, Papacy, Forgeries, Independencies,

744
00:46:58.360 --> 00:47:03.360
<v Speaker 1>and reading. I recommend reading this section here on innovations.

745
00:47:03.440 --> 00:47:07.239
<v Speaker 1>Is this mainly like sacramental or is it all the

746
00:47:07.239 --> 00:47:08.920
<v Speaker 1>papal theological innovations.

747
00:47:09.920 --> 00:47:13.079
<v Speaker 2>I went over as many of the historical innovations as

748
00:47:13.159 --> 00:47:17.880
<v Speaker 2>I could, Yeah, starting with sacraments, and then yeah, theological

749
00:47:17.960 --> 00:47:20.400
<v Speaker 2>changes and then some of Sometimes I just talk more

750
00:47:20.440 --> 00:47:23.760
<v Speaker 2>neutral about other questions such as you know, Bishop.

751
00:47:23.440 --> 00:47:26.000
<v Speaker 1>Well you talk about infants and communion. That's important.

752
00:47:26.920 --> 00:47:30.199
<v Speaker 2>Yes, those, that's maybe one of the most critical differences.

753
00:47:30.519 --> 00:47:33.679
<v Speaker 2>I think that that alone is maybe the most important.

754
00:47:33.880 --> 00:47:38.719
<v Speaker 1>Right. Yeah, it's a really easy indicator of difference.

755
00:47:39.000 --> 00:47:44.400
<v Speaker 2>Right, It's sometimes forgotten in the debates between No.

756
00:47:44.400 --> 00:47:46.119
<v Speaker 1>It shouldn't be forgotten because it's really important.

757
00:47:46.119 --> 00:47:50.079
<v Speaker 2>I am so, yeah, very high level. Yeah, infants forgiven

758
00:47:50.079 --> 00:47:53.679
<v Speaker 2>communion in the ancient Church, and I quote quote Pious

759
00:47:53.679 --> 00:47:57.559
<v Speaker 2>Attenth admitting this, but later the Roman Catholics change that

760
00:47:57.679 --> 00:47:59.840
<v Speaker 2>to only those who have reached you know, quote the

761
00:48:00.199 --> 00:48:05.159
<v Speaker 2>of reason R. Shafe interpreted with big discrepancies on the

762
00:48:05.480 --> 00:48:09.159
<v Speaker 2>what age that is, only those should receive communion, but

763
00:48:09.199 --> 00:48:13.639
<v Speaker 2>the early Church gave them to nursing infants, and it's

764
00:48:13.679 --> 00:48:17.840
<v Speaker 2>it should yeah, it should continue. And yeah, the Council

765
00:48:17.880 --> 00:48:21.039
<v Speaker 2>of Trent actually makes a misleading claim. I think it's

766
00:48:21.079 --> 00:48:22.840
<v Speaker 2>one of the evidences that the Council of Trent's not

767
00:48:22.880 --> 00:48:27.519
<v Speaker 2>inspired by the Holy Spirit because it does let me

768
00:48:27.559 --> 00:48:32.320
<v Speaker 2>see you. And same with the Trents Catechism. It says

769
00:48:32.159 --> 00:48:36.239
<v Speaker 2>it basically tries to misrepresent the historical prevalence of this practice.

770
00:48:38.280 --> 00:48:40.159
<v Speaker 2>I could go more in depth in that, but yeah.

771
00:48:40.199 --> 00:48:43.119
<v Speaker 2>Other items are the question of the eleventh bread in

772
00:48:43.159 --> 00:48:45.280
<v Speaker 2>the eucharse that that was a big issue in Yeah,

773
00:48:45.320 --> 00:48:46.440
<v Speaker 2>definitely ten fifty four.

774
00:48:46.920 --> 00:48:48.440
<v Speaker 1>Let me ask you. Let me ask you a question

775
00:48:49.159 --> 00:48:54.079
<v Speaker 1>about wafers, because I've never known this, because it says

776
00:48:54.119 --> 00:48:56.719
<v Speaker 1>here on section three, page one O four use of wafers.

777
00:48:57.679 --> 00:49:02.159
<v Speaker 1>He says, connection of wafers with coins. Why in the

778
00:49:02.199 --> 00:49:07.360
<v Speaker 1>world did they use wafers. I've always wondered that, Yeah.

779
00:49:07.159 --> 00:49:11.840
<v Speaker 2>And that was the excuse was given. I mean, related

780
00:49:11.840 --> 00:49:14.599
<v Speaker 2>to the leavened bread, was that it just wouldn't crumble

781
00:49:14.639 --> 00:49:17.679
<v Speaker 2>as easily. I think that was one of them in

782
00:49:17.760 --> 00:49:21.480
<v Speaker 2>the leven bread debates. For wafers, that was something a

783
00:49:21.480 --> 00:49:25.159
<v Speaker 2>little more strange, And that was something I came up

784
00:49:25.199 --> 00:49:27.559
<v Speaker 2>across later, of this connection with coins, and I think

785
00:49:27.599 --> 00:49:30.159
<v Speaker 2>maybe there's some thread. I don't really connect them, but

786
00:49:30.880 --> 00:49:35.079
<v Speaker 2>you can find this issue of like coins and currency

787
00:49:35.159 --> 00:49:37.800
<v Speaker 2>and the kind of banking idea behind a lot of

788
00:49:37.840 --> 00:49:41.840
<v Speaker 2>these medieval theological innovations like the indulgences, like the treasury

789
00:49:41.960 --> 00:49:43.519
<v Speaker 2>of merit. Oh.

790
00:49:43.719 --> 00:49:47.920
<v Speaker 1>Interesting, so like you're getting paid the coin wage of

791
00:49:47.960 --> 00:49:49.159
<v Speaker 1>your salvation or something.

792
00:49:50.800 --> 00:49:54.800
<v Speaker 2>I mean, maybe I don't know quite the interpretation, but

793
00:49:54.840 --> 00:49:58.199
<v Speaker 2>there's a strange connection with with coins I mean.

794
00:49:59.480 --> 00:50:01.719
<v Speaker 1>What do you are argue in this section of connection

795
00:50:01.800 --> 00:50:03.360
<v Speaker 1>of coins with wafers?

796
00:50:04.519 --> 00:50:09.519
<v Speaker 2>I simply quote a So there's a medieval room. Catholic

797
00:50:09.559 --> 00:50:15.599
<v Speaker 2>theologian William durandis from the twelve hundreds. He gives a

798
00:50:15.639 --> 00:50:18.599
<v Speaker 2>symbolic interpretation with the Eucharist as quote formed in the

799
00:50:18.639 --> 00:50:23.679
<v Speaker 2>matter of a denarius. But that's not that's foreign to

800
00:50:23.719 --> 00:50:27.400
<v Speaker 2>the first millennium church. Sure, so recent scholars have said

801
00:50:27.760 --> 00:50:30.400
<v Speaker 2>from the eleventh century, I think it could be connected

802
00:50:30.440 --> 00:50:36.239
<v Speaker 2>to Yeah, so a Norwegian numismatist some studies coins, and

803
00:50:38.000 --> 00:50:40.119
<v Speaker 2>he was saying from the eleventh century wafers were made

804
00:50:40.119 --> 00:50:43.000
<v Speaker 2>in the image of coins. They were round, flat, white,

805
00:50:43.000 --> 00:50:46.320
<v Speaker 2>and two sided. Like coins. They were mass produced by

806
00:50:46.400 --> 00:50:50.519
<v Speaker 2>means of an iron host press, sometimes carved or engraved

807
00:50:50.559 --> 00:50:55.199
<v Speaker 2>with religious imagery or liturgical phrases. The timing is significant.

808
00:50:55.239 --> 00:50:58.159
<v Speaker 2>The emergence of coin like wafers corresponds with the rise

809
00:50:58.199 --> 00:51:01.639
<v Speaker 2>of monetary offerings and coin, suggesting a notion of the

810
00:51:01.760 --> 00:51:03.440
<v Speaker 2>quote minting of the Eucharist.

811
00:51:04.320 --> 00:51:05.400
<v Speaker 1>So oh that's fast.

812
00:51:05.760 --> 00:51:09.280
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, wow, you maybe some connection with minting.

813
00:51:10.440 --> 00:51:15.679
<v Speaker 1>Now you've also got elevation of the host epiclesis terminology

814
00:51:15.679 --> 00:51:21.559
<v Speaker 1>transit association in scolasticism community. Both kinds give us a

815
00:51:21.599 --> 00:51:23.840
<v Speaker 1>summation of of kind of what's going on.

816
00:51:23.840 --> 00:51:27.480
<v Speaker 2>Here, Yeah, very high level, you know, the aim of

817
00:51:28.199 --> 00:51:30.800
<v Speaker 2>these chapters sometimes are really short, just to show that

818
00:51:31.440 --> 00:51:34.280
<v Speaker 2>Roman Catholic scholars admit that there was a liturgical practice

819
00:51:34.320 --> 00:51:36.599
<v Speaker 2>done a certain way in the first millennium, but they

820
00:51:36.639 --> 00:51:39.360
<v Speaker 2>no longer follow that or they change it later. So

821
00:51:39.400 --> 00:51:42.960
<v Speaker 2>the elevation of the host, that's a liturgical right. That's

822
00:51:43.159 --> 00:51:46.159
<v Speaker 2>the Roman Catholic Encyclopedia. It says it's a right of

823
00:51:46.480 --> 00:51:51.760
<v Speaker 2>comparatively recent introduction, so it's it's not known to be exist,

824
00:51:52.000 --> 00:51:54.480
<v Speaker 2>to have existed earlier than the close of the twelfth century,

825
00:51:55.559 --> 00:51:59.360
<v Speaker 2>and they date that to yeah, maybe the very end

826
00:51:59.360 --> 00:52:04.159
<v Speaker 2>of eleven hundred or early twelve hundreds. And yeah, Epiclesis

827
00:52:04.159 --> 00:52:07.320
<v Speaker 2>that was mentioned as well, love times. I cite the

828
00:52:07.440 --> 00:52:11.360
<v Speaker 2>Orthodox encyclicals of eighteen forty eight and eighteen ninety five

829
00:52:11.360 --> 00:52:13.920
<v Speaker 2>because they list several issues of.

830
00:52:13.880 --> 00:52:16.760
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, innovations that are still there. I mean, I remember,

831
00:52:16.800 --> 00:52:20.199
<v Speaker 1>as a trad cat when I first heard of this issue,

832
00:52:20.280 --> 00:52:24.519
<v Speaker 1>I didn't even know that the ancient liturgies had the

833
00:52:24.519 --> 00:52:28.079
<v Speaker 1>epiclesis and that this was But now I understand being

834
00:52:28.159 --> 00:52:30.800
<v Speaker 1>Orthodox for a while now, Like I understand why this

835
00:52:30.840 --> 00:52:32.559
<v Speaker 1>is an issue.

836
00:52:32.800 --> 00:52:36.239
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and for that, I mean, I simply just a

837
00:52:36.280 --> 00:52:38.760
<v Speaker 2>lot of that chapter is just me quoting the Catholic Encyclopedia.

838
00:52:38.800 --> 00:52:42.760
<v Speaker 2>I mean quote it says the epiclesis it occurs in

839
00:52:42.840 --> 00:52:47.079
<v Speaker 2>all Eastern liturgies and originally in Western liturgies. Also, oh wow,

840
00:52:47.119 --> 00:52:49.599
<v Speaker 2>because it's certain that all the old liturgies contained such

841
00:52:49.599 --> 00:52:54.800
<v Speaker 2>a prayer. But it's no longer the case now, you know,

842
00:52:54.800 --> 00:52:56.239
<v Speaker 2>they've omitted this ancient tradition.

843
00:52:56.559 --> 00:52:58.800
<v Speaker 1>Do we know why? Is it just because in the

844
00:52:58.800 --> 00:53:01.599
<v Speaker 1>Middle Ages they came up this idea of defining what

845
00:53:01.639 --> 00:53:04.199
<v Speaker 1>the essence of the sacrament was to be matter form

846
00:53:04.199 --> 00:53:08.039
<v Speaker 1>and intention, and so somehow that led to the trimming

847
00:53:08.079 --> 00:53:10.159
<v Speaker 1>down of the liturgy to not have the epiceasis.

848
00:53:12.199 --> 00:53:14.400
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, that could be it. To be honest, I don't

849
00:53:14.400 --> 00:53:19.280
<v Speaker 2>know what's the reason of that. I mean, I simply

850
00:53:19.320 --> 00:53:22.599
<v Speaker 2>just document the fact that they're no longer doing that.

851
00:53:23.199 --> 00:53:25.480
<v Speaker 2>But it seems to be Yeah, as a result of

852
00:53:25.719 --> 00:53:30.719
<v Speaker 2>scholastic disputations that where they discuss what's.

853
00:53:31.280 --> 00:53:33.199
<v Speaker 1>What's essential to have the sacrament?

854
00:53:34.360 --> 00:53:40.079
<v Speaker 2>Right right? I love that is maybe just just less

855
00:53:40.159 --> 00:53:42.599
<v Speaker 2>careful following the traditions.

856
00:53:44.119 --> 00:53:46.320
<v Speaker 1>By the way, what you're arguing here too, is also

857
00:53:46.440 --> 00:53:49.639
<v Speaker 1>a good refutation of some of the people that are

858
00:53:49.639 --> 00:53:52.760
<v Speaker 1>trying to push a lot of these latin trad cat

859
00:53:52.800 --> 00:53:55.679
<v Speaker 1>ideas in the Orthodox world as well, not just amongst

860
00:53:56.480 --> 00:54:00.280
<v Speaker 1>Western Rites, but also even outside of that, people trying

861
00:54:00.280 --> 00:54:03.360
<v Speaker 1>to convince catechumens and converts that oh, we actually need

862
00:54:03.400 --> 00:54:08.280
<v Speaker 1>all of these you know, Carolinian and and uh, you know,

863
00:54:08.400 --> 00:54:13.599
<v Speaker 1>medieval scholastic traditions and ideas. And I think, and I

864
00:54:13.599 --> 00:54:15.800
<v Speaker 1>haven't read your book yet because it's new, but looking

865
00:54:15.840 --> 00:54:18.639
<v Speaker 1>at the subject matter here, it looks to me like

866
00:54:18.679 --> 00:54:22.280
<v Speaker 1>this would also be kind of a good refutation of

867
00:54:22.360 --> 00:54:25.840
<v Speaker 1>the Latinizing ideas of some new Orthodox people.

868
00:54:28.440 --> 00:54:32.119
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I mean, I I try to avoid making any

869
00:54:32.159 --> 00:54:35.559
<v Speaker 2>criticism of Orthodox people. I know, there's yet the Western

870
00:54:35.639 --> 00:54:39.400
<v Speaker 2>right question. I mean, maybe some of the notes here

871
00:54:39.440 --> 00:54:43.280
<v Speaker 2>and some of the chapters could help provide more context, but.

872
00:54:44.199 --> 00:54:46.239
<v Speaker 1>Well, not even Western Right itself. I'm some about the

873
00:54:46.239 --> 00:54:48.719
<v Speaker 1>people who want to bring in, like some of these

874
00:54:48.760 --> 00:54:52.320
<v Speaker 1>medieval ideas, like oh, we actually need to have the

875
00:54:52.400 --> 00:54:54.800
<v Speaker 1>sacred heart. Not that you not that your book's dealing

876
00:54:54.880 --> 00:54:59.360
<v Speaker 1>with medieval Romanolic devotions, but this idea that we need

877
00:54:59.400 --> 00:54:59.960
<v Speaker 1>all this stuff.

878
00:55:01.880 --> 00:55:03.679
<v Speaker 2>Yes, I do even have a short chapter on the

879
00:55:03.719 --> 00:55:07.360
<v Speaker 2>Sacred Heart Sacred Hearts of Jesus and of Mary. And

880
00:55:07.679 --> 00:55:10.039
<v Speaker 2>again I mean that chapter is simply a quote from

881
00:55:10.079 --> 00:55:14.800
<v Speaker 2>the Catholic Encyclopedia where they admit that there's no evidence

882
00:55:14.880 --> 00:55:17.639
<v Speaker 2>for this. I mean, the first time it existed is

883
00:55:17.679 --> 00:55:20.719
<v Speaker 2>in the eleven hundreds for both the Sacred Hearts of

884
00:55:20.800 --> 00:55:24.360
<v Speaker 2>Jesus and Mary. If I remember that, I think that

885
00:55:24.519 --> 00:55:29.760
<v Speaker 2>century of the eleven hundreds, And yes, so I don't

886
00:55:29.760 --> 00:55:32.679
<v Speaker 2>think those should be introduced into Orthodoxy because it's not

887
00:55:32.760 --> 00:55:34.400
<v Speaker 2>a tradition of the first millennium Church.

888
00:55:34.519 --> 00:55:37.320
<v Speaker 1>Well, you also have the legalistic view of original sin

889
00:55:37.400 --> 00:55:41.639
<v Speaker 1>listed here, which I think is another element of why

890
00:55:41.719 --> 00:55:45.920
<v Speaker 1>the position is wrong, you know what I mean, the

891
00:55:46.039 --> 00:55:48.920
<v Speaker 1>latinizing position, right.

892
00:55:49.039 --> 00:55:52.320
<v Speaker 2>I think my book is stronger on the more historical questions,

893
00:55:52.360 --> 00:55:54.719
<v Speaker 2>and because I tried to focus on those, because those

894
00:55:54.719 --> 00:55:57.639
<v Speaker 2>are a lot more clear and are harder to really ignore.

895
00:55:57.760 --> 00:56:00.480
<v Speaker 2>Like it's just okay, this tradition, this as a tradition

896
00:56:00.519 --> 00:56:02.760
<v Speaker 2>of the first millennium. It is no longer or here's

897
00:56:02.800 --> 00:56:06.719
<v Speaker 2>a clear proof of a new invention or innovation. I

898
00:56:06.840 --> 00:56:09.800
<v Speaker 2>prefer to document those, but yeah, there are some discussions

899
00:56:09.800 --> 00:56:13.519
<v Speaker 2>of theology, which is maybe not my strong suit. I'm

900
00:56:13.599 --> 00:56:15.159
<v Speaker 2>just a I got you.

901
00:56:15.320 --> 00:56:17.199
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, And so you move on to talk about some

902
00:56:17.280 --> 00:56:22.679
<v Speaker 1>of these other key areas that really should be brought forward. Purgatory,

903
00:56:22.800 --> 00:56:26.639
<v Speaker 1>the treasury of merits, indulgences. I mean I try to

904
00:56:26.760 --> 00:56:31.039
<v Speaker 1>when I have extended remanclic discussion, especially with trad cats,

905
00:56:31.079 --> 00:56:34.920
<v Speaker 1>I do often bring up issues with indulgences, the treasure

906
00:56:34.960 --> 00:56:38.079
<v Speaker 1>of merits, because I think these are also really strong

907
00:56:38.519 --> 00:56:43.639
<v Speaker 1>things to critique that get forgotten when, for one, I

908
00:56:43.639 --> 00:56:47.519
<v Speaker 1>think Roman Catholics typically always want to focus the debate

909
00:56:47.719 --> 00:56:49.719
<v Speaker 1>on the papacy. That's really the only thing they want

910
00:56:49.719 --> 00:56:52.679
<v Speaker 1>a debate, and then we're not getting into some of

911
00:56:52.719 --> 00:56:55.280
<v Speaker 1>the other nitty gritty issues like well, now wait a minute,

912
00:56:55.320 --> 00:56:58.519
<v Speaker 1>this issue of the treasure of merits, this is another

913
00:56:58.639 --> 00:57:01.079
<v Speaker 1>pretty big defeater. I think it's as strong as like,

914
00:57:01.400 --> 00:57:03.519
<v Speaker 1>if you really get into it, it's a strong critique

915
00:57:03.599 --> 00:57:07.320
<v Speaker 1>as you know, papal geopolitical power being in contradiction to

916
00:57:07.360 --> 00:57:10.039
<v Speaker 1>the first you know, thousand years of Christianity. So you

917
00:57:10.079 --> 00:57:13.519
<v Speaker 1>mentioned Essen Senter distinction in here, You've got even all

918
00:57:13.559 --> 00:57:17.360
<v Speaker 1>the way up to modernism and the Second Vatican Council.

919
00:57:17.559 --> 00:57:21.599
<v Speaker 1>So the reason I'm asking is, do let's say, papal

920
00:57:21.599 --> 00:57:25.480
<v Speaker 1>Treasury of Merit and indulgences, do these also rely on

921
00:57:25.599 --> 00:57:27.760
<v Speaker 1>perhaps forgeries or not really?

922
00:57:30.119 --> 00:57:33.000
<v Speaker 2>For the Treasure Merit, I did not come across any

923
00:57:33.760 --> 00:57:36.519
<v Speaker 2>forgeries on that, although maybe you could say there were

924
00:57:36.559 --> 00:57:40.199
<v Speaker 2>a lot of an authentic documents that maybe misled the

925
00:57:40.239 --> 00:57:45.840
<v Speaker 2>medieval authors, such as those of Saint Augustine. But for

926
00:57:45.880 --> 00:57:49.239
<v Speaker 2>the Treasure Merit, you can almost date the decade when

927
00:57:49.440 --> 00:57:54.079
<v Speaker 2>it originated. And I quote a Roman Catholic professor, Robert Schaffern.

928
00:57:54.599 --> 00:57:57.719
<v Speaker 2>He specializes in medieval indulgences and wrote a book. I

929
00:57:57.760 --> 00:58:02.280
<v Speaker 2>mean he basically indicates that this tradition dates to the

930
00:58:02.320 --> 00:58:06.320
<v Speaker 2>twelve thirties, and then just a century later, in thirteen

931
00:58:06.400 --> 00:58:08.880
<v Speaker 2>forty three, it was formally defined by the pope. So

932
00:58:08.920 --> 00:58:12.639
<v Speaker 2>it barely had a century of antiquity to its name.

933
00:58:13.320 --> 00:58:17.000
<v Speaker 2>The Treasury of Merit, so from the twelve thirties it

934
00:58:17.119 --> 00:58:18.599
<v Speaker 2>was brought up by the theater.

935
00:58:18.800 --> 00:58:20.760
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I just like, I don't see how you can't

936
00:58:21.320 --> 00:58:24.360
<v Speaker 1>see this as an innovation. I mean, I know all

937
00:58:24.360 --> 00:58:25.920
<v Speaker 1>the arguments about it. You know, it used to be

938
00:58:25.960 --> 00:58:27.679
<v Speaker 1>a trad cat used to try to defend it. But

939
00:58:27.840 --> 00:58:33.119
<v Speaker 1>I mean, now you mentioned here mercantile doctrine, what would

940
00:58:33.159 --> 00:58:34.679
<v Speaker 1>you what are you arguing there?

941
00:58:35.519 --> 00:58:38.239
<v Speaker 2>It So it does seem like it's a very transactional

942
00:58:38.920 --> 00:58:43.239
<v Speaker 2>mercantild like a bank account. So it does.

943
00:58:43.559 --> 00:58:47.000
<v Speaker 1>The Pope has access to the Saints infinite bitcoin account

944
00:58:47.079 --> 00:58:49.000
<v Speaker 1>and he can just sort of send you this spiritual

945
00:58:49.039 --> 00:58:51.639
<v Speaker 1>cryptocurrency to your wallet, your soul wallet.

946
00:58:53.119 --> 00:58:55.239
<v Speaker 2>It is a little strange and some I mean the

947
00:58:55.360 --> 00:59:00.159
<v Speaker 2>language of the Pope and defining it rather, it's it's

948
00:59:00.239 --> 00:59:03.199
<v Speaker 2>quite strange where he says, you know that, okay, only

949
00:59:03.239 --> 00:59:06.280
<v Speaker 2>one drop of Christ's blood was necessary for the salvation

950
00:59:06.400 --> 00:59:13.039
<v Speaker 2>of all humanity. So all this otherwise excess or maybe superfluous.

951
00:59:13.320 --> 00:59:15.800
<v Speaker 2>Maybe you can think about what the intention of that

952
00:59:15.880 --> 00:59:19.679
<v Speaker 2>word means. All the extra superfluous blood was it can

953
00:59:19.679 --> 00:59:22.119
<v Speaker 2>be used by the Pope to dispense.

954
00:59:21.760 --> 00:59:23.719
<v Speaker 1>Oh wow, I didn't even know. He argued that that's

955
00:59:23.760 --> 00:59:25.079
<v Speaker 1>a crazy line of argument.

956
00:59:27.800 --> 00:59:30.719
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it's yes, all these can be dispens same with

957
00:59:30.760 --> 00:59:33.880
<v Speaker 2>the merits of the blessed Virgin Mary and the other saints.

958
00:59:34.559 --> 00:59:38.599
<v Speaker 2>I mean that's the Yeah, these superabundance of the virtues

959
00:59:38.639 --> 00:59:42.840
<v Speaker 2>of the Saints and it. Yeah, it is a little strange.

960
00:59:42.840 --> 00:59:45.199
<v Speaker 2>I mean maybe realman Catholics might interpret it a little differently,

961
00:59:45.239 --> 00:59:47.519
<v Speaker 2>but basically, gist of it as I see it, it's

962
00:59:47.599 --> 00:59:49.599
<v Speaker 2>just one drop of Christ's blood would have been enough

963
00:59:49.639 --> 00:59:51.920
<v Speaker 2>for our starvations. So all the extra the pope can use.

964
00:59:52.239 --> 00:59:54.159
<v Speaker 1>You know, I didn't even I didn't even realize it

965
00:59:54.199 --> 00:59:56.920
<v Speaker 1>was that wacky. Even I was trying to defend that,

966
00:59:56.920 --> 00:59:59.079
<v Speaker 1>I didn't even know that's a line of argument I

967
00:59:59.079 --> 01:00:03.239
<v Speaker 1>didn't know about using. But okay, so we've got changes

968
01:00:03.280 --> 01:00:07.599
<v Speaker 1>to calendar fasting changes, so you actually go into pretty

969
01:00:07.639 --> 01:00:10.639
<v Speaker 1>significant like this isn't this isn't just a book about

970
01:00:10.639 --> 01:00:14.079
<v Speaker 1>the forgeries. This is kind of going into a much broader,

971
01:00:14.199 --> 01:00:17.800
<v Speaker 1>much more in depth discussion of really the whole ethos

972
01:00:17.840 --> 01:00:20.639
<v Speaker 1>of the difference between the Papal Church and the orthodox Y.

973
01:00:21.840 --> 01:00:25.400
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. I think originally the scope was, hey, look at

974
01:00:25.400 --> 01:00:27.639
<v Speaker 2>these forgery Look how come you know cited in ten

975
01:00:27.760 --> 01:00:31.159
<v Speaker 2>fifty four that's originally had a blog article back in

976
01:00:31.199 --> 01:00:34.480
<v Speaker 2>the mid twenty tens. I don't know, it's been over

977
01:00:34.679 --> 01:00:37.559
<v Speaker 2>twelve years. I've been I kind of started researching this

978
01:00:37.599 --> 01:00:40.920
<v Speaker 2>and putting together notes. It's been a long I think

979
01:00:40.960 --> 01:00:44.320
<v Speaker 2>it's for the best, because yeah, I had some made

980
01:00:44.320 --> 01:00:47.239
<v Speaker 2>some mistakes and made law corrections along the way, and

981
01:00:47.280 --> 01:00:52.480
<v Speaker 2>of course it's still maybe won't be perfect. But sorry,

982
01:00:52.840 --> 01:00:53.440
<v Speaker 2>wow you get all.

983
01:00:53.760 --> 01:00:58.320
<v Speaker 1>You even get into papal dispensations and cyclicals, the cardinals,

984
01:00:58.440 --> 01:01:02.719
<v Speaker 1>jubilees interdicts. Yeah, so this is getting This is super indubt.

985
01:01:03.599 --> 01:01:05.880
<v Speaker 2>Some are yes, really high level, like I could go

986
01:01:05.960 --> 01:01:09.840
<v Speaker 2>over in just a few sentences, like trend substantiation. I mean,

987
01:01:09.920 --> 01:01:14.239
<v Speaker 2>the main maybe Orthodox believe the doctrine, but the terminology

988
01:01:14.320 --> 01:01:18.280
<v Speaker 2>and the real intricate mythology is just it's invented in

989
01:01:18.320 --> 01:01:22.280
<v Speaker 2>the late ten hundreds. It's not before this ism. Although

990
01:01:22.280 --> 01:01:26.840
<v Speaker 2>we're okay with the word. And then for some other items,

991
01:01:27.400 --> 01:01:33.199
<v Speaker 2>some are simply terminologies, oh okay, and then oh yeah,

992
01:01:33.239 --> 01:01:37.559
<v Speaker 2>to go back to the Eucharist or liturgy, communion under

993
01:01:37.559 --> 01:01:40.280
<v Speaker 2>both kinds where and again some of these have changed

994
01:01:40.280 --> 01:01:44.760
<v Speaker 2>since Vatican Two, But traditionally the Church gave both the

995
01:01:44.840 --> 01:01:46.880
<v Speaker 2>Christ's body and blood under the forms of bread and

996
01:01:46.920 --> 01:01:50.119
<v Speaker 2>wine and the euchars, but the Roman Catholics changed it

997
01:01:50.519 --> 01:01:54.519
<v Speaker 2>to just give communion under the form of bread only

998
01:01:54.559 --> 01:01:58.679
<v Speaker 2>and would reserve the wine or Christ's blood for the priests,

999
01:01:58.840 --> 01:02:00.960
<v Speaker 2>but of course, you know, they'd say, well, Christ's whole

1000
01:02:01.000 --> 01:02:03.880
<v Speaker 2>body and blood is contained in his body of the bread,

1001
01:02:03.920 --> 01:02:06.920
<v Speaker 2>so they'll make these distinctions. But traditionally that was not

1002
01:02:07.079 --> 01:02:10.280
<v Speaker 2>the case. They just argue from certain exceptions in the past.

1003
01:02:10.360 --> 01:02:13.920
<v Speaker 2>But sometimes infants were just given only the Christ's blood

1004
01:02:13.960 --> 01:02:21.280
<v Speaker 2>as wine, so they argue from those exceptional cases. Yeah,

1005
01:02:21.320 --> 01:02:24.440
<v Speaker 2>the same with confirmation, where the early Church confirmed children

1006
01:02:24.519 --> 01:02:28.400
<v Speaker 2>right after baptism. But then that's another item like infant communion,

1007
01:02:28.400 --> 01:02:30.679
<v Speaker 2>where the Latins say this is not expedient before the

1008
01:02:30.800 --> 01:02:34.159
<v Speaker 2>use of reason, even though they admit the early Church

1009
01:02:35.320 --> 01:02:42.039
<v Speaker 2>did that with baptism and communion. Yeah. I spent a

1010
01:02:42.079 --> 01:02:45.800
<v Speaker 2>lot of time going into some rather intricate items.

1011
01:02:45.800 --> 01:02:49.599
<v Speaker 1>Sometimes this is great, this is a this is well,

1012
01:02:49.639 --> 01:02:52.559
<v Speaker 1>actually a way more thorough Not that I didn't think

1013
01:02:52.599 --> 01:02:54.639
<v Speaker 1>you were capable. I just thought this will be a

1014
01:02:54.639 --> 01:02:57.440
<v Speaker 1>book about the forgeries that he's finally publishing. But it's

1015
01:02:57.480 --> 01:02:59.920
<v Speaker 1>a lot more thorough than that. You even get into

1016
01:03:00.079 --> 01:03:04.880
<v Speaker 1>these pretty lengthy discussions later on about well it's not

1017
01:03:04.920 --> 01:03:07.840
<v Speaker 1>that lengthy, but there's a lot of discussion about you know,

1018
01:03:08.079 --> 01:03:13.320
<v Speaker 1>Canon twenty a of Chalcedon. I mean, it gets really

1019
01:03:13.960 --> 01:03:15.559
<v Speaker 1>we don't have time to go through all of these.

1020
01:03:16.599 --> 01:03:21.599
<v Speaker 2>No, Yeah, yeah, I would say the parts I researched

1021
01:03:21.639 --> 01:03:25.679
<v Speaker 2>the most would be the question of Pope Penoris's condemnation.

1022
01:03:25.880 --> 01:03:29.880
<v Speaker 2>I just put together everything I could find, very thorough. Yeah,

1023
01:03:30.360 --> 01:03:32.400
<v Speaker 2>that I tried to be. I think it might be

1024
01:03:32.400 --> 01:03:36.719
<v Speaker 2>the most thorough collection of just all the evidence on him,

1025
01:03:36.719 --> 01:03:40.360
<v Speaker 2>both in favor of him and in defense. I think

1026
01:03:40.400 --> 01:03:44.599
<v Speaker 2>it's maybe the most comprehensive ever collected. I mean, by

1027
01:03:44.599 --> 01:03:46.440
<v Speaker 2>the way, I didn't use any AI at all. I

1028
01:03:47.000 --> 01:03:49.360
<v Speaker 2>somewhat regret a bit of terminology I used in the

1029
01:03:49.360 --> 01:03:52.800
<v Speaker 2>beginning of the intro where I said, like, I think

1030
01:03:52.880 --> 01:03:57.440
<v Speaker 2>like technological innovation. That's just simply referring to digitized books

1031
01:03:57.639 --> 01:04:03.360
<v Speaker 2>because that helped yea CIEs Co email because this wasn't

1032
01:04:02.960 --> 01:04:04.360
<v Speaker 2>would have been really hard.

1033
01:04:04.519 --> 01:04:09.639
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, you can't go find all these yeah, I like

1034
01:04:09.719 --> 01:04:11.840
<v Speaker 1>Indiana Jones or something trying to find all this stuff.

1035
01:04:12.599 --> 01:04:15.239
<v Speaker 2>So yeah, maybe the most thoroughly research is Yeah, Honorius,

1036
01:04:15.519 --> 01:04:18.840
<v Speaker 2>I mean spoiler he is a heretic, and the technologists

1037
01:04:18.880 --> 01:04:21.320
<v Speaker 2>such and then Kennon twenty eight of Calcdon followed by

1038
01:04:21.320 --> 01:04:23.639
<v Speaker 2>the Council of Truela. Those are really important. I think

1039
01:04:23.639 --> 01:04:25.960
<v Speaker 2>it takes too much time to get into. But and

1040
01:04:26.000 --> 01:04:29.760
<v Speaker 2>then baptism by triple immersion. Those are the three UH

1041
01:04:30.239 --> 01:04:34.079
<v Speaker 2>topics I studied the most in terms of like those

1042
01:04:34.159 --> 01:04:38.880
<v Speaker 2>early differences, I mean other things I looked into, I

1043
01:04:38.880 --> 01:04:42.480
<v Speaker 2>mean the idea of of marriage and a Roman Catholics

1044
01:04:43.119 --> 01:04:45.920
<v Speaker 2>talk about divorce a lot, but there's there's some other

1045
01:04:45.960 --> 01:04:51.760
<v Speaker 2>issues they they have, such as allowing marriage within prohibited degrees,

1046
01:04:51.800 --> 01:04:57.119
<v Speaker 2>such as a marriage between UH an uncle and niece

1047
01:04:57.519 --> 01:05:00.760
<v Speaker 2>or nephew and aunt. I mean the pope has allowed

1048
01:05:00.760 --> 01:05:05.159
<v Speaker 2>that even though that's prohibited in Leviticus, and the early

1049
01:05:05.239 --> 01:05:08.800
<v Speaker 2>Church held those prohibitions to still be in force. So

1050
01:05:09.119 --> 01:05:13.400
<v Speaker 2>it's some of that is rather disturbing, you know, led

1051
01:05:13.440 --> 01:05:17.119
<v Speaker 2>to the Habsburg Charles the second he had an inbreeding

1052
01:05:17.800 --> 01:05:26.000
<v Speaker 2>issue could have been responsible for some disabilities. And there's

1053
01:05:26.039 --> 01:05:29.679
<v Speaker 2>even a pope who said a brother sister marriage could

1054
01:05:29.719 --> 01:05:33.639
<v Speaker 2>be allowed by papal dispensation. So some of this is

1055
01:05:34.239 --> 01:05:37.039
<v Speaker 2>a little yeah, it was not the early Church did

1056
01:05:37.079 --> 01:05:41.960
<v Speaker 2>not think that was appropriate, right, And so I go

1057
01:05:42.000 --> 01:05:46.440
<v Speaker 2>in depth into all of those items and related Yeah,

1058
01:05:46.440 --> 01:05:50.880
<v Speaker 2>clerical celibacy. I think that's that's another important one to

1059
01:05:51.039 --> 01:05:54.639
<v Speaker 2>just talk about because many Roman Catholics criticized the Orthodox

1060
01:05:54.719 --> 01:05:58.440
<v Speaker 2>for having married priests. But you know the Gospel show

1061
01:05:58.480 --> 01:06:02.840
<v Speaker 2>say Peter was married, and I mentioned that. Saint Patrick

1062
01:06:02.880 --> 01:06:06.239
<v Speaker 2>of Ireland, if if you Reaca has confession in the

1063
01:06:06.360 --> 01:06:09.239
<v Speaker 2>very beginning, he says, I Patrick, the sinner, am the

1064
01:06:09.239 --> 01:06:12.000
<v Speaker 2>most illiterate and least of all the faithful, and contemptible

1065
01:06:12.039 --> 01:06:15.239
<v Speaker 2>in the eyes of very many. My father was Calpurnius,

1066
01:06:15.519 --> 01:06:18.639
<v Speaker 2>a deacon, one of the sons of po Titus, a

1067
01:06:18.679 --> 01:06:24.440
<v Speaker 2>presidter who belonged to a village. And then I was

1068
01:06:24.639 --> 01:06:27.239
<v Speaker 2>taken captive, so he mentions, Yeah, his father was a deacon,

1069
01:06:27.360 --> 01:06:29.599
<v Speaker 2>his grandfather was a priest, and then the later source

1070
01:06:29.599 --> 01:06:33.119
<v Speaker 2>adds that his great grandfather was a deacon as well.

1071
01:06:33.159 --> 01:06:35.920
<v Speaker 2>So we can trace like married clergy. And you know,

1072
01:06:35.960 --> 01:06:37.880
<v Speaker 2>if any of these priests had been celibate, we wouldn't

1073
01:06:37.920 --> 01:06:41.440
<v Speaker 2>have had, uh, Saint Patrick if the.

1074
01:06:41.480 --> 01:06:43.679
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, you know, and what about the the that's a

1075
01:06:43.679 --> 01:06:47.440
<v Speaker 1>great point. What about the trollo? Did do you argue

1076
01:06:47.719 --> 01:06:49.760
<v Speaker 1>and show that trollo was accepted?

1077
01:06:51.360 --> 01:06:54.800
<v Speaker 2>Yes? Uh, yeah, trello is something I really go in

1078
01:06:54.880 --> 01:06:58.320
<v Speaker 2>depth into. I would say, in the very high level view,

1079
01:06:58.320 --> 01:07:01.679
<v Speaker 2>you can prove it accepted by the Seventh Documental Council

1080
01:07:02.199 --> 01:07:08.000
<v Speaker 2>clearly accepting Trelo's canons. I go into that council at

1081
01:07:08.719 --> 01:07:11.239
<v Speaker 2>in extreme length. I tried to collect basically everything that

1082
01:07:11.280 --> 01:07:14.119
<v Speaker 2>could be said but for and against it. But I'll

1083
01:07:14.159 --> 01:07:16.320
<v Speaker 2>say it's just simply settled by the fact the Seventh

1084
01:07:16.320 --> 01:07:17.800
<v Speaker 2>Documental Council endorset.

1085
01:07:19.679 --> 01:07:26.039
<v Speaker 1>Is there any evidence that the papacy did not or

1086
01:07:26.079 --> 01:07:28.679
<v Speaker 1>had a problem with Trello at the Seventh Council?

1087
01:07:30.400 --> 01:07:33.360
<v Speaker 2>Oh, at the Seventh Council, I know, it doesn't seem

1088
01:07:33.480 --> 01:07:38.400
<v Speaker 2>that they didn't make any objections then, even though the yeah,

1089
01:07:38.400 --> 01:07:42.039
<v Speaker 2>the room Catholic legates were there. But sometimes Roman Catholics

1090
01:07:42.280 --> 01:07:47.400
<v Speaker 2>make rather strange claims about that the ecumenical councils are

1091
01:07:49.239 --> 01:07:51.880
<v Speaker 2>I guess they might not fully love them, are reluctant

1092
01:07:51.920 --> 01:07:52.960
<v Speaker 2>to accept the full.

1093
01:07:53.320 --> 01:07:55.440
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's like they don't. The only thing that matters

1094
01:07:55.440 --> 01:07:57.199
<v Speaker 1>from them is what the Pope says matters.

1095
01:07:57.239 --> 01:08:04.039
<v Speaker 2>Basically, Yeah, it's really on traditional view. Yeah, for Trilo.

1096
01:08:04.119 --> 01:08:07.679
<v Speaker 2>There are some cases of apparently some popes not liking

1097
01:08:07.719 --> 01:08:09.599
<v Speaker 2>what it said, but that just simply shows that the

1098
01:08:09.679 --> 01:08:13.119
<v Speaker 2>church did not it was not swayed by that, and

1099
01:08:13.159 --> 01:08:15.320
<v Speaker 2>it did not affect what.

1100
01:08:14.679 --> 01:08:17.720
<v Speaker 1>What What's the do you recall the first sort of

1101
01:08:18.319 --> 01:08:24.880
<v Speaker 1>evidence or mention from the popes not liking Trollo or

1102
01:08:24.920 --> 01:08:26.039
<v Speaker 1>something at Nicia too?

1103
01:08:28.159 --> 01:08:30.760
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, let me, I'll have to check my notes. I'm

1104
01:08:30.800 --> 01:08:31.760
<v Speaker 2>trying to think.

1105
01:08:33.600 --> 01:08:36.000
<v Speaker 1>If it's not a big deal. Just this was curious.

1106
01:08:36.279 --> 01:08:40.600
<v Speaker 2>I know, the Liber pontific caulis that book of popes.

1107
01:08:40.640 --> 01:08:46.119
<v Speaker 2>It does mention, uh some, it does not like it

1108
01:08:46.159 --> 01:08:49.600
<v Speaker 2>doesn't like the council at all. And there's there's also.

1109
01:08:49.560 --> 01:08:52.119
<v Speaker 1>A trollo or which one trollo?

1110
01:08:52.399 --> 01:08:55.039
<v Speaker 2>Uh yeah, that that council. I mean I see too.

1111
01:08:55.039 --> 01:08:57.720
<v Speaker 2>It's yeah, it's fully accepted.

1112
01:08:58.000 --> 01:09:02.199
<v Speaker 1>Although yeah, well people's but even that I'm curious about

1113
01:09:02.279 --> 01:09:05.960
<v Speaker 1>because when Roman Callolics say they fully accept it, I

1114
01:09:06.039 --> 01:09:07.640
<v Speaker 1>mean I'm not. I'm not even sure they really do,

1115
01:09:07.840 --> 01:09:13.800
<v Speaker 1>like because there's things that you know are canonical some

1116
01:09:13.800 --> 01:09:17.000
<v Speaker 1>somewhat in the Canons of Nicia two that I don't

1117
01:09:17.039 --> 01:09:19.439
<v Speaker 1>think Roman Cloics would agree with, like images of the

1118
01:09:19.479 --> 01:09:22.359
<v Speaker 1>Father and this kind of stuff. And you know the

1119
01:09:22.359 --> 01:09:25.439
<v Speaker 1>Sonoticon which comes out of the eight forty three reaffirmation

1120
01:09:25.720 --> 01:09:30.399
<v Speaker 1>of Nicia two. Romancalox suresack don't follow that, so I

1121
01:09:30.399 --> 01:09:31.920
<v Speaker 1>don't even I mean, now I think you can even

1122
01:09:32.119 --> 01:09:34.600
<v Speaker 1>I think the way it seems like they give like

1123
01:09:35.439 --> 01:09:38.159
<v Speaker 1>name verbal credence to Nicia too, but they don't really

1124
01:09:38.199 --> 01:09:38.760
<v Speaker 1>follow it.

1125
01:09:39.479 --> 01:09:41.279
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I think that is the case. I mean some

1126
01:09:41.319 --> 01:09:44.079
<v Speaker 2>of them are very disparaging to the Fathers, like right on,

1127
01:09:44.840 --> 01:09:48.520
<v Speaker 2>like Beller mean when he criticizes the Seventh Ecumental Council

1128
01:09:48.760 --> 01:09:54.319
<v Speaker 2>Fathers for endorsing the condemnation of Honorius Robert Beller mean

1129
01:09:54.399 --> 01:09:57.880
<v Speaker 2>in Roman Catholic saying he says the father simply followed

1130
01:09:57.880 --> 01:10:01.439
<v Speaker 2>what they saw in the any scripts they were basically

1131
01:10:01.439 --> 01:10:05.119
<v Speaker 2>just implies they were misled. They don't. Many rom Katacs

1132
01:10:05.159 --> 01:10:09.079
<v Speaker 2>have not been respectful to the Church Fathers in that degree.

1133
01:10:11.680 --> 01:10:16.239
<v Speaker 2>So I yeah, because the Seventh Council does also reiterate.

1134
01:10:16.479 --> 01:10:19.640
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it reiterates Honri's's condination exactly.

1135
01:10:21.039 --> 01:10:23.880
<v Speaker 2>As for the images of God the Father, I used

1136
01:10:23.880 --> 01:10:26.720
<v Speaker 2>to have a chapter on that, but I got rid

1137
01:10:26.760 --> 01:10:29.399
<v Speaker 2>of that basically, not just some notes. If someone really

1138
01:10:29.399 --> 01:10:32.560
<v Speaker 2>wants they could always reach out to me, because I

1139
01:10:32.560 --> 01:10:34.760
<v Speaker 2>I think it's just one of those points on which

1140
01:10:34.760 --> 01:10:35.840
<v Speaker 2>there's differences within.

1141
01:10:35.960 --> 01:10:37.800
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. I know, it's a nuanced issue and we have

1142
01:10:37.920 --> 01:10:41.600
<v Speaker 1>the you know, the ancient days, and my point was

1143
01:10:41.640 --> 01:10:45.920
<v Speaker 1>not to be hyper precise about the canon. I'm just

1144
01:10:45.960 --> 01:10:50.000
<v Speaker 1>saying that the theology of icons, which clearly is the

1145
01:10:50.000 --> 01:10:53.439
<v Speaker 1>ethos of the Seventh Council, is not followed by Rome.

1146
01:10:53.960 --> 01:10:56.279
<v Speaker 1>So I mean, in their minds, it's just yeah, you

1147
01:10:56.319 --> 01:10:59.520
<v Speaker 1>can have artistic religious images, It's like, but that's not

1148
01:10:59.560 --> 01:11:02.279
<v Speaker 1>what I anography and iconographic theology really is.

1149
01:11:03.720 --> 01:11:06.359
<v Speaker 2>Yes, yes, same with the statues as well. I know

1150
01:11:06.439 --> 01:11:09.680
<v Speaker 2>that's disputed. I mean I would say Roman Catholics exceeded

1151
01:11:09.680 --> 01:11:13.239
<v Speaker 2>the bounds of propriety. Oh and even on images, there's

1152
01:11:13.279 --> 01:11:17.960
<v Speaker 2>some rather strange things with the Renaissance art work.

1153
01:11:18.039 --> 01:11:22.159
<v Speaker 1>Oh absolutely, So that's that's that's essentially what the Well,

1154
01:11:22.159 --> 01:11:24.760
<v Speaker 1>the Los Gawspensky book is really good kind of critiquing

1155
01:11:24.800 --> 01:11:25.119
<v Speaker 1>some of that.

1156
01:11:25.199 --> 01:11:29.840
<v Speaker 2>Later on, there's some rather disturbing things. I mean, in

1157
01:11:29.920 --> 01:11:35.319
<v Speaker 2>the Sistine Chapel that Michaelangelo depicts the Blessed Virgin Mary

1158
01:11:35.399 --> 01:11:37.319
<v Speaker 2>in a rather sensual pose.

1159
01:11:37.600 --> 01:11:39.239
<v Speaker 1>Well, it's a lot more than that. I mean, there's

1160
01:11:39.279 --> 01:11:43.000
<v Speaker 1>a lot of weird hermetic stuff going on. And that's

1161
01:11:43.039 --> 01:11:45.600
<v Speaker 1>that's I mentioned earlier that book a cult Renaissance Church

1162
01:11:45.600 --> 01:11:49.319
<v Speaker 1>of Rome, and even as a trad cat Hoffman wrote

1163
01:11:49.359 --> 01:11:54.239
<v Speaker 1>that critiquing a lot of the Renaissance art of the Roman,

1164
01:11:54.479 --> 01:11:55.800
<v Speaker 1>of the Vatican, the Roman Church.

1165
01:11:55.840 --> 01:12:00.600
<v Speaker 2>So yeah, yeah, it's disturbing sometimes how they depict Blessed

1166
01:12:00.640 --> 01:12:04.159
<v Speaker 2>Virgin Mary similar to the so called Goddess of Desire

1167
01:12:04.359 --> 01:12:08.239
<v Speaker 2>of Venus. They imitate those ancient exact statues. It's like,

1168
01:12:08.319 --> 01:12:13.079
<v Speaker 2>that's not appropriate. Same with some strange ideas of people

1169
01:12:13.119 --> 01:12:15.600
<v Speaker 2>receiving milk from the breast of the Virgin Mary.

1170
01:12:15.720 --> 01:12:19.760
<v Speaker 1>Yes, this is a Taylor Marshall the favorite.

1171
01:12:20.439 --> 01:12:22.760
<v Speaker 2>Oh yes, I have seen that.

1172
01:12:23.520 --> 01:12:25.720
<v Speaker 1>But that's I mean, that's kind of a joke. But

1173
01:12:25.760 --> 01:12:28.640
<v Speaker 1>it's also not a joke because this is actually really

1174
01:12:28.720 --> 01:12:32.720
<v Speaker 1>important to a lot of Roman Catholic devotional life. In fact,

1175
01:12:32.880 --> 01:12:35.880
<v Speaker 1>the church down the road from us is Our Lady

1176
01:12:35.880 --> 01:12:39.600
<v Speaker 1>of La Leche, which is a giant Roman Catholic shrine,

1177
01:12:39.680 --> 01:12:42.920
<v Speaker 1>because the Franciscans did one of the first masses in America.

1178
01:12:42.960 --> 01:12:45.840
<v Speaker 1>There might be the first mass even in North America,

1179
01:12:46.479 --> 01:12:48.840
<v Speaker 1>and it's Our Lady of the Milk. This is actually

1180
01:12:48.840 --> 01:12:54.760
<v Speaker 1>a really important thing in Roman calog mysticism.

1181
01:12:54.840 --> 01:12:57.279
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it's strange, and you can document it. There's no

1182
01:12:57.319 --> 01:13:00.600
<v Speaker 2>evidence of anyone you same with the stigma, no evidence

1183
01:13:00.600 --> 01:13:03.279
<v Speaker 2>of this in the first millennium, no evidence of someone

1184
01:13:03.319 --> 01:13:06.680
<v Speaker 2>receiving milk from Mary's breast. It's a rather strange thing,

1185
01:13:06.680 --> 01:13:08.920
<v Speaker 2>but there's no evidence of that in the first millennium.

1186
01:13:08.920 --> 01:13:09.760
<v Speaker 2>It's starting now.

1187
01:13:09.800 --> 01:13:13.279
<v Speaker 1>I'm assuming I know that it comes up. It's in

1188
01:13:13.439 --> 01:13:16.000
<v Speaker 1>paintings of Bernard and that when I was a tried cap,

1189
01:13:16.079 --> 01:13:17.960
<v Speaker 1>I used to love Bernard of Clervau and I'd read

1190
01:13:17.960 --> 01:13:20.119
<v Speaker 1>his stuff all the time. And you have a little

1191
01:13:20.159 --> 01:13:22.439
<v Speaker 1>section on that. What was your conclusion on that.

1192
01:13:24.119 --> 01:13:27.680
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I've seen it in the Proudu Museum in Spain,

1193
01:13:28.079 --> 01:13:34.439
<v Speaker 2>in Madrid, they have the artwork. It's rather strange. I

1194
01:13:34.439 --> 01:13:37.319
<v Speaker 2>mean they say it's supposed to be. Sometimes they say

1195
01:13:37.359 --> 01:13:39.239
<v Speaker 2>it was in a miracle or a vision, not in

1196
01:13:39.680 --> 01:13:40.239
<v Speaker 2>real life.

1197
01:13:40.399 --> 01:13:41.880
<v Speaker 1>Of who of was it?

1198
01:13:44.439 --> 01:13:47.079
<v Speaker 2>I think it, Yeah, it was Bernard of Clervaux. I

1199
01:13:47.079 --> 01:13:50.159
<v Speaker 2>think there's been different interpretations of how this event happened.

1200
01:13:50.720 --> 01:13:52.720
<v Speaker 2>But again I would say, you know, we had many

1201
01:13:52.840 --> 01:13:56.199
<v Speaker 2>you know, all the thousands of tens of thousands, millions

1202
01:13:56.239 --> 01:13:59.079
<v Speaker 2>of Christians in the first millennium, no one had the

1203
01:13:59.119 --> 01:14:02.600
<v Speaker 2>stigma that no one had this. It's it's just it.

1204
01:14:03.079 --> 01:14:05.880
<v Speaker 2>I focus just on the historical discontinuity. You know, maybe

1205
01:14:06.199 --> 01:14:08.840
<v Speaker 2>the same with the stigmata. They defend it from Saint

1206
01:14:08.880 --> 01:14:10.920
<v Speaker 2>Paul's words where he says I bear in my body

1207
01:14:10.960 --> 01:14:13.239
<v Speaker 2>the marks of the Lord Jesus, and the word marks

1208
01:14:13.279 --> 01:14:17.560
<v Speaker 2>in Latin is stigmata. But the church fathers don't see

1209
01:14:17.560 --> 01:14:18.159
<v Speaker 2>that as.

1210
01:14:18.000 --> 01:14:19.640
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's not literally the marks.

1211
01:14:19.720 --> 01:14:23.159
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, no, it's not. Yeah, and yeah. I quote John

1212
01:14:23.199 --> 01:14:26.880
<v Speaker 2>Crazostom giving it a different interpretation, saying it's his trials,

1213
01:14:26.880 --> 01:14:30.279
<v Speaker 2>his dangers, his stripes, the perils which attended his conversion.

1214
01:14:31.680 --> 01:14:34.119
<v Speaker 2>But they say there's been three hundred, at least three

1215
01:14:34.159 --> 01:14:38.399
<v Speaker 2>hundred and twenty one stigmatics since twelve twenty four. I mean, right,

1216
01:14:38.479 --> 01:14:41.880
<v Speaker 2>it's how is that it's not statistically possible? If uh,

1217
01:14:42.159 --> 01:14:44.720
<v Speaker 2>it's just strange that you know, Saint Francis, the Roman Catholic,

1218
01:14:44.800 --> 01:14:47.720
<v Speaker 2>Saint Francis of ASSISI was the first to have received

1219
01:14:48.079 --> 01:14:49.039
<v Speaker 2>the stigmata.

1220
01:14:49.159 --> 01:14:52.119
<v Speaker 1>So yeah, did you know I've found in Uh. I

1221
01:14:52.159 --> 01:14:55.399
<v Speaker 1>was reading a book, The Oxford Companion to Western Mysticism,

1222
01:14:55.479 --> 01:14:59.079
<v Speaker 1>and this whole chapter on medieval Roman Catholic male and

1223
01:14:59.119 --> 01:15:03.039
<v Speaker 1>female mystic and I didn't know that Francis claimed to

1224
01:15:03.039 --> 01:15:06.079
<v Speaker 1>have a vision of seeing a crucified seraphim. Did you

1225
01:15:06.079 --> 01:15:10.039
<v Speaker 1>know that I know I did really really weird stuff,

1226
01:15:10.039 --> 01:15:12.640
<v Speaker 1>which you know is orthodox would be like that's out there.

1227
01:15:14.000 --> 01:15:16.479
<v Speaker 1>Rum Mcallich's love it. They think this is like a

1228
01:15:17.159 --> 01:15:19.479
<v Speaker 1>there's a sign. You know, he's clearly saying he saw

1229
01:15:19.560 --> 01:15:22.359
<v Speaker 1>a crucified seraphim. I mean the angels weren't crucified. It

1230
01:15:22.359 --> 01:15:27.439
<v Speaker 1>doesn't make any sense. But okay, so we've gone for

1231
01:15:27.600 --> 01:15:30.119
<v Speaker 1>a little you know, hour and fifteen. That's a pretty good,

1232
01:15:30.159 --> 01:15:35.439
<v Speaker 1>I think overview of this text. Again, I highly recommend

1233
01:15:35.520 --> 01:15:39.119
<v Speaker 1>everybody get this. As I look at the chapter section

1234
01:15:39.439 --> 01:15:42.439
<v Speaker 1>titles here, this is way more extensive than I expected.

1235
01:15:42.600 --> 01:15:44.840
<v Speaker 1>In fact, I'm not that I wasn't interested in the

1236
01:15:44.840 --> 01:15:47.000
<v Speaker 1>forgeries book. This is this is way more than that.

1237
01:15:47.399 --> 01:15:50.199
<v Speaker 1>So I think, guys, you really need to get airs

1238
01:15:50.199 --> 01:15:52.880
<v Speaker 1>of the Latins Volume one and two. I've got it

1239
01:15:52.920 --> 01:15:56.279
<v Speaker 1>linked below from Uncut Mountain Press, and it is now available,

1240
01:15:56.279 --> 01:15:59.479
<v Speaker 1>so it is ready to ship. It just went to

1241
01:15:59.520 --> 01:16:02.960
<v Speaker 1>the printer couple days ago. So what else, George, anything

1242
01:16:02.960 --> 01:16:05.359
<v Speaker 1>else that we need to know about the book before

1243
01:16:05.399 --> 01:16:05.880
<v Speaker 1>we get it.

1244
01:16:07.399 --> 01:16:11.720
<v Speaker 2>I think that's basically it. Yeah, there's these different topics.

1245
01:16:11.760 --> 01:16:15.039
<v Speaker 2>I tried my best to be as fair as I could,

1246
01:16:15.640 --> 01:16:19.520
<v Speaker 2>and I put a love effort into the research.

1247
01:16:19.840 --> 01:16:22.119
<v Speaker 1>It's well many years. This isn't This isn't like a

1248
01:16:22.279 --> 01:16:24.399
<v Speaker 1>you know, throw it together thing. You've been working on

1249
01:16:24.479 --> 01:16:25.159
<v Speaker 1>us for a long time.

1250
01:16:26.119 --> 01:16:29.119
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it's a lot of time. I mean it's meant

1251
01:16:29.159 --> 01:16:30.560
<v Speaker 2>to be more of a reference work. You don't have

1252
01:16:30.600 --> 01:16:34.319
<v Speaker 2>to read from beginning to end. It's meant to I

1253
01:16:34.319 --> 01:16:38.000
<v Speaker 2>have a lot of recommendations for additional reading so that

1254
01:16:38.600 --> 01:16:40.359
<v Speaker 2>someone could turn to those if they want to get

1255
01:16:40.359 --> 01:16:44.479
<v Speaker 2>more details. And yeah, it's meant to be more Yeah,

1256
01:16:44.560 --> 01:16:47.039
<v Speaker 2>reference work. You don't have to read all the pages.

1257
01:16:47.079 --> 01:16:49.760
<v Speaker 2>I know it's a lot of text, but I think

1258
01:16:50.199 --> 01:16:53.439
<v Speaker 2>it helps to just document. That's my main name, to

1259
01:16:53.560 --> 01:16:57.279
<v Speaker 2>just have these quotations and cite things fairly and try

1260
01:16:57.319 --> 01:17:01.000
<v Speaker 2>and consider aspect of the question.

1261
01:17:01.479 --> 01:17:03.720
<v Speaker 1>It looks like a really well done scholarly work. I'm

1262
01:17:03.760 --> 01:17:06.199
<v Speaker 1>really proud of you. I think it's awesome. It's amazing.

1263
01:17:07.359 --> 01:17:10.520
<v Speaker 1>May God bless this venture. Guys. Remember to head on

1264
01:17:10.520 --> 01:17:12.439
<v Speaker 1>over to chalk dot com. That is a show sponsor,

1265
01:17:12.880 --> 01:17:14.720
<v Speaker 1>and they do have the best and supplements. If you're

1266
01:17:14.760 --> 01:17:16.399
<v Speaker 1>ready to get in the gym, you're ready to change

1267
01:17:16.479 --> 01:17:20.840
<v Speaker 1>your physical appearance. Of course, spiritual stuff is what matters.

1268
01:17:20.880 --> 01:17:23.640
<v Speaker 1>The most, but also our body does matter, so let's

1269
01:17:23.680 --> 01:17:27.079
<v Speaker 1>not abuse our bodies. Let's not be unhealthy. Get in

1270
01:17:27.119 --> 01:17:29.239
<v Speaker 1>the gym, get your diet right. Head on over to

1271
01:17:29.279 --> 01:17:31.439
<v Speaker 1>chalk dot com. Use promo code J forty JYF or

1272
01:17:31.520 --> 01:17:33.600
<v Speaker 1>zero get forty percent off of all those great products

1273
01:17:33.640 --> 01:17:37.199
<v Speaker 1>as well as the recurring subscription J forty four Life.

1274
01:17:37.199 --> 01:17:40.079
<v Speaker 1>This is Jay four four l I f E, as

1275
01:17:40.079 --> 01:17:45.039
<v Speaker 1>well as supporting George and other Orthodox content creators and writers. George,

1276
01:17:45.079 --> 01:17:46.920
<v Speaker 1>thank you so much for coming on. Great discussion.

1277
01:17:48.000 --> 01:17:50.479
<v Speaker 2>Thank you very much, Jay, absolutely.

1278
01:17:50.000 --> 01:17:52.359
<v Speaker 1>And we're going to have this up very soon, probably tonight,

1279
01:17:53.119 --> 01:17:55.920
<v Speaker 1>and yeah, we'll see what the reactions are and we'll

1280
01:17:55.920 --> 01:17:58.039
<v Speaker 1>probably get you back on. We'll get into some more

1281
01:17:58.079 --> 01:18:02.399
<v Speaker 1>of these subjects. It's so extensive, like there's stuff going

1282
01:18:02.439 --> 01:18:06.479
<v Speaker 1>on here with the papacy and medieval stuff. Nobody talks

1283
01:18:06.520 --> 01:18:08.800
<v Speaker 1>about weird medieval mysticism, I think, but this needs to

1284
01:18:08.840 --> 01:18:10.399
<v Speaker 1>be talked about more. So maybe we'll come back and

1285
01:18:10.439 --> 01:18:12.960
<v Speaker 1>talk about some of that. But thank you so much, George.

1286
01:18:13.920 --> 01:18:15.079
<v Speaker 2>Sure, any time,