The Eastern Orthodox Mission to China (from "A History of Orthodox Christian Missions Part II")
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ต.ค. 2024
- This clip is from our 2nd video in the Orthodox Missions series. It is found in the second half only available for patrons. The clip discusses the Orthodox Christian mission to China headed by the Russian Orthodox Church.
The first half can be found here: • Video
Our subscribestar for full video:www.subscribes...
Affiliate link for FreeFiltering: freefiltering....
My wife is Chinese and Orthodox.
I guess you could say she is "Gookadox" 😆
@@frankpontone2139 Classy
@@panokostouros7609 Thank you very much.
Hello, I am studying Chinese Orthodox music. Does your wife have relevant sheet music or recordings?
Fascinating stuff. Would love to see a video regarding Georgia and the many people the Georgian Churched helped to convert at one point of time (Christian missions in Dagestan and Vainakhia, alongside the christianization of Alans via cooperation of the Greeks and Western Georgians).
That's covered here: th-cam.com/video/_nImg9C9Xsw/w-d-xo.html
I think it's only on the full version, though which is on SubscribeStar, which is found here:
www.subscribestar.com/ubi-petrus
Another good vid is the "voices from/of the past" on the first christians in China though might not be Orthodox. The text read is from around 700 ad. Good vid thx ubi!
I will hunt that one down. "Voices from the Past" is a great channel, btw..
Ubi
Petrus
Ubi Petrus respond plz
Respond to what?
Ubi Petrus, I am trying to start learning about history and I don’t know where to start. I feel in the dark a little bit. How do I start learning about history ? (I know it’s a silly question) I’m interested in orthodox history , Rome Greece etc
You first have to find which period and region you want to read about. I'd recommending starting from broad surveys and then delving deeper from there.
How do the Eastern Orthodox get around The Council of Lyons II when they themselves recited The Filioque 3 times??????
Why did Rome called Florence them?
Pretty obvious that the greeks representing Orthodoxy in Lyon were not enough to be considered representatives of the whole of Orthodoxy (It was basically the emperor and Constantinople). In Florence the Pope himself said that it was the 8° ecumenical council. LoL 🤣🤣
@@Jerônimo_de_Estridão I see that you're trying to find some inconsistencies within Papal and Church history but I recommend that you don't waste your time since there are not any. The Roman Catholic Church is the One True Church founded by Christ and nothing has changed within it that is contradictory to anything Christ and his original apostles taught. Our priests' and bishops' lineages can be traced all the way back to the original Apostles.
@@frankpontone2139 The Roman church was indeed part of the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, where a roman bishop never reigned supreme, or professed to be infallible. But after the schism the Roman church was no more apostate than the nestorians. There are many inconsistences, like divorce and remarriage, that it was the norm on the western church, but now Rome say the opposite.
@@Jerônimo_de_Estridão Thank you for responding. The last comment I made concerning this video was 2 months ago. Since then I've done some research and study and have come to the conclusion that the Eastern Orthodox are correct concerning these issues. Reading the book "The Sedevacantist Delusion" helped me out a great deal.
@@frankpontone2139 Hope you will join the Orthodox Church ☦️
How do the Eastern Orthodox get around The Council of Lyons II when they themselves recited The Filioque 3 times??????
Show me the signatures of patriarchs who signed it and then you'll have an argument.
@@ubipetrus3882 Back in those days, oral acceptance superseded signatures and so the patriarchs lifted their heads in unison and shouted out 3 times "Filioque! Filioque! Filioque!".....historians do not deny this.
@@frankpontone2139 Of oral acceptance trumped signatures, why did the emperors insist prelates actually sign acts and decrees? Case in point, the emperor Marcian insisted Leo sign the acts of Chalcedon despite the fact Leo was holding out for nearly 18 months
@@ubipetrus3882 Signatures initially superseded oral acceptance (as your example of Chalcedon proves), however, Chalcedon was in the 5th century and by the time Lyons II took place in the 13th century, that apparently was no longer the case. That is why the patriarchs chose to shout out 3 times "Filioque! Filioque! Filioque!" and the Catholic attendees were completely satisfied. However, even if you disagree with the claim that oral acceptance trumped signatures, it still proves my argument because: If the Eastern Churches didn't believe in the Filioque, then they wouldn't have gone out of their way to shout it in unison 3 times in a row. Apparently signatures weren't good enough or else they'd have kept their mouths shut. They wanted the entire Church Body to know that they believed in Filioque and so they shouted it in unison 3 times in a row so nobody would be unsure of their correct position. Then they did a complete 180 when Palamas came around a century later.
@Frank Pontone
(1) What is your evidence the patriarchs were at Lyon II?
(2) At every council before, bishops had to sign even after oral proclamations of faith so I see no reason why this is different. For example, at Florence in 1439, a date closer to Lyon II in 1274, the delegates we're required to sign even after professing faith. Why would that be if what really mattered was signatures?
How do the Eastern Orthodox get around The Council of Lyons II when they themselves recited The Filioque 3 times??????
We didn't a uniate emperor did and we dogmatically anathematized that synod at blachernae 1285
@@shiningdiamond5046 Thank you so much for that information! People such as Ubi Petrus and David The Magic Midwife never respond to that. I'm thinking of becoming Orthodox.
Show me the signatures of patriarchs who signed it and then you'll have an argument.
Nota bene: the only comments of yours I have ever seen are on this video in which you posted the same comment a three times. David rarely responds to comments and he has stated so in videos.
@@ubipetrus3882 Back in those days, oral acceptance superseded signatures and so the patriarchs lifted their heads in unison and shouted out 3 times "Filioque! Filioque! Filioque!".....historians do not deny this.
@@frankpontone2139 If oral acceptance trumped signatures, why did the emperors insist prelates actually sign acts and decrees? Case in point, the emperor Marcian insisted Leo sign the acts of Chalcedon despite the fact Leo was holding out for nearly 18 months