Here are the links to our podcast - www.kingsandgenerals.net/podcast/ apple.co/2QTuMNG bit.ly/2QDF7y0 spoti.fi/2UBmyuO Please follow and comment and rate!
Plz do a documentary on either anglo-mysore wars or anglo-maratha wars if not then plz do mughal-maratha war. These things is mostly unknown as many westerner thinks that's British took India from mughals and that Indians jut surrendered.also plz do a video about mysorean rockets and Kohinoor diamond which is in the crown of queen of UK. From ur dedicated but a non-petreon fan from India.
Again and again I am amazed by the rich art styles and visual representation techniques the antiquity presents us. Thanks to the nameless Roman, Greek, European artists whose art inspired me through the making of this video in terms of mosaics, stained glasses, manuscript illustrations, and icons. For any political or religious reasons art must not be a thing to be banned imho, since it is ridiculous to ban a thing which defines the humankind and it's power comes from core urges. Anyways art finds a way and insists to get out to the great openness of the earth no matter what.
The slippery slope there is that malicious people can redefine what art is and peddle all sorts of cultural weaponry as "art". All things in balance, especially tolerance.
don't seek the doctrines of men, worshiping idols, following their own lusts... seek The Truth on your own beloved ones. ask The Most High to lead you in His Ways (I believe this is outside the churches who delight in idols and icons, although I am sure they have many True Believers)
As a Catholic from Ireland, I appreciated it. It helps me to learn about the tragic schism. Wish all brothers and sisters of Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant and other Christian faith all good health.
@@hetalvnThe topic is the tragic schism of Christendom, so involving other faiths would be a bit off topic. Secondly, it is naive to assume that other religions share your values even to the point that you should wish them good health (omitting such a wish is not the same as wishing someone ill health, but I'm not sure you'd want to wish good health upon ISIS -- or even someone like David Miscavige). Lastly, one could also ask "what about non-religious people?" I find it hard to learn about this topic without wondering what a more united Christianity could have done in the face of the centuries long Jihad that conquered so many previously Christian lands. It may or may not have made a huge difference (by our standards) at the time, but what the world might look like now is an interesting thought. Did the world benefit from having various checks on Christian power over the centuries? Or would we have a more just, equal, and liberal North Africa and Middle East today if, say, the Crusades had been a far bigger success? It's a counterfactual, but an interesting one to ponder.
Translation of greek words: Irene= peace(Ειρήνη), Nikephoros=victorious(Νικηφόρος), Hagia Sophia= Holy Wisdom(Αγία Σοφία), schism= gap/tear(σχίσμα), Thessaloniki=victory over the Thessalians(Alexander's sister name), Nicomedia=victory over the Medes(Persians)
Θεσσαλονίκη/Thessaloniki means "victory *at* Thessaly". It was an allied force of Macedonians and Thessalians that fought there against a common enemy. And Nikephoros means "Victory bringer", not just victorious
@@dimitrismihalopoulos1469 yes, Nikiforos means the bringer of victory, literally "the one who carries the win"... But I am not sure about Thessaloniki if it was about "a victory over the Thesalians" or "a victory of the Thessalians"... The two words are Thessalon and Niki and in any case was a Makedonian victory, but can't remember, if it was the first its obvious, it's because Makedones win the Thessalous (Brothers kill Brothers) or if it is the second it must be due to a win that was given to the Macedonians due to their allied Thessalians allies... (Thessalians was back and forth being enemies and aliens of Makedonian all the time until Alexander unified all Greece)
It's missing the details on how Pope St. Leo III resisted the Filoque, and this video still holds on to the traditional 1054 as completely factual. Etc etc
Ferrer Mihkael I agree 1054 isn’t exactly right but it is when the first excommunications and anathemas were thrown around West vs East, mainly due to personal dislike. However they did show the importance of 1204 as the final nail in the coffin that split them from the commoners to hierarchs.
I wouldn’t see it as a happy ending if almost all western and central european conflicts originated from charlemagne dividing his empire between his sons 😅
@@armandoan6328 No, there is only one mediator between God and man...and it is Christ. I am a Christian. Get it right. Jesus is my priest. Jesus is my Redeemer. Jesus is my king. The pope, worships Satan, not YHWH.
@@armandoan6328 I read from THE church father, and I understands completely. Anyone brainwashed to believe Catholicism is of YHWH, needs forgiveness, for worshipping Satan. I don't pray to Mary, or Peter, or any other HUMAN. Jesus only. These people still had to worship, at the feet of Jesus. Jesus says He is the only way to the Father. I believe Him, not people that use fake power, to abuse little boys.
@@WillyIlluminatoz nah JESUS never turn to ISLAM. He use ISLAM as a tool to correct christianity. Is a fact ISLAM can destroy ortodox but cant beat catolic and even can't hold protestant spread
The schism affects us to this day. My Grandma who was half-Greek and half-German was a Catholic due to her Germanic Heritage. My Grandpa who was a Greek was Orthodox. So there was a stupid issue when they were going to marry eachother. Where would they be wed in a Catholic Church or an Orthodox Church? The couple themselves didn't care much but it was an issue with their parents. So they decided to compromise they would marry twice once in an Orthodox ceremony and once in a Catholic one. (AKA Double the cost of a wedding) Since the husband was Orthodox they decided to do the Orthodox one first. Afterward my Grandma went to the Catholic Church in Athens to plan her wedding. Upon learning that the couple were already married in an Orthodox ceremony the bishop excommunicated my Grandma on the spot. She snapped at him telling him that even Jesus didn't excommunicate the ones who put him to the cross and she was getting excommunicated because she married an Orthodox? That stunt although it impressed the bishop it wasn't enough to remove her excommunication. She died in 2014 and the Catholic Church refused to do her funeral we did it on an Orthodox one even though she wasn't an Orthodox Christian. It wasn't because she was already married since wasn't rare for couples of different faiths to marry twice. And even if it was because of the marriage not the Orthodox part the church would simply refuse to marrie them not excommunicate the woman and refuse to do her burial 50+ years later. But the sad part is our own family was split. We are not in good terms with pretty much anyone on my mom's Catholic side. And with those that we are in decent terms we barely speak to eachother at all. Personally, I believe that the Scishim is stupid it tries to use the Will of God to abuse the worshipers. The Lord said after all "Love everyone".
@@vadimdon agreed, thankfully as the church gets seperated more and more from power each year one day we all go back to being a single faith that praises the Lord for his love.
4:12 Rome & Constantinople stand as the two sole influential churches 5:08 Eastern Roman Empire's control over the papacy in Rome 5:40 Leo III begins Iconoclasm (727 AD) 6:02 Lombards end Eastern Roman Empire's control over Northern Italy (751 AD) 6:25 The Franks enter the fray under Pepin the short & the papal states are established 7:57 Irene rises to power in Constantinople (797 AD) by deposing her son Constantine VI She stops Iconoclasm 8:59 Charlemagne is crowned as Holy Roman Emperor (800 AD) 10:02 Rift between Holy Roman Empire & Eastern Roman Empire 11:51 Church power 12:11 The Photian Controversy (863 AD) 12:53 Difference between religious rituals of the two churches 13:28 Two churches come to blows & *The Great Schism* occurs 15:57 Massacre of Latin population in Constantinople (1182 AD) 17:08 Fourth Crusade
@@Ibraheem776 Christians fought each other a lot. How does that make it untrue that Muslims fought/fight each other a lot as well? The one doesn't exclude the other.
@@marksuperkid1253 we don't have shit show like "Sack of Constantinople" or "Thirty years war" which decimated the population of present day Germany. Muslims have no record of sinking THIS low.
Alvira Rahman sinking this low. Yeah say that again verbally but think about the word Mongolia at the same time. One little man change your whole history only legit empire to come out of the ruin was ottomans and the only real competition they had was a dying Byzantine that was getting out of a plague.
@@jaimealvarez5666 lol commenting irrelevant crap here won't save you from the shit hole u dug yourself for haha. Name any Sect war inside the realm of Islam that is as bad as "Sack of Constantinople" or "Thirty Years War" you Christians even assassinated your Pope of the other sect and you have the nerve to speak here. What kind of shameless human are you? Either be relevant or shut up.
The Byzantines had a law that a blind man could not be emperor, so many claimants to the Byzantine throne were ritually blinded over the centuries in power struggles, sometimes with golden tools made especially for removing eyeballs
Latin and Greek Christians: We will always be the greatest rivals, we will never be pissed at any other Christians more than that. Protestant Heretics: Let us introduce ourselves.....
A tragicomical fact is, that as pope Leo IX had already died at 19th April, the excommunication enacted by Cardinal Humbert of Sevilla on 19th July 1054 was void, because Leo had only given a blanko excommunication, to be enacted in case the negotiation would fail. But by canonical law not only this document would´ve lost it´s validity with Leo´s death, but also the papal delegation had lost it´s authority, as they weren´t (yet) authorized by the new pope Victor II. But the news of Leo´s death hadn´t reached Constantinopel by the 19th July, and in the aftermath of the reciprocall excommunication all party´s were to proud and stubborn to acknowledge this fact, and get a compromise going.
This is honestly the best overview and breakdown of this historical event I have ever seen. If you are a teacher in an english speaking classroom then use this!
@Lord Voldemort Caesar is what the German word for King (Kaizer) derives from. The Holy Roman Empire was a germanised continuation of Rome so it makes sense really.
Proverbs 22:3 "A prudent man foresees evil and hides himself, But the simple pass on and are punished." Take heed to this truth, or if you reject it as "conspiracy" or "craziness" you will suffer the consequences. "Popery Puseyism Jesuitism" By Luigi Desanctis Page 140: At what, then, do the Jesuits aim? According to them, they only seek the greater glory of God; but if you examine the facts you will find that they aim at universal dominion alone. They have rendered themselves indispensable to the Pope, who, without them, could not exist, because Catholicism is identified with them. They have rendered themselves indispensable to governors and hold revolutions in their hands; and in this way, either under one name or another, it is they who rule the world, who have reduced it to such perversion of ideas, that he can neither be a good citizen nor a good Catholic who is not a Jesuit. Page 139: He who thinks he knows the Jesuits by having read all the books that were written in the past century to unmask them, would be grossly deceived. The Jesuitism of that day was an open war against the Gospel and society; the Jesuitism of the present day is a slow but contagious and deadly disease, which secretly insinuates itself; it is a poison taken under the name of medicine. "History of the Jesuits: their origin, progress, doctrines, and designs" 1854 By Nicolini, G. B. (Giovanni Battista) Page 39: take the Jesuit for what he ought or appears to be, and you commit the greatest of blunders. Draw the character after what the Jesuit seems to be in London, and you will not recognize your portrait in the Jesuit of Rome. The Jesuit is the man of circumstances. Despotic in Spain, constitutional in England, republican in Paraguay, bigot in Rome, idolater in India, he shall assume and act out in his own person, with admirable flexibility, all those different features by which men are usually to be distinguished from each other. He will accompany the gay woman of the world to the theatre, and will share in the excesses of the debauchee. With solemn countenance, he will take his place by the side of the religious man at church, and he will revel in the tavern with the glutton and the sot. He dresses, in all garbs, speaks all languages, knows all customs, is present everywhere though nowhere recognized-and all this, it should seem (O monstrous blasphemy!), for the greater glory of God Page 82: [Jesuit] Father Francis Pelhco... candidly confesses that " the many illustrious friends of the Society, prelates, orators, learned and distinguished men of every description, the supporters of the Society, remain occult, and obliged to be silent.'' "The Jesuits in History" by Hector MacPherson Page 148: Danger lies in the fact that since the Vatican Council the interests of both are identical. Jesuitism is the power behind the Papal throne. “The presence of the Jesuits in any country, Romanist or Protestant,” once remarked Lord Palmerston, “ is likely to breed social disturbance.” So hurtful was the Jesuit Order found to be that, up to 1860, it was expelled no fewer than seventy times from countries which has suffered from its machinations... In spite of Continental warnings, England, in the name of a spurious toleration, has become a Jesuit dumping-ground. Those whom other countries have found from sad experience to be enemies, Britain allows to land on her shores, and to carry on unmolested their work of iniquity. We are carrying toleration to excess, and unless there is a change of policy, this nation will one day pay a heavy penalty. If we wish to escape the penalty, we must come to realize that a system which enslaves the individual, fosters superstition, is at war with patriotism and destroys morality, will, if allowed to flourish unchecked, sooner or later destroy society. "The Jesuits in History" 1914 by Hector MacPherson Page 122: In order to clearness of thought in dealing with this subject, it is well to note the distinction between Roman Catholicism and the Papacy. The former has to do mainly with religion. It rests upon the theological doctrines which Protestants believe to be erroneous. There are Roman Catholics who take their religion but not their politics from the Pope. Had the Roman Catholic Church remained a purely religious organisation like any other sect, the world would have been spared centuries of evil. But in the course of its development the Romish Church, through its Popes, entered the civil sphere and aspired to universal monarchy. "The Vatican Against Europe" 1993 by Edmond Paris Page 308: In the future, as in the past, she (The Catholic Church) will inexorably move towards the end she has set herself, without the slightest thought for the ruins and the catastrophes that her unwearying pursuit might be causing. "The end justifies the means". "No political event or circumstance can be evaluated without the knowledge of the Vatican's part in it. And no significant world situation exists in which the Vatican does not play an important explicit or implicit role. "The Secret History Of The Jesuits" 1975 by Edmond Paris Page 7: The public is practically unaware of the overwhelming responsibility carried by the Vatican and its Jesuits in the start of the two world wars-a situation which may be explained in part by the gigantic finances at the disposition of the Vatican and its Jesuits, giving them power in so many spheres, especially since the last conflict. Page -163-164: But let us see, first, how an especially "authorized" personality, Franco, Knight of the Order of Christ, expressly confirmed the collusion between the Vatican and the nazis. According to "Reforme", this is what the press of the Spanish dictator (Franco) published on the 3rd of May 1945, the day of Hitler's death: ... "I learned much from the Order of the Jesuits", said Hitler... "Until now, there has never been anything more grandiose, on the earth, than the hierarchical organisation of the Catholic Church. I transferred much of this organisation into my own party... I am going to let you in on a secret... I am founding an Order... In my "Burgs" of the Order, we will raise up a youth which will make the world tremble... Hitler then stopped, saying that he couldn't say any more.."(108) "Swarms of Locusts: The Jesuit attack on the Faith" 2002 by Michael Bunker Page 12: There is a conspiracy against Christendom.... But who are Satan’s agents in this conspiracy? The “agents” are the Jesuits. Even though the Jesuits exude vast influence and control in the areas of theology, education, recorded history and current media, I am still perplexed that virtually no literature exists exposing the Jesuit’s influence on mainline Protestantism. This is what makes “Swarms of Locusts” such a necessary book. In this work, the author uncovers forgotten history regarding the cooperative salvation theology of the Jesuits. The author then builds upon these historical truths and clearly exposes how the Jesuits (and their cooperative redemption theology) have permeated all denominations of the Protestant Church. From Cain to Charles Finney, this book historically connects-the-dots and undeniably proves that modem Protestantism has abandoned the Doctrines of Grace and embraced the doctrines of cooperative salvation.
The Patriarchate of Constantinople was not saying it was the head highest power. The Bishop of Constantinople said all bishops are equal the Roman Bishop was the one fighting for power
Exactly, this video straw mans the entire schism into politics, and makes some straight out false statements. The schism was theological. But we hear none of this in order to undermine Christianity as a sort of "political religion". Jesus apparently started a "new religion" as one example. Complete ignorance imo.
The Roman Empire might still be standing today. Frankish muscle combined with Greek science and intellectualism would create for a potent combination. They may even be able to beat back the Muslims.
DUDE, I was literally sitting here like....that ball-less son of a bitch literally deprived us of the world's most badass power couple, im so fuckin mad!!!!! They would have been BOSS!!!!
@Hoàng Nguyên Well it's okay then since they weren't vikings. That's probably why they actually brought something to england (mainly architectural techniques) . Italy is another matter though I admit.
@Hoàng Nguyên "Norman" in 1050 just meant "inhabitants of Normandy", which only had a small portion of scandinavian blood (since the frankish locals in Normandy have always been the majority), and which completely discarded scandinavian culture, so much that most didn't speak norse at all, just old french. William the conqueror itself had very few viking ancestors compared with the overwhelming majority of frankish ancestors. And by "frankish", I also mean what it meant at the time, not the germanic tribe of the 500s. Normans and vikings were as close as germans and french. Not that close. And btw Celtic people (Irish, Scot...) aren't Germanic, that's a different ethnicity. Russians are also a different ethnicity: Slav. It's just that historically the Rus' of kiev was kick started by scandinavians (which indeed are germanic).
@Hoàng Nguyên You're wrong. Celtic people are celtic people, slavs are slavs, germanic people are germanic people. Different ethnic groups historically speaking. Franks in 1050 mainly meant people from western frankia (not the former germanic tribe 5 centuries earlier), historians generally call them french already because in that west part they were already french culturally speaking (but they called themselves the franks). People in western frankia were for a large part from Gaulish ancestry (thus mainly Celtic), mixed with Germanic migrations (and a bit of roman migrations) throughout history. Frankish or french society was thus mixed, you can't consider french people strictly germanic, just a part. The normans consequently added to that mix. Historically, the meaning of terms just depend on what era you're talking about. For example before the 900s "Norman" was indeed just the name of the vikings (the way french people called them, all of them). But once Rollo was given a duchy which was named Normandy and swear fealty to the king of France, Normans were the people that lived in the duchy of Normandy, a totally different thing. Then in one century and half, they totally assimilated to the locals of that region.
"... had conquered the Saxons and the Avars, introducing these pagan people to the faith of the Roman Church." - well, that's a diplomatic way of putting it, lol!
You are sentient. All pay tribute to Rome or the legion will be at the door. The battle for rights of Roman tribute between the Greeks and Latins could be called the two thousand year war. Likely the Forth Crusade did not settle the issue completely amicable to the Papacy. The dollar sufficient evidence of our continued Roman indenture.
the catholic church murdered all the Christians who didn't follow in it's idolatry and false doctrines... they murdered millions of True Believers as well, not only pagans.... that church is well known for it's murderous ways.
rami chahin millions? Idolatry? My friend I’m gonna need some numbers because you Protestants haven’t exactly been too nice either, the Kulturkampf of Germany, persecution in England and its colonies, revolutionary France, Salem witch trials, my friend we’ve killed way fewer than millions, you people and your fanatic asceticism is fine, sure, but calling us idolatrous is foolish
@@ramichahin2 What is a pagan except he who does not subscribe to Roman idolatry? I say anthropomorphism is degenerate spirituality. For that matter, Capitalism is commodification of life or nature or God for personal aggrandizement. Capitalism is usury in fact and the worship of Moloch in practice. Spirit is beyond form or species or sex or time. We may check with our own for the truth of this. The art of man has no life of its own. Nor do his books or languages.
I love learning about the history of Christianity :) It was thanks to the Greeks that my nation of Bulgaria converted to Christianity and it was a combined Bulgarian and Greek effort that successfully converted the future Russian. This is why a lot of Slavic names actually have Greek origins.
It seems to me that the Bulgarians overestimate their role in the formation of Russia a bit, the fact that we became Christians is mainly the merit of the Greeks, with whom the future tsars almost completely tried to copy the state system
@@ikipemiko Are you talking about the alphabet for which the citizens of Byzantium of Slavic origin were paid for in an organization entirely owned by the Greeks? no one says that the whole world watches Russian TV because an important part of this invention belongs to Zvorykin.
A fairly well balanced portrayal of the divide between the sides of Christianity. Obviously this is fraught with complex history and theology and I feel like it was well done in relatively brief way.
Freaking love the artworks man- there aren'e enough good Early Christian slash "Dark Age" European artworks out there and I for one absolutely love the quality of the works featured here! 🙏🙏🙏
@@coolthief8375 yeah, the Balkan region is probably the most divided region in the world, full of biased people with some of the most conflicted ideas, worldview and ethnical disputes and just bitter hate towards each other
@@coolthief8375 it's also weird how the Ottoman occupation brought some form of unity in the Balkans between Christians no matter the doctrine but after the Turks disappeared that unity disappeared with them. Also I said those things about the Balkans because I live in the region and the people are wild.
Dude the problem with Irene was not that "women were unfit to rule". Though not an usual thing, women could (and did) hold temporal power if the situation required it. They could not however (and still can't) hold positions of power in the Church. The title of Emperor was different to every other one. The Emperor was the supreme sovereign of Christendom. It was both a temporal and spiritual office. Byzantium could be rule by a woman, Christendom couldn't.
Keep in mind too that there were loads of queens who did most of the major decision making through their husband, they basically just told the king what to say.
@@derekk.2263 "Loads" is an exaggeration. Medieval times were brutal and women received little to no education. Also, contrary to modern belief, the vast majority of queens were happy just being wives and didn't have any political aspirations. You do have examples of queens being more influential than their husbands, but it's a rare thing and only really started happening with the Renaissance, once women started receiving some education and the world got less brutal.
@One Two that’s bullshit. What survey is this? The churches have a good 5-15% of abuse amongst their clergymen (employees) just like most other organizations. It just gets way more scrutiny bc of who they are and what they are supposed to represent. Btw studies say 100% of people named One Two on TH-cam like men. See how that works?
Very concise explanation, good job capturing the concept highlighting the important events. Glad that this channel addressed this topic. This could be a good high school history class lecture. Thank you!
I have a unique perspective on the division between the Orthodox and Catholic churches, since it could be said that I have one foot in each cultural world. My mom is Greek Orthodox, while my dad is Irish Catholic. I was raised and baptized into the Greek Orthodox Church, of which I am still a proud member, but my secondary, undergraduate and graduate education was at Catholic schools, run by the Xaverian and Jesuit orders. This video provides a very good summary of the events surrounding the schism between the churches
Other than a few things like the fact the Orthodox Church would never agree that the pope was ever the sole power. The Church was, is and always will be the sole power. Though the fact there may be many scattered true Christians outside of it, the Orthodox Church was, is and will be to the end, the only true remnant of the Church God gifted to us. With His son Christ as the head under the Holy Spirit. Of course.
@@Orthodoxi I'm a Catholic but the Orthodox priests in my country use the succession of Peter as a symbol of the supremacy of the bishop of Rome in settling the Ecumenical councils. The reason why Protestants still don't overwhelm the churches of Christ (Apostolic), are because of 1. The legitimacy of Ecumenical Councils, and 2. The apostolic succession. Who is there to say that we can settle an Ecumenical council and settle it? Is it a democracy or not? Yes they chose who will replace Judas, but that's it. The rest supports the claims of the bishop of Rome, which succeeds from Peter. If you'll deny that the bishop of Rome descended from Peter, then you might as well deny the validity of the Ecumenical councils. There is a reason why Jesus gave keys to Peter referencing explicitly to Eliakim in Isaiah 22:22. Even if you read what Ireneus and various early Christian scholars noted the supremacy of the bishop of Rome. Israel was once ruled by many Judges, but there is an existing blueprint that Judah will be the kingdom. It existed there in the scriptures for so long. Back then they only see what is good in their own eyes, but when they become a kingdom, it is not also immediately accepted, they even went to civil war, to banishment, to enslavement, until they realize that it is true that Judah in all of the tribes is all along the sole authority despite being written there in the scriptures for so long. The same thing you can keep arguing now. Any Orthodox or Protestants of today can do councils upon councils that they wanted to, and keep on splitting, but if they don't trace where their roots are, and which authority was actually given to, the church would be shaky at its core. We Catholics don't even curse the Orthodox church, we see it as a part of the true original Catholic and Apostolic church that Jesus Christ made, that Ignatius the disciple of John mentioned as early as 1st century AD. But it is the Orthodox who claims that they are the "Only" church, and by saying so, gives also legitimacy to the "Lutherans and Anglicans" who traces their roots to the Apostles through the apostate priests who broke off from the Church and then used the Apostolic succession as their reasoning, mixed with blasphemy and protestantism against the Church. Check out why the top intellectuals and scholars from Protestantism converts to Catholicism of all the Apostolic churches existing. People like Scott Hahn, Trent Horn, Cameroon, and so on.
@@Orthodoxi so Jesus words don't count? Peter you are my rock and upon my rock I will build my church? This is just a quick summary but the inevitable division by the East was material possession by emperors to inherit and hand over to their bloodline while the Pope is voted in and replaceable. On paper at least. The same case with the reformation of King Henry. Listen as a Asian man short brown and poor I never envy anyone's wealth because I understand that envy is the result of wanting to be in their place. In other words envious people are mad at handsome and rich people because they want to be them... What I'm trying to say is somebody has to be above you in this life and you have to learn to live with that because God is above you after you die. The Pope was put there by Jesus to be above emperor's Kings and all leaders. If the pope is bad he will be replaced.
I don't believe he was meant to be a "2nd Emperor" or a competing emperor. He was declared the "true successor" to Constantine V, the son of Irene. Competing Emperors didn't come around until Otto.
@@paulmayson3129 While ultimately correct about their power coming from Augustan succession, the role of Christianity in the coronation of Roman emperors (and all European monarchs since) has been vital since the 500s. We can't ignore that the role of Emperor had become more than a secular position, but an important Christian one by then. And as a Christian, he was a spiritual subject to the Church.
"There's no such thing as toxic femininity." Nobody talks about Athaliah, queen of Judah (841-835 BC) who seized the throne after the death of her son King Ahaziah, killed her rivals, and established Baal worship in Judah. "When Athaliah the mother of Ahaziah saw that her son was dead, she proceeded to destroy the whole royal family of the house of Judah." (2 Chronicles 22: 10).
So when Ivan the Terrible killed his son, Constantine “the Great” killed his wife and son, Süleyman killed several of his sons was not a toxic masculinity, but when Irene did it it suddenly is. It’s funny how some men today are so afraid of women in history doing what men in history also did. Laughable...
The video is incomplete in details. I am a former Catholic seminarian who studies this and it's even more complicated than this that misses key points.
Roman Empire: The Original Eastern Roman Empire: The Sequel Fascist Italy: The Sequel Nobody Wanted Holy Roman Empire: The one that ruined the original. Ottoman Empire: The bad spinoff. Russian Empire: The weird fanfiction. Alexander's Empire: The short lived prequel.
Spanish Empire: the cult classic film that took good note from the original, it is currently mainly forgotten by mainstream and normies, but everyone in his time took inspiration from or tried to copy or steal.
How was the Ottoman empire a bad spinoff? They ruled for over 600 years and essentially had hegemonic rule for over 300. They also achieved a a land mass equivalent to the Roman Empire with a larger population.
The filioque controversy had less to do with an actual disagreement in how the east and west percieved the spirit of God, and more to do with changing what was at the time already an ancient creed. Essentially the western roman church added a clarification statement to the nicene creed and the eastern roman church was upset that the west was making changes to ancient creeds without the patriarchs permission. Could be wrong but that's what i've heard at least.
Actually, the Filioque addition to the Creed is not considered ecumenical since the Western church made the changes unilaterally and without the Eastern church involvement ( by définition non-ecumenical). Thus, the Orthodox stick to the original Nicean Creed without the Filioque which is how the last ecumenical council left it (where it was agreed upon by all).
@@georgemarkakis9552 Actually the Orthodox use the amended Nicene Creed which they clarified in 381 at the Council of Constantinople of which no western bishop was present…
If you can see the easterns has as a political status the Democracy. The westerns has the monarchy of the kings!Completely deferential world's!!depression against freedom.
Technically, they still have not really reconciled with each other even though some strides have been made. In order to tell this story from a certain perspective, it would offend the other side. I do agree with you though that it would make for great tv.
An absolutely astonishing accomplishment. The simplicity of your approach belies it's ability to encapsulate a vast scope. Should be used by schools everywhere!
Proverbs 22:3 "A prudent man foresees evil and hides himself, But the simple pass on and are punished." Take heed to this truth, or if you reject it as "conspiracy" or "craziness" you will suffer the consequences. "Popery Puseyism Jesuitism" By Luigi Desanctis Page 140: At what, then, do the Jesuits aim? According to them, they only seek the greater glory of God; but if you examine the facts you will find that they aim at universal dominion alone. They have rendered themselves indispensable to the Pope, who, without them, could not exist, because Catholicism is identified with them. They have rendered themselves indispensable to governors and hold revolutions in their hands; and in this way, either under one name or another, it is they who rule the world, who have reduced it to such perversion of ideas, that he can neither be a good citizen nor a good Catholic who is not a Jesuit. Page 139: He who thinks he knows the Jesuits by having read all the books that were written in the past century to unmask them, would be grossly deceived. The Jesuitism of that day was an open war against the Gospel and society; the Jesuitism of the present day is a slow but contagious and deadly disease, which secretly insinuates itself; it is a poison taken under the name of medicine. "History of the Jesuits: their origin, progress, doctrines, and designs" 1854 By Nicolini, G. B. (Giovanni Battista) Page 39: take the Jesuit for what he ought or appears to be, and you commit the greatest of blunders. Draw the character after what the Jesuit seems to be in London, and you will not recognize your portrait in the Jesuit of Rome. The Jesuit is the man of circumstances. Despotic in Spain, constitutional in England, republican in Paraguay, bigot in Rome, idolater in India, he shall assume and act out in his own person, with admirable flexibility, all those different features by which men are usually to be distinguished from each other. He will accompany the gay woman of the world to the theatre, and will share in the excesses of the debauchee. With solemn countenance, he will take his place by the side of the religious man at church, and he will revel in the tavern with the glutton and the sot. He dresses, in all garbs, speaks all languages, knows all customs, is present everywhere though nowhere recognized-and all this, it should seem (O monstrous blasphemy!), for the greater glory of God Page 82: [Jesuit] Father Francis Pelhco... candidly confesses that " the many illustrious friends of the Society, prelates, orators, learned and distinguished men of every description, the supporters of the Society, remain occult, and obliged to be silent.'' "The Jesuits in History" by Hector MacPherson Page 148: Danger lies in the fact that since the Vatican Council the interests of both are identical. Jesuitism is the power behind the Papal throne. “The presence of the Jesuits in any country, Romanist or Protestant,” once remarked Lord Palmerston, “ is likely to breed social disturbance.” So hurtful was the Jesuit Order found to be that, up to 1860, it was expelled no fewer than seventy times from countries which has suffered from its machinations... In spite of Continental warnings, England, in the name of a spurious toleration, has become a Jesuit dumping-ground. Those whom other countries have found from sad experience to be enemies, Britain allows to land on her shores, and to carry on unmolested their work of iniquity. We are carrying toleration to excess, and unless there is a change of policy, this nation will one day pay a heavy penalty. If we wish to escape the penalty, we must come to realize that a system which enslaves the individual, fosters superstition, is at war with patriotism and destroys morality, will, if allowed to flourish unchecked, sooner or later destroy society. "The Jesuits in History" 1914 by Hector MacPherson Page 122: In order to clearness of thought in dealing with this subject, it is well to note the distinction between Roman Catholicism and the Papacy. The former has to do mainly with religion. It rests upon the theological doctrines which Protestants believe to be erroneous. There are Roman Catholics who take their religion but not their politics from the Pope. Had the Roman Catholic Church remained a purely religious organisation like any other sect, the world would have been spared centuries of evil. But in the course of its development the Romish Church, through its Popes, entered the civil sphere and aspired to universal monarchy. "The Vatican Against Europe" 1993 by Edmond Paris Page 308: In the future, as in the past, she (The Catholic Church) will inexorably move towards the end she has set herself, without the slightest thought for the ruins and the catastrophes that her unwearying pursuit might be causing. "The end justifies the means". "No political event or circumstance can be evaluated without the knowledge of the Vatican's part in it. And no significant world situation exists in which the Vatican does not play an important explicit or implicit role. "The Secret History Of The Jesuits" 1975 by Edmond Paris Page 7: The public is practically unaware of the overwhelming responsibility carried by the Vatican and its Jesuits in the start of the two world wars-a situation which may be explained in part by the gigantic finances at the disposition of the Vatican and its Jesuits, giving them power in so many spheres, especially since the last conflict. Page -163-164: But let us see, first, how an especially "authorized" personality, Franco, Knight of the Order of Christ, expressly confirmed the collusion between the Vatican and the nazis. According to "Reforme", this is what the press of the Spanish dictator (Franco) published on the 3rd of May 1945, the day of Hitler's death: ... "I learned much from the Order of the Jesuits", said Hitler... "Until now, there has never been anything more grandiose, on the earth, than the hierarchical organisation of the Catholic Church. I transferred much of this organisation into my own party... I am going to let you in on a secret... I am founding an Order... In my "Burgs" of the Order, we will raise up a youth which will make the world tremble... Hitler then stopped, saying that he couldn't say any more.."(108) "Swarms of Locusts: The Jesuit attack on the Faith" 2002 by Michael Bunker Page 12: There is a conspiracy against Christendom.... But who are Satan’s agents in this conspiracy? The “agents” are the Jesuits. Even though the Jesuits exude vast influence and control in the areas of theology, education, recorded history and current media, I am still perplexed that virtually no literature exists exposing the Jesuit’s influence on mainline Protestantism. This is what makes “Swarms of Locusts” such a necessary book. In this work, the author uncovers forgotten history regarding the cooperative salvation theology of the Jesuits. The author then builds upon these historical truths and clearly exposes how the Jesuits (and their cooperative redemption theology) have permeated all denominations of the Protestant Church. From Cain to Charles Finney, this book historically connects-the-dots and undeniably proves that modem Protestantism has abandoned the Doctrines of Grace and embraced the doctrines of cooperative salvation.
As a Catholic I have nothing but love for my Eastern Orthodox brothers and sisters. I listen to eastern religious chanting and love the Byzantine Empire.
Star Star they may be schismatic but don’t let it stop one from loving the Byzantines, with enough time the east and west WILL be brought back together.
My first time viewing the channel. I love the high-level overview of the Great Schism. I also love the maps and artwork by Oğuz Tunç and company. Keep up the great work!
The East Roman nobility would never accept him as an imperial consort , never mind co-ruler. Irene was likely menopausal by that age, so it's unlikely they would have children, and even if they had imperial blood was no concrete guarantee to being Basileus (being half barbarian would be an obstacle). It's doubtful as well that Louis the Pious would want to share his kingdom with an infant half brother, as Frankish law dictated. Charlemagne only lived to 814 as well, so any child between the imperial couple would be 14 at the oldest by that point. It's a fascinating idea to think about, but I doubt it would've had a long lasting effect, certainly not one past the half century mark
It would kind of be like if Donald Trump married Angela Merkel, if Charlemagne had been an ignorant lout with all the intellectual acumen of a hedgehog.
Not really. The Byzantine court would not have tolerated a Western barbarian calling the shots! It's more likely Irene would have been overthrown than an heir inheriting the Byzantine and Frankish realms!
Though being Muslim but such division saddens me. I'm from Albania and I can still feel this division where Catholic and Orthodox Albanians have always argued against each other due to their differences and Orthodox Albanians have sometimes been blamed as Serbian/Greek/Macedonian agents though I view them as Albanians. The two churches need to settle their differences.
By settle differences, I hope you mean the Pope removing the doctrines of Papal supremacy, infallibility, filioque, immaculate conception, purgatory, and penal substitution. Because true faith and objective truth can’t compromise and contradict itself for the sake of resolving differences.
@vasiliskaranos605 True faith has nothing to do with objective truth. It's an oxymoron. You either believe in something, and it [might] turn out to be true or know something that is true. So it's obvious that objective true will contradict true faith in many cases.
5:47 orthodox Christians don’t worship images and icons, it’s called veneration and it’s a symbol of love and respect for whoever or whatever is depicted on the icon. Not worshiping the icon itself.
@@greatexpectations6577 from the outside it really seems that way. But no one in Orthodoxy is saying that image is a "god" and worshipping it. From what I understand is that they are looking at the verses where Paul says "for we are surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses in the saints who have gone before us. Therefore brothers and sisters let us run our race not in vain."(paraphrased) thus the showing respect to those ancestors who lived their lives righteously and are "now seated with Christ in heavenly places" As to the "praying to" again this isn't seen or acted upon as praying to God himself, which they still do. But rather the concept behind that is that just as we are told to go to one another and seek corporate prayer, i.e. someone's child is struggling with addiction so they go to their church and ask people to join with them in prayer for this person thus showing the unity of Christ' body, so they go to the saints who have passed. As it says in Hebrews(I think) "for Christ rose from the grave. Therefore God is not Lord of the dead but of the Living" the belief is that the saints though dead on earth are alive and seated with Christ and while yes we have unfiltered access to Christ(see the tearing of the veil) how much more so is the access of those who are seated next to them and as you may ask a brother at Church to pray for a struggle so you ask the saints. As a protestant, once looked at in the true light of where the tradition comes from I really fail to see the Idol worship. They still profess the Lord Jesus Christ is their savior and is Himself God and the Son of God, one with the Father and the Holy Spirit. They still offer their worship to Him and Him alone and show respect and honor to those church fathers who have already passed on. There's more but honestly The Ten Minute Bible Hour has a wonderful series where he goes and talk with the various Orthodox churches and sits down with a Catholic theologian friend and discusses all of this, I highly recommend watching it.
".. laid a letter of excommnication in Hagia Sofia" I actually hit pause, and went "woooah!" As an outsider, it surely looks like it was the pope who was escalating the stakes all the time.
Generally this is poorly researched, the Papal Legate that did that did not have the authority from the pope to do that and the easterners would have known this (in addition to the fact the pope had died and so he had no authority of any kind anyway)
Heavy move but there are so many factors that go into not only the lead up but also this act itself that it should have been ignored by both sides (& apologized by the new Pope). At this point schism was going to happen.
That was an incredibly awesome video and covered most of the facts. You could have done some mentions on the attempts made between 1261 and 1453 for a solution of the Schism (like the Florence Council) even though popular controversy and bad timing proved these attempts fruitless....
@@matheenarif8645 Depends on what you call "factions". The Catholic Church has more than a billion faithful on all continents. Of course there are different traditions, rituals, beliefs, and so on. Catholics in Mexico, "charismatic" Catholics in Ghana, traditional Catholics in Italy, Catholics in the Philippines, in India, and so on and so on - Catholicism incorporates a lot of various traditions and movements, but (in contrast to Protestantism where every little movement has their own church, or Orthodoxy, where every nation needs its own church (or two)) they are all organised under the umbrella of the one Roman Catholic Church, not in separate organisations. There are also various churches of the Middle East that have a separate structure and rituals but acknowledge the primacy of the Pope in Rome (like the Maronites in Lebanon).
@@varana Yet me as a non-believer, I can not leave the church, there is no formal way to resign membership, which is fucked up. Surely the numbers would be a little smaller if there was a way not to be counted in on account of being born into it.
Just discovered this channel. Fantastic stuff! I love history and these bite-sized, easy-to-follow videos help me add to my knowledge with practically zero effort.
@@DJMeriMero He is not hater, just stating the truth... In that time that was the "Despotato tis Ipirou"... Albanians were brought there later by Ottomans (origin of Albanians is somewhere in Caucasian mountains)... Albanians are referred to the list of nations of the army under Darius in the battle of Gaugamela against Alexander! Real Albanians are Asians and did not exist in Balkans before the fall of Constantinople and Byzantine Empire at 1453...
Maybe I'm wrong but at 17:55, after the sack of Constantinople, the successor state that formed in western Greece was the Despotate of Epirus, not Albania. Or at the very least, Albania did not occupy land so far south into Epirus, if anything it was the Despotate who controlled southern Albania.
So called Despotate of Epirus was ruled by albanian princes and most of its inhabitants were albanians so Epirus and Albania is one and the same ....welcome to the real history my friend....now you know the truth
Congratulations guys! You keep surprising me! Historically accurate and well presented videos. About this story, its useful to say that many historian believe that the real schism between the two peoples, was occured when the crusaders sacked Constantinople. The hubris of sacking the first christian capital, the city of God, was the decisive moment that pushed Orthodox Greeks away from Catholics, for good.
Bruh i was half way through and my mind started going down ck2 paths like "did i remember to betroth my fourth son to the heir of the... and then i woke up and was like wait a minute thats ck2 music
historians always forget that during the first caliphate there was one eastern christian territory that was never converted which is Mount. Lebanon. Proud to be a Maronite
The content of videos here have always been super but now video editing skill also surpassed beyond just good. This channel is great. Way better than traditional documentaries from history channel or BBC. Thank you so much for posting invaluable contents for free. I do appreciate very much!
@@Amado9111 Russia isn't the leader of the orthodox church, they are just another autocephalous patriarchate (and the most troublesome one, since they are committed to Russian imperialism).
@@alanguages untrue, very untrue. Of course Christians care about the original Christians from Jerusalem, it’s a holy city and people fought for it in the crusades.
@@theodorusstevensitanggang6130 That's partially true. The concept of the 5 patriarchates (Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria, in geographical order) dates to Justinian in the 6th century. It is often used retroactively to explain the situation in the Christian Church in the 2 centuries prior to that. It's an anachronism, but not a bad approximation.
Well structured, clear and synthetic presentation, once again ! You stressed the most important points and articulated perfectly the key issues of this deep rivalry which still continues to impact our world.
@Tom K in some alternate universe there's some alternate history video about "What if the Christian Church never reunified" and speculates about what's basically our world. Their world is likely centuries behind ours, or more tho. Or, one could argue centuries AHEAD. I always just thought the Reformation led to less restriction on innovation.
NO WE are Catholic. Orthodox Catholic. The west became Roman Catholic. Pope John Paul admitted that BOTH can claim apostolic succession and they are like lungs. Left Lung and Right Lung.
If you want to learn about the religion, I’d recommend reading the New Testament. Old Testament/Torah is important to read first though, a study bible is a good tool for that.
Can you do a video on the council of Florence, where the Orthodox bishops almost reunited with the Catholic Church, until Mark of Ephesus and the conquest of Constantinople by the Ottomans derailed it?
The otoman conquest didn't dereailed it. It was the reason why the emperor was trying to unite with Rome, to get help from the West against the turks. Saint Mark of Ephesus only pointed the theological reasons why it couldn't happen.
@@markuhler2664 what do you mean Byzantine Catholic Priest? Do you mean those priests that are saying that are orthodox but there are under poe and admit in the Creed the filioqwe?
Great video. This might be one of the best history channels on TH-cam. Great content. However, in this case it would have been great if you'd had mentioned the nullification of mutual anathemas through the Catholic-Orthodox Joint Declaration of 1965, that put an end to the excomunications.
As a Roman Catholic I was laughing and wincing in embarrassment while watching all these madness, but more than that I'm sad 'coz we are all brother & sister's in CHRIST. It is so unfortunate. Anyway Pax Christi ;P
We are not brothers and sisters in Christ, since you are not in Christ, as you are in heresy and schism from His Body, the Church. Repent and become Orthodox.
@@FreshWholeMilk Both Catholicism and Orthodoxy follow the main tenants laid down by our lord Jesus Christ, and mainly differ in how their churches practice, and as such should be understood to be as brothers.
@@absolutelyyousless7605 There is only one Church. The Church is the Body of Christ, and Christ has only one Body, lest you become a Nestorian. The main difference between us and the Papists isn’t praxial, it’s the heretical doctrines the Latins promulgate dogmatically - chief among them the Filioque, which contradicts the Trinitarian Dogma of the Monarchy of the Father
This was a fascinating video on a subject with ramifications too this very day. Now I'm curious if you'll make one about the division of Islam between Shia and Sunni
When I first read about this, I started to finally understand why my church and friends churches did things differently especially when it came to rules about communion
One minor but important correction to this video. Before the great schism and one of the reasons for it was that the patriarchs of the church were all considered equals in matters of faith. The patriarch of Rome (the pope) was considered the "first among equals" and was not supposed to make decisions on cue matters of faith without an ecumenical council. Yet the pope added a word to the Nicean creed (a creed developed at an ecumenical council) to clarify the creed to some of its German converts. This infuriated Constantinople since they believed that the pope did not have authority to do this without an ecumenical council. After the split, Rome grew more and more excessive in its grab for power and money in Europe which ultimately triggered the reformation. The big question is why the reformers didn't push harder for communion with the East and instead forged its own path. Now Protestantism has had more internal schisms than either the Roman or Eastern church and Lutheranism is closer in practice to Catholicism than it is to Pentecostalism. Though in many ways protestant theology is far closer to orthodox theology than it is to Catholic theology, their practices are worlds apart.
The power grabs were the only "legitimate" reasons for the protestants. Theologically they're barren. German princes helped Luther spread. They were so allied that Luther even attacked peasants and called for their slaughter. Protestants denied the 7 sacraments that both East and West churches had. They deny the basics of Christianity formed over 1500 years. They only succeeded because of political reasons, like medici corruption, land grabs, etc. This is why there was no such revolution in the East. If it was truly theological then the East should've had a reformation earlier especially since they used a common language like Greek unlike the alienating Latin of the west.
True. Catholicism in general is still influenced by the older religions, especially Judism. Many of their rituals are not Biblical at all but an added panacea to appease the various tribes they embraced.
@@MH3GL Honestly? You would have to take a course or find some good books on the history of religion. As this doc points out, the base religion is divided. Catholicism is an offshoot of Judism. The Bible clearly shows the progression of Judism and how Jesus started another religious movement. His goal was to embrace people of different backgrounds. Yet, many old Jews chose to remain less secular. Anyone can convert to Judism, Trumps daughter, Ivanka is a practicing converted Jew. However, it had a bad reputation in many lands. As the Roman's accepted Christianity, they helped to form the new religion, the Roman Catholic Church. This United a lot of people of different classes and grew to become a very powerful force to aid royalty to either retain or obtain power over the people. Once the Bible was distributed in print, followers questioned the many non-biblical events practiced by the Catholic Church. There are some obvious contradiction. This is often because the Catholic religion converted pagan celebrations into religious ones. It is how the very time of Jesus's birth was weaved into December rather then the Spring when traveling made more sense. The three Magi? Was an attempt to pull in Middle Eastern people to the religion and make it seem more believable and acceptable. It helps to study the cultures of other parts of the World. The World was not flooded over because there is historical accounts during that time found in Northern Cultures. But it can be stated, that in how small the world was to societies that did not travel the world? Such mistakes in historical accounts will happen. A believer of good intensions needs to accept that Bible History, is not perfect. It is mens interpretation of what they believe their God wants from them to share. Their intentions were not always wise because it is based on common knowledge at that time in history. Things were much different then. Not everything in the Bible is relevent today. That is because if you study the Bible, you will see how culture changed as people learned better ways to live and discovered more answers to questions that were theories not proven true by facts. That is why preachers say religion is based on faith. You either believe it is true or you don't. The only thing that makes a God true is people choosing to believe in something that cannot be confirmed as a fact. It only hurts people when it is being used to hurt people not to help people. This is when religion is a stumbling block and not a ladder to a successful life.
@@pennyc11 I appreciate the long response, but let's clear some things up 🙂 I said I was RAISED Catholic, I am therefore familiar with its teachings, but I am not a practicing Catholic. On a whole, I find it very odd that 3 of the most abundant religions of the world (Christianity, Islam, and Judaism) all pray to the same God (the god of Moses) and yet are all at war with one another over whose faith/God is the "true faith/God." Rather amusing. In your initial comment, you stated that many rituals in Catholicism were not biblical in origin, but "added panacea," and I was simply asking for clarification on that. Yes, I'm aware Christmas is based on a pagan holiday. I was not aware that the 3 magi were added in to be more appeasing to easterners - but it makes sense. Are there any other examples you can provide? As I said, I'm familiar, but not an expert. So while I may be aware of what I was taught, I may not be fully aware of the implications behind its origins. So I'm simply appealing to someone who appears to have more knowledge than I.
@@ComptGeorges So called Despotate of Epirus was ruled by albanian princes and most of its inhabitants were albanians so Epirus and Albania is one and the same ....welcome to the real history my friend....now you know the truth
The Despotate of Epirus was a Greek successor state to the Roman/ Byzantine Empire. The Rulers were from the Doukai and Komnenoi family who were both descendants of Greek/ Medieval Roman families and the capital of the Despotate was the city of Arta in modern day Greece. Please, do not start with the Albanians claiming everything was Albanian nonsense in this video too
Great video Kings and Generals!! You have done good videos before but this one exceeds excellency and is well balanced between the opposite sides! My father is Greek Orthodox, my mother is Italian Catholic so I know the story from both hands. :)
This episode is excellent! One suggestion for improvement: Keep dates in the Top Right whenever announcing a new king or event! I kept asking myself when was this? It's hard to remember a date when it is just said. Giving both audio and visual cues would maximize memory retention!
Can't help but think Kings and Generals and Knowledgia did a collab on this subject, they've each covered the historical and theological background of the schism respectively and the two videos complement each other so well.
Here are the links to our podcast - www.kingsandgenerals.net/podcast/ apple.co/2QTuMNG bit.ly/2QDF7y0 spoti.fi/2UBmyuO Please follow and comment and rate!
Plz do a documentary on either anglo-mysore wars or anglo-maratha wars if not then plz do mughal-maratha war. These things is mostly unknown as many westerner thinks that's British took India from mughals and that Indians jut surrendered.also plz do a video about mysorean rockets and Kohinoor diamond which is in the crown of queen of UK.
From ur dedicated but a non-petreon fan from India.
Hey what back ground music did you used in the end of Lepanto video ?
@Kings and Generals I would apply but I don’t have enough fingers to use photo shop
(Although I am good at drawing dinosaurs)
17:57 It's Ipyrus you're referring to , not Albania .
I'm afraid my skill set is most suited for translation and localization, when you want to do k&g on Spanish, I'd be more than happy to apply 😎
Konstantinos VI: "I hate you mother, and never wish to see you again!"
Irene: "Your wish is granted"
Damn
That's sad....😥
Loool
@Y2kSd4 Crucify Jesus again.
Not gonna lie, that's some Cersei Lannister shit right there.
Again and again I am amazed by the rich art styles and visual representation techniques the antiquity presents us. Thanks to the nameless Roman, Greek, European artists whose art inspired me through the making of this video in terms of mosaics, stained glasses, manuscript illustrations, and icons.
For any political or religious reasons art must not be a thing to be banned imho, since it is ridiculous to ban a thing which defines the humankind and it's power comes from core urges. Anyways art finds a way and insists to get out to the great openness of the earth no matter what.
The slippery slope there is that malicious people can redefine what art is and peddle all sorts of cultural weaponry as "art". All things in balance, especially tolerance.
You and Aquila hit it right on the nail. Art must be preserved and never censored but balance between tolerance and openness must be struck.
that has to be one of the most amazing messeges I ever red on ytb
don't seek the doctrines of men, worshiping idols, following their own lusts... seek The Truth on your own beloved ones. ask The Most High to lead you in His Ways (I believe this is outside the churches who delight in idols and icons, although I am sure they have many True Believers)
Roman and Greek are European.
If only the history they taught in school was this well presented.
Well presented but more accurate than this.
@@prismadelsaber6317 don't even think lol, sometimes it's too much of a bias in schools than TH-cam.
The only thing I remember from highschool history class was "Remember class, Prussia wasn't Russia, it was Germany" which isn't even accurate
@@Hilder78 same lol my history teacher couldn't differentiate between Prussia and Germany.
True. I loved buy my school history teacher was really messed up
As a Catholic from Ireland, I appreciated it. It helps me to learn about the tragic schism. Wish all brothers and sisters of Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant and other Christian faith all good health.
Wishing you the best as well.
what about other religions
@@hetalvnNo!!
@@hetalvnThe topic is the tragic schism of Christendom, so involving other faiths would be a bit off topic. Secondly, it is naive to assume that other religions share your values even to the point that you should wish them good health (omitting such a wish is not the same as wishing someone ill health, but I'm not sure you'd want to wish good health upon ISIS -- or even someone like David Miscavige). Lastly, one could also ask "what about non-religious people?"
I find it hard to learn about this topic without wondering what a more united Christianity could have done in the face of the centuries long Jihad that conquered so many previously Christian lands. It may or may not have made a huge difference (by our standards) at the time, but what the world might look like now is an interesting thought. Did the world benefit from having various checks on Christian power over the centuries? Or would we have a more just, equal, and liberal North Africa and Middle East today if, say, the Crusades had been a far bigger success? It's a counterfactual, but an interesting one to ponder.
Amen!
Translation of greek words: Irene= peace(Ειρήνη), Nikephoros=victorious(Νικηφόρος), Hagia Sophia= Holy Wisdom(Αγία Σοφία), schism= gap/tear(σχίσμα), Thessaloniki=victory over the Thessalians(Alexander's sister name), Nicomedia=victory over the Medes(Persians)
Θεσσαλονίκη/Thessaloniki means "victory *at* Thessaly". It was an allied force of Macedonians and Thessalians that fought there against a common enemy.
And Nikephoros means "Victory bringer", not just victorious
The Medians were Iranians but they were not Persians.
@@sarban1653 yes but the Greek call the Persians ,Medes as later the Germanic s as Celts and later all the westvEuropians as Frank's
And later they use to call the Huns and the slavs Scuthian s .
@@dimitrismihalopoulos1469 yes, Nikiforos means the bringer of victory, literally "the one who carries the win"...
But I am not sure about Thessaloniki if it was about "a victory over the Thesalians" or "a victory of the Thessalians"...
The two words are Thessalon and Niki and in any case was a Makedonian victory, but can't remember, if it was the first its obvious, it's because Makedones win the Thessalous (Brothers kill Brothers) or if it is the second it must be due to a win that was given to the Macedonians due to their allied Thessalians allies...
(Thessalians was back and forth being enemies and aliens of Makedonian all the time until Alexander unified all Greece)
As an Orthodox, I was hesitant clicking the video, but great job being impartial and covering pertinent facts!
Am Catholic, I was impressed too (& in fact thought there were a couple of places the wording tilted to far west).
It's missing the details on how Pope St. Leo III resisted the Filoque, and this video still holds on to the traditional 1054 as completely factual. Etc etc
Ferrer Mihkael I agree 1054 isn’t exactly right but it is when the first excommunications and anathemas were thrown around West vs East, mainly due to personal dislike. However they did show the importance of 1204 as the final nail in the coffin that split them from the commoners to hierarchs.
Mark Uhler To be expected but I’ve seen textbooks actually denouncing the East as wrong so I’ll gladly take this :)
I am Russian Orthodox
Kings, Generals, and Popes! You seriously need to do a series on Charlamagne!
Big daddy of Europe
I wouldn’t see it as a happy ending if almost all western and central european conflicts originated from charlemagne dividing his empire between his sons 😅
Yes
@@themitri5643 Basks, in the Pyrenees mountain passes killed Rolland, not Serbs...
Oh yes! the fake "emperor " .
Pretty crazy to realize that the Roman Empire basically lasted all the way until 1452.
Lmao, no. They are still lasting. They are leading Satanism from the Vatican.
@@firstamendment2887 protestard at it again 🤡🤡🤡
@@armandoan6328 No, there is only one mediator between God and man...and it is Christ. I am a Christian. Get it right. Jesus is my priest. Jesus is my Redeemer. Jesus is my king. The pope, worships Satan, not YHWH.
@@firstamendment2887 go read some church fathers and u will understand
@@armandoan6328 I read from THE church father, and I understands completely. Anyone brainwashed to believe Catholicism is of YHWH, needs forgiveness, for worshipping Satan. I don't pray to Mary, or Peter, or any other HUMAN. Jesus only. These people still had to worship, at the feet of Jesus. Jesus says He is the only way to the Father. I believe Him, not people that use fake power, to abuse little boys.
Catholics: "May Jesus aid me in battle"
Orthodox: "May Jesus aid me in battle"
Catholics: "Wait"
Orthodox: "Wait"
LOL
@@D_Marrenalv jesus will never help them .they did not even listen to a single word he said .
@@lunchingtangpua2415 Agreed!
@@WillyIlluminatoz nah JESUS never turn to ISLAM. He use ISLAM as a tool to correct christianity. Is a fact ISLAM can destroy ortodox but cant beat catolic and even can't hold protestant spread
@@WillyIlluminatoz Islam denies the most proven fact about Jesus' life, Him being crucified.
"Irene gouged out her son's eyes, becoming the sole ruler." A mother's tender love! (sniff, sniff)
Μάνα μου!
s nah man he didn’t knock when he walked into her room on accident and he gouged his own eyes out
she didn't want her son to see the ugly world of politics. she was protecting him
" you have your mother's eyes.. no wait, other way around.
@@BSKX17 Making him a priest was not an option?
The schism affects us to this day.
My Grandma who was half-Greek and half-German was a Catholic due to her Germanic Heritage.
My Grandpa who was a Greek was Orthodox.
So there was a stupid issue when they were going to marry eachother. Where would they be wed in a Catholic Church or an Orthodox Church?
The couple themselves didn't care much but it was an issue with their parents. So they decided to compromise they would marry twice once in an Orthodox ceremony and once in a Catholic one. (AKA Double the cost of a wedding)
Since the husband was Orthodox they decided to do the Orthodox one first. Afterward my Grandma went to the Catholic Church in Athens to plan her wedding. Upon learning that the couple were already married in an Orthodox ceremony the bishop excommunicated my Grandma on the spot. She snapped at him telling him that even Jesus didn't excommunicate the ones who put him to the cross and she was getting excommunicated because she married an Orthodox?
That stunt although it impressed the bishop it wasn't enough to remove her excommunication. She died in 2014 and the Catholic Church refused to do her funeral we did it on an Orthodox one even though she wasn't an Orthodox Christian.
It wasn't because she was already married since wasn't rare for couples of different faiths to marry twice. And even if it was because of the marriage not the Orthodox part the church would simply refuse to marrie them not excommunicate the woman and refuse to do her burial 50+ years later.
But the sad part is our own family was split. We are not in good terms with pretty much anyone on my mom's Catholic side. And with those that we are in decent terms we barely speak to eachother at all.
Personally, I believe that the Scishim is stupid it tries to use the Will of God to abuse the worshipers. The Lord said after all "Love everyone".
Γρηγόρης Αράπης that's sad. And your grandma was right. Jesus didn't excommunicate anyone but the church feels the need to do so, what a joke
@@vadimdon agreed, thankfully as the church gets seperated more and more from power each year one day we all go back to being a single faith that praises the Lord for his love.
Sorry to say so but your family is so living in the middle ages. Perhaps they need to chill and keep up
@@miliba *grandparents
@@theemirofjaffa2266 Don't worry most folks are normal XD
Also there are some bad relatives on either side.
4:12 Rome & Constantinople stand as the two sole influential churches
5:08 Eastern Roman Empire's control over the papacy in Rome
5:40 Leo III begins Iconoclasm (727 AD)
6:02 Lombards end Eastern Roman Empire's control over Northern Italy (751 AD)
6:25 The Franks enter the fray under Pepin the short & the papal states are established
7:57 Irene rises to power in Constantinople (797 AD) by deposing her son Constantine VI
She stops Iconoclasm
8:59 Charlemagne is crowned as Holy Roman Emperor (800 AD)
10:02 Rift between Holy Roman Empire & Eastern Roman Empire
11:51 Church power
12:11 The Photian Controversy (863 AD)
12:53 Difference between religious rituals of the two churches
13:28 Two churches come to blows & *The Great Schism* occurs
15:57 Massacre of Latin population in Constantinople (1182 AD)
17:08 Fourth Crusade
Jazakallahu khayran. I’m learning this to tell some Christians that they can’t say Muslims always fight eachother when they did
@@Ibraheem776 Christians fought each other a lot. How does that make it untrue that Muslims fought/fight each other a lot as well? The one doesn't exclude the other.
@@marksuperkid1253 we don't have shit show like "Sack of Constantinople" or "Thirty years war" which decimated the population of present day Germany. Muslims have no record of sinking THIS low.
Alvira Rahman sinking this low. Yeah say that again verbally but think about the word Mongolia at the same time. One little man change your whole history only legit empire to come out of the ruin was ottomans and the only real competition they had was a dying Byzantine that was getting out of a plague.
@@jaimealvarez5666 lol commenting irrelevant crap here won't save you from the shit hole u dug yourself for haha. Name any Sect war inside the realm of Islam that is as bad as "Sack of Constantinople" or "Thirty Years War" you Christians even assassinated your Pope of the other sect and you have the nerve to speak here. What kind of shameless human are you? Either be relevant or shut up.
Constantine VI: I hate you Mom
Irene: Off with your eyes, son
Our parents when they told us what punishment was like in their childhood.
The Byzantines had a law that a blind man could not be emperor, so many claimants to the Byzantine throne were ritually blinded over the centuries in power struggles, sometimes with golden tools made especially for removing eyeballs
@Boris Erdogan Ironically...it was considered a mercy by most people of the times because outright execution was deemed far worse of a sin.
@@saguntum-iberian-greekkons7014 nah, it was just a way to seed fear, and deffo he took this example from ancient greek mythology
Oh shit my mom is named Irene.
Latin and Greek Christians: We will always be the greatest rivals, we will never be pissed at any other Christians more than that.
Protestant Heretics: Let us introduce ourselves.....
4th crusade
Protestants of protestantism: Call a ambulance....
But not for me
You can always rely on religion to find a reason to kill each other, dumdarsed idiots.
@@colindebourg3884 because we all know the great leap backwards was made by religious people and not atheist commies.
@@colindebourg3884 aw shut up it's human nature. We could all be athiest and I garuntee you we will be killing each other over some obscure difference
Roman Catholic Church: you’re hereby excommunicated eastern heretic
Orthodox Church: ...no u
Simplistic, but fairly accurate.
The same can be said about the HRE and the Papal States
A tragicomical fact is, that as pope Leo IX had already died at 19th April, the excommunication enacted by Cardinal Humbert of Sevilla on 19th July 1054 was void, because Leo had only given a blanko excommunication, to be enacted in case the negotiation would fail. But by canonical law not only this document would´ve lost it´s validity with Leo´s death, but also the papal delegation had lost it´s authority, as they weren´t (yet) authorized by the new pope Victor II. But the news of Leo´s death hadn´t reached Constantinopel by the 19th July, and in the aftermath of the reciprocall excommunication all party´s were to proud and stubborn to acknowledge this fact, and get a compromise going.
Yea...Christians became from love thy neighbors by Jesus to fuck you neighbors by some popes. The popes back in the days making Jesus proud.
And as for Leo the X...
This is honestly the best overview and breakdown of this historical event I have ever seen.
If you are a teacher in an english speaking classroom then use this!
So this channel is Kings, Generals and Cardinals now
And those called “the Short”, “the Great”, and so forth
@@patrick9876 not the terrible though 🙅♂️
Could that be Exeter from Azur Lane?
@@emperoripmgproductions3150 yes
@Lord Voldemort Caesar is what the German word for King (Kaizer) derives from. The Holy Roman Empire was a germanised continuation of Rome so it makes sense really.
Jesus: 'Were... you guys even listening to a word I said?'
Peoples: Pretty sure he was preaching about babtism by sword.
Exactly
Martin Luther: I got you fam
@@firingallcylinders2949 NO MARTIAN WAS A SATANIC PRECHER. HE GAVE BIRTH TO PROTESTENT HERESY
@@rebeccaanderson5626 You mean he restored Biblical teaching.
Give credit to those who carefully noted everything so that we could learn about it more than 1000 years later for free
Thanks for watching!
Proverbs 22:3
"A prudent man foresees evil and hides himself, But the simple pass on and are punished."
Take heed to this truth, or if you reject it as "conspiracy" or "craziness" you will suffer the consequences.
"Popery Puseyism Jesuitism"
By Luigi Desanctis
Page 140:
At what, then, do the Jesuits aim? According to them, they only seek the greater glory of God; but if you examine the facts you will find that they aim at universal dominion alone. They have rendered themselves indispensable to the Pope, who, without them, could not exist, because Catholicism is identified with them. They have rendered themselves indispensable to governors and hold revolutions in their hands; and in this way, either under one name or another, it is they who rule the world, who have reduced it to such perversion of ideas, that he can neither be a good citizen nor a good Catholic who is not a Jesuit.
Page 139:
He who thinks he knows the Jesuits by having read all the books that were written in the past century to unmask them, would be grossly deceived. The Jesuitism of that day was an open war against the Gospel and society; the Jesuitism of the present day is a slow but contagious and deadly disease, which secretly insinuates itself; it is a poison taken under the name of medicine.
"History of the Jesuits: their origin, progress, doctrines, and designs" 1854
By Nicolini, G. B. (Giovanni Battista)
Page 39:
take the Jesuit for what he ought or appears to be, and you commit the greatest of blunders. Draw the character after what the Jesuit seems to be in London, and you will not recognize your portrait in the Jesuit of Rome. The Jesuit is the man of circumstances. Despotic in Spain, constitutional in England, republican in Paraguay, bigot in Rome, idolater in India, he shall assume and act out in his own person, with admirable flexibility, all those different features by which men are usually to be distinguished from each other. He will accompany the gay woman of the world to the theatre, and will share in the excesses of the debauchee. With solemn countenance, he will take his place by the side of the religious man at church, and he will revel in the tavern with the glutton and the sot. He dresses, in all garbs, speaks all languages, knows all customs, is present everywhere though nowhere recognized-and all this, it should seem (O monstrous blasphemy!), for the greater glory of God
Page 82:
[Jesuit] Father Francis Pelhco... candidly confesses that " the many illustrious friends of the Society, prelates, orators, learned and distinguished men of every description, the supporters of the Society, remain occult, and obliged to be silent.''
"The Jesuits in History"
by Hector MacPherson
Page 148:
Danger lies in the fact that since the Vatican Council the interests of both are identical. Jesuitism is the power behind the Papal throne. “The presence of the Jesuits in any country, Romanist or Protestant,” once remarked Lord Palmerston, “ is likely to breed social disturbance.” So hurtful was the Jesuit Order found
to be that, up to 1860, it was expelled no fewer than seventy times from countries which has
suffered from its machinations...
In spite of Continental warnings, England, in the name of a spurious toleration, has become a Jesuit dumping-ground. Those whom
other countries have found from sad experience to be enemies, Britain allows to land on her shores, and to carry on unmolested their work of iniquity. We are carrying toleration to excess, and unless there is a change of policy, this nation will one day pay a heavy penalty. If we wish to escape the penalty, we must come to realize that a system which enslaves the individual, fosters superstition, is at war with patriotism and destroys morality, will, if allowed to flourish unchecked, sooner or later destroy society.
"The Jesuits in History" 1914
by Hector MacPherson
Page 122:
In order to clearness of thought in dealing with this subject, it is well to note the distinction between Roman Catholicism and the Papacy. The former has to do mainly with religion. It rests upon the theological doctrines which Protestants believe to be erroneous. There are Roman Catholics who take their religion but not their politics from the Pope. Had the Roman Catholic Church remained a purely religious organisation like any other sect, the world would have been spared centuries of evil. But in the course of its development the Romish Church, through its Popes, entered the civil sphere and aspired to universal monarchy.
"The Vatican Against Europe" 1993
by Edmond Paris
Page 308:
In the future, as in the past, she (The Catholic Church) will inexorably move towards the end she has set herself, without the slightest thought for the ruins and the catastrophes that her unwearying pursuit might be causing. "The end justifies the means". "No political event or circumstance can be evaluated without the knowledge of the Vatican's part in it. And no significant world situation exists in which the Vatican does not play an important explicit or implicit role.
"The Secret History Of The Jesuits" 1975
by Edmond Paris
Page 7:
The public is practically unaware of the overwhelming responsibility carried by the Vatican and its Jesuits in the start of the two world wars-a situation which may be explained in part by the gigantic finances at the disposition of the Vatican and its Jesuits, giving them power in so many spheres, especially since the last conflict.
Page -163-164:
But let us see, first, how an especially "authorized" personality, Franco, Knight of the Order of Christ, expressly confirmed the collusion between the Vatican and the nazis. According to "Reforme", this is what the press of the Spanish dictator (Franco) published on the 3rd of May 1945, the day of Hitler's death: ...
"I learned much from the Order of the Jesuits", said Hitler... "Until now, there has never been anything more grandiose, on the earth, than the hierarchical organisation of the Catholic Church. I transferred much of this organisation into my own party... I am going to let you in on a secret... I am founding an Order... In my "Burgs" of the Order, we will raise up a youth which will make the world tremble... Hitler then stopped, saying that he couldn't say any more.."(108)
"Swarms of Locusts: The Jesuit attack on the Faith" 2002
by Michael Bunker
Page 12:
There is a conspiracy against Christendom.... But who are Satan’s agents in this conspiracy? The “agents” are the Jesuits.
Even though the Jesuits exude vast influence and control in the areas of theology, education, recorded history and current media, I am still perplexed that virtually no literature exists exposing the Jesuit’s influence on mainline Protestantism. This is what makes “Swarms of Locusts” such a necessary book. In this work, the author uncovers forgotten history regarding the cooperative salvation theology of the Jesuits. The author then builds upon these historical truths and clearly exposes how the Jesuits (and their cooperative redemption theology) have permeated all denominations of the Protestant Church. From Cain to Charles Finney, this book historically connects-the-dots and undeniably proves that modem Protestantism has abandoned the Doctrines of Grace and embraced the doctrines of cooperative salvation.
The Patriarchate of Constantinople was not saying it was the head highest power. The Bishop of Constantinople said all bishops are equal the Roman Bishop was the one fighting for power
Exactly, this video straw mans the entire schism into politics, and makes some straight out false statements. The schism was theological. But we hear none of this in order to undermine Christianity as a sort of "political religion". Jesus apparently started a "new religion" as one example. Complete ignorance imo.
Nope, but be my guest in believing so.
The art in these videos is gorgeous. Love the illustrations for the different leaders.
thanks for watching!
@@otgunz are you the artist?
David k I think
imagine if irene had married charlemagne! how different would today's europe be?
The Roman Empire might still be standing today. Frankish muscle combined with Greek science and intellectualism would create for a potent combination. They may even be able to beat back the Muslims.
HolyknightVader999 no lol.
Stopped by an impotent eunuch...thanks Obama 🙄🙄🙄
@@sanjak689 Yes lol.
DUDE, I was literally sitting here like....that ball-less son of a bitch literally deprived us of the world's most badass power couple, im so fuckin mad!!!!! They would have been BOSS!!!!
"normans living peaceful lives" that statement is not possible
"Oh, you know... just following orders from our bastard king..."
-Sincerely, a Norman soldier
@Hoàng Nguyên That's pretty offensive
@Hoàng Nguyên Well it's okay then since they weren't vikings. That's probably why they actually brought something to england (mainly architectural techniques) . Italy is another matter though I admit.
@Hoàng Nguyên "Norman" in 1050 just meant "inhabitants of Normandy", which only had a small portion of scandinavian blood (since the frankish locals in Normandy have always been the majority), and which completely discarded scandinavian culture, so much that most didn't speak norse at all, just old french. William the conqueror itself had very few viking ancestors compared with the overwhelming majority of frankish ancestors. And by "frankish", I also mean what it meant at the time, not the germanic tribe of the 500s.
Normans and vikings were as close as germans and french. Not that close.
And btw Celtic people (Irish, Scot...) aren't Germanic, that's a different ethnicity. Russians are also a different ethnicity: Slav. It's just that historically the Rus' of kiev was kick started by scandinavians (which indeed are germanic).
@Hoàng Nguyên You're wrong. Celtic people are celtic people, slavs are slavs, germanic people are germanic people. Different ethnic groups historically speaking. Franks in 1050 mainly meant people from western frankia (not the former germanic tribe 5 centuries earlier), historians generally call them french already because in that west part they were already french culturally speaking (but they called themselves the franks). People in western frankia were for a large part from Gaulish ancestry (thus mainly Celtic), mixed with Germanic migrations (and a bit of roman migrations) throughout history. Frankish or french society was thus mixed, you can't consider french people strictly germanic, just a part. The normans consequently added to that mix.
Historically, the meaning of terms just depend on what era you're talking about. For example before the 900s "Norman" was indeed just the name of the vikings (the way french people called them, all of them). But once Rollo was given a duchy which was named Normandy and swear fealty to the king of France, Normans were the people that lived in the duchy of Normandy, a totally different thing. Then in one century and half, they totally assimilated to the locals of that region.
I think this is my favorite video from K&G.
It's a very coherent and storied piece that also represents the matured style of this channel.
"... had conquered the Saxons and the Avars, introducing these pagan people to the faith of the Roman Church." - well, that's a diplomatic way of putting it, lol!
You are sentient. All pay tribute to Rome or the legion will be at the door. The battle for rights of Roman tribute between the Greeks and Latins could be called the two thousand year war. Likely the Forth Crusade did not settle the issue completely amicable to the Papacy. The dollar sufficient evidence of our continued Roman indenture.
Forceful conversion is the more appropriate word
the catholic church murdered all the Christians who didn't follow in it's idolatry and false doctrines... they murdered millions of True Believers as well, not only pagans.... that church is well known for it's murderous ways.
rami chahin millions? Idolatry? My friend I’m gonna need some numbers because you Protestants haven’t exactly been too nice either, the Kulturkampf of Germany, persecution in England and its colonies, revolutionary France, Salem witch trials, my friend we’ve killed way fewer than millions, you people and your fanatic asceticism is fine, sure, but calling us idolatrous is foolish
@@ramichahin2 What is a pagan except he who does not subscribe to Roman idolatry? I say anthropomorphism is degenerate spirituality. For that matter, Capitalism is commodification of life or nature or God for personal aggrandizement. Capitalism is usury in fact and the worship of Moloch in practice. Spirit is beyond form or species or sex or time. We may check with our own for the truth of this. The art of man has no life of its own. Nor do his books or languages.
I love learning about the history of Christianity :) It was thanks to the Greeks that my nation of Bulgaria converted to Christianity and it was a combined Bulgarian and Greek effort that successfully converted the future Russian. This is why a lot of Slavic names actually have Greek origins.
cough* Rus conversion
It seems to me that the Bulgarians overestimate their role in the formation of Russia a bit, the fact that we became Christians is mainly the merit of the Greeks, with whom the future tsars almost completely tried to copy the state system
@@DVXDemetrivs Interesting! Can you point me to some sources so that I can learn more about this? :)
@@ikipemiko Are you talking about the alphabet for which the citizens of Byzantium of Slavic origin were paid for in an organization entirely owned by the Greeks? no one says that the whole world watches Russian TV because an important part of this invention belongs to Zvorykin.
Artem
cant wait for the for the Schism Part 2: Lutheran Bugaloo
Western schism: Am I a joke to you??? ;)
MOM, LUTHER IS NAILING SOMETHING TO THE DOOR AGAIN!!
@@bvdemier1 Martin Luther King day
@@bvdemier1 I think they were feces.
"That's bullshit, this whole thing is bullshit. That's a scam, fuck the church. Here's 95 reasons why."
-Martin Luther
A fairly well balanced portrayal of the divide between the sides of Christianity. Obviously this is fraught with complex history and theology and I feel like it was well done in relatively brief way.
Freaking love the artworks man- there aren'e enough good Early Christian slash "Dark Age" European artworks out there and I for one absolutely love the quality of the works featured here! 🙏🙏🙏
Honestly whoever did the art did a fantastic job... some of their best art yet
Empress Irene was looking good! :D
This is like Game of Thrones: Church Edition!
17:08 *"The grim end of this tale is already well known to many."*
Don't, it's too soon 😔
It's been over 800 years...
@@coolthief8375 yeah, the Balkan region is probably the most divided region in the world, full of biased people with some of the most conflicted ideas, worldview and ethnical disputes and just bitter hate towards each other
@@coolthief8375 it's also weird how the Ottoman occupation brought some form of unity in the Balkans between Christians no matter the doctrine but after the Turks disappeared that unity disappeared with them. Also I said those things about the Balkans because I live in the region and the people are wild.
@@coolthief8375 Also quiet a lot of people in Russia. Almoust got Constantinople in 1878, still feeling bad about "almoust" part.
Where is Rome?
*points to map*
Where is Moscow?
*points to map*
Where is Constantinople?
*points to own heart*
Dude the problem with Irene was not that "women were unfit to rule". Though not an usual thing, women could (and did) hold temporal power if the situation required it. They could not however (and still can't) hold positions of power in the Church.
The title of Emperor was different to every other one. The Emperor was the supreme sovereign of Christendom. It was both a temporal and spiritual office. Byzantium could be rule by a woman, Christendom couldn't.
Keep in mind too that there were loads of queens who did most of the major decision making through their husband, they basically just told the king what to say.
it did work when the Eastern Empire was dominant as the Patriarch was serving the Emperor or Empress
@@derekk.2263 "Loads" is an exaggeration. Medieval times were brutal and women received little to no education. Also, contrary to modern belief, the vast majority of queens were happy just being wives and didn't have any political aspirations. You do have examples of queens being more influential than their husbands, but it's a rare thing and only really started happening with the Renaissance, once women started receiving some education and the world got less brutal.
@Derek K. Examples? I’ll wait....
@One Two that’s bullshit. What survey is this? The churches have a good 5-15% of abuse amongst their clergymen (employees) just like most other organizations. It just gets way more scrutiny bc of who they are and what they are supposed to represent. Btw studies say 100% of people named One Two on TH-cam like men. See how that works?
Very concise explanation, good job capturing the concept highlighting the important events. Glad that this channel addressed this topic. This could be a good high school history class lecture. Thank you!
I have a unique perspective on the division between the Orthodox and Catholic churches, since it could be said that I have one foot in each cultural world. My mom is Greek Orthodox, while my dad is Irish Catholic. I was raised and baptized into the Greek Orthodox Church, of which I am still a proud member, but my secondary, undergraduate and graduate education was at Catholic schools, run by the Xaverian and Jesuit orders. This video provides a very good summary of the events surrounding the schism between the churches
You should become Muslim :)
beta dad
Other than a few things like the fact the Orthodox Church would never agree that the pope was ever the sole power. The Church was, is and always will be the sole power. Though the fact there may be many scattered true Christians outside of it, the Orthodox Church was, is and will be to the end, the only true remnant of the Church God gifted to us. With His son Christ as the head under the Holy Spirit. Of course.
@@Orthodoxi
I'm a Catholic but the Orthodox priests in my country use the succession of Peter as a symbol of the supremacy of the bishop of Rome in settling the Ecumenical councils. The reason why Protestants still don't overwhelm the churches of Christ (Apostolic), are because of
1. The legitimacy of Ecumenical Councils, and
2. The apostolic succession.
Who is there to say that we can settle an Ecumenical council and settle it? Is it a democracy or not? Yes they chose who will replace Judas, but that's it. The rest supports the claims of the bishop of Rome, which succeeds from Peter. If you'll deny that the bishop of Rome descended from Peter, then you might as well deny the validity of the Ecumenical councils. There is a reason why Jesus gave keys to Peter referencing explicitly to Eliakim in Isaiah 22:22. Even if you read what Ireneus and various early Christian scholars noted the supremacy of the bishop of Rome. Israel was once ruled by many Judges, but there is an existing blueprint that Judah will be the kingdom. It existed there in the scriptures for so long. Back then they only see what is good in their own eyes, but when they become a kingdom, it is not also immediately accepted, they even went to civil war, to banishment, to enslavement, until they realize that it is true that Judah in all of the tribes is all along the sole authority despite being written there in the scriptures for so long. The same thing you can keep arguing now. Any Orthodox or Protestants of today can do councils upon councils that they wanted to, and keep on splitting, but if they don't trace where their roots are, and which authority was actually given to, the church would be shaky at its core. We Catholics don't even curse the Orthodox church, we see it as a part of the true original Catholic and Apostolic church that Jesus Christ made, that Ignatius the disciple of John mentioned as early as 1st century AD. But it is the Orthodox who claims that they are the "Only" church, and by saying so, gives also legitimacy to the "Lutherans and Anglicans" who traces their roots to the Apostles through the apostate priests who broke off from the Church and then used the Apostolic succession as their reasoning, mixed with blasphemy and protestantism against the Church.
Check out why the top intellectuals and scholars from Protestantism converts to Catholicism of all the Apostolic churches existing. People like Scott Hahn, Trent Horn, Cameroon, and so on.
@@Orthodoxi so Jesus words don't count? Peter you are my rock and upon my rock I will build my church? This is just a quick summary but the inevitable division by the East was material possession by emperors to inherit and hand over to their bloodline while the Pope is voted in and replaceable. On paper at least. The same case with the reformation of King Henry. Listen as a Asian man short brown and poor I never envy anyone's wealth because I understand that envy is the result of wanting to be in their place. In other words envious people are mad at handsome and rich people because they want to be them... What I'm trying to say is somebody has to be above you in this life and you have to learn to live with that because God is above you after you die. The Pope was put there by Jesus to be above emperor's Kings and all leaders. If the pope is bad he will be replaced.
"For the first time since antiquity there were 2 Roman emperors"
Well yes, but actually no
TheDHC well actually only one of them was welcome in Rome.
@@zarni000 I mean Charlemagne did have control of Rome, the papacy was a puppet state to the Franks.
Christian Trevisan I wonder if you can bring something else than your despise.
I don't believe he was meant to be a "2nd Emperor" or a competing emperor. He was declared the "true successor" to Constantine V, the son of Irene.
Competing Emperors didn't come around until Otto.
@@paulmayson3129 While ultimately correct about their power coming from Augustan succession, the role of Christianity in the coronation of Roman emperors (and all European monarchs since) has been vital since the 500s. We can't ignore that the role of Emperor had become more than a secular position, but an important Christian one by then. And as a Christian, he was a spiritual subject to the Church.
"There's no such thing as toxic femininity."
Irene: Hold my son's eyes
And some people say that's sexist. She's why I'm Catholic.
Anastasia B you are the only idiot here
"There's no such thing as toxic femininity." Nobody talks about Athaliah, queen of Judah (841-835 BC) who seized the throne after the death of her son King Ahaziah, killed her rivals, and established Baal worship in Judah.
"When Athaliah the mother of Ahaziah saw that her son was dead, she proceeded to destroy the whole royal family of the house of Judah." (2 Chronicles 22: 10).
I'm sure toxic femininity exists, but that's not an example of it.
So when Ivan the Terrible killed his son, Constantine “the Great” killed his wife and son, Süleyman killed several of his sons was not a toxic masculinity, but when Irene did it it suddenly is. It’s funny how some men today are so afraid of women in history doing what men in history also did. Laughable...
WOW! What a fact packed 20 minutes! I'll have to watch this a few more times! Thank you!
I've been wanting to learn more about the Great Schism for a long time, great video!
Evan Curtis well you should probably start reading because this video is horrible
The video is incomplete in details. I am a former Catholic seminarian who studies this and it's even more complicated than this that misses key points.
@@YeenMagecare to share any info
Roman Empire: The Original
Eastern Roman Empire: The Sequel
Fascist Italy: The Sequel Nobody Wanted
Holy Roman Empire: The one that ruined the original.
Ottoman Empire: The bad spinoff.
Russian Empire: The weird fanfiction.
Alexander's Empire: The short lived prequel.
They are both original. If anything the west betrayed the east more than once and continue to betray today...
Spanish Empire: the cult classic film that took good note from the original, it is currently mainly forgotten by mainstream and normies, but everyone in his time took inspiration from or tried to copy or steal.
How was the Ottoman empire a bad spinoff? They ruled for over 600 years and essentially had hegemonic rule for over 300. They also achieved a a land mass equivalent to the Roman Empire with a larger population.
@Valentina Nightingale Well said 👍
@@skhan1992 Yeah, if you wanna call sand "a land mass equivalent to the Roman Empire", by all means go ahead. It's a bad spinoff.
If Irine was exiled to Lesbos, this means she technically became a Lesbian.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣.
Lesbosian*
@@ata-urrehman6842 yeah, like Cyprusian
Best. Comment. On. The. Net!
LOL!!! 😆😆😆😆😆😆😆🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Thanks!
I love how they subtly used CK-II music
That music is drilled into my head
I was just gonna say that LMAO
They even used ck2 colors for the Byzantines, Franks etc. lol
Didn't use CK music while presenting medieval history is a heresy.
They used it in most Roman-Byzantine related videos, and I love it
The parallax animations of these videos are absolutely spectacular!
I really love how you guys take a complex subject like this, simplify it & make it quite entertaining & fun to watch.
Well done!
The filioque controversy had less to do with an actual disagreement in how the east and west percieved the spirit of God, and more to do with changing what was at the time already an ancient creed. Essentially the western roman church added a clarification statement to the nicene creed and the eastern roman church was upset that the west was making changes to ancient creeds without the patriarchs permission.
Could be wrong but that's what i've heard at least.
It was all about politics/authority disputes
The Orthodox Church sees it as a false addition that disrupts the previous understanding of the Holy Trinity
Actually, the Filioque addition to the Creed is not considered ecumenical since the Western church made the changes unilaterally and without the Eastern church involvement ( by définition non-ecumenical). Thus, the Orthodox stick to the original Nicean Creed without the Filioque which is how the last ecumenical council left it (where it was agreed upon by all).
@@georgemarkakis9552 Actually the Orthodox use the amended Nicene Creed which they clarified in 381 at the Council of Constantinople of which no western bishop was present…
It's always this. Western heathens always wanted changes as per their wims of the time.
I'd totally watch a show about this from the eastern perspective.
If you can see the easterns has as a political status the Democracy. The westerns has the monarchy of the kings!Completely deferential world's!!depression against freedom.
Technically, they still have not really reconciled with each other even though some strides have been made. In order to tell this story from a certain perspective, it would offend the other side. I do agree with you though that it would make for great tv.
@@fotischaronis4597 Not really democracy. They have slaves.
@@fotischaronis4597 then hegemony versus hierarchy?
@@bojanstare8667 sure !depend the period
An absolutely astonishing accomplishment. The simplicity of your approach belies it's ability to encapsulate a vast scope. Should be used by schools everywhere!
Proverbs 22:3
"A prudent man foresees evil and hides himself, But the simple pass on and are punished."
Take heed to this truth, or if you reject it as "conspiracy" or "craziness" you will suffer the consequences.
"Popery Puseyism Jesuitism"
By Luigi Desanctis
Page 140:
At what, then, do the Jesuits aim? According to them, they only seek the greater glory of God; but if you examine the facts you will find that they aim at universal dominion alone. They have rendered themselves indispensable to the Pope, who, without them, could not exist, because Catholicism is identified with them. They have rendered themselves indispensable to governors and hold revolutions in their hands; and in this way, either under one name or another, it is they who rule the world, who have reduced it to such perversion of ideas, that he can neither be a good citizen nor a good Catholic who is not a Jesuit.
Page 139:
He who thinks he knows the Jesuits by having read all the books that were written in the past century to unmask them, would be grossly deceived. The Jesuitism of that day was an open war against the Gospel and society; the Jesuitism of the present day is a slow but contagious and deadly disease, which secretly insinuates itself; it is a poison taken under the name of medicine.
"History of the Jesuits: their origin, progress, doctrines, and designs" 1854
By Nicolini, G. B. (Giovanni Battista)
Page 39:
take the Jesuit for what he ought or appears to be, and you commit the greatest of blunders. Draw the character after what the Jesuit seems to be in London, and you will not recognize your portrait in the Jesuit of Rome. The Jesuit is the man of circumstances. Despotic in Spain, constitutional in England, republican in Paraguay, bigot in Rome, idolater in India, he shall assume and act out in his own person, with admirable flexibility, all those different features by which men are usually to be distinguished from each other. He will accompany the gay woman of the world to the theatre, and will share in the excesses of the debauchee. With solemn countenance, he will take his place by the side of the religious man at church, and he will revel in the tavern with the glutton and the sot. He dresses, in all garbs, speaks all languages, knows all customs, is present everywhere though nowhere recognized-and all this, it should seem (O monstrous blasphemy!), for the greater glory of God
Page 82:
[Jesuit] Father Francis Pelhco... candidly confesses that " the many illustrious friends of the Society, prelates, orators, learned and distinguished men of every description, the supporters of the Society, remain occult, and obliged to be silent.''
"The Jesuits in History"
by Hector MacPherson
Page 148:
Danger lies in the fact that since the Vatican Council the interests of both are identical. Jesuitism is the power behind the Papal throne. “The presence of the Jesuits in any country, Romanist or Protestant,” once remarked Lord Palmerston, “ is likely to breed social disturbance.” So hurtful was the Jesuit Order found
to be that, up to 1860, it was expelled no fewer than seventy times from countries which has
suffered from its machinations...
In spite of Continental warnings, England, in the name of a spurious toleration, has become a Jesuit dumping-ground. Those whom
other countries have found from sad experience to be enemies, Britain allows to land on her shores, and to carry on unmolested their work of iniquity. We are carrying toleration to excess, and unless there is a change of policy, this nation will one day pay a heavy penalty. If we wish to escape the penalty, we must come to realize that a system which enslaves the individual, fosters superstition, is at war with patriotism and destroys morality, will, if allowed to flourish unchecked, sooner or later destroy society.
"The Jesuits in History" 1914
by Hector MacPherson
Page 122:
In order to clearness of thought in dealing with this subject, it is well to note the distinction between Roman Catholicism and the Papacy. The former has to do mainly with religion. It rests upon the theological doctrines which Protestants believe to be erroneous. There are Roman Catholics who take their religion but not their politics from the Pope. Had the Roman Catholic Church remained a purely religious organisation like any other sect, the world would have been spared centuries of evil. But in the course of its development the Romish Church, through its Popes, entered the civil sphere and aspired to universal monarchy.
"The Vatican Against Europe" 1993
by Edmond Paris
Page 308:
In the future, as in the past, she (The Catholic Church) will inexorably move towards the end she has set herself, without the slightest thought for the ruins and the catastrophes that her unwearying pursuit might be causing. "The end justifies the means". "No political event or circumstance can be evaluated without the knowledge of the Vatican's part in it. And no significant world situation exists in which the Vatican does not play an important explicit or implicit role.
"The Secret History Of The Jesuits" 1975
by Edmond Paris
Page 7:
The public is practically unaware of the overwhelming responsibility carried by the Vatican and its Jesuits in the start of the two world wars-a situation which may be explained in part by the gigantic finances at the disposition of the Vatican and its Jesuits, giving them power in so many spheres, especially since the last conflict.
Page -163-164:
But let us see, first, how an especially "authorized" personality, Franco, Knight of the Order of Christ, expressly confirmed the collusion between the Vatican and the nazis. According to "Reforme", this is what the press of the Spanish dictator (Franco) published on the 3rd of May 1945, the day of Hitler's death: ...
"I learned much from the Order of the Jesuits", said Hitler... "Until now, there has never been anything more grandiose, on the earth, than the hierarchical organisation of the Catholic Church. I transferred much of this organisation into my own party... I am going to let you in on a secret... I am founding an Order... In my "Burgs" of the Order, we will raise up a youth which will make the world tremble... Hitler then stopped, saying that he couldn't say any more.."(108)
"Swarms of Locusts: The Jesuit attack on the Faith" 2002
by Michael Bunker
Page 12:
There is a conspiracy against Christendom.... But who are Satan’s agents in this conspiracy? The “agents” are the Jesuits.
Even though the Jesuits exude vast influence and control in the areas of theology, education, recorded history and current media, I am still perplexed that virtually no literature exists exposing the Jesuit’s influence on mainline Protestantism. This is what makes “Swarms of Locusts” such a necessary book. In this work, the author uncovers forgotten history regarding the cooperative salvation theology of the Jesuits. The author then builds upon these historical truths and clearly exposes how the Jesuits (and their cooperative redemption theology) have permeated all denominations of the Protestant Church. From Cain to Charles Finney, this book historically connects-the-dots and undeniably proves that modem Protestantism has abandoned the Doctrines of Grace and embraced the doctrines of cooperative salvation.
So instead of marrying Charlemagne, Irene went full Lesbo
WGTOW
i am an orthodox christian i love all humans and christians around the world ❤️☦️
Humans AND Christians 😂😂 😘
Im just aworthless sinner depending on my King Jesus we were never supposed to put labels on it for we are all one in Jesus
I was born orthodox and fuck that church, most idol obsessed, conservative and superstitious crap
@@kalebloshbough1551 Jesus was as worthless as you think you are. Probably more.
Lier!
As a Catholic I have nothing but love for my Eastern Orthodox brothers and sisters. I listen to eastern religious chanting and love the Byzantine Empire.
The Jesus Prayer is one of the greatest gifts they've given.
daniel you should pay a visit to agios oros in the third leg of chalkidiki
your ancestors didnt so that doesnt count
Star Star they may be schismatic but don’t let it stop one from loving the Byzantines, with enough time the east and west WILL be brought back together.
@Syed Ahmed east west schism, Greek orthodoxy is considered the east
Another interesting topic u guys are always a highlight of my day
Frankie Fontecchio, I see your comments everywhere in this channel.
Enivid Clinton, I know you’re doing this as a part of some offer or discount if you advertise that thing...
Just made 1300usd, thanks guys for pathronizing, please also drop a like too.
Enivid Clinton , what is this forex trading?
Enivid Clinton, well I’m a minor and I don’t have any money, so...
My first time viewing the channel. I love the high-level overview of the Great Schism. I also love the maps and artwork by Oğuz Tunç and company. Keep up the great work!
This is the best explanation of this event I’ve ever encountered. Thank you.
Imagine if Charlemagne had actually married Irene. Wow. That would be incredible.
He did a smart call, that woman plucked out her owns son's eyes... Would you want to marry a woman that ruthless and cold?
The East Roman nobility would never accept him as an imperial consort , never mind co-ruler. Irene was likely menopausal by that age, so it's unlikely they would have children, and even if they had imperial blood was no concrete guarantee to being Basileus (being half barbarian would be an obstacle). It's doubtful as well that Louis the Pious would want to share his kingdom with an infant half brother, as Frankish law dictated. Charlemagne only lived to 814 as well, so any child between the imperial couple would be 14 at the oldest by that point. It's a fascinating idea to think about, but I doubt it would've had a long lasting effect, certainly not one past the half century mark
It would kind of be like if Donald Trump married Angela Merkel, if Charlemagne had been an ignorant lout with all the intellectual acumen of a hedgehog.
Not really. The Byzantine court would not have tolerated a Western barbarian calling the shots! It's more likely Irene would have been overthrown than an heir inheriting the Byzantine and Frankish realms!
Tony MacFarlane lol comparing Charlemagne to any current leader is an insult to Charlemagne
Love the supporting visuals, very interesting history. Great video. Thanks for making it.
Though being Muslim but such division saddens me. I'm from Albania and I can still feel this division where Catholic and Orthodox Albanians have always argued against each other due to their differences and Orthodox Albanians have sometimes been blamed as Serbian/Greek/Macedonian agents though I view them as Albanians. The two churches need to settle their differences.
By settle differences, I hope you mean the Pope removing the doctrines of Papal supremacy, infallibility, filioque, immaculate conception, purgatory, and penal substitution. Because true faith and objective truth can’t compromise and contradict itself for the sake of resolving differences.
@@vasiliskaranos605"objective truth" funny
@@alexlover1619 ??
@vasiliskaranos605 True faith has nothing to do with objective truth. It's an oxymoron. You either believe in something, and it [might] turn out to be true or know something that is true. So it's obvious that objective true will contradict true faith in many cases.
@@alexlover1619 i disagree. Faith in something can be based in objective truth.
Just to muddle things up, Romanians are the only Latins who are Greek Orthodox.
I swear to god, there is always that one guy...
they are slavs not latins
@@CARPENTER1991 umm, no. The Romanian language is recognized as a Romance language.
alexander lmao. You need to get an education. Romanian= romans. It’s even in the name.
@@3dwardcullen69 sorry, pretenders are not accepted
when you recently watched the video on the Normans in southern Italy, and then get to 13:29 in this video
"Oh yeah. It's all coming together."
5:47 orthodox Christians don’t worship images and icons, it’s called veneration and it’s a symbol of love and respect for whoever or whatever is depicted on the icon. Not worshiping the icon itself.
It is hard to distinguish. At the end of the day, you are bowing down to an in-graven image, which makes you an idol worshiper.
@@greatexpectations6577 ah yes and every time someone bows to a king or queen that’s idol worship? When you kiss your grandma that’s idol worship?
@@sidpan8218 Actually, yes.
@@greatexpectations6577 Catholics and Orthodox Christians are no more idol worshippers than Protestants are Bible worshippers.
@@greatexpectations6577 from the outside it really seems that way. But no one in Orthodoxy is saying that image is a "god" and worshipping it. From what I understand is that they are looking at the verses where Paul says "for we are surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses in the saints who have gone before us. Therefore brothers and sisters let us run our race not in vain."(paraphrased) thus the showing respect to those ancestors who lived their lives righteously and are "now seated with Christ in heavenly places"
As to the "praying to" again this isn't seen or acted upon as praying to God himself, which they still do. But rather the concept behind that is that just as we are told to go to one another and seek corporate prayer, i.e. someone's child is struggling with addiction so they go to their church and ask people to join with them in prayer for this person thus showing the unity of Christ' body, so they go to the saints who have passed. As it says in Hebrews(I think) "for Christ rose from the grave. Therefore God is not Lord of the dead but of the Living" the belief is that the saints though dead on earth are alive and seated with Christ and while yes we have unfiltered access to Christ(see the tearing of the veil) how much more so is the access of those who are seated next to them and as you may ask a brother at Church to pray for a struggle so you ask the saints.
As a protestant, once looked at in the true light of where the tradition comes from I really fail to see the Idol worship. They still profess the Lord Jesus Christ is their savior and is Himself God and the Son of God, one with the Father and the Holy Spirit. They still offer their worship to Him and Him alone and show respect and honor to those church fathers who have already passed on. There's more but honestly The Ten Minute Bible Hour has a wonderful series where he goes and talk with the various Orthodox churches and sits down with a Catholic theologian friend and discusses all of this, I highly recommend watching it.
Late to this but superbly explained. I showed this to my daughter to explain her Orthodox heritage better than I could.
“I bet my God could beat up your God.”
- Some Priest (probably)
Most definitely!
Both sides were Christian so there was only one God lmao
@@chaosXP3RT Thatsthejoke
@Poop Poop nope one
@@cetus4449 dangerous, not stupid
One of the best short documentary I have seen.
".. laid a letter of excommnication in Hagia Sofia"
I actually hit pause, and went "woooah!"
As an outsider, it surely looks like it was the pope who was escalating the stakes all the time.
"You can't fire mehhh! I quit !!!!" 😤😡
Shut up bitch
That what orthodox think too,even if the father from Rome is called "the first among equals".
Generally this is poorly researched, the Papal Legate that did that did not have the authority from the pope to do that and the easterners would have known this (in addition to the fact the pope had died and so he had no authority of any kind anyway)
Heavy move but there are so many factors that go into not only the lead up but also this act itself that it should have been ignored by both sides (& apologized by the new Pope). At this point schism was going to happen.
Gotta love how the Bulgarians are casually sitting on the sidelines, grabbing land whenever the Romans aren't paying attention.
We even conquered all of Greece... Wish we could turn back time, to the good old days..
That was an incredibly awesome video and covered most of the facts. You could have done some mentions on the attempts made between 1261 and 1453 for a solution of the Schism (like the Florence Council) even though popular controversy and bad timing proved these attempts fruitless....
AMAZING video!
hello from Philippines.
Love this! As a Catholic and a lover of history I am amazed by the detail and the beautiful art and graphics used to present this video.
I've heard there are several factions within Catholic Church. Is it true?
thanks for watching!
@@matheenarif8645 Depends on what you call "factions". The Catholic Church has more than a billion faithful on all continents. Of course there are different traditions, rituals, beliefs, and so on. Catholics in Mexico, "charismatic" Catholics in Ghana, traditional Catholics in Italy, Catholics in the Philippines, in India, and so on and so on - Catholicism incorporates a lot of various traditions and movements, but (in contrast to Protestantism where every little movement has their own church, or Orthodoxy, where every nation needs its own church (or two)) they are all organised under the umbrella of the one Roman Catholic Church, not in separate organisations.
There are also various churches of the Middle East that have a separate structure and rituals but acknowledge the primacy of the Pope in Rome (like the Maronites in Lebanon).
@@varana Yet me as a non-believer, I can not leave the church, there is no formal way to resign membership, which is fucked up. Surely the numbers would be a little smaller if there was a way not to be counted in on account of being born into it.
@Marcelo Henrique Soares da Silva not all in syria and Lebanon there are marons which somewhat appoint there own cardinal
Just discovered this channel. Fantastic stuff! I love history and these bite-sized, easy-to-follow videos help me add to my knowledge with practically zero effort.
Could’ve married Charlemagne but instead went Lesbos..
Correction to**
They didn't let her. She would but they dethroned her.
She went full Lesbo, man
Imagine if they got married.....Rome might have seen another "unification" on that era.
Someone tell Jeanette Winterson to write a book about this.
18:14 This map is wrong. Albania didn't exist yet. It was the Greek Despotate of Epirus.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Despotate_of_Epirus
Denis Zt. Haha 😄 hater 👍🏼
@@DJMeriMero ?
@@DJMeriMero ??
@@DJMeriMero He is not hater, just stating the truth... In that time that was the "Despotato tis Ipirou"...
Albanians were brought there later by Ottomans (origin of Albanians is somewhere in Caucasian mountains)...
Albanians are referred to the list of nations of the army under Darius in the battle of Gaugamela against Alexander!
Real Albanians are Asians and did not exist in Balkans before the fall of Constantinople and Byzantine Empire at 1453...
@@Ellinon_Vasileus what an idiotic thing to say. Albanians were not brought by the Ottomans.
Maybe I'm wrong but at 17:55, after the sack of Constantinople, the successor state that formed in western Greece was the Despotate of Epirus, not Albania. Or at the very least, Albania did not occupy land so far south into Epirus, if anything it was the Despotate who controlled southern Albania.
Your right that should definitely be Epirus, not Albania.
Yeah, video is great, but the map is inaccurate in multiple accounts
Lol look at the slavs , fucking nomads
@@albanianultranationalist1929 And yet those nomads literally saved humanity 70 years ago from the psychopath retards of the "west".
So called Despotate of Epirus was ruled by albanian princes and most of its inhabitants were albanians so Epirus and Albania is one and the same ....welcome to the real history my friend....now you know the truth
Congratulations guys! You keep surprising me! Historically accurate and well presented videos. About this story, its useful to say that many historian believe that the real schism between the two peoples, was occured when the crusaders sacked Constantinople. The hubris of sacking the first christian capital, the city of God, was the decisive moment that pushed Orthodox Greeks away from Catholics, for good.
Where my Orthodox brothers at ☦️🇬🇷
Γεια σας!
👌
Hey Hey ! Some of my family also Catholic. My two older sisters were Catholic. Former Orthodox Alterboy. Church name Yakov
🇧🇬🇧🇾🇬🇪🇬🇷🇲🇩🇲🇪🇷🇴🇷🇸🇷🇺🇺🇦 here
Estonian Orthodox here 🇪🇪☦️
Is that CKII music? I can-t wait to get home and continue my dynasty
Bruh i was half way through and my mind started going down ck2 paths like "did i remember to betroth my fourth son to the heir of the... and then i woke up and was like wait a minute thats ck2 music
I'm in mid 12th century.. can't wait for the 4th cru- er, war..
Intriguing historical topic - love this one!
I definitely agree!
22vx, I see you everywhere
historians always forget that during the first caliphate there was one eastern christian territory that was never converted which is Mount. Lebanon. Proud to be a Maronite
There were several
The content of videos here have always been super but now video editing skill also surpassed beyond just good. This channel is great. Way better than traditional documentaries from history channel or BBC. Thank you so much for posting invaluable contents for free. I do appreciate very much!
Thanks for watching!
Thank God, both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, have moved closer to each other. Let us pray and hope that they once again unite.
as a catholic, no thanks…but god bless the russians church
It is true as a Catholic I would love to the see consecration of Russia and the unity of the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church.
@@Amado9111 Russia isn't the leader of the orthodox church, they are just another autocephalous patriarchate (and the most troublesome one, since they are committed to Russian imperialism).
@@Amado9111 we hope no... They must go out both from Greece
at least orthodoxy did not turn on itself
2:45 you forgot Jerusalem.
The original Christians from Jerusalem unfortunately don't get any recognition. It is the European Christians, that seem to get all the publicity.
True
@@alanguages untrue, very untrue. Of course Christians care about the original Christians from Jerusalem, it’s a holy city and people fought for it in the crusades.
It was called Hierosolym back then.
@@theodorusstevensitanggang6130 That's partially true. The concept of the 5 patriarchates (Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria, in geographical order) dates to Justinian in the 6th century. It is often used retroactively to explain the situation in the Christian Church in the 2 centuries prior to that. It's an anachronism, but not a bad approximation.
Great video. Quite informative. Keep up the good work.
Well structured, clear and synthetic presentation, once again ! You stressed the most important points and articulated perfectly the key issues of this deep rivalry which still continues to impact our world.
Dang, imagine if Irene did marry Charlemagne... That would have been so sick
Yes, everybody would be Catholic
@Tom K in some alternate universe there's some alternate history video about "What if the Christian Church never reunified" and speculates about what's basically our world. Their world is likely centuries behind ours, or more tho. Or, one could argue centuries AHEAD. I always just thought the Reformation led to less restriction on innovation.
Constantine VI: *Exists*
Irene of Athens: I'm gonna end this boy's whole carreer
boz then don’t look at them
boz good cause he’s trash
As a muslim, this is great insight about other's religions. Thanks!
U just gotta understand that there was no orthodoxy before 1000s lol romans followed catholism
Christianity and Islam both stem from Abraham
NO WE are Catholic. Orthodox Catholic. The west became Roman Catholic. Pope John Paul admitted that BOTH can claim apostolic succession and they are like lungs. Left Lung and Right Lung.
@@bruhmcchaddeus413 I think you missed the point of this video
If you want to learn about the religion, I’d recommend reading the New Testament. Old Testament/Torah is important to read first though, a study bible is a good tool for that.
This is probably the best video and the best presentation about the subject that exists. Also, stunning art! Congratulations.
Can you do a video on the council of Florence, where the Orthodox bishops almost reunited with the Catholic Church, until Mark of Ephesus and the conquest of Constantinople by the Ottomans derailed it?
SAINT Mark of Ephesus*
Plenty of Orthodox reunited with Rome.I am a Byzantine Catholic and we are part of that history
The otoman conquest didn't dereailed it. It was the reason why the emperor was trying to unite with Rome, to get help from the West against the turks. Saint Mark of Ephesus only pointed the theological reasons why it couldn't happen.
@@richlopez5896 Had a Byzantine Catholic priest at a parish I attended with my wife. His final explanations finished my conversion from Lutheranism.
@@markuhler2664 what do you mean Byzantine Catholic Priest?
Do you mean those priests that are saying that are orthodox but there are under poe and admit in the Creed the filioqwe?
Great video. This might be one of the best history channels on TH-cam. Great content. However, in this case it would have been great if you'd had mentioned the nullification of mutual anathemas through the Catholic-Orthodox Joint Declaration of 1965, that put an end to the excomunications.
As a Roman Catholic I was laughing and wincing in embarrassment while watching all these madness, but more than that I'm sad 'coz we are all brother & sister's in CHRIST. It is so unfortunate. Anyway Pax Christi ;P
Reformation has entered the chat
We are not brothers and sisters in Christ, since you are not in Christ, as you are in heresy and schism from His Body, the Church. Repent and become Orthodox.
@@FreshWholeMilk No you
@@FreshWholeMilk Both Catholicism and Orthodoxy follow the main tenants laid down by our lord Jesus Christ, and mainly differ in how their churches practice, and as such should be understood to be as brothers.
@@absolutelyyousless7605 There is only one Church. The Church is the Body of Christ, and Christ has only one Body, lest you become a Nestorian. The main difference between us and the Papists isn’t praxial, it’s the heretical doctrines the Latins promulgate dogmatically - chief among them the Filioque, which contradicts the Trinitarian Dogma of the Monarchy of the Father
This was a fascinating video on a subject with ramifications too this very day. Now I'm curious if you'll make one about the division of Islam between Shia and Sunni
Damn Irene that's your own son wtf?
Charlie! Wasn’t expecting to see yo here my rich friend
@@ontasbulent5709 what's up dude? I love Kings and Generals.
When I first read about this, I started to finally understand why my church and friends churches did things differently especially when it came to rules about communion
One minor but important correction to this video.
Before the great schism and one of the reasons for it was that the patriarchs of the church were all considered equals in matters of faith. The patriarch of Rome (the pope) was considered the "first among equals" and was not supposed to make decisions on cue matters of faith without an ecumenical council.
Yet the pope added a word to the Nicean creed (a creed developed at an ecumenical council) to clarify the creed to some of its German converts. This infuriated Constantinople since they believed that the pope did not have authority to do this without an ecumenical council.
After the split, Rome grew more and more excessive in its grab for power and money in Europe which ultimately triggered the reformation.
The big question is why the reformers didn't push harder for communion with the East and instead forged its own path.
Now Protestantism has had more internal schisms than either the Roman or Eastern church and Lutheranism is closer in practice to Catholicism than it is to Pentecostalism. Though in many ways protestant theology is far closer to orthodox theology than it is to Catholic theology, their practices are worlds apart.
The power grabs were the only "legitimate" reasons for the protestants. Theologically they're barren.
German princes helped Luther spread. They were so allied that Luther even attacked peasants and called for their slaughter.
Protestants denied the 7 sacraments that both East and West churches had. They deny the basics of Christianity formed over 1500 years.
They only succeeded because of political reasons, like medici corruption, land grabs, etc.
This is why there was no such revolution in the East. If it was truly theological then the East should've had a reformation earlier especially since they used a common language like Greek unlike the alienating Latin of the west.
True. Catholicism in general is still influenced by the older religions, especially Judism. Many of their rituals are not Biblical at all but an added panacea to appease the various tribes they embraced.
@@pennyc11 as someone who was raised Catholic, please elaborate, if you will.
@@MH3GL Honestly? You would have to take a course or find some good books on the history of religion. As this doc points out, the base religion is divided. Catholicism is an offshoot of Judism. The Bible clearly shows the progression of Judism and how Jesus started another religious movement. His goal was to embrace people of different backgrounds. Yet, many old Jews chose to remain less secular. Anyone can convert to Judism, Trumps daughter, Ivanka is a practicing converted Jew. However, it had a bad reputation in many lands. As the Roman's accepted Christianity, they helped to form the new religion, the Roman Catholic Church. This United a lot of people of different classes and grew to become a very powerful force to aid royalty to either retain or obtain power over the people. Once the Bible was distributed in print, followers questioned the many non-biblical events practiced by the Catholic Church. There are some obvious contradiction. This is often because the Catholic religion converted pagan celebrations into religious ones. It is how the very time of Jesus's birth was weaved into December rather then the Spring when traveling made more sense. The three Magi? Was an attempt to pull in Middle Eastern people to the religion and make it seem more believable and acceptable.
It helps to study the cultures of other parts of the World. The World was not flooded over because there is historical accounts during that time found in Northern Cultures. But it can be stated, that in how small the world was to societies that did not travel the world? Such mistakes in historical accounts will happen.
A believer of good intensions needs to accept that Bible History, is not perfect. It is mens interpretation of what they believe their God wants from them to share. Their intentions were not always wise because it is based on common knowledge at that time in history. Things were much different then. Not everything in the Bible is relevent today. That is because if you study the Bible, you will see how culture changed as people learned better ways to live and discovered more answers to questions that were theories not proven true by facts.
That is why preachers say religion is based on faith. You either believe it is true or you don't. The only thing that makes a God true is people choosing to believe in something that cannot be confirmed as a fact. It only hurts people when it is being used to hurt people not to help people. This is when religion is a stumbling block and not a ladder to a successful life.
@@pennyc11 I appreciate the long response, but let's clear some things up 🙂
I said I was RAISED Catholic, I am therefore familiar with its teachings, but I am not a practicing Catholic. On a whole, I find it very odd that 3 of the most abundant religions of the world (Christianity, Islam, and Judaism) all pray to the same God (the god of Moses) and yet are all at war with one another over whose faith/God is the "true faith/God." Rather amusing.
In your initial comment, you stated that many rituals in Catholicism were not biblical in origin, but "added panacea," and I was simply asking for clarification on that.
Yes, I'm aware Christmas is based on a pagan holiday. I was not aware that the 3 magi were added in to be more appeasing to easterners - but it makes sense. Are there any other examples you can provide?
As I said, I'm familiar, but not an expert. So while I may be aware of what I was taught, I may not be fully aware of the implications behind its origins. So I'm simply appealing to someone who appears to have more knowledge than I.
Great vid! One minor correction though, the map at 18:05 should say Despotate of Epirus instead of Albania...
Despotate of Epirus was Albanian
@@albanianultranationalist1929 truth be told.....now everybody knows that
@@ComptGeorges So called Despotate of Epirus was ruled by albanian princes and most of its inhabitants were albanians so Epirus and Albania is one and the same ....welcome to the real history my friend....now you know the truth
The Despotate of Epirus was a Greek successor state to the Roman/ Byzantine Empire. The Rulers were from the Doukai and Komnenoi family who were both descendants of Greek/ Medieval Roman families and the capital of the Despotate was the city of Arta in modern day Greece.
Please, do not start with the Albanians claiming everything was Albanian nonsense in this video too
@@deskouk1773 Thanks for reminding us the real History. The rest is nationalist crap.
Pope: Stop fighting other Christian states or I will excommunicate you.
Me, playing as orthodox nation:
Medieval 1212?
Medieval 2 total war
Read revelation chapter 6. The White House is Christianity the false Christ European supposedly spending by force
@@americaisajokenow1090 read book of numbers 31:17-18
I'd just say "excommunicate this."
Great video Kings and Generals!! You have done good videos before but this one exceeds excellency and is well balanced between the opposite sides! My father is Greek Orthodox, my mother is Italian Catholic so I know the story from both hands. :)
Your father is a liar
18:43 I respect you for mostly staying true to the EU IV map colors.
This episode is excellent! One suggestion for improvement: Keep dates in the Top Right whenever announcing a new king or event! I kept asking myself when was this? It's hard to remember a date when it is just said. Giving both audio and visual cues would maximize memory retention!
Can you do the Schism between the Miaphysites and the Chalcedonians?
and the Dyophysites
Wtf is that
@@soelsnatch3858 Miaphysites are the Christians of Ethiopia, Egypt and Armenia. It was a much older division
@vikedude 123 Thanks for the recommendation.
Very well presented! Extremely detailed and quick information though I had to watch this a few times to absorb it all.
Can't help but think Kings and Generals and Knowledgia did a collab on this subject, they've each covered the historical and theological background of the schism respectively and the two videos complement each other so well.