Just to clarify the Patriarch of Constantinople had and still has *very* little authority over other Patriarchs. He is considered first among equals meaning unlike the Pope his role is more or less just honorary. The Orthodox Church is very decentralized and every Patriarch (even those below them) have the freedom to handle religious activities on their own.
@@alexandrub8786 The problem with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is simple: it never existed. It was always a part of the Russian Orthodox Church. Creating a new Church based on politics and border changes is not something that's supposed to be done. The argument "our country is independent so our church should be too" is idiotic especially considering that the church and state are supposed to be separate.
@@nekilik7886 what you are speaking about is "phyletism" and it was condemn as a modern heresy by the Holy and Great pan-Orthodox synode of Constantinople of 1872 that is why the Montenegro Orthodox Church is not Recognized by any country,i am sure that the Ecumenical Patriarch had his reason but i will do as my bishops and patriarch(of Romania) and stay on the sideline and just watch.
@@gxbenzi If we are doing that then we should count every autocephalous branch of orthodoxy as a separate church then? My point being, though nondenominational churches inflate the number of separate church branches under Protestantism they fit into about twelve main branches that internally follow identical theology.
The Lutherans sent 3 delegations to Constantinople and each time the Patriarch was like "Yeah we agree the Pope is bad but you still have the Filioque and here's why it's wrong." The Lutherans responded that it didn't matter that much and insisted that they still had largely the same beliefs. After refuting them twice, the Patriarch finally said "Since you won't listen to our criticisms, stop coming all the way over here just to annoy us!"
Melenchthon read the Church Fathers, and (as anyone who looks at early Lutheran theology can see) thought that the Fathers were firmly on his side. Because of this, he thought that the East must surely have agreed with him, and that there was simply a language barrier or something (the Germans had a lot more practice at reading Byzantine and Koine Greek than they did communicating in Greek of any period).
"After refuting" More like after a lot of argument, the Catholic Church battled with the East on the Filioque for centuries, to think that the Lutherans, who's own interpretation proceeded from Catholic interpretation had any chance to change that is beyond foolish.
@@Crawedfish it's historically illiterate to suggest the filioque was ever a "resolved" thing. What do you know about the 879 Council of Constantinople where Rome anathematized the filioque?
@@patriarchprime Those of the Queen of cities have attacked the synodal letter of the present very holy Pope (Martin I), not in the case of all the chapters that he has written in it, but only in the case of two of them. One relates to theology, because it says he says that ‘the Holy Spirit proceeds (ἐκπορεύεσθαι) also from the Son.’ The other has to do with the divine incarnation, because he has written, ‘The Lord, as man, is without original sin.’ With regard to the first matter, they (the Romans) have produced the unanimous documentary evidence of the Latin fathers, and also of Cyril of Alexandria, from the sacred commentary he composed on the gospel of St. John. On the basis of these texts, they have shown that they have not made the Son the cause of the Spirit - they know in fact that the Father is the only cause of the Son and the Spirit, the one by begetting and the other by procession; but [they use this expression] in order to manifest the Spirit’s coming-forth (προϊέναι) through him and, in this way, to make clear the unity and identity of the essence…. The Romans have therefore been accused of things of which it is wrong to accuse them, whereas of the things of which the Byzantines have quite rightly been accused (viz., Monothelitism), they have, to date, made no self-defense, because neither have they gotten rid of the things introduced by them. But, in accordance with your request, I have asked the Romans to translate what is peculiar to them in such a way that any obscurities that may result from it will be avoided. But since the practice of writing and sending (the synodal letters) has been observed, I wonder whether they will possibly agree to doing this. One should also keep in mind that they cannot express their meaning in a language and idiom that are foreign to them as precisely as they can in their own mother-tongue, any more than we can do. -maximus
Actually after their initial conquest, Greece had a lot of love for Rome, because Rome loved all things greek exspecially greek culture, so they spread it all over europe and Rome stopped the endless barbarian raids on greek lands, which had plagued them for millineas. And the Roman middle east(modern day Syria/Israel/Jordan) was also fairly fond of Rome because they had been endless punching bags for Egypt and greek states in Turkey, and they finally saw stability under Rome, until the Persians/Seljuk Turks came.
On one hand, it's understandable that the Protestants thought they would find common ground with the Orthodox as both factions had a common enemy in Rome. On the other hand, it's hilarious that the Protestants thought they could convince the Orthodox to agree with them on theology when they couldn't even get other Protestants to agree with them.
@@mimorisenpai8540 Luther died 29 years before the Augsburg Confession was translated into Greek. Besides, the Calvinists and Anabaptists (among others) had already splintered off during his lifetime.
At that time, there were only really two influential iterations of Protestantism (Reformed and Lutheran), and even despite the Lutheran and Reformed's failure to unify they still hold far more in common than you are making it sound. Heck, the core tenents of modern-day evangelicalism are still compatible with the Magesterial reformers. It's just that they haven't systematized everything as thoroughly, and so they have far more flexibility on the view of the supper, baptism, and other secondary issues. Anabaptism is mostly alive today in the US as Amish, Mennonite, Hutterite, and the church of the Brethren. These groups tend to be fairly isolationist, pacifists, and pietistic in their rejection of the modern world. For all intents and purposes, they don't really matter when it comes to the broader conversation since they aren't present to voice their doctrine.
Same here. Reminds me of the time I found out there is more than one Pope. The Coptic, or "Egyptian" Christians have their own pope. I went to Catholic school for 12 years so the revelation was quite substantial.
It has been a really solid adaptation from the 10 minute videos about topics that several other channels have covered. It’s gives this channel a unique niche and identity of its own now.
@@Gwildor2020 true, that’s why I wanted to clarify that we do exist, we have the Swedish church which is the normal Lutheran Protestant church and then we have all these splinter groups that we call “fri kyrkor” and those are a little bit different bur still Christian. There are more Christian’s in Sweden than you think trust me
I'm still a member of the "Church of Norway" (Lutheran), but the church has become gay and feminine. I don't have to wonder why that is, as I personally used to know a communist+atheist (member of "Rødt") who studied theology to become a priest, just so he could infiltrate the church and change it from the inside. They've succeeded in making a joke out of the church, allowing not only women to be priests and bishops, but also openly gay men with "partners", and finally gay marrige in 2016... I'm converting if I get the chance.
Ivan was a great guy. Had strong feelings about his son, took an active role in his daughter in-laws life, and prevented his subjects from thinking about pointless things. 10/10 great job keeping his subjects from hell and making sure his son and grandson got to heaven.
@@Andrew-gn9qp you are in fact wrong because at least in my country (Slovakia) there is an agreement between catholic church and protestants ones where they mutually recognize baptism of each other
For a physical representation of one major difference, icons are somewhat frowned on in the Protestant churches, and in Orthodox churches there is a literal wall of icons, or Iconostasis, between the nave and sanctuary.
The Calvinists certainly did not like images. The Lutherans use the crucifix to this day. Protestant denominations in the US came mainly from the Calvinist tradition even when they rejected Calvinism per se. Many people in the US assume that, while Catholics use the crucifix, all Protestants use the plain cross. That is just that the Lutherans did not have much of an effect in the US.
0:20 those murals in the back look so good, I see ur art budget has gone up also “What was Vietnam like after the Vietnam War?” would be a good idea for a future video.
The answer is "fighting yet another decade-plus war against yet another world power and still winning." From what I've heard, the war against China is much more salient in the Vietnamese public memory than the American war.
They eventually adopted a capitalist system like China did when they and other communist countries that didn’t collapse realise there form of State Capitalism wasn’t working anymore.
Made a research about the Church of Cyprus during the Reformation, an orthodox church under Catholic control, their response was "not our business, leave us both alone" sort of...
all religions fail to adapt with time. I'm surprised we still have religion in this world. we still see idiot religious fanatics killing in the name of God around the Middle East these days. or some politicians talk about the "glory days" of their great empire or caliphate. example? Sultan Erdogan from Turkey.
Buddy we're pretty clearly going to re-enter a religious age. I don't say that because of any biblical or superstitious prophecy or whathaveyou either.
Hi. I adore your work and am learning a lot. I've read history for 40 years, but you're filling in gaps and I'm grateful. BETTER: My wife, who is not much for history, gets a lot of laughs out of your work, and asks for us to share your vids. So . . . THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!
Anglicanism started as an Orthodox-like movement. Henry VIII wasn't a reformer, he was a schismatic. Mind, Henry VIII was also a... terrible person. And Edward VI after him *was* a reformer, as would be Elizabeth.
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out. -Acts 3:19 If are in North America, please go check out any of the churches available to you: PCA, OPC, Rpcna/Rpc, Urcna, or a canrc church (These are conservative and actual Presbyterian churches) If you can’t find one of the conservative presby churches then, maybe a Lcms or Wels Lutheran church. If you are Scottish, I recommend the Free Church of Scotland and the APC (Different from the Church of Scotland) If you are English I recommend the Free Church of England. (Different from the Church of England) Online you can look up church finders for each of the groups and it will show you locations. :)
I’m currently a seminary student at a Protestant seminary, working on completing a Master of Divinity degree: it entails doing courses in theology, church history/historical theology, pastoral care & counseling, cultural studies, and philosophy. I LOVE these sorts of videos because I enjoy history so much! This is awesome!
@@radicalgremlin6440 I hear that! Do it if it’s a call, not for ego, attention, or to fill a hole, or it’ll destroy you, your family, and parishioners, and God does NOT want that. Learn & remember how to come back to the Center of your life that is Christ: that you are beloved of Him, as you are and not as you should be, because no one is as they should be, but God welcomes, accepts, forgives, heals, and shapes them; it’s only those who think they’ve got everything together perfectly that God cannot do much with, because pride is a killer. But there’s two sides to pride: the boisterous, cocky, self-indulgent kind, and the overly timid, self condemning, always worrying, perfectionist kind. Both are ultimately obsessed with themselves, not God, though they think they are. The cocky kind thinks “I’m doing things so well; everyone else needs to be like me; why am I the only who cares??” He can’t see that he NEEDS the grace of God, without which he wouldn’t be alive, saved, or sustained in faith. He needs to humble himself, and trust that only God can save, and that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, even him; that ultimately, self-sufficiency will lead to destruction, because it’s an attempt to live apart from God through self-righteousness-the very sin in the story of the garden of Eden. The timid, self-condemning guy (I was/sometimes still am this type) is constantly worried about his and others’ performance under God; he takes seriously the biblical call to be holy as God is holy, but forgets that he can do NOTHING apart from Christ. Instead of resting in Christ, trusting Him to be faithful to help us grow, learn, overcome sin & struggles, and be enough for salvation, this type really does at his core believe that if he doesn’t do it all, then no one will (apparently not even God, though he’d never consciously say that), yet he acts as if his messing up will someone invalidate Christ’s death and resurrection; like it applies to everyone else, but not him. And that is the HEIGHT of arrogance. He needs to learn to rest in God-the only thing that will bring peace, rest, joy, and true progress over sin. When in doubt, always pray, “Come Holy Spirit” and rest in the fact that God knows your heart and will help you. He brings clarity, peace, understanding and growth, not panic, striving, and condemnation. I say all this because it’s a tricky call, but rewarding. Take it one step at a time. Be willing to apologize. Be willing to be firm and enforce boundaries. Learn how to say “no,” because Jesus said “no” to people, and it’s healthy for you, and reminds you that you’re not God. Take time to rest and enjoy things you like to do weekly at least. Serve others kindly, but don’t tolerate abuse of others or yourself (it’s one thing to endure hardship for the sake of the Kingdom, but another thing to enable horrendous behavior that hurts you, them, and others). Never stop clinging to Jesus. He’s the only Way. Ps, some GREAT books: Abba’s Child by Brennan Manning Making all things new by Henri Nouwen Ministry in the Image of God by Seamands
@@CourtlySeaDog To be fair, the 'set them on fire' bit is more because I'm a convert from Protestantism, so that's pretty much just 'convert syndrome' or whatever you want to call it.
Great video! Interestingly, in the second half of the nineteenth century through to the early twentieth, there was a lot of discussion around uniting the Anglican and Orthodox churches. Imagine what an alternate reality it would be if Britain and Russia shared the same faith?
I wander, though, if Anglican church is protestant at all, 'cause it has nothing to do with Martin Luther or Jaques Calvin or Reformation for that matter, but with Henry Vlll's desire to get divorsed and remarry as many times as he wanted.
@@kerriwilson7732 yep, you are right - adherents always had little say in what their leaders chose to do (and continue to have little say in some circumstances)
why i like this channel so much is because each time i see the question you answer, i think " yeah, that's a good question, i never thought about it" and i'm genuily interested in the answer.
But in this case, the orthodox is like a wife who wants to do what she wants and no man or husband is gonna tell her what to do, so she breaks up with her dominant husband. Not very traditional but it is what it is.
Interesting, that you chose to use borders from the middle of the Livonian War in the Baltic region of the map, as the Bishopric of Tartu (Dorpat) was most certainly not orthodox. I would also like to point out, that most of the present-day territory of Estonia joined the reformation quite early on, with Martin Luther even sending a letter to Tallinn (Reval) at the time. I do, however, understand the practicality of using political boundries, as the true religious divides were all over the place. Thank you for the great video as always! Keep up the good work! :)
Political are way more convenient. Imagine Poland-Lithuania with all their colonies settles by minority religious groups, Muslim communities and.. Well, the fact that most of the population just started converting during reformation actually. There was an inspection send by the Pope and they realised that outside of cities and nobility, the old faith was practiced like nothing happened since the 10th century.
There were some Orthodox (and/or crypto -Orthodox?) people in around Tartu since 11th century. Idk how many though but in 1472 some were murdered by the local authorities for being Eastern Orthodox by drawning them in Emajõgi river.
Ck2 has an event that encapsulates it well; "Hah! The fools bicker amongst themselves!" . basically Ivan's response but with no fear of it spreading because of incompatibility of protestant ideas
In one sense, they didn't, really. I mean, it was obvious that the Holy Roman Empire and a few other centers of power in the Catholic world were having some drama, and so there were some rumblings of it being a good time to invade (one of the Sieges of Vienna happened during the drama of the early Reformation) but when Vienna didn't fall, it wasn't really all that big of a deal. Nobody was translating what Luther said about the Koran into Turkish or Arabic or anything. I mean, if they had, the Muslim world probably would have been as offended by Lutherans as Luther was by the Koran. Maybe the sultan and the emperor would have teamed up in the Smalkaldic War or something. However, none of that happened.
The Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox were all heretics in their view. Things get really interesting during the 30 years war when the Ottomans try to take advantage of the situation, it does not work but it's not from lack of trying.
Well... before That genius monk of Martin Luther.. everybody was Roman Catholic.. but I think that he was wrong to separate the Christian faith Although I admit that some personality in the Vatican they misbehave... but that was not enough to change the Holy Bible according to his ideas.
The patriarch of Constantinople is *NOT* the highest ranked patriarch in the orthodox world. All of the orthodox patriarchs of the East have equal stature in orthodoxy. The patriarchies are Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, Constantinople & Rome. Also important to note that the apostate “popes” of Rome are nothing more than an equal bishop/patriarch equal to all the other patriarchal cities of the East. The western Latin Catholics broke away from the original Christian church. The original Christian church is the Eastern Orthodox Church (as it is today). The Protestants then broke away from the already broken-away Catholics. Therefore the Orthodox perspective is that Protestants must actually come back to the original unchanged Christian which which is the Orthodox Church. And Catholics must come back too.
Since the 1st century we have documents that attest the supremacy of the Church of Rome. Moreover, you Orthodoxes, just like us, Catholics, believe in the Doctrine of the Apostolic Succession (that's why we know your sacraments are still valid). Accordingly, the powers once held by the Apostles are continued throughout their appointed successors. You also believe that Saint Peter has a special role amongst the Apostles (which is impossible to deny, since it appears in several verses of the holy scriptures) but, contradictorily, you deny that this role is applied to his successors.
Its nice that he made his animation style version of The Wounded Angel painting by Hugo Simberg as the background of the patreon supporters list. Its a beautiful painting seen it in person when I was a kid.
@@realtsarbomba yes because we all know leopold ii,hitler,stalin, and pol pot were devout christains even tho im an athiest this is one of the most stupid comment i have seen and ignores historical context behind wars
I agree it's the subtle things you notice with this guys art, I would even say his "papers" look better now, they look more like paper or parchment instead of white squares
The only instance I can think of where heretics were burned by Orthodox authorities was during the end of the reign of Alexios Komnenos and at his orders. It was during the height of the Crusades and Alexios wanted to impress some of his Western "guests", so it was politically motivated. The act, of course, was massively unpopular with both the clergy and the citizenry. Revolting even. Manuel Komnenos did something similar to appease the Crusaders. Runciman recounts this episode in his History of the Crusades.
I was just about to make a rebuttal, referencing the emperor Alexios Komnenos but as you pointed out, these imperial acts tended to spark opposition from the Church. This is not too dissimilar to the Spanish Inquisition, which was largely the product of the kings of Spain rather than the Church of Rome.
I’m a former Pentecostal from the Evangelical Protestant world, and I converted to the Greek Orthodox Church last year. Although, I do respect Roman Catholic and Protestants because we’re all Christians in the end.
@@mlc4495 Yeah, I agree with you. I took sociology during my freshman year at college, and they stated in the textbook, “Non-Trinitarian believers in Christ are not considered to be Christians by the majority of people.”
I’m looking to convert to orthodoxy, however I’ve run into some members of the Orthodox Church and their beliefs regarding the salvation of other denominations bother me. They say that those who aren’t orthodox aren’t truly saved. Is this a common belief among the members of the Orthodox Churches?? If so, that may be something that can prevent my conversion. Why would they say that?
@@spidermayne4193 Before A.D. 1054, the Western (Roman Catholic) and Eastern (Orthodox) churches were together as the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ with his 12 apostles founded the church on the Day of Pentecost in AD 33. Basically, when those people at your parish say that those people aren’t saved, they’re just trying to say that the Orthodox Church is pre-denominational. It’s not a denomination because that began with Martin Luther and the rest of mainline Protestants and evangelical Protestants. {We} Orthodox Christians believe we carry on the holy tradition and holy scriptures of the church that Christ established in AD 33. It’s called “Apostolic succession.” Even though I ain’t Roman Catholic, they are also pre-denominational because they were with us Orthodox before 1054 (The Great Schism). Furthermore, Roman Catholics adhere to the doctrine, “There’s no salvation outside the Roman Catholic Church.” That’s just dogma. Orthodox Christians follow doctrine, too. But, you know... it’s just part of doctrine in the church. Honestly, since I’m a former Pentecostal, I believe God still loves any kind of Christian. However, I believe that the Orthodox Church is the most accurate way to worship God and live like Jesus. Talk to the parish priest there and ask him that question ‘cause he’ll give you a better answer than I can. Anyway, salvation from the Orthodox view is through a process. It’s a past, present, and future thing. I was saved by Jesus, I’m still trying to carry my cross everyday like Jesus (Present) and I hope to be with Jesus at the end of my earthly life (Future tense). One final statement that I’d say is that Jesus loves us all: sinners and believers. He’s merciful. God bless you, and I hope I was able to really answer your question with a depth explanation. In Christ, Elijah
I love how they taught they could agree with orthodox, which are literally the" i want to stay the same" deal. Like, the reason in general for the great skism was simply that the orthodox wanted to do what they've always done , keep the tradition
Thank you very much for giving some coverage to this not very talked about subject. I really enjoyed it and will look further into it. One thing I have found interesting in the past was how the new monarchies in Eastern Europe created in the 19th century for lands with a mainly Christian Orthodox population, chose mostly junior German Protestant princes to be their new sovereigns in their newly created countries, like Greece and Romania. And the newly minted royal families adopted the Orthodox Church of their new nations. They then seemed able as newly minted Orthodox Christians to have more flexibility in making matches with both Protestant and Catholic families of older Royal houses. For example Orthodox Prince Philip of Greece marrying C of E Princess Elizabeth, because the only religion she was barred from marrying into was the Roman Catholic faith. Or Orthodox Prince Nicholas of Russia marrying Lutheran Princess Alexandra of Hesse. Or Prince Philip of Greece’s Orthodox cousin Princess Sophia of Greece marrying Catholic Prince Juan Carlos of Spain.
@@ironduke3780 Eh, what did you expect. Rome made a blunder turning to christianity instead of stamping them out like Manicheism. Seriously - not even Mars cultists are this prone to conflict lmao
@@ironduke3780 The Arian and Donatist Schisms happened during his lifetime, and were subjects of Church synods and Councils which failed to resolve them.
@@kestutisvaiciunas8663 Nah it was fine. The problem every single member of the Christian church were and are motivated by different reasons. Most Christians would want to be united under One Church and focused on the spiritual treasure, others were motivated by selfishness and lust of the flesh and treasures of this world. Take the Pope for example, he is not supposed to be above the other Patriarchs, he is supposed to be first among equals. Not to mention, Protestants and are their Sola Scriptural non sense. Politics also come into play to be honest. Even Islam is also prone to division.
The biggest difference is how Philippians 2:12 and similar verses are understood. Theologically, Eastern Orthodoxy and Reformed Protestantism are closer to each other than they are to Roman Catholicism. Protestants and Orthodox often mistakenly ascribe Catholic errors to each other. I recommend Robert Letham’s THROUGH WESTERN EYES as a good analysis.
@@davisgeorgemoye9689 Most Protestant sects still hold the Western way of thinking i.e. a Thomistic of understanding the Trinity, Original Sin, and the Fillioque
@@davisgeorgemoye9689 Roman Catholicism and all branches of Protestantism are relatively identical when compared to Orthodoxy. As an Orthodox Christian, the system is totally different. This is why Western Christians often try to find common ground with Orthodox Christians, which the Orthodox usually rebuff.
@thehungh0nkey853 The Protestant conception of heaven, hell, salvation, and sin, is thoroughly Roman Catholic. People who think Protestantism and Orthodoxy are similar just don't understand the differences.
@@thehungh0nkey853 Aquinas is respected for his scholarship, and the Reformation stemmed from an academic history, but rejecting Thomistic soteriology was/is one of the main Reformed differences with Rome. Concerning the Filioque: That is an Eastern-Roman controversy. Given the Protestant focus on Scripture Alone (sola Scriptura) creeds are not used much. The Protestant perspective: Early church fathers carefully wrote the Nicene Creed vs non-Trinitarian heretics misreading it centuries later. Both sides have valid concerns, but this has little bearing on day-to-day Christian living or life in a healthy Protestant church.
Sabbath is no longer for us to keep, otherwise we would ruin the 6th commandments, which says: DO NOT KILL! Matthew 5:21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: it is the sabbath or the 6th commandment. Cant have both. Souls, know and understand the bible as we all should: 2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. The 2 most important commandments for us to keep TODAY are: Matthew 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. Matthew 22:39 “And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” but you , the listeners of all these “religious lessons” all blind, devil gives out himself through the hand signs of masonry. You are still deceived by lucifer and his angelic look and having lack of knowledge about the truth. Time is passing away, the clock inside each of your chest are ticking. Drop religions, pick up BIBLE.
@@ethanbrown7198One patriarchate left the other four patriarchates. So surely the one that left the four is the schismatic, especially considering that they (the Roman see) are the ones that began the excommunication process over the refusal of the other four to literally go against scripture and say that the Holy Spirit comes also from the Son (John 15:26), which confuses the nature of the Trinity considering that the Logos is begotten and the Theandros who is the Logos in the flesh has a human nature. Instead, the Holy Spirit comes from the Father, and manifests through the Son (through the Church and apostles) but isn't from the Son. Much like the world was made by the Father through the Son, so it is with the Spirit of Truth.
I love that you always manage to ask questions that i had never thought to ask until I see the video and then immediately am very interested in finding out the answer.
“If ever a monk get into heaven by his monkery it is I.” No monk who is of maturity would say this, they would shy far from it and run in the opposite direction. It speaks volumes of the mans pride.
Interesting as always! Could you make another video doing a deeper dive into the doctrinal disputes between Protestants and Orthodox one day? Yes or no, thank you for this one! Stay well out there everybody, and God bless you friends. :)
Orthodox has much more in common with Catholicism than Protestantism. Most Protestants don't care since they read and interpet the Bible for themselves. Protestants and Catholics these days are more likely to get along than Orthodox and Protestants. Orthodox are more likely to call Protestants out for heresy whereas the Catholic is more likely to just shrug.
Actually Protestants and Orthodox could get along compared to Catholics, in the sense of religious unity. Most Protestants view Catholicism as a centralized institution run by the Pope. If the were attempts of conversion to the other faith, Protestants would most likely follow Orthodoxy than Catholicism, the reason being that they do not sought the Ecumenical Church in terms of Catholicity, but the Church that made them feel like a second home, a spiritual home in that regard.
@Абдульзефир Yeah no, there's a difference between getting democracy and freedom of speech, and getting communism and being purged if you decided you didn't like being purged.
@Абдульзефир Well i can proof your point as I live in the UK if I say "The government is trash" then I don't get prisoned, the colonial days are over and we're different countries now, with much more civil liberties for minorities than any non democratic nations. Wasn't like the communist nations didn't commit atrocities or anything...
World is not black and white Both capitalism and communism have their good and bad sides It's just that capitalism is default while communism is an experiment
@@nicholasoneal1521 "Eastern Orthodoxy" is a political name refering to Greeks(mainly).The reason the Pope broke away off Orthodoxy is a political reason only.
@@dereinepeterpan5637 No it wasn't. The organization existed the entire time. The new organization was the one based on papal supremacy, meaning the Roman Catholic Church was the created one.
Short but packed with information and very useful insight. I like the humorous placards and word balloons too, they make the appropriate points in a humorous way.
The lack of mention of Ecumenical Patriarch Cyril Lucaris here seems to be a huge gap in this video. Lucaris sent Orthodox seminarians to Geneva, and attempted a reform of the Eastern Orthodox Church along Calvinist Protestant lines. He is celebrated as a saint in at least one Orthodox jurisdiction.
Unironically, montenegro was the bulwark of orthodoxy in the balkans after everyone got taken over by the turks, hence why the flag even to this day has so much crosses
The Western churches are barren in comparison to Orthodoxy. I realised when I moved to the Balkans that it was the first time I had encountered Christianity.
I don’t understand how the Lutherans or Reformed movements which junked the Catholics for things such as use of images in churches, veneration of the Virgin Mary and saints, hierarchical clergy, etc would think the Orthodox are better when these are things shared by Catholics, Orthodox, and practically all the other major branches at the time.
Not entirely true. The Orthodox declared that they are more in agreement with Roman Catholics than with the protestants. Orthodox see Catholics as Christians, but protestants are not Christians anymore. Orthodox and Catholics are very similar, but protestants basically threw everything out of the window. I remember with my Orthodox girlfriend, I was allowed to marry in the Orthodox Church, because I am Catholic, but a protestant couldn't marry there.
@@Lyendith Rejection of the sacraments, lack of real presence in the Eucharist (Communion), no hierarchy in the church, the Fillioque, Sola Fide, and Sola Scripture just to name a few
I am not an educated theologian, so please forgive me a sinner if i say this wrong; and please if i inadvertently offend you please know that it is not my intention. I just think that something important needs to be clarified lest we get bogged down in human politics which is what caused the problem in the first place. We need to clarify the real difference between the East and the West which is the question : Why did Jesus come and Why did He die? It is this one question which is the number 1 primary difference between the East and the West. Essentially, it comes down to a difference of understanding the primary principle of how we define the relationship between man and God. It may sound paltry, or possibly overly grandiose, but what premise you begin with determines which path you take. First and foremost, the Orthodox Church rejects the heresy of "original"sin: the doctrine that humans are born with the literal guilt of Adam and Eve's sin on their souls, we believe in "Ancestral"sin which means that you are born with a predisposional weakness for sin and the consequences of sin, i.e. being born into a world where there is sickness and death, and so, yes, physically, all humans will die. However, the Orthodox Church utterly rejects the concept that sin is passed down through conception.( This idea is a misunderstanding by the Blessed Augustine during the 380's because he was reading a Latin version of the Bible and was unable to read It in It's original Koina Greek.[ Unfortunately, many modern Orthodox don't realize this because they were born in the West speaking English and the words "original" and "ancestral" became conflated over the last 100 years and their immigrant predecessors arrived speaking Greek, Russian, Arabic, Serbian, etc; they didn't explain a lot of things because, they simply couldn't. They came from countries where theology was taught by hearing the words of the Liturgy instead of detailed explanations. Remember, between the communist atheists, the Nazis,and the Ottomans all centers of learning were shut down; Churches in the middle east fluctuated between he extremes of being victims of persecution like the Russians(Jihad) to being allowed to meet only on Christmas or Easter.] Why is this is important? Well, the Western Church's (Catholic then Protestant) understanding of the "fall" is a matter of an act of rebellion against God's Justice- i.e. Adam and Eve broke God's Rules, and He is justly angry about it; therefore, after this event all further humans are born guilty of a sin they didn't commit because they inherited it from their wicked parents and deserve to be punished; so Jesus had to come to save us from a Wrathful Angry Father, who has no choice but to send us to hell. So, the problem here is this means that God has anger issues. Which seems strange since even earthly human dad's don't even hold what a child can't help against him, much less punish the younger child because older children- who knew full well what the rules were but chose to break them- were bad and so all the younger children born after the crime are guilty by association. Furthermore, this Father will only stop being mad if a perfect Son kills Himself because in the end something wicked has been done and SOMEBODY has to pay! From the East's point of view Western Christianity is full of guilt because the message of the Gospel has been over simplified to "Straighten up and fly right because Jesus is the only reason that God the Father is not going to smite you; Salvation just means you don't go to hell. This is a Juridical point of view Vs. the extrapolation of the original Jewish view that views the "fall" as a family that became a disfunctional; i.e. the relationship between God and mankind began as perfect harmony, but became estranged. Therefore, Jesus came to heal the rift and save us ( all of humanity) from ourselves because we just couldn't stop sinning; we struggle with God just as did Jacob because the Truth is we couldn't stop struggling with our own will. Orthodoxy regards God as a loving Father who forbade the tree to Adam and Eve for the same reason a human father doesn't give his 2 yr. olds espresso: they were not yet ready to handle it yet. ( Basically it was the first ordained fasting period) But no, just like toddlers they ate it anyway; what happened to them is what would happen to any toddler who is suddenly overwhelmed by stealing their Dad's triple espresso Latte, they were physically overwhelmed, and sickness that leads to death became their reality. Orthodoxy teaches that each child born is completely pure but is completely free to decide to abandon the natural human communion with God for his own will. This abandonment of the complete unselfish communion shared by man with his creator is the definition of sin. Sin in the Greek means to miss the mark (target), and because we become addicted to this jolt of power to walk away from God's love, then sin becomes essentially our crack cocaine. Like all addicts it starts out small, but slowly begins to twist us and turn us into selfish creatures who begin to regard everything and everyone as something to be used rather than cherished. So the Orthodox answer is that Jesus, the second Person of the Trinity, suffered because He knew that we would suffer. He died so that death would become attached to Him, and He could destroy its' power over us, and Salvation is the healing of all the soul (nous) so that we can love God completely and accept His love in return. To use a modern analogy the relationship between man and God can be understood as a relationship between a loving Father and his crack-addicted kids resulting in a severe emotional trauma which destroys the trust and love that allowed them to function as a family. The 1st person of the Trinity,God the Father, makes a plan with God the Son, and the Holy Spirit Inn Eternity before creation even happens. God wants to save us so the Father gives the Son plain clothes( a human body), & He comes into the crack den ( the world) He gives first-aid (heals) and feeds people. The Head supplier ( the devil) decides at first to offer the Son a cut which He refuses. Frustrated, the head Dealer instructs his local pushers to try trickery, then threats, and intimidation; nothing deters Him. Finally, the local dealers jump and beat Him; but He allows it and suffers willingly because He wants to empathize completely ; the pushers try to inject an overdose, & at first it worked, and they throw His Body down a well. BUT the Power of His Father resides within Him destroying the drug. He resuscitate all of those who died trying to escape and leads them home to His Father's House; then He returns to the Crack House in victory to reassure His friends that they don't need to be afraid anymore. He goes back to His Father's house to oversee their homecoming but sends His Counselor to live and work in the crackhouse arranging for those who are willing check-in to the new Rehab facility which operates with an open-door policy right inside the crack house. So, the Church is your Rehab clinic. You enter the front door go straight to the operating Room called Baptism-where Christ gives you His very own Heart to replace your diseased one; but the journey is not over. Your daily prayers are your Counseling sessions because Jesus is your Therapist. Like all therapy there must be respectful boundaries, so yes there need to be rules in place. Temptations to return to the crack house since sin twisted your natural desires to make bad habits. The Eucharist is your methodone, the fasts and the feast are your daily physical therapy after a heart teansplant; christian saints on earth are your fellow recovering addicts; Saints in heaven are your sponsers- who have completed Rehab & are sober; they can help you. Salvation to be permanently sober.
As a Chaldean Catholic who is able to stick with Eastern Tradition, but maintain full unity with Rome, it is very interesting to see the debate between Orthodoxy and Catholicism from an Eastern Rite within the Catholic Church. Beautiful video explaining this understanding. I pray for my Orthodox and Protestant brothers and sisters, as well as all of those on the tip of their faith, to make the plunge and delve into the arms of our loving Father. Pray for me, everyone, please!
I have a sneaking suspicion, that the Orthodox's reaction to the Reformation, was to tell the Catholic Church, was along the lines of ... "NYAH NYAH NYAH NYAH NYAH !!!!" "We told you, you guys suck"
Just imagine if Martin Luther was James Bisonette, while the Patriarch of Constantinople would be Boogily Woogily. The real question is, who would be the pope?
Catholics: Bunch of heretics
Lutheran: I'm not taking that from a heretic
Orthodox: That sounds like something a heretic would say
Coptic and Nestorian christians: "Ding-dong your branch of christianity is wrong"
Jews: We will outlive you all.
@@Bluesonofman much to Martin Luther will be raging. He wrote a number books hating on the Jews.
@@icemanire5467 And then several hundred years later a black man steals his name
Lutherans actually refrained from using the word heresy when accusing because it was a word too closely related with the Catholic Church
Just to clarify the Patriarch of Constantinople had and still has *very* little authority over other Patriarchs. He is considered first among equals meaning unlike the Pope his role is more or less just honorary. The Orthodox Church is very decentralized and every Patriarch (even those below them) have the freedom to handle religious activities on their own.
Isn't his title Ecumenical Patriarch,is tell because is more simple than Patriarch of C-nople.
Also,pretty sure that is why he is now in schism with the Russian Patriarch over the Ukrainian church,that my Patriarch has not yet recognize.
You're right. Only a general ecumenical council is supposed to outrank an Orthodox Bishop.
@@alexandrub8786 The problem with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is simple: it never existed. It was always a part of the Russian Orthodox Church. Creating a new Church based on politics and border changes is not something that's supposed to be done. The argument "our country is independent so our church should be too" is idiotic especially considering that the church and state are supposed to be separate.
@@nekilik7886 what you are speaking about is "phyletism" and it was condemn as a modern heresy by the Holy and Great pan-Orthodox synode of Constantinople of 1872 that is why the Montenegro Orthodox Church is not Recognized by any country,i am sure that the Ecumenical Patriarch had his reason but i will do as my bishops and patriarch(of Romania) and stay on the sideline and just watch.
"This is getting out of hand, now there are two of them!" - The Orthodox Patriarch, probably.
500 years later: "Oh no, now there are 5000 of them!"
@@anthemsofeurope2408missin a couple of zeroes
Squidward: There’s two of them?!
- Star Wars quote
@@gxbenzi If we are doing that then we should count every autocephalous branch of orthodoxy as a separate church then? My point being, though nondenominational churches inflate the number of separate church branches under Protestantism they fit into about twelve main branches that internally follow identical theology.
The Lutherans sent 3 delegations to Constantinople and each time the Patriarch was like "Yeah we agree the Pope is bad but you still have the Filioque and here's why it's wrong." The Lutherans responded that it didn't matter that much and insisted that they still had largely the same beliefs. After refuting them twice, the Patriarch finally said "Since you won't listen to our criticisms, stop coming all the way over here just to annoy us!"
Melenchthon read the Church Fathers, and (as anyone who looks at early Lutheran theology can see) thought that the Fathers were firmly on his side. Because of this, he thought that the East must surely have agreed with him, and that there was simply a language barrier or something (the Germans had a lot more practice at reading Byzantine and Koine Greek than they did communicating in Greek of any period).
"After refuting"
More like after a lot of argument, the Catholic Church battled with the East on the Filioque for centuries, to think that the Lutherans, who's own interpretation proceeded from Catholic interpretation had any chance to change that is beyond foolish.
the filioque issue was resolved by maximus the confessor, but it seems the eastern church is too god damn stubborn to see reason
@@Crawedfish it's historically illiterate to suggest the filioque was ever a "resolved" thing. What do you know about the 879 Council of Constantinople where Rome anathematized the filioque?
@@patriarchprime Those of the Queen of cities have attacked the synodal letter of the present very holy Pope (Martin I), not in the case of all the chapters that he has written in it, but only in the case of two of them. One relates to theology, because it says he says that ‘the Holy Spirit proceeds (ἐκπορεύεσθαι) also from the Son.’
The other has to do with the divine incarnation, because he has written, ‘The Lord, as man, is without original sin.’
With regard to the first matter, they (the Romans) have produced the unanimous documentary evidence of the Latin fathers, and also of Cyril of Alexandria, from the sacred commentary he composed on the gospel of St. John. On the basis of these texts, they have shown that they have not made the Son the cause of the Spirit - they know in fact that the Father is the only cause of the Son and the Spirit, the one by begetting and the other by procession; but [they use this expression] in order to manifest the Spirit’s coming-forth (προϊέναι) through him and, in this way, to make clear the unity and identity of the essence….
The Romans have therefore been accused of things of which it is wrong to accuse them, whereas of the things of which the Byzantines have quite rightly been accused (viz., Monothelitism), they have, to date, made no self-defense, because neither have they gotten rid of the things introduced by them.
But, in accordance with your request, I have asked the Romans to translate what is peculiar to them in such a way that any obscurities that may result from it will be avoided. But since the practice of writing and sending (the synodal letters) has been observed, I wonder whether they will possibly agree to doing this. One should also keep in mind that they cannot express their meaning in a language and idiom that are foreign to them as precisely as they can in their own mother-tongue, any more than we can do.
-maximus
“There was no love for Rome in the east” in some way fits into almost every historical discussion since the founding of Rome.
meanwhile catholics in the east around asia: :(
@@xXxSkyViperxXx if anything the Philippines wouldn't like rome for not being Catholic enough
▫️SERCH ADITYA RATHORE- HE ALSO MAKES INFORMATIVE CONTENT LIKE HISTORY MATTERS
Actually after their initial conquest, Greece had a lot of love for Rome, because Rome loved all things greek exspecially greek culture, so they spread it all over europe and Rome stopped the endless barbarian raids on greek lands, which had plagued them for millineas.
And the Roman middle east(modern day Syria/Israel/Jordan) was also fairly fond of Rome because they had been endless punching bags for Egypt and greek states in Turkey, and they finally saw stability under Rome, until the Persians/Seljuk Turks came.
That's pretty hilarious actually, because the Byzantines literally called themselves 'Romaioi', which means ... Romans.
On one hand, it's understandable that the Protestants thought they would find common ground with the Orthodox as both factions had a common enemy in Rome.
On the other hand, it's hilarious that the Protestants thought they could convince the Orthodox to agree with them on theology when they couldn't even get other Protestants to agree with them.
Yea lol
During that time is Still Luther who lead that movement
@@mimorisenpai8540 Luther died 29 years before the Augsburg Confession was translated into Greek. Besides, the Calvinists and Anabaptists (among others) had already splintered off during his lifetime.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend? No, not if you are both heretics.
At that time, there were only really two influential iterations of Protestantism (Reformed and Lutheran), and even despite the Lutheran and Reformed's failure to unify they still hold far more in common than you are making it sound.
Heck, the core tenents of modern-day evangelicalism are still compatible with the Magesterial reformers. It's just that they haven't systematized everything as thoroughly, and so they have far more flexibility on the view of the supper, baptism, and other secondary issues.
Anabaptism is mostly alive today in the US as Amish, Mennonite, Hutterite, and the church of the Brethren. These groups tend to be fairly isolationist, pacifists, and pietistic in their rejection of the modern world. For all intents and purposes, they don't really matter when it comes to the broader conversation since they aren't present to voice their doctrine.
I fucking love how you cover slightly obscure topics, like the first deviation away from the regular narrative. Great video!
Why are you here lol, don't you got a server to run?
Shouldn't you be managing your pedocord server?
@@flynn659 sounds like you got banned from it for one reason or the other
@@Stoneworks nice lol
Any what's up man love your server, gonna join when I get minecraft
Another concept I never thought of before but now am interested in.
History Matters in a nutshell
Same here. Reminds me of the time I found out there is more than one Pope. The Coptic, or "Egyptian" Christians have their own pope. I went to Catholic school for 12 years so the revelation was quite substantial.
@@DisgruntledHippo There were also the antipopes, where each pope claimed to be the real one.
@@KougaJ7 I know about those ones. Lol That was such a ridiculous part of Church History. Haha
It has been a really solid adaptation from the 10 minute videos about topics that several other channels have covered. It’s gives this channel a unique niche and identity of its own now.
As a Swedish Protestant interested In history have I never thought of what the Orthodox Church views was in the reformation, great video!
Rock and Sand by Fr. Josiah Trenum is a more modern take. I've also purchased Religion of the Apostles by Fr. Stephen DeYoung.
Swedish Protestant? I don't even think that is considered Christian anymore.
@@Gwildor2020 true, that’s why I wanted to clarify that we do exist, we have the Swedish church which is the normal Lutheran Protestant church and then we have all these splinter groups that we call “fri kyrkor” and those are a little bit different bur still Christian. There are more Christian’s in Sweden than you think trust me
@@gunnarhjalmarson8930 haha finns typ inga kristna kvar här. För många gudlösa och vänner till den falske profeten och stendyrkare. :(
I'm still a member of the "Church of Norway" (Lutheran), but the church has become gay and feminine. I don't have to wonder why that is, as I personally used to know a communist+atheist (member of "Rødt") who studied theology to become a priest, just so he could infiltrate the church and change it from the inside. They've succeeded in making a joke out of the church, allowing not only women to be priests and bishops, but also openly gay men with "partners", and finally gay marrige in 2016...
I'm converting if I get the chance.
Ivan was a great guy. Had strong feelings about his son, took an active role in his daughter in-laws life, and prevented his subjects from thinking about pointless things. 10/10 great job keeping his subjects from hell and making sure his son and grandson got to heaven.
He wasn't called Ivan the based for nothing.
He slaugthered his sons, isnt it?
@@KouNagai only one though
subject blue gave him a VIP ticket to heaven.
@@KouNagai
It was a self defense situation.
Being orthodox, im happy someone acknowledged we exist
Catholic here, you guys are the only other Christians that we recognise as baptised.
@@Andrew-gn9qp your recognition means nothing. Only god can recognize baptism.
@@Andrew-gn9qp you are in fact wrong because at least in my country (Slovakia) there is an agreement between catholic church and protestants ones where they mutually recognize baptism of each other
I’m converting to Coptic orthodoxy
@@Andrew-gn9qp catholics knowing anything about their own doctrines challenge (very hard)
For a physical representation of one major difference, icons are somewhat frowned on in the Protestant churches, and in Orthodox churches there is a literal wall of icons, or Iconostasis, between the nave and sanctuary.
The Calvinists certainly did not like images. The Lutherans use the crucifix to this day. Protestant denominations in the US came mainly from the Calvinist tradition even when they rejected Calvinism per se. Many people in the US assume that, while Catholics use the crucifix, all Protestants use the plain cross. That is just that the Lutherans did not have much of an effect in the US.
Baptists just view these as wasteful
And then the Iconoclasts happened…
Protestantism is not a monolith. There are high church Protestant traditions like Lutherans and anglicans/episcopalians who use icons themselves
@@Onneukbaar Thanks for the info!
0:20 those murals in the back look so good, I see ur art budget has gone up also “What was Vietnam like after the Vietnam War?” would be a good idea for a future video.
The answer is "fighting yet another decade-plus war against yet another world power and still winning." From what I've heard, the war against China is much more salient in the Vietnamese public memory than the American war.
They eventually adopted a capitalist system like China did when they and other communist countries that didn’t collapse realise there form of State Capitalism wasn’t working anymore.
I sense a bit if butt licking in this comment
@@SamAronow Makes sense given the US is across an ocean and china is right next door
Yeah i also notice how theres more props, detailed backgrounds, and more clothing to the characters
Made a research about the Church of Cyprus during the Reformation, an orthodox church under Catholic control, their response was "not our business, leave us both alone" sort of...
all religions fail to adapt with time.
I'm surprised we still have religion in this world.
we still see idiot religious fanatics killing in the name of God around the Middle East these days.
or some politicians talk about the "glory days" of their great empire or caliphate.
example? Sultan Erdogan from Turkey.
Buddy we're pretty clearly going to re-enter a religious age.
I don't say that because of any biblical or superstitious prophecy or whathaveyou either.
@@LevisH21 wow bro how much reddit gold do you have
@@LevisH21 upvoted ;)
@@LevisH21 it is indeed surprising that religions persist.
It's almost like there are spiritual powers which keep them going.
As an Orthodox myself I have wondered this question for a long time thank you for the video
Rock and Sand by Fr. Josiah Trenum may interest you.
It's actually easy..
Contradictory doctrines..
This is how a church/sect/ religion assesses another.
Recommend reading Robert Letham’s THROUGH WESTERN EYES, which breaks down the differences that are semantics vs serious doctrine.
Protestants: Pope dumb
Orthodox: haha, nice
Also Protestants: hierarchy dumb
Orthodox: say sike right now
Protestants: Bible only
Orthodox: U wot m8?
Protestants: we are dumb as fuck and we have no idea how our own religon works
@@hugohom2280 wdym?
@@hugohom2280 hah. Humorous😐
@@hugohom2280 At least we don't give ultimate doctrinal authority to a bunch of corruptible baffoons.
I love how this guy just makes videos of the random questions that history geeks think about but is not covered in the textbook
Hi. I adore your work and am learning a lot. I've read history for 40 years, but you're filling in gaps and I'm grateful. BETTER: My wife, who is not much for history, gets a lot of laughs out of your work, and asks for us to share your vids. So . . . THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!
I am an Anglican Christian. My flatmate is a Greek Orthodox Christian. It's very interesting to see the history portrayed here
Anglicanism started as an Orthodox-like movement. Henry VIII wasn't a reformer, he was a schismatic.
Mind, Henry VIII was also a... terrible person. And Edward VI after him *was* a reformer, as would be Elizabeth.
@@zimrielBro just made an entire church to divorce his wife, pretty chad move tbh
@@colonelcorn9500He kept beheading them and his daughter whom became Queen ended the Tudor line with her to spite her evil dad. Chud move.
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16
Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out.
-Acts 3:19
If are in North America, please go check out any of the churches available to you: PCA, OPC, Rpcna/Rpc, Urcna, or a canrc church
(These are conservative and actual Presbyterian churches)
If you can’t find one of the conservative presby churches then, maybe a Lcms or Wels Lutheran church.
If you are Scottish, I recommend the Free Church of Scotland and the APC
(Different from the Church of Scotland)
If you are English I recommend the Free Church of England.
(Different from the Church of England)
Online you can look up church finders for each of the groups and it will show you locations.
:)
@@zimriel🦜
I'm guessing they found that event very .. Unorthodox!
...I'll see myself out
No, no. Stay.
You better....
technically thats true
Yes we did
I'm somewhere between congratulating your for your pun and turning you in for frivolous thinking.
I’m currently a seminary student at a Protestant seminary, working on completing a Master of Divinity degree: it entails doing courses in theology, church history/historical theology, pastoral care & counseling, cultural studies, and philosophy. I LOVE these sorts of videos because I enjoy history so much! This is awesome!
🟣 SERCH ADITYA RATHORE- HE ALSO MAKES INFORMATIVE CONTENT LIKE HISTORY MATTERS
Cool, soon going to college to treck the long rode to becoming a pastor.
@@radicalgremlin6440 I hear that!
Do it if it’s a call, not for ego, attention, or to fill a hole, or it’ll destroy you, your family, and parishioners, and God does NOT want that. Learn & remember how to come back to the Center of your life that is Christ: that you are beloved of Him, as you are and not as you should be, because no one is as they should be, but God welcomes, accepts, forgives, heals, and shapes them; it’s only those who think they’ve got everything together perfectly that God cannot do much with, because pride is a killer. But there’s two sides to pride: the boisterous, cocky, self-indulgent kind, and the overly timid, self condemning, always worrying, perfectionist kind. Both are ultimately obsessed with themselves, not God, though they think they are. The cocky kind thinks “I’m doing things so well; everyone else needs to be like me; why am I the only who cares??” He can’t see that he NEEDS the grace of God, without which he wouldn’t be alive, saved, or sustained in faith. He needs to humble himself, and trust that only God can save, and that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, even him; that ultimately, self-sufficiency will lead to destruction, because it’s an attempt to live apart from God through self-righteousness-the very sin in the story of the garden of Eden.
The timid, self-condemning guy (I was/sometimes still am this type) is constantly worried about his and others’ performance under God; he takes seriously the biblical call to be holy as God is holy, but forgets that he can do NOTHING apart from Christ. Instead of resting in Christ, trusting Him to be faithful to help us grow, learn, overcome sin & struggles, and be enough for salvation, this type really does at his core believe that if he doesn’t do it all, then no one will (apparently not even God, though he’d never consciously say that), yet he acts as if his messing up will someone invalidate Christ’s death and resurrection; like it applies to everyone else, but not him. And that is the HEIGHT of arrogance. He needs to learn to rest in God-the only thing that will bring peace, rest, joy, and true progress over sin.
When in doubt, always pray, “Come Holy Spirit” and rest in the fact that God knows your heart and will help you. He brings clarity, peace, understanding and growth, not panic, striving, and condemnation.
I say all this because it’s a tricky call, but rewarding. Take it one step at a time. Be willing to apologize. Be willing to be firm and enforce boundaries. Learn how to say “no,” because Jesus said “no” to people, and it’s healthy for you, and reminds you that you’re not God. Take time to rest and enjoy things you like to do weekly at least. Serve others kindly, but don’t tolerate abuse of others or yourself (it’s one thing to endure hardship for the sake of the Kingdom, but another thing to enable horrendous behavior that hurts you, them, and others). Never stop clinging to Jesus. He’s the only Way.
Ps, some GREAT books:
Abba’s Child by Brennan Manning
Making all things new by Henri Nouwen
Ministry in the Image of God by Seamands
Do you actually believe in the existence of a God or do you study religion as just a social construct ?
Come back home to Christ. Become Orthodox
"They mean well" "Set them on fire"
Laughed my ass off at this!
As an Orthodox Christian, I can confirm that those two sentences pretty well sum up my take on Protestantism.
🟥SERCH ADITYA RATHORE- HE ALSO MAKES INFORMATIVE CONTENT LIKE HISTORY MATTERS
@@Corwin256 I can really feel the love
@@CourtlySeaDog To be fair, the 'set them on fire' bit is more because I'm a convert from Protestantism, so that's pretty much just 'convert syndrome' or whatever you want to call it.
@Sanctus Paulus I was joking. I can see how that didn't translate well in text though, as that's usually pretty hard to do with dry humour.
It's like watching your ex's next guy break up with her for being too distant when you'd dumped her for being too clingy
Tragic injustice for her.
@@gwho nah a good lesson, just be yourself and eventually you'll find someone who appreciates that
What
How is this such a perfect analogy lmao
@@starliaghtsz8400 Clinginess in this case would be papal supremacy over primus inter pares. I guess? Not quite sure about distance.
Great video! Interestingly, in the second half of the nineteenth century through to the early twentieth, there was a lot of discussion around uniting the Anglican and Orthodox churches. Imagine what an alternate reality it would be if Britain and Russia shared the same faith?
Yep, Anglican church was the closest to orthodox
But now they are changing further and further away
The English Orthodox Church would have been epic.
I wander, though, if Anglican church is protestant at all, 'cause it has nothing to do with Martin Luther or Jaques Calvin or Reformation for that matter, but with Henry Vlll's desire to get divorsed and remarry as many times as he wanted.
Pretty confident most of the 'discussion' was amongst socialites, not adherents.
@@kerriwilson7732 yep, you are right - adherents always had little say in what their leaders chose to do (and continue to have little say in some circumstances)
why i like this channel so much is because each time i see the question you answer, i think " yeah, that's a good question, i never thought about it" and i'm genuily interested in the answer.
I've always thought it would be like watching an ex go through a nasty breakup.
@@noname_758 you have the same pp, nice.
But in this case, the orthodox is like a wife who wants to do what she wants and no man or husband is gonna tell her what to do, so she breaks up with her dominant husband. Not very traditional but it is what it is.
@@АртёмСавостин-п1ч The orthodox churches can't even come together for an eccumenical council and that makes it harder to call anyone a heretic.
Double heresy.
@@noname_758 bara för att man inte ber till helgon och maria betyder det inte att man hatar dem
Your animations are AMAZING. There's so much information density in minimal time with humour as laconic as your narration. I love it.
The christians in 1054: Let’s split up gang!
The catholics on 1517 (again): Let’s split up gang!
@@adolfhipsteryolocaust3443 Your saying Catholics suck and your literally making fun of the holocaust
@@seanfitzgerald4804 so what I don't see your point
@@adolfhipsteryolocaust3443 muahahaha funni
What the hell happened here
@@adolfhipsteryolocaust3443 You deleted your comment cause you know that your being a hypocrite
Interesting, that you chose to use borders from the middle of the Livonian War in the Baltic region of the map, as the Bishopric of Tartu (Dorpat) was most certainly not orthodox. I would also like to point out, that most of the present-day territory of Estonia joined the reformation quite early on, with Martin Luther even sending a letter to Tallinn (Reval) at the time. I do, however, understand the practicality of using political boundries, as the true religious divides were all over the place.
Thank you for the great video as always! Keep up the good work! :)
Political are way more convenient. Imagine Poland-Lithuania with all their colonies settles by minority religious groups, Muslim communities and.. Well, the fact that most of the population just started converting during reformation actually. There was an inspection send by the Pope and they realised that outside of cities and nobility, the old faith was practiced like nothing happened since the 10th century.
🟤SERCH ADITYA RATHORE- HE ALSO MAKES INFORMATIVE CONTENT LIKE HISTORY MATTERS
I was just about to comment on this one too.
…….
There were some Orthodox (and/or crypto -Orthodox?) people in around Tartu since 11th century. Idk how many though but in 1472 some were murdered by the local authorities for being Eastern Orthodox by drawning them in Emajõgi river.
Never thought these simple characters could express nuanced emotions.
1:24 changed my opinion of that. I love the subtle details you add.
This brings us to one question, how did the Muslim world react to the Protestant Reformation?
That's something I'd like to see a video of
Ck2 has an event that encapsulates it well; "Hah! The fools bicker amongst themselves!" . basically Ivan's response but with no fear of it spreading because of incompatibility of protestant ideas
In one sense, they didn't, really. I mean, it was obvious that the Holy Roman Empire and a few other centers of power in the Catholic world were having some drama, and so there were some rumblings of it being a good time to invade (one of the Sieges of Vienna happened during the drama of the early Reformation) but when Vienna didn't fall, it wasn't really all that big of a deal. Nobody was translating what Luther said about the Koran into Turkish or Arabic or anything. I mean, if they had, the Muslim world probably would have been as offended by Lutherans as Luther was by the Koran. Maybe the sultan and the emperor would have teamed up in the Smalkaldic War or something. However, none of that happened.
The Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox were all heretics in their view. Things get really interesting during the 30 years war when the Ottomans try to take advantage of the situation, it does not work but it's not from lack of trying.
The muslim world was really scared from the spanish empire and the habsburgs , they saw this as an opportunity to weaken spain and it worked
Reformation: Happens
Orthodox Church: Great, more heresy.
Us Catholics and Orthodox may be opposed to one another, but we come together in an ecumenical manner when it comes to making fun of Protestants lol
@@comicsans1689 Meanwhile they make fun about your pope and call you an hereric openly. That is a toxic relationship, just for wanting validation.
@@irsshill4502 cuz we do not want reformation
@@comicsans1689as a catholic that's exactly how I see it.
@@comicsans1689idiot , the Pope and the Vatican is corrupt, Not the true religion
Thanks!
Im sure the Russian's reaction was like: "C'mon!! the center of reformation is in Lübeck, how the fuck is reaching up here to Finland?!"
eu4 reference
Finland was a part of the Swedish Kingdom at that time and would remain so for another 300 years.
Ahhh yes eu4 reference, I see you're a man of culture aswell
North sea trade routes are a bitch
Even better, it starts in Tyrol and somehow converts an Orthodox province in Ukraine.
If TH-cam existed in that age
*#1 trending, 95 reasons why Catholic Church is wrong*
LAMO THIS IS A GENIUS COMMENT
Number 3 will surprise you!!
Gone wrong, gone sexual
You know, if TH-cam would've existed back then, it wouldn't have been 95 reasons but instead it would have been a Top 10 video.
Well... before That genius monk of Martin Luther.. everybody was Roman Catholic.. but I think that he was wrong to separate the Christian faith
Although I admit that some personality in the Vatican they misbehave... but that was not enough to change the Holy Bible according to his ideas.
The patriarch of Constantinople is *NOT* the highest ranked patriarch in the orthodox world. All of the orthodox patriarchs of the East have equal stature in orthodoxy. The patriarchies are Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, Constantinople & Rome. Also important to note that the apostate “popes” of Rome are nothing more than an equal bishop/patriarch equal to all the other patriarchal cities of the East. The western Latin Catholics broke away from the original Christian church. The original Christian church is the Eastern Orthodox Church (as it is today). The Protestants then broke away from the already broken-away Catholics. Therefore the Orthodox perspective is that Protestants must actually come back to the original unchanged Christian which which is the Orthodox Church. And Catholics must come back too.
Since the 1st century we have documents that attest the supremacy of the Church of Rome. Moreover, you Orthodoxes, just like us, Catholics, believe in the Doctrine of the Apostolic Succession (that's why we know your sacraments are still valid). Accordingly, the powers once held by the Apostles are continued throughout their appointed successors. You also believe that Saint Peter has a special role amongst the Apostles (which is impossible to deny, since it appears in several verses of the holy scriptures) but, contradictorily, you deny that this role is applied to his successors.
Its nice that he made his animation style version of The Wounded Angel painting by Hugo Simberg as the background of the patreon supporters list. Its a beautiful painting seen it in person when I was a kid.
“Everyday, we stray further from God.”
I love your comments
i love you military tactics i hope you dont spread ideas of freedoms to my land
◽SERCH ADITYA RATHORE- HE ALSO MAKES INFORMATIVE CONTENT LIKE HISTORY MATTERS
As we should, religions are poisons of the worst kind.
@@realtsarbomba yes because we all know leopold ii,hitler,stalin, and pol pot were devout christains even tho im an athiest this is one of the most stupid comment i have seen and ignores historical context behind wars
Only stumbled onto your stuff yesterday and pretty much binged most of it. Love the way you tell it.
I’m loving the more sophisticated changes to your art style, especially those smooth squints at 1:18.
I agree it's the subtle things you notice with this guys art, I would even say his "papers" look better now, they look more like paper or parchment instead of white squares
You finally did what we wanted. Great work mate.
What a great series this is. It explains complex history in such a simple, direct way !
Oh man, Lutherabism went down like a brick with the establishment.
Well well look who it is.
PROTOMARIO ON THE HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY?!
Dead channel
Based OrthoProtoMario?
Irrelevant
“There was no love for Rome in the east”
Persia: Couldn't agree more.
Eastern Romans: Yep
"Ivan the best Dad ever." Not many people can claim they have single handedly ended an 800 year old dinasty...
He really did it… LETS GOOOO
Dababy
I ruined your 69 likes Les gooo
🔸SERCH ADITYA RATHORE- HE ALSO MAKES INFORMATIVE CONTENT LIKE HISTORY MATTERS
1:10 "set them on fire". The Orthodox never burned heretics at the stake. That was an entirely Western phenomenon.
The funny thing, Orthodox heretics burned themselves to protest. Like Old Believers.
@@fyodorkojevin5756 Western doctrines are the true heresies
They should have burned
The only instance I can think of where heretics were burned by Orthodox authorities was during the end of the reign of Alexios Komnenos and at his orders. It was during the height of the Crusades and Alexios wanted to impress some of his Western "guests", so it was politically motivated. The act, of course, was massively unpopular with both the clergy and the citizenry. Revolting even. Manuel Komnenos did something similar to appease the Crusaders. Runciman recounts this episode in his History of the Crusades.
I was just about to make a rebuttal, referencing the emperor Alexios Komnenos but as you pointed out, these imperial acts tended to spark opposition from the Church. This is not too dissimilar to the Spanish Inquisition, which was largely the product of the kings of Spain rather than the Church of Rome.
I’m a former Pentecostal from the Evangelical Protestant world, and I converted to the Greek Orthodox Church last year. Although, I do respect Roman Catholic and Protestants because we’re all Christians in the end.
Except Mormons.
@@mlc4495 Yeah, I agree with you. I took sociology during my freshman year at college, and they stated in the textbook, “Non-Trinitarian believers in Christ are not considered to be Christians by the majority of people.”
I’m looking to convert to orthodoxy, however I’ve run into some members of the Orthodox Church and their beliefs regarding the salvation of other denominations bother me. They say that those who aren’t orthodox aren’t truly saved. Is this a common belief among the members of the Orthodox Churches?? If so, that may be something that can prevent my conversion. Why would they say that?
@@spidermayne4193
Before A.D. 1054, the Western (Roman Catholic) and Eastern (Orthodox) churches were together as the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ with his 12 apostles founded the church on the Day of Pentecost in AD 33.
Basically, when those people at your parish say that those people aren’t saved, they’re just trying to say that the Orthodox Church is pre-denominational. It’s not a denomination because that began with Martin Luther and the rest of mainline Protestants and evangelical Protestants. {We} Orthodox Christians believe we carry on the holy tradition and holy scriptures of the church that Christ established in AD 33. It’s called “Apostolic succession.” Even though I ain’t Roman Catholic, they are also pre-denominational because they were with us Orthodox before 1054 (The Great Schism).
Furthermore, Roman Catholics adhere to the doctrine, “There’s no salvation outside the Roman Catholic Church.” That’s just dogma. Orthodox Christians follow doctrine, too. But, you know... it’s just part of doctrine in the church. Honestly, since I’m a former Pentecostal, I believe God still loves any kind of Christian. However, I believe that the Orthodox Church is the most accurate way to worship God and live like Jesus. Talk to the parish priest there and ask him that question ‘cause he’ll give you a better answer than I can. Anyway, salvation from the Orthodox view is through a process. It’s a past, present, and future thing. I was saved by Jesus, I’m still trying to carry my cross everyday like Jesus (Present) and I hope to be with Jesus at the end of my earthly life (Future tense).
One final statement that I’d say is that Jesus loves us all: sinners and believers. He’s merciful. God bless you, and I hope I was able to really answer your question with a depth explanation.
In Christ,
Elijah
@@elijahc.brooks3493 thanks. That was graceful.
“Ivan the best dad ever“ 😆😆😆
Where does it say that
Minute please
@@sahibbhadal 1:21
@@sahibbhadal
Minute one
Love me a good running joke
"Ivan IV, the best dad ever"
Perfect.
I love how they taught they could agree with orthodox, which are literally the" i want to stay the same" deal. Like, the reason in general for the great skism was simply that the orthodox wanted to do what they've always done , keep the tradition
I could imagine the Byzantines' reactions if they were around during this time, "OH GOD, I'M ON FIRE, THE OTTOMANS AAAAAAHHH".
Hey dood, weird seeing you here
Hey buddy
*Romans, but lmao
There was no such thing called "Byzantines", nerd
@@angrymonkeynoises pebis
I've often wondered about this, but never at a time when I had the time and equipment to research it. Thank you for the succinct video.
Thank you very much for giving some coverage to this not very talked about subject. I really enjoyed it and will look further into it.
One thing I have found interesting in the past was how the new monarchies in Eastern Europe created in the 19th century for lands with a mainly Christian Orthodox population, chose mostly junior German Protestant princes to be their new sovereigns in their newly created countries, like Greece and Romania. And the newly minted royal families adopted the Orthodox Church of their new nations. They then seemed able as newly minted Orthodox Christians to have more flexibility in making matches with both Protestant and Catholic families of older Royal houses. For example Orthodox Prince Philip of Greece marrying C of E Princess Elizabeth, because the only religion she was barred from marrying into was the Roman Catholic faith. Or Orthodox Prince Nicholas of Russia marrying Lutheran Princess Alexandra of Hesse. Or Prince Philip of Greece’s Orthodox cousin Princess Sophia of Greece marrying Catholic Prince Juan Carlos of Spain.
The Roman Empire watching Europe divide into different nations, religious sects and political leanings: *I use to rule the world…*
Constantine the Great would have been rolling in his grave seeing Christianity split.
@@ironduke3780 Eh, what did you expect. Rome made a blunder turning to christianity instead of stamping them out like Manicheism.
Seriously - not even Mars cultists are this prone to conflict lmao
@@ironduke3780 The Arian and Donatist Schisms happened during his lifetime, and were subjects of Church synods and Councils which failed to resolve them.
@@ironduke3780 Constantine CAUSED the split as much as anyone.
@@kestutisvaiciunas8663 Nah it was fine. The problem every single member of the Christian church were and are motivated by different reasons. Most Christians would want to be united under One Church and focused on the spiritual treasure, others were motivated by selfishness and lust of the flesh and treasures of this world. Take the Pope for example, he is not supposed to be above the other Patriarchs, he is supposed to be first among equals. Not to mention, Protestants and are their Sola Scriptural non sense. Politics also come into play to be honest. Even Islam is also prone to division.
Thanks for making another excellent video!
Could it possibly be?! God finally revealed himself?!
@@TheGreatLiberator1209 just a Patreon supporter with a surreal experience in the comment section!
🤗
both james bissonette and kelly moneymaker in one comment section?!
As orthodox myself, I had wondered this from time to time. Was considering it as probably nothing, which it mostly was. Thanks.
The biggest difference is how Philippians 2:12 and similar verses are understood. Theologically, Eastern Orthodoxy and Reformed Protestantism are closer to each other than they are to Roman Catholicism. Protestants and Orthodox often mistakenly ascribe Catholic errors to each other. I recommend Robert Letham’s THROUGH WESTERN EYES as a good analysis.
@@davisgeorgemoye9689 Most Protestant sects still hold the Western way of thinking i.e. a Thomistic of understanding the Trinity, Original Sin, and the Fillioque
@@davisgeorgemoye9689 Roman Catholicism and all branches of Protestantism are relatively identical when compared to Orthodoxy. As an Orthodox Christian, the system is totally different. This is why Western Christians often try to find common ground with Orthodox Christians, which the Orthodox usually rebuff.
@thehungh0nkey853 The Protestant conception of heaven, hell, salvation, and sin, is thoroughly Roman Catholic. People who think Protestantism and Orthodoxy are similar just don't understand the differences.
@@thehungh0nkey853 Aquinas is respected for his scholarship, and the Reformation stemmed from an academic history, but rejecting Thomistic soteriology was/is one of the main Reformed differences with Rome. Concerning the Filioque: That is an Eastern-Roman controversy. Given the Protestant focus on Scripture Alone (sola Scriptura) creeds are not used much. The Protestant perspective: Early church fathers carefully wrote the Nicene Creed vs non-Trinitarian heretics misreading it centuries later. Both sides have valid concerns, but this has little bearing on day-to-day Christian living or life in a healthy Protestant church.
Now I always wondered about this one! Thank you!
Ah yes, Martin Luther’s ‘Y’all dumb’ of 1517. Timeless classic.
Sabbath is no longer for us to keep, otherwise we would ruin the 6th commandments, which says: DO NOT KILL!
Matthew 5:21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
it is the sabbath or the 6th commandment. Cant have both.
Souls, know and understand the bible as we all should:
2 Timothy 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
The 2 most important commandments for us to keep TODAY are:
Matthew 22:37
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
Matthew 22:39
“And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.”
but you , the listeners of all these “religious lessons” all blind, devil gives out himself through the hand signs of masonry.
You are still deceived by lucifer and his angelic look and having lack of knowledge about the truth.
Time is passing away, the clock inside each of your chest are ticking.
Drop religions, pick up BIBLE.
Orthodox here. It’s simple, really. Schism begets schism.
Ironic coming from a schismatic
@@ethanbrown7198One patriarchate left the other four patriarchates. So surely the one that left the four is the schismatic, especially considering that they (the Roman see) are the ones that began the excommunication process over the refusal of the other four to literally go against scripture and say that the Holy Spirit comes also from the Son (John 15:26), which confuses the nature of the Trinity considering that the Logos is begotten and the Theandros who is the Logos in the flesh has a human nature. Instead, the Holy Spirit comes from the Father, and manifests through the Son (through the Church and apostles) but isn't from the Son. Much like the world was made by the Father through the Son, so it is with the Spirit of Truth.
@EzioAuditoreDaFirenze99 trying to explain to the catholic how the catholics abandoned the ancient faith is an absolute lost cause
@@ethanbrown7198 Most theologically educated American:
@@MrSkzilla all the mainline protestant churches fell to liberal heretics
I love that you always manage to ask questions that i had never thought to ask until I see the video and then immediately am very interested in finding out the answer.
“If ever a monk get into heaven by his monkery it is I.”
No monk who is of maturity would say this, they would shy far from it and run in the opposite direction. It speaks volumes of the mans pride.
As an Orthodox Christian I am pleased by this video. Thank you for making this.
brachko jas sum Makedonets i Pravoslavni and I have to say this video had so many errors
As a Catholic Christian I am pleased by this video. Thank you for making this.
ew
@@TheWolfboy180Gay response.
it's almost like you hate gay people @@LukeTheGreat1
Yet another well presented historical presentation that I never realized I cared about...
🏮SERCH ADITYA RATHORE- HE ALSO MAKES INFORMATIVE CONTENT LIKE HISTORY MATTERS
Interesting as always! Could you make another video doing a deeper dive into the doctrinal disputes between Protestants and Orthodox one day? Yes or no, thank you for this one!
Stay well out there everybody, and God bless you friends. :)
Orthodox has much more in common with Catholicism than Protestantism. Most Protestants don't care since they read and interpet the Bible for themselves. Protestants and Catholics these days are more likely to get along than Orthodox and Protestants. Orthodox are more likely to call Protestants out for heresy whereas the Catholic is more likely to just shrug.
Actually Protestants and Orthodox could get along compared to Catholics, in the sense of religious unity. Most Protestants view Catholicism as a centralized institution run by the Pope. If the were attempts of conversion to the other faith, Protestants would most likely follow Orthodoxy than Catholicism, the reason being that they do not sought the Ecumenical Church in terms of Catholicity, but the Church that made them feel like a second home, a spiritual home in that regard.
He doesn't run a theology channel so he likely wouldnt
You can check out the channel Orthodox Christian Theology with Craig Truglia. He’s a convert from Protestantism.
@@alexanderstallings9352 Thank you for the recommend! I'll have to give it a look.
>Ivan IV better known as Ivan the best dad ever
HISTORY MATTERS! I actually spit my drink out holy shit.
What happened to the governments in exile of the soviet “liberated” countries after ww2?
Sounds like the kind of thing you could do
Kind of related. The Yugoslav monarchy stayed as house gests in Britain indefinetelly.
@Hernando Malinche best response to such a question I’ve ever seen
@Абдульзефир Yeah no, there's a difference between getting democracy and freedom of speech, and getting communism and being purged if you decided you didn't like being purged.
@Абдульзефир Well i can proof your point as I live in the UK if I say "The government is trash" then I don't get prisoned, the colonial days are over and we're different countries now, with much more civil liberties for minorities than any non democratic nations. Wasn't like the communist nations didn't commit atrocities or anything...
World is not black and white
Both capitalism and communism have their good and bad sides
It's just that capitalism is default while communism is an experiment
No, the Orthodox church was not "created" from a previous falling out with Rome.
He meant Eastern Orthodoxy as a distinctly separate branch of Christianity
@@nicholasoneal1521 "Eastern Orthodoxy" is a political name refering to Greeks(mainly).The reason the Pope broke away off Orthodoxy is a political reason only.
Yes it was
@RootGroves-hl8kt No it isn't, unless you are counting the religious doctrine of papal supremacy as a political factor.
@@dereinepeterpan5637 No it wasn't. The organization existed the entire time. The new organization was the one based on papal supremacy, meaning the Roman Catholic Church was the created one.
The horse riding animation always makes me chuckle lol
That, and the dancing through the daisies.
The Orthodox Church was not “created after a falling out with Rome.”
The schism was that in its entirety. Ambiguity over abortion, contraception and divorce notwithstanding.
Arguing over God? Lol I'll sell pointy things to both sides. So dumb.
Don't cut yourself over that edge edgyboy@@bigatomicsloth3369
Yea. It's the other way around 😂
More of this! It's fascinating
That is a question I have always wondered. Really. Thanks for your interesting and original work!
2:45 - there is a good song inspired by this painting by Nightwish: Amaranth
🟨SERCH ADITYA RATHORE- HE ALSO MAKES INFORMATIVE CONTENT LIKE HISTORY MATTERS
Short but packed with information and very useful insight. I like the humorous placards and word balloons too, they make the appropriate points in a humorous way.
This topic have been asked for a long time and History Matters did it. How about to celebrate 1M subscribers, do a video about James Bissonnette
Loved the last screen redition of a Finnish painting by Hugo Simberg
"Ivan IV, better known as Ivan the Best Dad Ever"
too soon, man
I don't know why but this videos bring me so much joy. I think it's because of the figurines and its animation, so cute.
Christianism: Upgrade!
*Catholicism and Orthodox split*
Christianism: Go back
*Protestant Reformation*
Christianism: I SAID GO BACK!!!
*Protestants just keep spliting for no reason*
Christianism: You guys aren't taking this seriously anymore...
*How it started* Filioque
*How it's going* Theo-deterministic Nihilism or Atheism
The lack of mention of Ecumenical Patriarch Cyril Lucaris here seems to be a huge gap in this video. Lucaris sent Orthodox seminarians to Geneva, and attempted a reform of the Eastern Orthodox Church along Calvinist Protestant lines. He is celebrated as a saint in at least one Orthodox jurisdiction.
Luther: See we are just like you!
Orthodox: Yea?! Lemme see your Bible
Luther: Why?!
I never thought about how they reacted but I needed to know.
the byzantine icons depicted in this vid were very well done, good job with the "shiny" effect
What are those borders in 0:29 ?
Seriously wth happened in Livonia? why catholics and protestants are reversed there?
do a video on: "What was it like in Central Asia in the USSR"
1:25 - “I have mixed feelings”
God that’s funny
🟠SERCH ADITYA RATHORE- HE ALSO MAKES INFORMATIVE CONTENT LIKE HISTORY MATTERS
0:15 the Balkans belong on map gore.
Where’s Catholic Albanians?
Why is Montenegro Muslim?
Why is Herzegovina Orthodox?
Unironically, montenegro was the bulwark of orthodoxy in the balkans after everyone got taken over by the turks, hence why the flag even to this day has so much crosses
1:48 Ivan the Terrible found heretics to be fiery but he treated them warmly
Great video as always
I'm sure %100 of the comments are gonna be wholesome and kind.
It's kinder to dispatch heretics than to let them suffer heresy. What are we, monsters?
The Western churches are barren in comparison to Orthodoxy.
I realised when I moved to the Balkans that it was the first time I had encountered Christianity.
I don’t understand how the Lutherans or Reformed movements which junked the Catholics for things such as use of images in churches, veneration of the Virgin Mary and saints, hierarchical clergy, etc would think the Orthodox are better when these are things shared by Catholics, Orthodox, and practically all the other major branches at the time.
Not entirely true. The Orthodox declared that they are more in agreement with Roman Catholics than with the protestants. Orthodox see Catholics as Christians, but protestants are not Christians anymore. Orthodox and Catholics are very similar, but protestants basically threw everything out of the window. I remember with my Orthodox girlfriend, I was allowed to marry in the Orthodox Church, because I am Catholic, but a protestant couldn't marry there.
I’m curious, what are the deep differences that make them frown at protestants so much?
@@Lyendith They don't like how indenpendent protestatism makes the masses
@@duruarute5445 so Protestants are more liberal than the Catholic or Orthodox church????
@@Lyendith Rejection of the sacraments, lack of real presence in the Eucharist (Communion), no hierarchy in the church, the Fillioque, Sola Fide, and Sola Scripture just to name a few
@@duruarute5445Wrong. See the comment above.
I am not an educated theologian, so please forgive me a sinner if i say this wrong; and please if i inadvertently offend you please know that it is not my intention. I just think that something important needs to be clarified lest we get bogged down in human politics which is what caused the problem in the first place. We need to clarify the real difference between the East and the West which is the question : Why did Jesus come and Why did He die? It is this one question which is the number 1 primary difference between the East and the West. Essentially, it comes down to a difference of understanding the primary principle of how we define the relationship between man and God. It may sound paltry, or possibly overly grandiose, but what premise you begin with determines which path you take. First and foremost, the Orthodox Church rejects the heresy of "original"sin: the doctrine that humans are born with the literal guilt of Adam and Eve's sin on their souls, we believe in "Ancestral"sin which means that you are born with a predisposional weakness for sin and the consequences of sin, i.e. being born into a world where there is sickness and death, and so, yes, physically, all humans will die. However, the Orthodox Church utterly rejects the concept that sin is passed down through conception.( This idea is a misunderstanding by the Blessed Augustine during the 380's because he was reading a Latin version of the Bible and was unable to read It in It's original Koina Greek.[ Unfortunately, many modern Orthodox don't realize this because they were born in the West speaking English and the words "original" and "ancestral" became conflated over the last 100 years and their immigrant predecessors arrived speaking Greek, Russian, Arabic, Serbian, etc; they didn't explain a lot of things because, they simply couldn't. They came from countries where theology was taught by hearing the words of the Liturgy instead of detailed explanations. Remember, between the communist atheists, the Nazis,and the Ottomans all centers of learning were shut down; Churches in the middle east fluctuated between he extremes of being victims of persecution like the Russians(Jihad) to being allowed to meet only on Christmas or Easter.] Why is this is important? Well, the Western Church's (Catholic then Protestant) understanding of the "fall" is a matter of an act of rebellion against God's Justice- i.e. Adam and Eve broke God's Rules, and He is justly angry about it; therefore, after this event all further humans are born guilty of a sin they didn't commit because they inherited it from their wicked parents and deserve to be punished; so Jesus had to come to save us from a Wrathful Angry Father, who has no choice but to send us to hell. So, the problem here is this means that God has anger issues. Which seems strange since even earthly human dad's don't even hold what a child can't help against him, much less punish the younger child because older children- who knew full well what the rules were but chose to break them- were bad and so all the younger children born after the crime are guilty by association. Furthermore, this Father will only stop being mad if a perfect Son kills Himself because in the end something wicked has been done and SOMEBODY has to pay! From the East's point of view Western Christianity is full of guilt because the message of the Gospel has been over simplified to "Straighten up and fly right because Jesus is the only reason that God the Father is not going to smite you; Salvation just means you don't go to hell. This is a Juridical point of view Vs. the extrapolation of the original Jewish view that views the "fall" as a family that became a disfunctional; i.e. the relationship between God and mankind began as perfect harmony, but became estranged. Therefore, Jesus came to heal the rift and save us ( all of humanity) from ourselves because we just couldn't stop sinning; we struggle with God just as did Jacob because the Truth is we couldn't stop struggling with our own will. Orthodoxy regards God as a loving Father who forbade the tree to Adam and Eve for the same reason a human father doesn't give his 2 yr. olds espresso: they were not yet ready to handle it yet. ( Basically it was the first ordained fasting period) But no, just like toddlers they ate it anyway; what happened to them is what would happen to any toddler who is suddenly overwhelmed by stealing their Dad's triple espresso Latte, they were physically overwhelmed, and sickness that leads to death became their reality. Orthodoxy teaches that each child born is completely pure but is completely free to decide to abandon the natural human communion with God for his own will. This abandonment of the complete unselfish communion shared by man with his creator is the definition of sin. Sin in the Greek means to miss the mark (target), and because we become addicted to this jolt of power to walk away from God's love, then sin becomes essentially our crack cocaine. Like all addicts it starts out small, but slowly begins to twist us and turn us into selfish creatures who begin to regard everything and everyone as something to be used rather than cherished.
So the Orthodox answer is that Jesus, the second Person of the Trinity, suffered because He knew that we would suffer. He died so that death would become attached to Him, and He could destroy its' power over us, and Salvation is the healing of all the soul (nous) so that we can love God completely and accept His love in return. To use a modern analogy the relationship between man and God can be understood as a relationship between a loving Father and his crack-addicted kids resulting in a severe emotional trauma which destroys the trust and love that allowed them to function as a family. The 1st person of the Trinity,God the Father, makes a plan with God the Son, and the Holy Spirit Inn Eternity before creation even happens. God wants to save us so the Father gives the Son plain clothes( a human body), & He comes into the crack den ( the world) He gives first-aid (heals) and feeds people. The Head supplier ( the devil) decides at first to offer the Son a cut which He refuses. Frustrated, the head Dealer instructs his local pushers to try trickery, then threats, and intimidation; nothing deters Him. Finally, the local dealers jump and beat Him; but He allows it and suffers willingly because He wants to empathize completely ; the pushers try to inject an overdose, & at first it worked, and they throw His Body down a well. BUT the Power of His Father resides within Him destroying the drug. He resuscitate all of those who died trying to escape and leads them home to His Father's House; then He returns to the Crack House in victory to reassure His friends that they don't need to be afraid anymore. He goes back to His Father's house to oversee their homecoming but sends His Counselor to live and work in the crackhouse arranging for those who are willing check-in to the new Rehab facility which operates with an open-door policy right inside the crack house. So, the Church is your Rehab clinic. You enter the front door go straight to the operating Room called Baptism-where Christ gives you His very own Heart to replace your diseased one; but the journey is not over. Your daily prayers are your Counseling sessions because Jesus is your Therapist. Like all therapy there must be respectful boundaries, so yes there need to be rules in place. Temptations to return to the crack house since sin twisted your natural desires to make bad habits. The Eucharist is your methodone, the fasts and the feast are your daily physical therapy after a heart teansplant; christian saints on earth are your fellow recovering addicts; Saints in heaven are your sponsers- who have completed Rehab & are sober; they can help you. Salvation to be permanently sober.
Fun fact: i always asked myself this question. Happy you covered it. Cheers mate
As a Chaldean Catholic who is able to stick with Eastern Tradition, but maintain full unity with Rome, it is very interesting to see the debate between Orthodoxy and Catholicism from an Eastern Rite within the Catholic Church. Beautiful video explaining this understanding. I pray for my Orthodox and Protestant brothers and sisters, as well as all of those on the tip of their faith, to make the plunge and delve into the arms of our loving Father. Pray for me, everyone, please!
Eastern Catholicism refutes Rome. Look it up.
@@Kostas_Dikefalaios and thankfully the Bible refutes catholicism!
@@tony1685 The Bible Was Made BY POPE DAMASUS ITS A CATHOLIC BOOK !!!!!!
@@Kostas_Dikefalaios Not sure what you mean by this.
@@tony1685 That's a little bit of a ridiculous statement. Care to elaborate?
I have a sneaking suspicion, that the Orthodox's reaction to the Reformation, was to tell the Catholic Church, was along the lines of ... "NYAH NYAH NYAH NYAH NYAH !!!!"
"We told you, you guys suck"
Ivan IV, better known as "the best dad ever". I love this channel
Just imagine if Martin Luther was James Bisonette, while the Patriarch of Constantinople would be Boogily Woogily.
The real question is, who would be the pope?
Come on, like it wouldn't be Phil the Oink-Oink?
Kelly Moneymaker, clearly.
One of the Wolves, perhaps? 🐺
Beats the Borgias, anyway... ; )
Perhaps Gustav Swan.
Kelly Moneymaker
I've been waiting so long for this one