Same here. Sometimes I have to remind my own family that the Maronites are indeed Catholics, have never broken communion with Rome, and are not Eastern Orthodox
Maronites were originally Syriac, where whole worship is in Syriac (Aramaic dialect). Saint maroun was ordained in the Syriac priesthood. The Maronites joined with Rome, and broke off from Antioch as a political choice, and forced Rome to allow the Aramaic elements (rather than complete Latin)
Yeah sure Jesus spoke Aramaic but hate to be the one to tell you this but Christianity is just Greek paganism in a monotheistic outfit Especially you catholics.. just turn the god of lost causes into the patron saint of lost causes.
As an Eastern Catholic convert from Evangelicalism (who seriously considered Orthodoxy) this is an excellent video - as are all of your content I've watched. Thank you!
It's a lot larger than a YT comment will properly hold, but I partly got hung up on *which* Orthodox Church, because there isn't "Orthodoxy" as much as "Orthodoxies". Greeks and Russians aren't (currently) in communion, nor are the Orientals. In short, Orthodoxy isn't "catholic"(universal)@@KarmaKraftttt
@@cactoidjim1477 1. The orientals schismed 500 years previous to the Great Schism 2. Church history is filled with temporary schisms. Just because two churches aren't currently in communion due to political issues, doesn't mean they aren't part of the broader church.
@@cactoidjim1477That’s not true. We are all one Orthodox Church with various traditions. But we all hold the same dogma and are in communion with one another. There are certainly not multiple Orthodoxies. I was baptized in the Russian church and I attend services at a mainly Georgian/Romanian parish. Absolutely nothing weird or wrong with that because we all share the exact same faith. The differences are even smaller than the differences between Western and Eastern Catholics. I could argue there are two “Catholic” churches by your logic.
Agree with both points. The Ruthenian Church was temporarily separated from Rome, but did rejoin universal communion in 1646. Things weren't perfect in 1053, but we did have a more visible communion. Hope we can get back there.@@adjustedbrass7551
Except that this isn't a divide at all, as everything the Orthodox believe Catholics already believe through one of the 23 sui iuris "Eastern" churches. This was really more like 60 differences between Latin rite Catholics and Eastern rite Catholics within the Catholic Church. The problem with the schismatic apostolic churches is not theology. It's simply the refusal to submit to the proper authority of the Roman church, which makes them proto-protestants.
@@JudeMalachi you can't believe mutually contradictory things about dogmatic theology and be part of the same church. Uniates disprove Papism, not prove it. There is no unity, as there is no unity of belief, of truth, of faith. However, Orthodoxy is one faith: the faith of the apostles, the faith of Christ.
Open the door of Thy loving kindness, O blessed Theotokos , that we who put our hope in thee may not perish. Through thee, may we be delivered from adversities, for thou art the salvation of Christian people. Lord have Mercy, Lord have Mercy, Lord have Mercy. Glory to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen. ☦️🙏
@@thetrutharchive4202 Jesus said I am the way, the truth, and the life and no one comes to the father expect through me. So explain to me how switching denominations(except from Mormon and JW to other denominations) is really gonna change anything
@Yonaqusf it changes everything lmao. The validity of your communion is pretty important. And also, the church is part of the body of Christ- that is.. the correct church. $20 says you're either Catholic and angry or protestant and ignorant
@@ReadyToHarvest I’ve noticed many of the denominational coverage tends to be on American denominations, and while that makes sense with regards to the overwhelming diversity in the US, have you considered covering groups like the Polish Mariavites? By the way I enjoyed your coverage of Iglesia ni Cristo and Ang Dating Daan
Yeah, I want to do more international denominations, but here's the thing: I work a full time job outside of the channel and I put out a video once a week. If there's plentiful information in English that's fine, but as soon as I have to deal with translation it's just too much for me to take on right now. I'm thankful that people are supporting the channel because eventually I hope that extra support will allow me to focus more time on the channel than I already am. At that point I will take on more denominations with mostly non-English resources.
@@ReadyToHarvestif you want to do some international denominations please do HKBP from indonesia. They claim to be Lutheran (they are part of LWF) but their doctrines are a fusion of lutheranism and calvinism.
And yet is not that different from what Redeemed Zommer said, the explanation is just more nuanced, and yet Orthobros started to stonned him accusing him of having COMPLETELY represented his opinions LOL.
@@josephcorno6046 Maybe the claim that we can become "uncreated" is an exageration but Eastern Orthodox theology does indeed affirm the concept of participating in God's uncreated energies as part of the process of theosis, or deification. According to this belief, through prayer, sacraments, and ascetic practices, individuals can experience a transformative union with God's divine energies, leading to spiritual growth and likeness to God. And since God is also His energies, he is right in affirming that this confuses the creator - creature distinction and the West historically rejects that idea . Thats also why Mormons like that part of EO theology so much.
I'm a Syro-Malabarese.. it's good to see that you included the Eastern Catholic Churches in your video as the Catholic Church herself is a union of Churches ❤❤
@@leannewheeler5351 I mean it's not wrong for Jesus Christ came down to show us as an example how to become like God for He is God himself and no better example you could ever have.
Joshua, thank you so much for covering the atonement on point 7. I’m a Baptist trying to understand the strong Orthodox opposition to penal substitutionary atonement, and you really helped me with the Carlton quotes. God bless your week. 🙏🏻
I love some of these arguments. It's pretty much impossible for anyone to know the differences in some of these cases, and yet it is enough to divide brothers in Christ.
A lot of these would not be enough to divide. The biggest issue and the one that cannot be gotten past yet is the authority of the Pope. The east shows no sign of acknowledging universal papal jurisdiction and the west shows no sign of backing down from that universal jurisdiction.
@@johnathanrhoades7751 It is very odd for the Russian Orthodox Church which is resistant to the Authority of the Pope, but is OK with ceding Authority to Czars, the Soviet Union, and now Putin. It's pretty clear the ROC is subservient to the FSB and acts as a Soft Power Asset of Putin under former KGB officer Patriarch Kirill.
I think that doctrinal disputes are mostly post hoc rationalizations. I don't mean to say that doctrine doesn't matter at all, because it does have consequences. For example, bad doctrine or bad philosophy can justify the part of you that is selfish or arrogant or resentful. But I agree with Jonathan in that it's mostly an argument about authority, and that is mostly about the role of the pope. If the Catholics say that the Orthodox need to accept some Catholic doctrine, the Orthodox are going to find some reason to object to it, and they will find a reason because they don't want to be told what to believe by an authority that they don't accept. On the other side, Catholics are going to find fault with what the Orthodox say primarily because the Orthodox don't accept Catholic authority; therefore, whatever they say must be flawed. They may be arguing about doctrine, but they are not really arguing about doctrine. Or, if you prefer, they may be in conflict about a superficial doctrine, but they are actually in conflict over a more fundamental doctrine.
@@johnbahler I find most arguments in religion are mostly about worldly power and worldly wealth. For instance in the Orthodox Church, there have been ongoing fights between Russian Orthodox Patriarch and the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople which are largely about power and control.
Simplistically in terms of Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic what you essentially have is the same Church developing in different linguistic/political/cultural contexts. Oriental Orthodox Churches to a large extent developed outside the then Roman Empire. While within the Roman Empire. You had the Greek speaking East vs the Latin speaking West. One could argue that the “North” of Europe Germania and certain areas in Arabia were actually “Arian” Christian which has died out. In my view the seminal events were the collapse of the Roman Empire in the West in 476 AD which resulted in the splintering of the Empire and the decline in centralised secular power. The Western Patriarch ( Pope) effectively was the only “commonality” the former West had. Also the Germanic Tribes that conquered the West were Arian Christian ( Vandals, Visigoth, Ostrogoth) so the Filioque in Latin was essential in order to ensure the consubstantially of Father Son, as the Arians would have pointed out that if the Holy Spirit proceeded only from the Father then They were correct! The East did not have this problem as they were not as affected, and after Justinian stopped even worrying about trying to reconquer the West. The Eastern Empire became a totally “Greek” focussed world, however their challenge came from Islam (which would have absorbed the remnants of Arian Christianity in the East) and from 650 onwards were on the back foot trying to defend a shrinking empire. Accordingly most of the Eastern Church ended up under Islamic rule, and the Islamic leaders were only to happy to endure that their Christian population was divided. Furthermore this effectively stopped the Eastern Church from Evangelisation (except for Far Eastern Europe), and the Islamic East encouraged the Eastern Christians not to liaise with the West. The result was a massive decline in Eastern Christianity ( with the Exception of the conversion of the Rus) especially in its former heartland of Egypt, and Anatolia. This also forced the Eastern Church to become more introspective. In the West however the Church ended up becoming the dominant institution and had to evangelise the North of Europe, accordingly it had to be more “aggressive” in its doctrinal development and also more “rigid” in its structure as it had to have a structure which allowed for disputes to be settled, appeals and eventually a final arbitrator who’s decision would be final- Pope. That’s just my view. Remember while the Head of the Church is Christ (all agree on that), we still live on the Earth and have to muddle our way through this life😂! So it’s not surprising that after 2000 years you are going to have differences. What is surprising actually is that Christianity still exists functions and continues to grow despite the 2000 years …
@@k-v-d1795 oh plz, shut your biased mouth and learn some things. stop being so shallow and narrow minded - oops, forgive me Lord. you havent yet been blessed with wisdom?
@essafats5728 maybe one of your priest dj's can enlighten me. If you don't know what I'm talking about, check the last conference/music festival in Brazil.
I think that’s a very charitable view of our Christian brothers and sisters in the East and West. I’m a Lutheran who’s considering converting to Catholicism. Although I have some disagreement with EO theology, well, who cares. We’re all just trying our best to follow Jesus.
There is only one Church presently, but I also hope the schismatic churches enter back into communion with the Catholic Church so that the Church may be a more potent witness of the universal kingdom of heaven in the world.
It's very easy, just stick with the church fathers teaching which is a beautiful thing andcthey were called just "Christian" ... period but I don't see the Roman Catholic church give up their itching for dominion and control
I have a very good friend who's an Orthodox Deacon. I'm Roman Catholic. He insists I'm not Roman I'm Latin Rite. Because I understand the history of Catholicism I do understand how and why he's saying that. I've tried to remind him that names change over time and today most Roman Catholics would have no idea what he's talking about. It's always an interesting discussion.
Thanks for bringing this up. I though about using "Latin Rite" for this video, but I thought a lot of people wouldn't click because like you said, most people wouldn't recognize what was being talked about. I try to use familiar terms and not jargon. Pretty much everyone recognizes "Roman Catholic" even though there is sometimes some disputing about the term. But as I showed in the video, even many dioceses use the term themselves!
@oHarvest Oh yes. Names do change over time even if slowly. This works both ways too. I suspect one of the obstacles for a closer relationship between East and West are these slow changes over time. One side is still operating on the outdated model and the other side is scratching their head and wondering what the other side is talking about.
So what’s his argument for it not being Roman and instead being Latin? Is it because Rome fell and Constantinople lingered for a few hundred more years? Or is it something else?
Excellent research. I'm an Orthodox Christian who converted from Protestantism long ago. I really appreciate how well you represented these various issues, and clarified that many of the more obscure views on some of these topics are held by *some* Orthodox Christians, but not unanimous by any means. If you had asked *me* how many differences there were between the Churches - I'd probably say somewhere between 3 & 5. The Filioque, the Pope/Patriarchs, Icons, Fasting customs, and Musical traditions being the most prevalent. I'm amazed you can find so many - but don't deny that these other issues are out there. I tend to see all Christians - Orthodox, Catholic & Protestant - as remarkably similar : )
Regarding current dialogue and relationship between Roman and Orthodox churches, I've heard that at Liturgies in which both Catholic and Orthodox are present, the use of the filioque is either included or not as a sign of ecumenism between the churches. For example, Roman Rite Liturgies in which Orthodox clerics are present, the filioque is omitted and vice versa.
Orthodox don’t consider such fluctuations a net positive. The Roman Church since the 17th c. has shown itself willing to bend and twist a lot to get folks into the papal camp. I know that sounds argumentative, but as an EO that’s how it looks to me.
@@traceyedson9652 I agree with that. I do think it's nice when the two churches express signs of their historic connections. I do know it was reported that when Patriarch Bartholomew and Pope Francis met after the latter's installation, they greeted each other as "Peter" and "Andrew"-the namesakes of the founding bishops of each of their respective sees. I thought that was somewhat remarkable, along with it being the first time an Ecumenical Patriarch attended the installation of the Bishop of Rome since at least 1054.
Awesome video! I consider myself agnostic but having grown up around a lot of Roman Catholics, I love learning about religions, and how even within them there are such cultural differences.
Most consist of porting the cultural contexts of their particular rite into the theology of their communions. Ukrainians who are in communion w Rome, for example. Western Rite Orthodox not only includes the ‘Latin-ish’ category but also Book of Common Prayer-adjacent Anglo converts. To my understanding, the Anglo tradition is actually more popular at least here in the states, which would look similar to a traditional Anglican Mass
I'm Eastern Orthodox and yes, it's true. It's not a matter of theology per se, but history and politics. Catholics (and some Protestants) have persecuted our faith. In fact, we probably had better relations with Muslims in terms of religion than with Western Christianity. My country (Romania) fought on and off against the Ottomans for 500 years, but it was about politics and economics. Meanwhile, the Habsburgs made it about religion. They had religious tolerance, but only for Catholics and Protestants, the Eastern Orthodox were excluded and we weren't allowed to rise above peasants, unless we converted to their religion. We weren't allowed to have any say in the government of Austria-Hungary, everyone had representatives, we weren't allowed to have any representation. Then there was the Iron Curtain, which separated us from any ties with the West. So, we view Western Christianity as... frankly, a foreign religion like Hinduism or Buddhism. We don't really think (the Church hierachy might, but the regular people don't) of Catholicism and Protestantism as branches of the same religion, as denominations. We consider them as separate religions, like Judaism. I honestly feel closer to Copts, Ethiopians or Armenians. They never oppressed us. Calls for closer ties... can come across like a trick to impose foreign political domination on us. I'm aware it might not be that, but on our Eastern Orthodox side, it's likely to be met with scepticism and reservations. Not hate or hostility, but there is distrust, there is a historical elephant in the room and at the back of our heads. The memory of people like Horea, Closca and Crisan and what happened to them (broken at the wheel) are reminders of what might hide behind the smiling faces.
From a Catholic view, the differences between Catholic and Orthodox theology is miniscule. The differences are much larger in the minds of the Orthodox.
@@octavianpopescu4776 This is an interesting viewpoint in light of the modern autocephaly disputes between Orthodox churches. I know at least that the Armenians don't perceive Catholics and Protestants as totally foreign, considering how much their diaspora appealed to Western as much as Orthodox Christians to defend the faith in Artsakh.
The main difference between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church is that the Catholic Church is trying to be the universal Church while the Orthodox is trying to be a universal Church. Most of the challenges the Catholic Church faces is that it tries to unify multiple different cultures, languages, and ethnicities into one Church. The reason the Catholic Church included the filioque was to combat a particular heresy that was plaguing a particular region of the Catholic Church. Many of the changes the Catholic Church makes are to deal with crises and problems that may affect only part of the Church. The Church reformed itself after its own abuses sparked the Protestant Reformation. The failures of missionary work in Japan caused the Catholic Church to invent the concept of religion to better reach people around the world with no connection to the West. The First and Second Vatican Council was in response to the secular modernity that was dominating the First World. The Orthodox Churches operate differently. Each Church is based on a single linguistic and often ethnic group. The smaller and unified nature of each Church means it is much stronger and more resilient. Those Churches have less need to change and adapt because there is no inclusion of new people to force that change. The result is that the Orthodox Church have mush less success in evangelizing and spreading Christianity compared to Catholic, though it must be noted Orthodox Churches face a much more hostile areas. In the places where Orthodox Churches do have success in missionary work such as Russia, they just form a new independent Church. The allows Orthodox Churches to avoid the painful challenge the Catholic Church faces by trying to unify different languages cultures, but it does allow drift between the different Churches to occur and issues in recognition of new Orthodox Churches.
Local Expressions of Liturgical Rites is not a bad thing. The Trilingual Heresy was Anathematized in the 1st Millennium and then Rome went back on it and forced Latin on their flock.
And that is the problem, Rome is willing to compromise even on matters of doctrine to maintain her influence and temporal authority, where as Christ tells us that if they do not receive your teachings, shake the dust from your feet and move on. The response to the reformation was particularly egregious, not to say there weren't problems before, but the counter-reformation ultimately extinguished the last remnants of the medieval mystical tradition in the west that had carried the last flicker of the light of Christianity into the second millennium in the west west; Rome addressed the Protestant concerns, on the terms of the Protestant, and changed far too many of her ancient customs and beliefs. The vast majority of issues that separate east and west, other than the core theological concerns that caused the schism in the first place (the Monarchy of the Father, the Procession of the Spirit, and the Essence-Energy Distinction), are all a result of innovations during and after the counter-reformation. Compare this to the Orthodox response to Protestants sending letters and envoys, we exchanged a few letters, met with a few envoys and we gave them our confession of faith, asking if they would confess the same, and when instead of confessing the ancient faith they wanted to start bickering with the teachings and traditions that had been handed down from the time of the apostles, we saw they were not of Christ and told them to stop bothering us and that we wanted nothing more to do with them and stopped responding to their letters and receiving their envoys.
They form independent churches… except in Ukraine… and Korea… and the US… No argument against your excellent synopsis. It just reminded me that church politics are imperfect and an obstacle to us all
@FranzAntonMesmer my anglican parish was under an orthodox bishop for awhile, and a part of the anglican orthodox church for awhile, but there's no real difference between, "anglican orthodox" or "anglo-catholic." It's all just conservative 1928 or earlier bcp
Yes. Rome was essentially excommunicated by Constantinople in 1054 for making this unilateral change but it was just the straw that broke the camels back as Rome became more powerful and more independent.
Yes, to combat Arianism. Arianism was pushing the idea that Christ was not divine because he was a creation of the Father. The filioque was a simple fix to explain the trinitarian aspect of God. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father AND THE SON because they are all ONE. And then some people got upset.
@@drjanitor3747 Go bless your gay couples and attend your clown mass Papist schismatic, also make sure to kiss the Quran as your Pope does, as well as affirm that Atheists and Jews can go to Heaven without Jesus Christ as your Pope and "true" Church does as well. And also make sure to not try to convert the Orthodox, because that is a great sin according to your Pope. You should as well read the Dominus Iesus declaration by you oh so "holy" and "true" Church in Rome, that says that we the "Schismatics" have valid sacraments, apostolic succession and the Church of Christ present and operative. But who I'm kidding, you are probably a delusional TradCath that rejects the Vatican and it's teachings, while claiming you do not, while also at the same pretending like Vatican 1 is still in effect.
@@jwilsonhandmadeknives2760 Sure, but if it was just the theology, nobody would have cared. It's because Rome was just one of the ecumenical sees and the Pope was just a Patriarch among equal Patriarchs but then Rome started expanding into all of northern Europe such that the Roman see was enormously bigger and more important than all the other sees put together. So the Pope started thinking that he didn't really have to consult everybody else every time he made a decision that affected his own see. And then some people got upset. :)
The way the Orthodox Church views sim and salvation was the reason I became Orthodox. God is the physician of our souls. This whole idea of guilt is a western thing.
I'm Roman Catholic and i attend a Byzantine Ruthenian Catholic Church. Have been attending for a year now and im discerning making a canonical transfer but i need to attend for 2 more years and then file a bunch of paperwork and get my priest and bishops approval. But I'm definitely very interested. Glory to Jesus Christ 🙏☦️♥️
@@jdotoz Schism according to the Canons of St. Basil, which are Dogma for East and West, involves 2 standards; 1, Persistence in Error, and 2, Establishment of Parallel Sees in territories already held by Bishops. The 2nd clause was committed by Rome via the Norman Crusaders in Antioch and Jerusalem, which was set those Patriarchs against Rome even though they maintained communion even after the Rome-Constantinople Split. The 1st Clause was committed at the Council of Lyons in the 13th Century when the Dual Procession of the Holy Spirit was Dogmatised by Rome, which alienated them from Georgia and Alexandria. And now Rome doesn't even Consider the Orthodox Churches as Schismatic since Vatican 2. And even says we have Christ in our Chalice.
I love your unbiased take. I'm Orthodox, but I was raised Catholic though I was an atheist through my teen years and early adulthood. I wanted to learn more so I could comfortably talk to my Catholic family about our differences and similarities without coming off biased or like I felt like I was better than them and this video series has helped a lot! Thankfully they're really supportive of being Orthodox and I'm hoping one day I can bring them over
Yeah, they seem to recoil and shut down at the proof that it's essentially modern day Ph4ris33s and neo-Ta1mud, with all kinds of traditions elevated to the authority of scripture, even to the point of some outright heresies. All stemming from an egotistical assumption of a false translation of Petra/Petros and a single man being the foundation of the church rather than the foundation being the faith in Christ that was just confessed in that conversation to which Jesus is replying. Like JWs, they follow teachings outside of scripture to the point of ignoring scripture itself. I seem to recall Paul and even Jesus speaking against those who did this, those who claimed they're youknowwhat but are of the S.o.S.
@yPinchak Hesychasm isn't a "devotion". It's a kind of prayer, a way of life even. I take your point on the Jesus Prayer but Orthodox really treat that differently than Catholics treat devotions. For the Orthodox, the Jesus Prayer is a way to enter into contemplation, to practice watchfulness and still the mind. Many Catholics use devotions like talismans or magic amulets: Say this one lots and your wish will be granted. The rosary, I'd say, is an exception. That one I've seen commonly used like the Jesus Prayer, but you'll also hear Catholics saying that praying the rosary will accomplish x, y, and z goals-there are even bumper stickers to that effect.
@@curiousing Huh? You are mis informed my brother in Christ. Of all people, an orthodox should understand the rosary and devotions and why and how Catholics prey it. I have no qualms with orthodoxy, funny how so many outside the Latin rite think they know so much about it, This video should focus more on what we have in common.. the times we are in we need to pull together. Imagine the power if these Rites returned in communion with each other God Bless! We need to focus more on bringing our Protestant brothers back to the sacraments instead of focusing on our differences
I look forward to this series. Well researched. Also, if you're Catholic or Orthodox and these differences upset you, take a moment to realize you're not ready to debate these differences. Rather than wasting time, work on your faith to become a better Catholic or Orthodox.
To me, the difference isn't upset anyone suppose. The different is only in tradition congregations we are Catholic Rome/Orthodox same source "Jesus" Himself who revealed through His commandments.
I might be wrong about this, but I've read that the curia has downplayed "Filioque" in order to promote closer understanding between the two main branches of the Nicene church.
@@brandonm.6604 ,....Neither of you will be laughing on judgement day. Your laughing will turn to weeping and gnashing of teeth. When Jesus returns and you all find out how totally lost and deceived you were, you will wish you hadn't mocked likely the only person that ever gave the truth of God to you. You have both acted like the brute beasts made to be destroyed that you are. Repent! "But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;" 2 Peter 2:12 KJV "But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves." Jude 1:10 KJV
My Orthodox priest tells me the toll houses are allegorical. Whilst it's satisfying to have a 'process' for those mourning the death of a loved one, he says we don't actually know what happens after death, beyond undergoing our own particular judgement (Hebrews 9:27). Thereafter is a mystery and out of love, we pray for the dead. Purgatory in the Catholic Church, on the other hand is a dogma, so if you don't believe in it, you are condemned to hell. Big difference and something that did not exist in the first Millennium of the Church.
As usual, you present great stuff. Unfortunately you say there is a part 2, yet in your video list there is nothing listed called a Part 2 to this video!
Did you know that the name RCC was created by Anti-Catholic Protestants? They want to remove Catholics from the true historial church from the first century.
The EO objection to the addition of the filioque to the Creed wasn’t just because they didn’t have an ecumenical counsel or did it unilaterally, the ecumenical counsels actually FORBID changing the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed on pain of anathema multiple times..
Council of Florence attempted to do just that. Fortunately the faithful stood up to those who opportunistically attempted to change the creed in the Eastern churches. It was done, as I understand it, to gain help from the Roman Catholic Pope, in order to prevent further attacks on Byzantium by the Ottomans, and gain the support of those under the "supreme pontiff."
@@St.MartinofToursPrayToGodForUs I think I’ve heard about that. Isn’t that the correspondence that eventually led to the crusades starting a few years later?
@littlefishbigmountain no, I don't believe it resulted in the Crusades. Though there was already much strife between the Eastern church and the Ottomans, as well as with the Roman church.
What I'd most like to see is a huge spreadsheet of every denomination and every doctrinal point which is enough to split Christians on so everyone can find what churches best fit what they intend to pass down.
Right??? Also, the Latin Church is more concerned with cold, hard logic (ironically based on ancient Greek philosophy), whereas the Eastern Orthodox Church is more concerned with spirituality. For example, the Latin Church talks about transubstantiation. The Eastern Orthodox calls it something else, saying it's different, but. . . but it isn't different.
That’s honestly just a myth. Anyone who has any sort of foundation in both languages can honestly tell you they are way more similar than they are different simply because many Latin words literally come from Greek
I really appreciate that, even though you are neither Catholic nor Orthodox, you take the views seriously enough to want to present them accurately. I’m Catholic and have long enjoyed your videos.
It is important to note that things that today are less than secondary issues, like azyme bread and saturday fastings, were an integral part of the Great Schism. Cerularius out of nowhere began to attack these ancient customs of ours, starting a crisis that culminated in his excomunication. Saturday fasting is in fact a ancient custom of the Roman Church beyond any doubt, since Saint Ambrosius himself attested to it. St Monica, the saintly mother of St Augustine, fasted on saturdays
@@andrewsuryali8540 I cannot concede that, but I’m biased. My former priests wife is one of the principal tailors for liturgical vestments in North America. So I got to see samples of whatever she was working on being worn by my priest, and it was often jaw-droppingly beautiful.
Thank you for doing the research, deeply appreciated. I was Confirmed and Baptised in the Byzantine Catholic church. Unfortunately, i have yet to find a parish near my home. 😢
Just clarifying some things for the orthodox 1- It is important to remember that the addition wasn't initially done by the Papacy, but by a Spanish Synod that added it to the translation of the Creed to latin. And the Western view isn't that somehow the Father and the Son are two sources of the Spirit or join into a monstruous two headed source. The view is that just like a fountain gives water to the sea through a river the Father originates the Holy Spirit through the Son 3- In the Tridentine Canon it is not said Culpa, but Reatus. The video noticed the translation issue but I wanted to explain it. It is not that we have the Culpa(guilt), we have the punishment for it. Just like if the head of your country attacks another all the country will face the consequences of it. 4- Honestly, the Holy Scriptures themselves say some sins lead to death and some don't 1 Jonh 5 16-17 5- As the wonderful guy of Bible Illustrated once noted the Tollhouses are based not on Apostolic Tradition but on alleged visions by some Saints. 5- 6:03 text from that orthodox parish misrepresents a lot purgatory. It is not that we believe they are quantifiable substances that must be in balance, we rather believe that nothing will enter Heaven that is not fully purified. Purgatory is also connected to suffering because this is the way God wants us to purify our disordered desires: through penitence. 5:54 Also misrepresents it because we don't believe "the slate must be clean before a person can come before the judgement seat". Purgatory happens after the particular judgement. 6- Just clarifying for the orthodox, indulgences are exemptions of the need to do penance, in this or in the next life. They have a early church precendent in the libelli of the martyrs www.newadvent.org/cathen/09211a.htm 7- We don't officially reduce everything to a forensic attonement. Satisfaction is a part of it but is not everything. Aquinas, for example, doesn't view the Cross merely as Satisfaction of a dishonored God, but also as Merit, Sacrifice and Redemption (freeing us from slavery to sin and the evil one). We also don't deny at all that the descent into Hades and the Ressurection are salvific. Aquinas himself teached that Christ delivered the just from Hades www.newadvent.org/summa/4052.htm#article5 Even though the West focuses on the forensic and the East on the mystical one it doesn't mean that we deny the mystical
Also, we do believe in a spiritual mystical life that is not reduced from forensic attonement. Our mystics believed in three stages of spiritual life: purgative, illuminative and unitive. It is quite similar to katharsis, theoria and theosis.
On those who criticize our fasting on saturday: Even Augustine and Ambrosius mentions it as an ancient roman custom. St Monica fasted on saturdays, is she anathema to you?? www.newadvent.org/fathers/1102054.htm St Ambrosius "When I visit Rome, I fast on Saturday; when I am here, I do not fast. On the same principle, do you observe the custom prevailing in whatever Church you come to, if you desire neither to give offense by your conduct, nor to find cause of offense in another's." St Augustine about his saintly mother: "When my mother followed me to Milan, she found the Church there not fasting on Saturday. She began to be troubled, and to hesitate as to what she should do" Please stop this eastern triumphalism in which only eastern traditions are viewed as ancient and all western practices are later deviations.
Fair enough. Roman Catholics might question why their beliefs are so often rejected at a certain time when that rejection is debated, the difference remains, and centuries later is “misunderstood.” This was done in the 8th-15th c’s in the long development of E-W schism, and also in the 16th c. Protestant schism. In both cases the topics were fleshed out & debated. Rome did not claim its position on the papacy, azymes, original sin, etc. were misunderstood. Rather, they claimed that the Orthodox were wrong for reasons various & sundry. The RC is disingenuous in how it presents itself & how it applies its teachings by often changing them and claiming either antiquity or authority.
@@traceyedson9652 What that orthodox parish wrote about purgatory is not what you see in traditional catholic Doctrine. We never said that "the slate must be clean before we enter the judgement seat". But sure, everything an orthodox says about a Doctrine they never searched about is factually correct, while what we say based on our very Councils is an adaptation we made recently to appease you. Oh God, the gaslighting
I'm Eastern Orthodox and one of the things that I think is important in our divergence is the non-religious part: the politics. We treat Catholics and Protestants with a degree of distrust because of what their political leaders did to us, people like the Habsburgs and their empire. If there's one empire I despise it's Austria-Hungary. Incompetent buffoons. We were never allowed equal rights because of our religion, until we won them on battlefields. Our faith was treated better by the Muslim Ottomans. They allowed us to practice our faith in peace and didn't force us to convert. So, any reunification or even closer ties will have to not just stick to the theology, but it will also have to address the historical/political elephant in the room. Otherwise, the scepticism will not go away. And oddly enough, the Popes for the most part weren't as responsible for what happened, as much as political leaders were.
Regarding Austria-Hungary, the rivalry between the Byzantine Rite and Eastern Orthodox was brought over here to Pennsylvania USA in the 1800s and lasted for awhile it seems. Such as who could put a church where and who had authority.
As Joshua says, this is a controversial subject among Orthodox. It is not Orthodox dogma. Don't get hung up on it, much less see it as central to Orthodox theology. The main issue is the Orthodox teaching on deification, which is based on the essence-energies distinction, which Rome does not acknowledge.
Regarding holy fire, the Orthodox belief is that it is an uncreated energy which is experienced like a warmth of comfort to holy people and like burning fire to those who hate God, but its not some kind of punishment or torment
@@drjanitor3747 it's Orthodoxy, which is the actual church Christ founded and means correct belief. Being united to Christ is to be united to His Church
Quite interesting, for Western Christians had used the Filioque for nearly 5 centuries prior and no issue was brought up until then. Let's not beat around the bush here. The main issue that divides the EO and Catholics is ecclesiastical authority. Everything else is just supplementary. Things to justify schism.
You know that the crisis was started by Cerularius, right? He literally out of nowhere started to condemn us for using azymus bread and fasting on saturdays. And in an act of hostility to the West closed all the latin parishes in Constantinople. Cerularius is to blame for the Schism
@@igorlopes7589 the crisis existed for hundreds of years. Inserting political dominance is a Roman thing and fitting of Matthew 16:23 , the true foundation of the Roman Rite.
@@ri3m4nn There was an strangement between East and West, but Cerularius took it and turned it into a Schism. He took strangement and turned it into hostility
@@igorlopes7589 adding the Catholic filioque, a concept that was already considered a heresy hundreds of years before, is the schism. The Romans did this. Own it
From the Western-Rite Orthodox perspective, the average western rite parishioner would claim that they believe exactly the same dogma as the whole Orthodox body. I cannot say the same for my Uniate friends, who may not personally confirm the filioque and other Latin dogma.
The Toll Houses are a theological opinion that is not an Orthodox dogma. We believe that spiritual progress can always be made, souls are still living after bodily death, and therefore, we carry on praying for the salvation of the soul.
The differences are ultimately due to linguistic isolation, (since Latin and Greek are not mutually intelligible), and the doctrinal innovations (and reliance on Augustine in the West) that resulted from that isolation.
Absolutely not. The issue is those Eastern bishops do not accept the rightful authority of the Roman See. That is the primary issue (it was in the 800s, 1000s and still is today)
@@joao.fenix1473 or put another way, all four of the five original patriarchates retained the original ecclesiology in the face of Roman innovation. But we won’t solve that here so no doubt you’ll want a last word.
@@traceyedson9652 You can't maintain something that was never there. They were and are still rebellious. As of your last phrase the same would be applicant to you or any so called "Orthodox" who always twists words to justify their lack of humility (rebellion)
As a Roman Catholic who has been so intrigued lately about the Orthodox sect of Christianity, I find the whole “toll house” thing to be TERRIFYING. Sheesh! Orthodoxy is DEEP 😭
As a orthodox christian ☦️ convert from islam with My family and many family friends. That man that said do you understand Arabic Said the bishop is evilz He doesn't want people to know what was said in the interview because the bishop was correct. All Muslims will see the truth like we did. Bless you ☦️☝️ Have a great day.
Absolutely a killer of a video! I go to a Byzantine Catholic Church and yes the video is exactly right! I love what was said. Next you could talk about all the different tribes within the Latin rite lol
Because their description are not universal. It’s church to church , priests to priests , patriarchs to patriarchs while when Catholic do so it’s magisterial. That’s why both Catholic clergy and laymen can’t just individually call EO heretics or apostates or any other terrible names as They see fit while on the other hand it’s totally possible.
As a Protestant, I have just one question: Have any of these Catholic or Orthodox leaders actually read the Bible? This blows my mind. I have read the Bible several times. Nowhere in the it is there purgatory or, toll houses. Seriously, why do they make up things to scare people or lead them to believe they can do anything when they die to make up for their sin? Jesus took on all the sins of every single human being who would ever come to believe in this world. He became the perfect sacrifice, a sinless man, that would atone for our sins. A sacrifice that satisfied God’s wrath. On the Cross, He said, “It is finished!”, or, “paid in full”. No further acts of penance, indulgences needed. When the leaders demand indulgences, purgatory or toll’s, they say that Christ’s blood and sacrifice were not enough. Blasphemy. This is what the BIBLE says: ”For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,“ Hebrews 9:24-27 Please, for your own soul’s sake, read the Bible. As for those teachers who are adding human opinions to what the Word of God says, this will be their end, (also from the BIBLE): ”I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.“ Revelation 22:18-19
@@TheDarthmom1, so happy for you. There is nothing as beautiful as the Word of God. You might learn a lot from Pastors John MacArthur, Sinclair Ferguson and especially Voddie Baucham. So much wisdom. Blessings
@@grossepointemichigan 😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣 That’s a great joke. The Bible was written in the 1st century by JEWS. You’re referring to Catechism. Man’s, “wisdom”. cat·e·chism ˈka-tə-ˌki-zəm Synonyms of catechism 1 : oral instruction 2 : a manual for catechizing (see CATECHIZE sense 1) specifically : a summary of religious doctrine often in the form of questions and answers 3 a : a set of formal questions put as a test b : something resembling a catechism especially in being a rote response or formulaic statement
Your religion leaves out the verse in the Bible, spoken by Jesus in Matthew 23:9: 9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
@@Saint_nobodyThe Pope of Rome, obviously. Your question only makes sense if you ignore the distinction between a reality and the most common name to describe it
I think you need to do more on both the uniate rites of Catholicism; the recently joined groups to the Latin church (in the East Rome is Constantinople); and the groups of Catholic based schisms or sects both liberal and more conservative.
Catholic/Orthodox comparisons are hopelessly muddled. Catholics minimize the differences and relative significance (out of an ardent desire for unity) while Orthodox exaggerate differences and their significance (out of anti-Catholic hate for real and perceived past slights and insults). Most of these differences predate the Great Schism so they existed when the Eastern and Western Churches were in Communion. East/West ecumenism is further complicated by divisions within the Orthodox Churches (especially efforts by the Moscow Patriarch to usurp the place of the Patriarch of Constantinople as "first-among-equals" and to intrude on the territories of other Orthodox jurisdictions) and fracturing of the Catholic Church attributed to changes proposed and implemented by Pope Francis. The existence of the Eastern Catholic Churches is a point of contention by the Orthodox, especially the Russian Orthodox Church, who typically refers to them as "Unia", "Uniat" or "Uniate" Churches, terms ECaths consider pejorative . The ECChs assert that they are Orthodox in Communion with the Pope. The Roman Church has a generally poor relationship with the ECChs. (Many tens of thousands went to Orthodoxy due to the repugnant treatment of them and their clergy by Archbishop John Ireland and others who effectively persecuted ECaths. Even today, most Latin seminaries ignore Eastern Catholicism in the academic formation of their students. The Eastern Orthodox Churches have Western Orthodox Churches; the EOChs curiously do not see these western Orthodox copies as an ecumenical problem the way they do "Uniate" Churches. Ecumenical progress between the EOChs and the CathCh has little hope. They can't even agree on the differences and their severity. The CathCh is having much greater success with the Oriental Orthodox Churches and disaffected traditional Anglicans.
We are NOT Roman Catholic. We are Catholic. The name RCC was NEVER used before the Protestant Deformation. The name RCC was created by anti-Catholic Anlgicans in recent centuries to promote the Branch Theory of Denominationalism. PLEASE spare me the letter in 1208 if you do not add of the proper commas.
@@Kelcast777 it’s literally not dogma. Sure It’s tradition but they haven’t dogmatized it yet. Maybe there’ll be a council that dogmatizes it or not. I’m not sure but I know it’s not dogma for now
@@Kauahdhdhd Out of curiousity. How would the Orthodox Church actually proclaim and enforce dogma? I know they can call synods, but judging from recent history, that doesn't seem to be a reliable way to bound dogma. I am not asking this for polemics or to start a debate. I'm genuinely curious.
For the Orthodox dogma is defined by an Ecumenical Council. Toll Houses have only recently become an area for discussion, Ecumenical Councils cannot occur (the Trinitarian Church is too divided) hence "Toll Houses" remains an interesting idea
@@Kelcast777 As long as being accused by demons means being accused by demons during the Judgment done by God whose decision He fully controls it is fine. The soul goes to God for judgment and the demons accuse it before the Throne of God. But a literal understanding of tollhouses? Nope! Anything beyond demons accusing your sins to God is ridiculous
Another issue with Purgatory is that if you don't commit sins X, Y, Z you are basically saved. You may go through Purgatory, but you are saved. In Eastern Orthodox faith, you never know if you are saved. Our greatest saints passed away hoping only in the mercy of God that would save them. They were afraid that they would go to Hell. I feel that Purgatory is one step shy from the Protestant view of being saved only through Grace.
Catholics and Orthodox both believe in salvation by grace. We don't earn our salvation, that's a heresy called pelagianism condemned by both churches. We can't presume our salvation, but we also have confidence in the mercy and goodness of God to save us. No sin is too great to keep us from heaven. This is evident in the writings of both Catholic and Orthodox, and seen in our prayers and liturgy. Purgatory has nothing to do with only commiting "not so bad" sins. If we are still attached to sin at death, but die in God's friendship, God will purify us to prepare us for heaven. Many saints, Catholic and Orthodox, committed horrible sins but were saved by the grace of God.
I’m Roman Catholic but I go to a Maronite Catholic Church. They still sing in Aramaic during Mass!
Same here. Sometimes I have to remind my own family that the Maronites are indeed Catholics, have never broken communion with Rome, and are not Eastern Orthodox
Maronites were originally Syriac, where whole worship is in Syriac (Aramaic dialect). Saint maroun was ordained in the Syriac priesthood. The Maronites joined with Rome, and broke off from Antioch as a political choice, and forced Rome to allow the Aramaic elements (rather than complete Latin)
Why not switch rites then and become a Maronite Catholic?
Yeah sure Jesus spoke Aramaic but hate to be the one to tell you this but Christianity is just Greek paganism in a monotheistic outfit
Especially you catholics.. just turn the god of lost causes into the patron saint of lost causes.
@@4everseekingwisdom690 🤣🤣🤣
excellent overview, speaking as an Orthodox here, can't wait to see part two!
When the Filioque was 1. In a list of 60 I knew this video was gonna be good 🍿☺️
“When the Advocate comes whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth that proceeds from the Father, he will testify to me." John 15:26
@@jerryczarski5991Yeah, but have you heard of mental gymnastics.
It’s one 2 differences lol
As an Eastern Catholic convert from Evangelicalism (who seriously considered Orthodoxy) this is an excellent video - as are all of your content I've watched. Thank you!
What was reasoning for not joining the "orthodox"?
It's a lot larger than a YT comment will properly hold, but I partly got hung up on *which* Orthodox Church, because there isn't "Orthodoxy" as much as "Orthodoxies". Greeks and Russians aren't (currently) in communion, nor are the Orientals. In short, Orthodoxy isn't "catholic"(universal)@@KarmaKraftttt
@@cactoidjim1477
1. The orientals schismed 500 years previous to the Great Schism
2. Church history is filled with temporary schisms. Just because two churches aren't currently in communion due to political issues, doesn't mean they aren't part of the broader church.
@@cactoidjim1477That’s not true. We are all one Orthodox Church with various traditions. But we all hold the same dogma and are in communion with one another. There are certainly not multiple Orthodoxies. I was baptized in the Russian church and I attend services at a mainly Georgian/Romanian parish. Absolutely nothing weird or wrong with that because we all share the exact same faith. The differences are even smaller than the differences between Western and Eastern Catholics. I could argue there are two “Catholic” churches by your logic.
Agree with both points. The Ruthenian Church was temporarily separated from Rome, but did rejoin universal communion in 1646.
Things weren't perfect in 1053, but we did have a more visible communion. Hope we can get back there.@@adjustedbrass7551
Best description of the Catholic Orthodox divide I've come across... "an inch wide and a mile deep." (Edit: Typo)
Except that this isn't a divide at all, as everything the Orthodox believe Catholics already believe through one of the 23 sui iuris "Eastern" churches. This was really more like 60 differences between Latin rite Catholics and Eastern rite Catholics within the Catholic Church. The problem with the schismatic apostolic churches is not theology. It's simply the refusal to submit to the proper authority of the Roman church, which makes them proto-protestants.
@@JudeMalachi you can't believe mutually contradictory things about dogmatic theology and be part of the same church. Uniates disprove Papism, not prove it. There is no unity, as there is no unity of belief, of truth, of faith. However, Orthodoxy is one faith: the faith of the apostles, the faith of Christ.
Which Orthodoxy? Antiochian? Oriental? Greek? Russian?@@XiHamORTHOCN
@@cactoidjim1477 there is only one type, the question doesn't make sense
@JudeMalachi last i checked antioch had the see of 3 apostles but whatever
Former Catholic now Orthodox, these videos are great and very fair. Keep up the good work.
So a Christian to a Christian the point? Is switching denominations is going to save you?
Open the door of Thy loving kindness, O blessed Theotokos , that we who put our hope in thee may not perish. Through thee, may we be delivered from adversities, for thou art the salvation of Christian people.
Lord have Mercy, Lord have Mercy, Lord have Mercy.
Glory to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen. ☦️🙏
@@Yonaqusf yes, I believe the orthodox church is the ark of salvation. Nothing is lacking in her.
@@thetrutharchive4202 Jesus said I am the way, the truth, and the life and no one comes to the father expect through me. So explain to me how switching denominations(except from Mormon and JW to other denominations) is really gonna change anything
@Yonaqusf it changes everything lmao. The validity of your communion is pretty important. And also, the church is part of the body of Christ- that is.. the correct church. $20 says you're either Catholic and angry or protestant and ignorant
You should do a video into Roman Catholics and Eastern Rite Catholics and the differences
Definitely, I do plan to make a video on that at some point!
@@ReadyToHarvest I’ve noticed many of the denominational coverage tends to be on American denominations, and while that makes sense with regards to the overwhelming diversity in the US, have you considered covering groups like the Polish Mariavites?
By the way I enjoyed your coverage of Iglesia ni Cristo and Ang Dating Daan
Yeah, I want to do more international denominations, but here's the thing: I work a full time job outside of the channel and I put out a video once a week. If there's plentiful information in English that's fine, but as soon as I have to deal with translation it's just too much for me to take on right now. I'm thankful that people are supporting the channel because eventually I hope that extra support will allow me to focus more time on the channel than I already am. At that point I will take on more denominations with mostly non-English resources.
@@ReadyToHarvest You need to stay where you are I'm planning to send my kids to your college and they need a good teacher!
@@ReadyToHarvestif you want to do some international denominations please do HKBP from indonesia. They claim to be Lutheran (they are part of LWF) but their doctrines are a fusion of lutheranism and calvinism.
This is the most accurate and unbiased list of our differences I have ever seen.
And yet is not that different from what Redeemed Zommer said, the explanation is just more nuanced, and yet Orthobros started to stonned him accusing him of having COMPLETELY represented his opinions LOL.
@@pedroguimaraes6094Zoomer spews outright lies about the Catholic and orthodox church. He’s a prideful child
@@Theorthodoxcowboy Which lie?
@@pedroguimaraes6094we says in EO theology we can become uncreated which is false
@@josephcorno6046 Maybe the claim that we can become "uncreated" is an exageration but Eastern Orthodox theology does indeed affirm the concept of participating in God's uncreated energies as part of the process of theosis, or deification. According to this belief, through prayer, sacraments, and ascetic practices, individuals can experience a transformative union with God's divine energies, leading to spiritual growth and likeness to God. And since God is also His energies, he is right in affirming that this confuses the creator - creature distinction and the West historically rejects that idea . Thats also why Mormons like that part of EO theology so much.
I'm a Syro-Malabarese.. it's good to see that you included the Eastern Catholic Churches in your video as the Catholic Church herself is a union of Churches ❤❤
I would like to see a video comparing the Wesleyan doctrine of Entire Sanctification to the Orthodox doctrine of Theosis.
Yes.
@@Saint_nobodyand the different between those two and the Mormon view of actually becoming a god.
@@davidjanbaz7728 Mormon believe they will actually become God. And we Orthodox believe we can become more like God but not actually a new God.
@@leiyeuktsui8449I'm sure protestants believe in becoming like God too but semantically it's "becoming Christ like".
@@leannewheeler5351 I mean it's not wrong for Jesus Christ came down to show us as an example how to become like God for He is God himself and no better example you could ever have.
Eastern Orthodoxy: "We are not that similar."
Roman Catholicism: *looks at Protestants* "Yes, we are."
That's because Protestants are twice removed so it's easier to see, Catholics are just once removed
In many aspects Catholics are closer to many Protestants than to the Orthodox churches
Lol
Me, a Protestant: Actually, I think you Catholic folks are closer to us than those guys.
@@squiddwizzard8850I agree. Especially high church Protestants like Anglicans and Lutherans.
Do one with the oriental Orthodox church too please.
He did one I thought was great, called "Eastern Orthodox vs Oriental Orthodox - What's the difference?"
This video deserves more likes just for the amount of effort that went into it.
I appreciate your balanced and respectful approach.
I’m Protestant but am looking into orthodox Christianity and may convert at some point
Amen. One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism-One Church. May God bless your journey.
Which denomination?
Come home my friend
Why? In the spectrum of post Reformation Churches you may find a better home closer to Christ's Church intent.
@tomkoon4260 I don't know about him, but for me, it seems there is a whole lot less heresy in the orthodox church
Joshua, thank you so much for covering the atonement on point 7. I’m a Baptist trying to understand the strong Orthodox opposition to penal substitutionary atonement, and you really helped me with the Carlton quotes. God bless your week. 🙏🏻
This part one was remarkably well done.
I love some of these arguments. It's pretty much impossible for anyone to know the differences in some of these cases, and yet it is enough to divide brothers in Christ.
If we were really brothers in Christ, these would not be enough to divide us.
A lot of these would not be enough to divide. The biggest issue and the one that cannot be gotten past yet is the authority of the Pope. The east shows no sign of acknowledging universal papal jurisdiction and the west shows no sign of backing down from that universal jurisdiction.
@@johnathanrhoades7751 It is very odd for the Russian Orthodox Church which is resistant to the Authority of the Pope, but is OK with ceding Authority to Czars, the Soviet Union, and now Putin.
It's pretty clear the ROC is subservient to the FSB and acts as a Soft Power Asset of Putin under former KGB officer Patriarch Kirill.
I think that doctrinal disputes are mostly post hoc rationalizations. I don't mean to say that doctrine doesn't matter at all, because it does have consequences. For example, bad doctrine or bad philosophy can justify the part of you that is selfish or arrogant or resentful. But I agree with Jonathan in that it's mostly an argument about authority, and that is mostly about the role of the pope. If the Catholics say that the Orthodox need to accept some Catholic doctrine, the Orthodox are going to find some reason to object to it, and they will find a reason because they don't want to be told what to believe by an authority that they don't accept. On the other side, Catholics are going to find fault with what the Orthodox say primarily because the Orthodox don't accept Catholic authority; therefore, whatever they say must be flawed. They may be arguing about doctrine, but they are not really arguing about doctrine. Or, if you prefer, they may be in conflict about a superficial doctrine, but they are actually in conflict over a more fundamental doctrine.
@@johnbahler I find most arguments in religion are mostly about worldly power and worldly wealth. For instance in the Orthodox Church, there have been ongoing fights between Russian Orthodox Patriarch and the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople which are largely about power and control.
Simplistically in terms of Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic what you essentially have is the same Church developing in different linguistic/political/cultural contexts. Oriental Orthodox Churches to a large extent developed outside the then Roman Empire. While within the Roman Empire. You had the Greek speaking East vs the Latin speaking West. One could argue that the “North” of Europe Germania and certain areas in Arabia were actually “Arian” Christian which has died out. In my view the seminal events were the collapse of the Roman Empire in the West in 476 AD which resulted in the splintering of the Empire and the decline in centralised secular power. The Western Patriarch ( Pope) effectively was the only “commonality” the former West had. Also the Germanic Tribes that conquered the West were Arian Christian ( Vandals, Visigoth, Ostrogoth) so the Filioque in Latin was essential in order to ensure the consubstantially of Father Son, as the Arians would have pointed out that if the Holy Spirit proceeded only from the Father then They were correct! The East did not have this problem as they were not as affected, and after Justinian stopped even worrying about trying to reconquer the West. The Eastern Empire became a totally “Greek” focussed world, however their challenge came from Islam (which would have absorbed the remnants of Arian Christianity in the East) and from 650 onwards were on the back foot trying to defend a shrinking empire. Accordingly most of the Eastern Church ended up under Islamic rule, and the Islamic leaders were only to happy to endure that their Christian population was divided. Furthermore this effectively stopped the Eastern Church from Evangelisation (except for Far Eastern Europe), and the Islamic East encouraged the Eastern Christians not to liaise with the West. The result was a massive decline in Eastern Christianity ( with the Exception of the conversion of the Rus) especially in its former heartland of Egypt, and Anatolia. This also forced the Eastern Church to become more introspective. In the West however the Church ended up becoming the dominant institution and had to evangelise the North of Europe, accordingly it had to be more “aggressive” in its doctrinal development and also more “rigid” in its structure as it had to have a structure which allowed for disputes to be settled, appeals and eventually a final arbitrator who’s decision would be final- Pope. That’s just my view. Remember while the Head of the Church is Christ (all agree on that), we still live on the Earth and have to muddle our way through this life😂! So it’s not surprising that after 2000 years you are going to have differences. What is surprising actually is that Christianity still exists functions and continues to grow despite the 2000 years …
That's a very interesting insight on the split between East and West.
No, it was though, until the 60's and NO Masses started.
@@k-v-d1795 oh plz, shut your biased mouth and learn some things. stop being so shallow and narrow minded - oops, forgive me Lord. you havent yet been blessed with wisdom?
@essafats5728 maybe one of your priest dj's can enlighten me. If you don't know what I'm talking about, check the last conference/music festival in Brazil.
I think that’s a very charitable view of our Christian brothers and sisters in the East and West. I’m a Lutheran who’s considering converting to Catholicism. Although I have some disagreement with EO theology, well, who cares. We’re all just trying our best to follow Jesus.
I pray both become one Church again.
There is only one Church presently, but I also hope the schismatic churches enter back into communion with the Catholic Church so that the Church may be a more potent witness of the universal kingdom of heaven in the world.
Orthos are too stubborn to submit to the papacy. I wish they would, but they won't
It's very easy, just stick with the church fathers teaching which is a beautiful thing andcthey were called just "Christian" ... period but I don't see the Roman Catholic church give up their itching for dominion and control
@@DoctorDewgongyeah im not submitting to Francis
@@adjustedbrass7551 proving my point. Ortho being stubborn brats as always
I have a very good friend who's an Orthodox Deacon. I'm Roman Catholic. He insists I'm not Roman I'm Latin Rite. Because I understand the history of Catholicism I do understand how and why he's saying that. I've tried to remind him that names change over time and today most Roman Catholics would have no idea what he's talking about. It's always an interesting discussion.
Thanks for bringing this up. I though about using "Latin Rite" for this video, but I thought a lot of people wouldn't click because like you said, most people wouldn't recognize what was being talked about. I try to use familiar terms and not jargon. Pretty much everyone recognizes "Roman Catholic" even though there is sometimes some disputing about the term. But as I showed in the video, even many dioceses use the term themselves!
@oHarvest Oh yes. Names do change over time even if slowly. This works both ways too. I suspect one of the obstacles for a closer relationship between East and West are these slow changes over time. One side is still operating on the outdated model and the other side is scratching their head and wondering what the other side is talking about.
Because he feels the centre of Rome shifted to Constantinople?
So what’s his argument for it not being Roman and instead being Latin? Is it because Rome fell and Constantinople lingered for a few hundred more years? Or is it something else?
@@patraic5241We are not outdate. We just kept everything taught by the apostles and the Latin changed it.
Excellent research. I'm an Orthodox Christian who converted from Protestantism long ago. I really appreciate how well you represented these various issues, and clarified that many of the more obscure views on some of these topics are held by *some* Orthodox Christians, but not unanimous by any means. If you had asked *me* how many differences there were between the Churches - I'd probably say somewhere between 3 & 5. The Filioque, the Pope/Patriarchs, Icons, Fasting customs, and Musical traditions being the most prevalent. I'm amazed you can find so many - but don't deny that these other issues are out there. I tend to see all Christians - Orthodox, Catholic & Protestant - as remarkably similar : )
Regarding current dialogue and relationship between Roman and Orthodox churches, I've heard that at Liturgies in which both Catholic and Orthodox are present, the use of the filioque is either included or not as a sign of ecumenism between the churches. For example, Roman Rite Liturgies in which Orthodox clerics are present, the filioque is omitted and vice versa.
I don't even remember which was used. But at my Roman Catholic confirmation, we had a Byzantine Rite priest as a guest.
@@jeffkardosjr.3825Probably the byzantine rite priest was an eastern catholic
Orthodox don’t consider such fluctuations a net positive. The Roman Church since the 17th c. has shown itself willing to bend and twist a lot to get folks into the papal camp. I know that sounds argumentative, but as an EO that’s how it looks to me.
@@traceyedson9652 I agree with that. I do think it's nice when the two churches express signs of their historic connections. I do know it was reported that when Patriarch Bartholomew and Pope Francis met after the latter's installation, they greeted each other as "Peter" and "Andrew"-the namesakes of the founding bishops of each of their respective sees. I thought that was somewhat remarkable, along with it being the first time an Ecumenical Patriarch attended the installation of the Bishop of Rome since at least 1054.
@@traceyedson9652 The Pope never actually imposed to the East that they recite the Filioque in the Creed, not that I am aware.
Awesome video! I consider myself agnostic but having grown up around a lot of Roman Catholics, I love learning about religions, and how even within them there are such cultural differences.
What happens when a Western rite Orthodox meets an Eastern rite Catholic? Do they cancel out, like charged particles?
lol I’d love to hear a good but honest discussion, because they’d share a lot.
Uniates gonna uniate
Most consist of porting the cultural contexts of their particular rite into the theology of their communions. Ukrainians who are in communion w Rome, for example. Western Rite Orthodox not only includes the ‘Latin-ish’ category but also Book of Common Prayer-adjacent Anglo converts. To my understanding, the Anglo tradition is actually more popular at least here in the states, which would look similar to a traditional Anglican Mass
This is a really informative video. Thank you for sharing.
Some people say that the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church are the most similar to each other but this makes some people upset.
I'm Eastern Orthodox and yes, it's true. It's not a matter of theology per se, but history and politics. Catholics (and some Protestants) have persecuted our faith. In fact, we probably had better relations with Muslims in terms of religion than with Western Christianity. My country (Romania) fought on and off against the Ottomans for 500 years, but it was about politics and economics. Meanwhile, the Habsburgs made it about religion. They had religious tolerance, but only for Catholics and Protestants, the Eastern Orthodox were excluded and we weren't allowed to rise above peasants, unless we converted to their religion. We weren't allowed to have any say in the government of Austria-Hungary, everyone had representatives, we weren't allowed to have any representation. Then there was the Iron Curtain, which separated us from any ties with the West.
So, we view Western Christianity as... frankly, a foreign religion like Hinduism or Buddhism. We don't really think (the Church hierachy might, but the regular people don't) of Catholicism and Protestantism as branches of the same religion, as denominations. We consider them as separate religions, like Judaism. I honestly feel closer to Copts, Ethiopians or Armenians. They never oppressed us. Calls for closer ties... can come across like a trick to impose foreign political domination on us. I'm aware it might not be that, but on our Eastern Orthodox side, it's likely to be met with scepticism and reservations. Not hate or hostility, but there is distrust, there is a historical elephant in the room and at the back of our heads. The memory of people like Horea, Closca and Crisan and what happened to them (broken at the wheel) are reminders of what might hide behind the smiling faces.
In my experience, the closer two groups are overall, the bigger the differences look to them.
From a Catholic view, the differences between Catholic and Orthodox theology is miniscule. The differences are much larger in the minds of the Orthodox.
@@octavianpopescu4776 This is an interesting viewpoint in light of the modern autocephaly disputes between Orthodox churches. I know at least that the Armenians don't perceive Catholics and Protestants as totally foreign, considering how much their diaspora appealed to Western as much as Orthodox Christians to defend the faith in Artsakh.
@@brackguthrie9470Inch wide, mile deep
The main difference between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church is that the Catholic Church is trying to be the universal Church while the Orthodox is trying to be a universal Church. Most of the challenges the Catholic Church faces is that it tries to unify multiple different cultures, languages, and ethnicities into one Church. The reason the Catholic Church included the filioque was to combat a particular heresy that was plaguing a particular region of the Catholic Church. Many of the changes the Catholic Church makes are to deal with crises and problems that may affect only part of the Church. The Church reformed itself after its own abuses sparked the Protestant Reformation. The failures of missionary work in Japan caused the Catholic Church to invent the concept of religion to better reach people around the world with no connection to the West. The First and Second Vatican Council was in response to the secular modernity that was dominating the First World.
The Orthodox Churches operate differently. Each Church is based on a single linguistic and often ethnic group. The smaller and unified nature of each Church means it is much stronger and more resilient. Those Churches have less need to change and adapt because there is no inclusion of new people to force that change. The result is that the Orthodox Church have mush less success in evangelizing and spreading Christianity compared to Catholic, though it must be noted Orthodox Churches face a much more hostile areas. In the places where Orthodox Churches do have success in missionary work such as Russia, they just form a new independent Church. The allows Orthodox Churches to avoid the painful challenge the Catholic Church faces by trying to unify different languages cultures, but it does allow drift between the different Churches to occur and issues in recognition of new Orthodox Churches.
Excellent points
Until you come to America... But I agree these are excellent points-complicated by the American situation.
Local Expressions of Liturgical Rites is not a bad thing.
The Trilingual Heresy was Anathematized in the 1st Millennium and then Rome went back on it and forced Latin on their flock.
And that is the problem, Rome is willing to compromise even on matters of doctrine to maintain her influence and temporal authority, where as Christ tells us that if they do not receive your teachings, shake the dust from your feet and move on. The response to the reformation was particularly egregious, not to say there weren't problems before, but the counter-reformation ultimately extinguished the last remnants of the medieval mystical tradition in the west that had carried the last flicker of the light of Christianity into the second millennium in the west west; Rome addressed the Protestant concerns, on the terms of the Protestant, and changed far too many of her ancient customs and beliefs. The vast majority of issues that separate east and west, other than the core theological concerns that caused the schism in the first place (the Monarchy of the Father, the Procession of the Spirit, and the Essence-Energy Distinction), are all a result of innovations during and after the counter-reformation. Compare this to the Orthodox response to Protestants sending letters and envoys, we exchanged a few letters, met with a few envoys and we gave them our confession of faith, asking if they would confess the same, and when instead of confessing the ancient faith they wanted to start bickering with the teachings and traditions that had been handed down from the time of the apostles, we saw they were not of Christ and told them to stop bothering us and that we wanted nothing more to do with them and stopped responding to their letters and receiving their envoys.
They form independent churches… except in Ukraine… and Korea… and the US…
No argument against your excellent synopsis. It just reminded me that church politics are imperfect and an obstacle to us all
Doing anglo-catholic/anglican and orthodox next could be fun to research!
@FranzAntonMesmer my anglican parish was under an orthodox bishop for awhile, and a part of the anglican orthodox church for awhile, but there's no real difference between, "anglican orthodox" or "anglo-catholic." It's all just conservative 1928 or earlier bcp
As an Orthodox Christian, I feel this video was done very well, and in good faith. ☦️🤝✝️
Eastern Orthodox beliefs are closer to Islamic teachings
@@Clay-t3h not even close to true.
I'd like to hear about the Anglo-Catholics vs the Roman Catholics. This was a great video and I can't wait for the next one.
So basically, the Filioque was added by Roman Catholics?
Yes. Rome was essentially excommunicated by Constantinople in 1054 for making this unilateral change but it was just the straw that broke the camels back as Rome became more powerful and more independent.
@@drjanitor3747 Where do you see the filioque "taught" at the second council of Nicea?
Yes, to combat Arianism. Arianism was pushing the idea that Christ was not divine because he was a creation of the Father. The filioque was a simple fix to explain the trinitarian aspect of God. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father AND THE SON because they are all ONE. And then some people got upset.
@@drjanitor3747 Go bless your gay couples and attend your clown mass Papist schismatic, also make sure to kiss the Quran as your Pope does, as well as affirm that Atheists and Jews can go to Heaven without Jesus Christ as your Pope and "true" Church does as well. And also make sure to not try to convert the Orthodox, because that is a great sin according to your Pope. You should as well read the Dominus Iesus declaration by you oh so "holy" and "true" Church in Rome, that says that we the "Schismatics" have valid sacraments, apostolic succession and the Church of Christ
present and operative. But who I'm kidding, you are probably a delusional TradCath that rejects the Vatican and it's teachings, while claiming you do not, while also at the same pretending like Vatican 1 is still in effect.
@@jwilsonhandmadeknives2760 Sure, but if it was just the theology, nobody would have cared. It's because Rome was just one of the ecumenical sees and the Pope was just a Patriarch among equal Patriarchs but then Rome started expanding into all of northern Europe such that the Roman see was enormously bigger and more important than all the other sees put together. So the Pope started thinking that he didn't really have to consult everybody else every time he made a decision that affected his own see. And then some people got upset. :)
The way the Orthodox Church views sim and salvation was the reason I became Orthodox. God is the physician of our souls. This whole idea of guilt is a western thing.
Thats not true. Holy fathers also wrote about guilty in front of God in your own sins.
I'm Roman Catholic and i attend a Byzantine Ruthenian Catholic Church. Have been attending for a year now and im discerning making a canonical transfer but i need to attend for 2 more years and then file a bunch of paperwork and get my priest and bishops approval. But I'm definitely very interested.
Glory to Jesus Christ 🙏☦️♥️
3 years is not a canonical requirement, though it may be a requirement of your pastor or your bishop.
Why go thru all that maybe you should convert to an Eastern Orthodox Church. Sounds a bit simpler!
@@jordankaiser2717 Except for the schism part.
@@jdotoz
Schism according to the Canons of St. Basil, which are Dogma for East and West, involves 2 standards; 1, Persistence in Error, and 2, Establishment of Parallel Sees in territories already held by Bishops.
The 2nd clause was committed by Rome via the Norman Crusaders in Antioch and Jerusalem, which was set those Patriarchs against Rome even though they maintained communion even after the Rome-Constantinople Split.
The 1st Clause was committed at the Council of Lyons in the 13th Century when the Dual Procession of the Holy Spirit was Dogmatised by Rome, which alienated them from Georgia and Alexandria.
And now Rome doesn't even Consider the Orthodox Churches as Schismatic since Vatican 2. And even says we have Christ in our Chalice.
@@acekoala457 Are you saying a single bishop has the authority to define dogma for the entire Church?
As usual great video.
I love your unbiased take. I'm Orthodox, but I was raised Catholic though I was an atheist through my teen years and early adulthood. I wanted to learn more so I could comfortably talk to my Catholic family about our differences and similarities without coming off biased or like I felt like I was better than them and this video series has helped a lot! Thankfully they're really supportive of being Orthodox and I'm hoping one day I can bring them over
Yeah, they seem to recoil and shut down at the proof that it's essentially modern day Ph4ris33s and neo-Ta1mud, with all kinds of traditions elevated to the authority of scripture, even to the point of some outright heresies. All stemming from an egotistical assumption of a false translation of Petra/Petros and a single man being the foundation of the church rather than the foundation being the faith in Christ that was just confessed in that conversation to which Jesus is replying. Like JWs, they follow teachings outside of scripture to the point of ignoring scripture itself. I seem to recall Paul and even Jesus speaking against those who did this, those who claimed they're youknowwhat but are of the S.o.S.
I'm learning so much from you! Thank you again for this great video!
Thanks for watching! Lots more coming soon! :-)
Very well researched video. Good job, my friend.
This reminds me of Matt Fradd’s article about the Divine Mercy devotion and how it’s a bridge between the two Churches.
I really don't think any single devotion can bridge these two. The emphasis on devotions is a very Catholic thing, to begin with.
@@curiousing silently ignoring the Jesus Prayer and periods of intense hesychasm.
@yPinchak Hesychasm isn't a "devotion". It's a kind of prayer, a way of life even. I take your point on the Jesus Prayer but Orthodox really treat that differently than Catholics treat devotions. For the Orthodox, the Jesus Prayer is a way to enter into contemplation, to practice watchfulness and still the mind. Many Catholics use devotions like talismans or magic amulets: Say this one lots and your wish will be granted. The rosary, I'd say, is an exception. That one I've seen commonly used like the Jesus Prayer, but you'll also hear Catholics saying that praying the rosary will accomplish x, y, and z goals-there are even bumper stickers to that effect.
@@curiousing
Huh? You are mis informed my brother in Christ. Of all people, an orthodox should understand the rosary and devotions and why and how Catholics prey it. I have no qualms with orthodoxy, funny how so many outside the Latin rite think they know so much about it, This video should focus more on what we have in common.. the times we are in we need to pull together. Imagine the power if these Rites returned in communion with each other
God Bless! We need to focus more on bringing our Protestant brothers back to the sacraments instead of focusing on our differences
Thank you, Joshua 🌹⭐🌹
I’m a Roman Catholic, TLM goer actually but I’m converting to Antiochian Orthodoxy ❤
You could slow down a bit.
WOW WOW WOW
I know some of the differences but anytime videos like this one comes up I am running to click.
Thank you
Orthodox here. I'm nobody important, but I know the faith. Your videos are spot on brother. Let people decide for themselves based on these.
Catholic here - fantastic video. You explained the differences very well.
At 9:31 you glossed over the most significant requirement for a plenary indulgence, to be free from all attachment from sin. Pretty tough.
THANK YOU for this video. I'm a Catholic convert to Orthodoxy and I've encountered ALL of this!
❤
and when are you returning to mother church?
@@MrRUJNI I'm in Her, brother.
Very smart person. Learned much
Thanks for the Blessing of YOU, doing your homework!!!!
I look forward to this series. Well researched. Also, if you're Catholic or Orthodox and these differences upset you, take a moment to realize you're not ready to debate these differences. Rather than wasting time, work on your faith to become a better Catholic or Orthodox.
To me, the difference isn't upset anyone suppose. The different is only in tradition congregations we are Catholic Rome/Orthodox same source "Jesus" Himself who revealed through His commandments.
I might be wrong about this, but I've read that the curia has downplayed "Filioque" in order to promote closer understanding between the two main branches of the Nicene church.
I was in Athos last month. I saw paitings and churces before the Schism from 1054, in ortodox stile.
You finally mentioned the Orthodox Western Rite!! Thank you!!!
What he did not mention is, that cult has nothing whatsoever to do with the God nor the Christianity if the Bible.
@@AVoiceCryingintheDesert-tq4vw very convincing bro converting to evangelicalism now, paging Pastor Susan
@@spiderb3367 ,...Repent, and learn what the truth, the gospel, and the Christianity of the Bible actually is.
“Pastor Susan” 😂 😭
@@brandonm.6604 ,....Neither of you will be laughing on judgement day. Your laughing will turn to weeping and gnashing of teeth. When Jesus returns and you all find out how totally lost and deceived you were, you will wish you hadn't mocked likely the only person that ever gave the truth of God to you.
You have both acted like the brute beasts made to be destroyed that you are. Repent!
"But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;" 2 Peter 2:12 KJV
"But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves." Jude 1:10 KJV
Glory to Christ and his Holy Orthodox Church ☦️
Which Russian or Ukraine orthodox ????
Couse Russian Orthodox is under Putin they need to follow Putin
Love my Catholic faith 💜💜✝️
My Orthodox priest tells me the toll houses are allegorical. Whilst it's satisfying to have a 'process' for those mourning the death of a loved one, he says we don't actually know what happens after death, beyond undergoing our own particular judgement (Hebrews 9:27). Thereafter is a mystery and out of love, we pray for the dead. Purgatory in the Catholic Church, on the other hand is a dogma, so if you don't believe in it, you are condemned to hell. Big difference and something that did not exist in the first Millennium of the Church.
A video with 60 similarities would be great 👍
As usual, you present great stuff. Unfortunately you say there is a part 2, yet in your video list there is nothing listed called a Part 2 to this video!
Yep, it's not out yet! You'll have to stay tuned.
Cool video, Roman Catholic here
The catholic church the mother of all whores and abominations great choice 👌
Did you know that the name RCC was created by Anti-Catholic Protestants?
They want to remove Catholics from the true historial church from the first century.
Is catholic Cristian with state of Israel Judaism
The EO objection to the addition of the filioque to the Creed wasn’t just because they didn’t have an ecumenical counsel or did it unilaterally, the ecumenical counsels actually FORBID changing the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed on pain of anathema multiple times..
It cannot be changed without Ecumenical Council.
So without an Ecumenos there cannot be a change.
@@acekoala457
I’m not sure I know what your getting at
Council of Florence attempted to do just that. Fortunately the faithful stood up to those who opportunistically attempted to change the creed in the Eastern churches. It was done, as I understand it, to gain help from the Roman Catholic Pope, in order to prevent further attacks on Byzantium by the Ottomans, and gain the support of those under the "supreme pontiff."
@@St.MartinofToursPrayToGodForUs
I think I’ve heard about that. Isn’t that the correspondence that eventually led to the crusades starting a few years later?
@littlefishbigmountain no, I don't believe it resulted in the Crusades. Though there was already much strife between the Eastern church and the Ottomans, as well as with the Roman church.
What I'd most like to see is a huge spreadsheet of every denomination and every doctrinal point which is enough to split Christians on so everyone can find what churches best fit what they intend to pass down.
So many of these differences boil down to the linguistic challenges between Latin and Greek.
Right??? Also, the Latin Church is more concerned with cold, hard logic (ironically based on ancient Greek philosophy), whereas the Eastern Orthodox Church is more concerned with spirituality.
For example, the Latin Church talks about transubstantiation. The Eastern Orthodox calls it something else, saying it's different, but. . . but it isn't different.
I cannot buy the claim that differences stem from language differences. If that were the case, then doctrines would be different in every language.
@@sharonjackson5196 Given how much of a big deal it was to translate the Bible… yeah?
@@sharonjackson5196 It's semantics.
That’s honestly just a myth. Anyone who has any sort of foundation in both languages can honestly tell you they are way more similar than they are different simply because many Latin words literally come from Greek
I really appreciate that, even though you are neither Catholic nor Orthodox, you take the views seriously enough to want to present them accurately. I’m Catholic and have long enjoyed your videos.
If you are a catholic, you will be long not enjoining the lake of fire. Repent!
@@ForThoseSeparatedUntoThe-tc5jgLOL. Pound sand.
It is important to note that things that today are less than secondary issues, like azyme bread and saturday fastings, were an integral part of the Great Schism. Cerularius out of nowhere began to attack these ancient customs of ours, starting a crisis that culminated in his excomunication.
Saturday fasting is in fact a ancient custom of the Roman Church beyond any doubt, since Saint Ambrosius himself attested to it. St Monica, the saintly mother of St Augustine, fasted on saturdays
Thanks for the video.
As an Orthodox Christian, I will concede my Catholic friends among the clergy have cooler hats.
What??? No, we most definitely do not (unless you're talking about the bishop's miter, which IS pretty cool).
And robes! Concede the robes too!
@@andrewsuryali8540 I cannot concede that, but I’m biased. My former priests wife is one of the principal tailors for liturgical vestments in North America. So I got to see samples of whatever she was working on being worn by my priest, and it was often jaw-droppingly beautiful.
What?!?! No crowns in the Catholic Church
@@andymccaffrey
ByzCath Uniate Bishops wear Crowns like Orthodox Bishops.
Thank you for doing the research, deeply appreciated. I was Confirmed and Baptised in the Byzantine Catholic church. Unfortunately, i have yet to find a parish near my home. 😢
Just clarifying some things for the orthodox
1- It is important to remember that the addition wasn't initially done by the Papacy, but by a Spanish Synod that added it to the translation of the Creed to latin. And the Western view isn't that somehow the Father and the Son are two sources of the Spirit or join into a monstruous two headed source. The view is that just like a fountain gives water to the sea through a river the Father originates the Holy Spirit through the Son
3- In the Tridentine Canon it is not said Culpa, but Reatus. The video noticed the translation issue but I wanted to explain it. It is not that we have the Culpa(guilt), we have the punishment for it. Just like if the head of your country attacks another all the country will face the consequences of it.
4- Honestly, the Holy Scriptures themselves say some sins lead to death and some don't 1 Jonh 5 16-17
5- As the wonderful guy of Bible Illustrated once noted the Tollhouses are based not on Apostolic Tradition but on alleged visions by some Saints.
5- 6:03 text from that orthodox parish misrepresents a lot purgatory. It is not that we believe they are quantifiable substances that must be in balance, we rather believe that nothing will enter Heaven that is not fully purified. Purgatory is also connected to suffering because this is the way God wants us to purify our disordered desires: through penitence. 5:54 Also misrepresents it because we don't believe "the slate must be clean before a person can come before the judgement seat". Purgatory happens after the particular judgement.
6- Just clarifying for the orthodox, indulgences are exemptions of the need to do penance, in this or in the next life. They have a early church precendent in the libelli of the martyrs www.newadvent.org/cathen/09211a.htm
7- We don't officially reduce everything to a forensic attonement. Satisfaction is a part of it but is not everything. Aquinas, for example, doesn't view the Cross merely as Satisfaction of a dishonored God, but also as Merit, Sacrifice and Redemption (freeing us from slavery to sin and the evil one). We also don't deny at all that the descent into Hades and the Ressurection are salvific. Aquinas himself teached that Christ delivered the just from Hades www.newadvent.org/summa/4052.htm#article5 Even though the West focuses on the forensic and the East on the mystical one it doesn't mean that we deny the mystical
Also, we do believe in a spiritual mystical life that is not reduced from forensic attonement. Our mystics believed in three stages of spiritual life: purgative, illuminative and unitive. It is quite similar to katharsis, theoria and theosis.
On those who criticize our fasting on saturday:
Even Augustine and Ambrosius mentions it as an ancient roman custom. St Monica fasted on saturdays, is she anathema to you??
www.newadvent.org/fathers/1102054.htm
St Ambrosius
"When I visit Rome, I fast on Saturday; when I am here, I do not fast. On the same principle, do you observe the custom prevailing in whatever Church you come to, if you desire neither to give offense by your conduct, nor to find cause of offense in another's."
St Augustine about his saintly mother:
"When my mother followed me to Milan, she found the Church there not fasting on Saturday. She began to be troubled, and to hesitate as to what she should do"
Please stop this eastern triumphalism in which only eastern traditions are viewed as ancient and all western practices are later deviations.
These things we Orthodox are aware of, but they still remain just "an interesting idea" for the reasons I posted above
Fair enough. Roman Catholics might question why their beliefs are so often rejected at a certain time when that rejection is debated, the difference remains, and centuries later is “misunderstood.” This was done in the 8th-15th c’s in the long development of E-W schism, and also in the 16th c. Protestant schism.
In both cases the topics were fleshed out & debated. Rome did not claim its position on the papacy, azymes, original sin, etc. were misunderstood. Rather, they claimed that the Orthodox were wrong for reasons various & sundry.
The RC is disingenuous in how it presents itself & how it applies its teachings by often changing them and claiming either antiquity or authority.
@@traceyedson9652 What that orthodox parish wrote about purgatory is not what you see in traditional catholic Doctrine. We never said that "the slate must be clean before we enter the judgement seat". But sure, everything an orthodox says about a Doctrine they never searched about is factually correct, while what we say based on our very Councils is an adaptation we made recently to appease you. Oh God, the gaslighting
Excellent lesson as usual 😀
I'm Eastern Orthodox and one of the things that I think is important in our divergence is the non-religious part: the politics. We treat Catholics and Protestants with a degree of distrust because of what their political leaders did to us, people like the Habsburgs and their empire. If there's one empire I despise it's Austria-Hungary. Incompetent buffoons. We were never allowed equal rights because of our religion, until we won them on battlefields. Our faith was treated better by the Muslim Ottomans. They allowed us to practice our faith in peace and didn't force us to convert. So, any reunification or even closer ties will have to not just stick to the theology, but it will also have to address the historical/political elephant in the room. Otherwise, the scepticism will not go away. And oddly enough, the Popes for the most part weren't as responsible for what happened, as much as political leaders were.
They didn't force you to convert, except for the boys they kidnapped and raised to be servants.
EO are suspicious of all thing Papist and Protestantism for good reason-heterodoxy/heresy.
Ummm look up the janissaries
@@pcarnold9 Except the Devshirme system. I meant regarding the general population.
Regarding Austria-Hungary, the rivalry between the Byzantine Rite and Eastern Orthodox was brought over here to Pennsylvania USA in the 1800s and lasted for awhile it seems.
Such as who could put a church where and who had authority.
Nice video: toll houses are a New concept for me as a Protestant.
As Joshua says, this is a controversial subject among Orthodox. It is not Orthodox dogma. Don't get hung up on it, much less see it as central to Orthodox theology. The main issue is the Orthodox teaching on deification, which is based on the essence-energies distinction, which Rome does not acknowledge.
@@sharonjackson5196Nope you had deification / theosis prior to Palamas
Regarding holy fire, the Orthodox belief is that it is an uncreated energy which is experienced like a warmth of comfort to holy people and like burning fire to those who hate God, but its not some kind of punishment or torment
@@drjanitor3747 no it's an energy OF God experienced subjectively depending on the person
@@drjanitor3747I've heard it explained as the absence of God.
@@drjanitor3747 it's Orthodoxy, which is the actual church Christ founded and means correct belief. Being united to Christ is to be united to His Church
@@leannewheeler5351 that's "hell" as a place, not so much the fire. God is the source of all life so death and hell are the absence of God
@@drjanitor3747 I'll pray for you
Blows my mind how RCC can say with a straight face nothing has changed......
I'm so glad you covered this. People have no idea the Roman Catholic Church split off from the Orthodox officially in 1054AD over number 1.
Quite interesting, for Western Christians had used the Filioque for nearly 5 centuries prior and no issue was brought up until then.
Let's not beat around the bush here. The main issue that divides the EO and Catholics is ecclesiastical authority. Everything else is just supplementary. Things to justify schism.
You know that the crisis was started by Cerularius, right? He literally out of nowhere started to condemn us for using azymus bread and fasting on saturdays. And in an act of hostility to the West closed all the latin parishes in Constantinople. Cerularius is to blame for the Schism
@@igorlopes7589 the crisis existed for hundreds of years. Inserting political dominance is a Roman thing and fitting of Matthew 16:23 , the true foundation of the Roman Rite.
@@ri3m4nn There was an strangement between East and West, but Cerularius took it and turned it into a Schism. He took strangement and turned it into hostility
@@igorlopes7589 adding the Catholic filioque, a concept that was already considered a heresy hundreds of years before, is the schism. The Romans did this. Own it
A nice overview of the differences
You should do a video on things that are the same between Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians. I don't see many people really talking about that
Yeah, not a bad idea at all.
Yes.
Thanks another interesting video
From the Western-Rite Orthodox perspective, the average western rite parishioner would claim that they believe exactly the same dogma as the whole Orthodox body. I cannot say the same for my Uniate friends, who may not personally confirm the filioque and other Latin dogma.
thanks for this video brother
The Toll Houses are a theological opinion that is not an Orthodox dogma. We believe that spiritual progress can always be made, souls are still living after bodily death, and therefore, we carry on praying for the salvation of the soul.
Very interesting to learn about Anselm and ‘satisfaction’!
Most importantly, Beards > Shaved.
It seems that this was in fact one of the original major causes of the schism.
I'm a bearded Catholic priest, but I will forgive this insult
Beards are based, best for theological business. Change my mind.
Beards aren't needed.
Fair, fair but we have better hats.
strongly agree with the orthodox position on original sin. venial: first time i heard of that. thanks for sharing.same with tollhouse
The differences are ultimately due to linguistic isolation, (since Latin and Greek are not mutually intelligible), and the doctrinal innovations (and reliance on Augustine in the West) that resulted from that isolation.
When people don't grasp the differences among doctrines, they fall back on things like "linguistic isolation".
Respectfully, this is an inept comment.
Absolutely not. The issue is those Eastern bishops do not accept the rightful authority of the Roman See. That is the primary issue (it was in the 800s, 1000s and still is today)
@@joao.fenix1473 or put another way, all four of the five original patriarchates retained the original ecclesiology in the face of Roman innovation. But we won’t solve that here so no doubt you’ll want a last word.
@@traceyedson9652 You can't maintain something that was never there. They were and are still rebellious. As of your last phrase the same would be applicant to you or any so called "Orthodox" who always twists words to justify their lack of humility (rebellion)
As a Roman Catholic who has been so intrigued lately about the Orthodox sect of Christianity, I find the whole “toll house” thing to be TERRIFYING. Sheesh! Orthodoxy is DEEP 😭
As a orthodox christian ☦️ convert from islam with My family and many family friends.
That man that said do you understand Arabic Said the bishop is evilz
He doesn't want people to know what was said in the interview because the bishop was correct.
All Muslims will see the truth like we did.
Bless you ☦️☝️
Have a great day.
May God protect you, dear brother. Many years!
☦︎
Absolutely a killer of a video! I go to a Byzantine Catholic Church and yes the video is exactly right! I love what was said. Next you could talk about all the different tribes within the Latin rite lol
I have to say, being a Catholic that I disagree with many of the Orthodox descriptions of our position.
Because their description are not universal. It’s church to church , priests to priests , patriarchs to patriarchs while when Catholic do so it’s magisterial. That’s why both Catholic clergy and laymen can’t just individually call EO heretics or apostates or any other terrible names as They see fit while on the other hand it’s totally possible.
@@ImTiredOfThisChurch Orthodoxy is universal in belief. It is not a different faith from priest to priest 🤨
@@didymus2721 okay ma’am it’s personal sentiment towards Catholicism in general. The very anti-catholic narrative does vary from church to church!
Do the Orthodox prohibit the taking of communion without first going to confession for certain sins, like the Catholic church does?
As a Protestant, I have just one question: Have any of these Catholic or Orthodox leaders actually read the Bible? This blows my mind. I have read the Bible several times. Nowhere in the it is there purgatory or, toll houses. Seriously, why do they make up things to scare people or lead them to believe they can do anything when they die to make up for their sin? Jesus took on all the sins of every single human being who would ever come to believe in this world. He became the perfect sacrifice, a sinless man, that would atone for our sins. A sacrifice that satisfied God’s wrath. On the Cross, He said, “It is finished!”, or, “paid in full”. No further acts of penance, indulgences needed. When the leaders demand indulgences, purgatory or toll’s, they say that Christ’s blood and sacrifice were not enough. Blasphemy. This is what the BIBLE says:
”For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,“
Hebrews 9:24-27
Please, for your own soul’s sake, read the Bible.
As for those teachers who are adding human opinions to what the Word of God says, this will be their end, (also from the BIBLE):
”I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.“
Revelation 22:18-19
Amen. I left the Catholic Church. Learned alot by reading the Bible.
@@TheDarthmom1, so happy for you. There is nothing as beautiful as the Word of God. You might learn a lot from Pastors John MacArthur, Sinclair Ferguson and especially Voddie Baucham. So much wisdom. Blessings
You know that Bible you're waving around? Catholics wrote it. You're welcome.
P. S. Luther was a heretic.
@@grossepointemichigan 😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣 That’s a great joke. The Bible was written in the 1st century by JEWS. You’re referring to Catechism. Man’s, “wisdom”.
cat·e·chism ˈka-tə-ˌki-zəm
Synonyms of catechism
1
: oral instruction
2
: a manual for catechizing (see CATECHIZE sense 1)
specifically : a summary of religious doctrine often in the form of questions and answers
3
a
: a set of formal questions put as a test
b
: something resembling a catechism especially in being a rote response or formulaic statement
Your religion leaves out the verse in the Bible, spoken by Jesus in Matthew 23:9:
9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
Great work!
Long live the Pope!
Which one?
@@Saint_nobodyThe Pope of Rome, obviously. Your question only makes sense if you ignore the distinction between a reality and the most common name to describe it
@@Saint_nobodyAlexandria?
John XII. ...
Boniface VIII. ...
Benedict IX. ...
Alexander VI. ...
Sergius III. ...
Leo X. ...
Stephen VI. ...
Sixtus IV. Yep, all horrific Popes.
@@clivejames5058 And?
I think you need to do more on both the uniate rites of Catholicism; the recently joined groups to the Latin church (in the East Rome is Constantinople); and the groups of Catholic based schisms or sects both liberal and more conservative.
According to George Costanza, it's all about the hats.
Hats are important! It is a serious discussion . . .
Who has the kavorka? 😁
You should do a video on the differences between Western Rite Orthodoxy and Eastern Rite Catholicism.
It would totally confuse people.
Catholic/Orthodox comparisons are hopelessly muddled. Catholics minimize the differences and relative significance (out of an ardent desire for unity) while Orthodox exaggerate differences and their significance (out of anti-Catholic hate for real and perceived past slights and insults). Most of these differences predate the Great Schism so they existed when the Eastern and Western Churches were in Communion. East/West ecumenism is further complicated by divisions within the Orthodox Churches (especially efforts by the Moscow Patriarch to usurp the place of the Patriarch of Constantinople as "first-among-equals" and to intrude on the territories of other Orthodox jurisdictions) and fracturing of the Catholic Church attributed to changes proposed and implemented by Pope Francis. The existence of the Eastern Catholic Churches is a point of contention by the Orthodox, especially the Russian Orthodox Church, who typically refers to them as "Unia", "Uniat" or "Uniate" Churches, terms ECaths consider pejorative . The ECChs assert that they are Orthodox in Communion with the Pope. The Roman Church has a generally poor relationship with the ECChs. (Many tens of thousands went to Orthodoxy due to the repugnant treatment of them and their clergy by Archbishop John Ireland and others who effectively persecuted ECaths. Even today, most Latin seminaries ignore Eastern Catholicism in the academic formation of their students. The Eastern Orthodox Churches have Western Orthodox Churches; the EOChs curiously do not see these western Orthodox copies as an ecumenical problem the way they do "Uniate" Churches. Ecumenical progress between the EOChs and the CathCh has little hope. They can't even agree on the differences and their severity. The CathCh is having much greater success with the Oriental Orthodox Churches and disaffected traditional Anglicans.
Are you from PA? I heard you say “needs reversed” thirteen minutes in and it stood out to me, being a Southerner who has moved to PA
We are NOT Roman Catholic. We are Catholic.
The name RCC was NEVER used before the Protestant Deformation.
The name RCC was created by anti-Catholic Anlgicans in recent centuries to promote the Branch Theory of Denominationalism.
PLEASE spare me the letter in 1208 if you do not add of the proper commas.
We need to call Roman catholics Roman because eastern orthodox churches also call themselves catholic churches.
@eaqiie Orthodox call themselves, Orthodox.
@@annapennrose1158 No, maybe in America. But in the rest of the world you'll see the churches marked with catholic church.
@@eaqiieThere’s only one Catholic (universal) church , are Orthodox universal? No. Pretty regional. Catholics are in each continent.
Nice video bro.
Being Orthodox myself (Coptic) I was surprised at the toll house doctrine. This teaching must not be taught at my parish lol
Coptic Orthodox is non Chalcedonian and this video is about Chalcedonian orthodox . Also toll houses are not dogma
@@Kelcast777 it’s literally not dogma. Sure It’s tradition but they haven’t dogmatized it yet. Maybe there’ll be a council that dogmatizes it or not. I’m not sure but I know it’s not dogma for now
@@Kauahdhdhd Out of curiousity. How would the Orthodox Church actually proclaim and enforce dogma? I know they can call synods, but judging from recent history, that doesn't seem to be a reliable way to bound dogma. I am not asking this for polemics or to start a debate. I'm genuinely curious.
For the Orthodox dogma is defined by an Ecumenical Council. Toll Houses have only recently become an area for discussion, Ecumenical Councils cannot occur (the Trinitarian Church is too divided) hence "Toll Houses" remains an interesting idea
@@Kelcast777 As long as being accused by demons means being accused by demons during the Judgment done by God whose decision He fully controls it is fine.
The soul goes to God for judgment and the demons accuse it before the Throne of God. But a literal understanding of tollhouses? Nope!
Anything beyond demons accusing your sins to God is ridiculous
Another issue with Purgatory is that if you don't commit sins X, Y, Z you are basically saved. You may go through Purgatory, but you are saved. In Eastern Orthodox faith, you never know if you are saved. Our greatest saints passed away hoping only in the mercy of God that would save them. They were afraid that they would go to Hell.
I feel that Purgatory is one step shy from the Protestant view of being saved only through Grace.
Catholics and Orthodox both believe in salvation by grace. We don't earn our salvation, that's a heresy called pelagianism condemned by both churches.
We can't presume our salvation, but we also have confidence in the mercy and goodness of God to save us.
No sin is too great to keep us from heaven.
This is evident in the writings of both Catholic and Orthodox, and seen in our prayers and liturgy.
Purgatory has nothing to do with only commiting "not so bad" sins. If we are still attached to sin at death, but die in God's friendship, God will purify us to prepare us for heaven. Many saints, Catholic and Orthodox, committed horrible sins but were saved by the grace of God.