The PAPACY: ASK US ANYTHING w/@elijahyasi

[music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music] >> [music] >> Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music] Heat. [music] Heat. [music] [music] [music] Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] >> Hello. Hello. Welcome everybody. Welcome To tonight's show featuring yet again another legend. This time the people legend himself, the professor. I don't even know what I'm just going to give you like [laughter] some introduction here. But you are a legend in this man. >> Keep it minimalist. Yeah. >> Yeah. Minimalistic. Minimalistic uh introduction. That's >> so um No, God bless you guys. Welcome to The show. We're going

to be having um an ask us anything about the papacy. We're going to go through a little bit of a show. But first, how are you, brother? >> Habib, I'm doing well. How are you? >> I'm good, man. Can't complain. Tell me what's new. What's going on? Any big news? Anything we should look forward to? >> Um I I got a couple debates coming up that that are already on the schedule. one With the other Paul. Um, another one with an Eastern Orthodox apologist. I'm I want to say he's an apologist, but he's on Twitter.

Um, I'll take what I can get. He's not like somebody who's big, but um, I'll take what I can get. Uh, and I got some shows coming up responding to Trullia. Um, responding to Petra, Ubie Petrus. Um, and then you know something that you and I have planned, God willing, we'll Do that show as well, which I don't know if you've announced that yet, but I'll just keep that vague. >> No, go for it. No, no, go ahead. It's it's on the uh council of Nika and how the council of Nika is evidence for uh

the papacy which a lot of people don't realize until you look at the uh you look a little little deeper than than most people have seen. Um you know you've already prepared all the slides for that. So I can't wait to do that Show. That show is going to be amazing. [clears throat] >> Yeah. Praise the Lord guys. Look out for that. That's going to be pretty uh devastating. It's going to be a whole position I think no one touches on and I don't think anyone's done the work in that realm of uh you know

theology visav visav papacy right >> so guys keep an eye out for that that's going to be super important um Joey says salam to the three on the panel [laughter] [gasps] >> all right so um I'm gonna what we're going to do is we're going to put the prayer, guys. And then I'm going to put the link in the chat. I'm going to put the link in the chat. Um, we're going to do a little bit of a presentation. Don't So, come to the back if you want to ask questions. Um, and uh, yeah, we'll

go from there, but we're not bringing you up right away. We will bring you up After we do a little bit of a presentation. What do you think, Elijah? We think we'll get this done within two two parts. Yeah, you should be good for two parts. Yeah. >> Okay. So, hopefully you guys will enjoy this and we will have some people um [clears throat] let me just put the link in the chat. Okay. Let's see if uh you have enough Subscribers for someone to you. What why do we say why is it that we say

you don't have enough subscribers, Elijah? What is what's what's behind that? >> Uh well, if you ask me, I think it's it's just an excuse um that Jay Dyer started and everyone started using. So, I I think he has the right to use that to be like he has he's way bigger than me. I get it. But like when you have somebody like Ubie Petrus using that excuse, well, I guess he stopped using That excuse. Now it like uh you got to fly down to debate me. Um Luigi, use that uh excuse. I've seen other

people that I've challenged use that excuse that have like 10,000 subscribers on their YouTube. I'm like, are you serious? You're just trying to be like your daddy uh Dyer at this point by by using the same excuse. Um, but I I mean I I've I've like done shows not like on YouTube but on X on my ex where I invite people on to do like a live Thing with me. It's just like a one-on-one where it's not just inviting a bunch of people. They have like 30 subscribers or 30 followers to their Twitter. I I

don't care. For me, they're they're all they're all worthy to to have the truth shared with them. You don't have to have subscriber count for you to come and talk to me. I'm not I'm not anybody special. I I have like people that have two followers uh that DM me on their and and I'm like talking To them on DMs. It's just asking me questions and and they're picking my brain like this is this is this is about God here. This isn't about like a popularity contest. Who cares how many followers you have? They're human

beings with a soul. They need to be shared. The truth needs to be shared with them. So, it's it's ridiculous and it's arrogant. It's arrogant to think that you're you're too good to talk to somebody. It's just >> that's not Christlike. That's not the spirit of Christ. >> It's well said, brother. >> It's well said. So, um perhaps you can do an Our Father and I can do in Hail Mary and then we'll begin. Guys, the link the link is pinned if you want to come talk to the man Elijah or whatnot. Come on by,

ask questions. Um, yeah. All right. Go ahead, brother. >> All right. In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen. Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name, thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory now and forever. Amen. Hail Mary, full

of grace, the Lord Is with thee. Blessed art thou amongst women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen. In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen. >> All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. I'm excited, man. I'm excited, guys. Um, [clears throat] Are you guys excited? Put one in the chat, whatever.

Show some love. Share this out. Get the people in here. Uh, everybody has objections, Elijah, to the papacy, but then we open these platforms and then it's crickets, man. What's going on? >> Yeah. Yeah. It's frustrating. They talk a lot on Twitter, but every time I invite them to do a show, like I said, I don't care how many followers you have. If you're going to Challenge my position, I'm going to invite you on to to talk, to do a dialogue. Let's let's do a back and forth. Doesn't have to be a debate format. Doesn't

have to be formal. Uh doesn't have to be anything special. The only person I require that with is Jay Dyer because he's a manchild. He can't control his emotions. So, I need somebody there to to kind of babysit him to be in the middle. So, anybody else, it's open invitation. Not even just Here, but anywhere. Just let me know where you want me to come. Um and I'll be there. So, I don't care about winning debates. I don't care about humiliating my opponents. And that annoys you? I know because I'm too nice. Um, but to

me, I I just that's just I don't care about that. That's just not in my personality. >> Well, I mean, >> killing them soft. >> That's it, man. A regular Lauren Hill. Let's go. >> Fuji's. >> All right, guys. >> That was a good album. That was a good album. >> That was a good album, wasn't it? >> Oh, yeah. >> I heard he say. Anyway, so Elijah doesn't like this thumbnail, guys, and he made me very insecure about it. So, tell me what you think in the comments. >> I I I thought it was

hilarious because I look Egyptian. I look Coptic, [laughter] >> right? Let's Let's uh let's go for it. So, um we're hoping to put it together in a way, right? We're hoping to put it together in a way where you can sort of uh have some imagery, some mental imagery as to what it is uh we're teaching, right? How we understand the papacy, how we understand the economy of revealed truth, >> right? >> Okay. So guys, this is an understanding of the economy of revealed truth. be they, you know, like as what we understand an ordinary

truth or even an extraordinary truth. Why you smiling, man? Who's [laughter] >> I'm like, bingo, bingo. He goes, bro, made Elijah Indian. [laughter] [gasps] >> Yo, really? You think it looks Indian? >> Yeah. Now that he says that, I'm like, yeah. [laughter] >> All right, let's let's [clears throat] go. [laughter] All right. Um did you want to like touch on this what you see? I know you understand or maybe you can read what is upward and or what is downward and I'll read what is upward. >> Yeah. So the downward economy depicts God's operative condescension

for us Deliberation in the view of ecclesiology is not of man but of God. All things proper to the deposit of faith are sourced in God first. >> Right? So and this would be downward. Right? So the truth is revealed. God condescends for us guys. So like there's a reason why we made it like that or I'm you know and then of course there's upward economy. The upward economy depicts man's co-operative ascent to God deliberation in the view Of ecclesiology. Man abides by the truths revealed in God. So what is primary in the understanding of

this economy guys is of course God. >> Yeah. >> Right. And then his promise, his assistance. This is the economy. God, his promise, his assistance, his head and his members. Anything you want to add on that, brother? >> Yeah, I I think this is a very important slide for people to understand because here's here's what I hear from the likes of uh say Ubie Petrus, right? and he has a video on he says this on this video against the papacy um is that we put our eggs in one basket with papal infallibility meaning that they

have conceal your infallibility. So it's not one man that can break the whole church down. It it's like if you have a patriarch who is in heresy to Them it doesn't falsify their church because they don't put so much emphasis on individual bishops or patriarchs. Right? So they they his point is um and and you can and I'm going to tell you his point, but just think about it in the sense that how naturalistic he thinks, not supernatural. He thinks natural, right? He's he's looking at it as a historian or as someone who is almost

like an atheist rather than someone who's a Christian. And I'll I'll Unpack that. So when he says you put your eggs all in one basket, okay, that's the wrong way of looking at it. The question is, is that how God set it up? And if that's how God set it up, then what is God doing to protect that egg in that basket or those eggs in that basket? So, let's say let's say the the eggs in that basket, what he's referring to is papal infallibility, right? So, once papal infallibility is once the pope decrees a

heresy, then papal Infallibility is falsified. or if the pope is, you know, acting up, not being a good pope, then to him that disproves Vatican 1. But here's how to look at it from the way you're the way the the downward economy that you're explaining, right? It's really God who's protecting the church. So the question is, did God set up the papacy or not? That's the only question we should be asking, right? Because if the answer is yes, then those eggs and that basket are Protected by God, right? And then we should look in look

in those eggs in that basket, right? That's what we should be doing, looking at it supernaturally. But if you're look thinking naturally, humanistically, then I could see somebody saying, "You're putting all your eggs in one basket." because he's not thinking of the way God sees things which is if he instituted that that office and he Protects that office from heresy then that's a different story. So does that make sense? No, absolutely, absolutely. And on that note, since you did talk about um eggs in baskets, all the eggs in one basket, when I I speak about

indeibility of the pope, Elijah or the infallibility of the pope or you know um the supremacy of the pope and when I speak of all these things, a person like Ubie Petus would say that all those ideas they are proper to the Headship according to us. Right. >> Thus he would straw in our position. >> Yeah. >> But effectively effectively we don't place those tenants in the pope. Certain things are placed in the pope. >> Yeah. >> Because they're operative, right? But for instance, uh uh I'll read the inf the promise part. You can read

the assistance part. >> Sure. Uh essentially infallibility is in the Lord's promise. Yeah. Right. Indeability is in the Lord's promise, universality or supremacy is in the Lord's promise. Right. So when they ask you Elijah, is the Pope infallible? What's your answer? >> No. the Pope. If you say the Pope is infallible, then that could be misunderstood to mean he's always infallible. Like he has that gift that that follows him everywhere in the sense That no matter what he does, it's infallible. And and there are some people that think that like I I I engage with

these people online and they're literally saying that, oh, you're you know, the Pope said this, [clears throat] >> excuse me, >> and that that was like off and that means that falsifies your your church. I'm like whatever he said here that's not what we mean by infallibility that He's not claiming infallibility in in what he says here right um so yeah no what we mean what we should say is that the pope has the gift of infallibility that's what we should say okay and that gift is utilized when he as Vatican 1 talks about binds

the whole church to a dogma of faith or morals, right? And and he invokes his petrine authority when he does it. So that's that's when he's infallible, right? Any other time you Can say generally speaking, we we have like a general assurance that it's true, but the only guarantee of truth is when he's speaking excited. That's his highest form of teaching. Right. >> Right. And you would say the same about universality or supremacy. Right. in the declaration of something or in defectability, we would say all this is as to the promise, right? Not as to

the person of the pope. Are you comfortable with making that statement? >> So the promise uh the Yes. So the promise in a sense is all three things, but it's most especially the first two. >> Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. >> I guess it depends on what you mean by universality. I think the way you're using it, you can apply that. But if you're talking about jurisdictional supremacy, like as far as like >> uh if the pope says, you know, let's say somebody is is is is not is not acting right >> um or seemingly

not acting or not teaching the truth, but he's he's just being misunderstood. If the pope deposes that person based on a misunderstanding, we don't believe that is infallible. The pope could be wrong in depositions of other bishops and even even be wrong in in reinstatements of other bishops, right? That's not infallib. We don't have he doesn't have infallibility there or indeibility. He could be wrong there. Like for example, um I'm trying to think of an example in in in history of the church where the pope depose somebody or say to somebody where where he he

ended up being wrong. >> Um I'm sure I'm sure there's examples, you know. Um, but I think the way you're using universality is different and I think it would apply this promise would apply in there. I just want to make that distinction that I'm talking about jurisdiction. >> Yeah. Well, I I placed that in primacy. >> Correct. >> Which is in the red section effectively. >> There you go. Exactly. There you go. There you go. Yeah. >> Yeah. So assistance I have divine hindrance which is what you would say divine impeding. >> Yep. >> Right.

So or divine impedence. >> Yes. Yes. >> Divine protection and divine intervention. Now by divine intervention Guys I merely mean guidance active and passive guidance. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um so um would you like to touch on that brother? >> Yes absolutely. So uh basically the assistance there um we have to distinguish what it is and what it's not right. So what it's not first of all let's talk about what it's not. It's not inspiration. Right. So the pope is not Inspired in the same way or in any way that the apostles were or uh

the Christians in the first century were who were preaching at the time of public revelation. Right? So Christ and the apostles and the apostles uh successors when all the apostles were alive or at least one was alive that was public revelation. So God is literally leading the faithful in a positive manner, right? So when Paul is writing the epistle of the Ephesians, right? It's It's it's God's word because he's being inspired to write this in a literal way, right? Um but when we say assistance, okay, that means okay, so you have the public revelation is

closed when the last apostle died. So that was roughly around 100 AD when John the Apostle died. So now think of think of the revelation as if it's in a treasure box. So this is the teaching of Christ and the apostles. Place all those Teachings on the in the treasure box and close that box. Right? Divine assistance is that box given to the church to protect the teachings. Right? So that when a dispute arises in the church, the church can go into that box, look at it, and say, "Here's what's always been taught, right?" And

the church decrees what's in that box that that Christ and the apostles uh gave to the church, right? The the teachings that Christ and the apostles gave to us, right? Um so Let's give an example. Let's say the pope was going to decree something that's heretical, right? We believe that's impossible, right? And the reason why we believe that's impossible is because of what your slide says, divine hindrance. That God is going to protect and intervene and hinder the pope from decreeing that heresy. So the gift of assistance of God's assistance, divine assistance, the gift itself

is God stepping in and stopping the pope from Decreeing heresy. It's not necessarily a gift of God stepping in and giving information to the Pope's brain and saying, "Here's what the truth is." That would be inspiration. We don't believe that he has that gift. The other thing that assistance is is that God is going to assist the pope in finding out what the answer is to the question at hand. How he's going to find out is God is going to lead the pope to do his due diligence. Uh and that's look at the Scriptures, look

at tradition, look at the councils, uh go ask the bishops, hold senates, hold council, hold the councils himself, and he's going to he's going to do his due diligence and get the full information before he decrees because he needs to do his homework. It's not a it's not an inspiration, right? It's it's an assistance. So, God is assisting the pope in getting that information and making sure it's right. And if it's not right, God is not going To change the pope's mind, right? He's just going to impede him from decreeing that thing, right? So now,

if he does decree something, then we know it's orthodox because if it wasn't, then God would have impeded him. That's what we believe. I know to others that might sound ridiculous, but that's that's our belief. So don't straw in that. Right. That's our belief. >> Right. Right. And uh so I'll just go on brother to the next uh to the section Called the vicer his jeritical and moral moral charrorisms of unity bindingness ratification which is to lift to plenary position and leadership or primacy. How do you how do you view that section before we go

forward? And did you want to say something about that? So the the fathers of the church everywhere see the pope as a center or principle of unity, right? And so they'll say things like the uh Christ set up a church with first 12 Apostles and out of the 12 apostles he set out one as the head so that divisions may not arise. >> Right? So they they say this everywhere. So >> and that's logical, right? If you have one who's the head then you won't have divisions because anytime there are divisions let's say five say

something and six say another thing right so then you have the the one who can look at the two sides and say no six you guys are Wrong the five are right and then the six >> and the five have to adhere to what the one says so that divisions may not arise right so you look at you look you look to that one head >> right >> for the for the truth for the answer Right. So um and so that's where unity comes comes in. Um and uh bindingness uh and ratification, you know, that's

when the pope is let's Say there's uh we'll give an example of >> Constantinople one. >> That's exactly what I was thinking. Yeah. Constantinople one where the pope he wasn't at the council or I mean they weren't at any councils but uh they weren't even represented at the council so to speak. Um so he's the council decrees that the Holy Spirit is God. Essentially it creates a gre a creed. Um and the pope After about a hundred years ratifies that council but not >> 70 years. 70 years. That's right. 70 381 to 450ish. >> Um

it wasn't even ratified in full. So when Pope Leo ratified it, he didn't ratify its cannons. He only ratified the faith of the council, right? >> The faith of the council being the dogma that it produced which is the Holy Spirit is God and the creed that it produced. That's it. So, so that's what He ratified, right? So, the the the authority to ratify things, right? So, you can't act in a universal manner in a church without the consent of the bishop of Rome. Again, that's the teachings of the fathers, right? You need the consent

of Rome for that to be universal binding. You can have four patriarchs consenting, but if Rome doesn't consent, you don't have a universal binding teaching. Right? >> So that's that's ratification. And There's other there's other other the other way around, right? So with Calcedon, it's Leo's tome that was introduced into the council and the bishops are the ones that so to speak ratified it, right? Consented to it. So you can have one being first and then the pope ratifying or you can have the other way around and then the bishops at the council saying amen

to it. Right? So you can have both ways. Um right we we've seen that in in uh in all the Councils. >> Um and then primacy, we already talked about this is is leadership. So if if anybody is acting up in the church, God can step God can step in. Uh uh the pope can step in. Um and this is where he doesn't have the divine assistance that you talked about. Um, so he could be wrong here, right? He could be he could be a dictator and he could be um he could be a bad

pope, right? He could be a bad pope. He could be a horrible pope. Um, and he still has authority, right? And if you're going to say uh that the authority is contingent on how he acts, whether he's acting good or not, then then that becomes a subjective thing, right? So then what constitute as good, right? who who's to say what he's doing is good or bad, right? That's why in the early church the theme was no one can judge Rome. Only God can judge Rome. Only God can judge the pope. And the reason why that

that was there in the Early church in the first millennium is because if people can judge him, if the faithful can judge him, then it becomes subjective. Does that make sense? Yeah. >> Right. So then the authority is is contingent on the people's uh opinion on the pope. That can't work that way. Imagine imagine a husband and a wife. The husband is the head. The wife um is supposed to be subordinate to the husband. But then she says, "Well, I'll only obey you if if you're a good Husband, right?" Well, what what makes a like

to you to her, he [snorts] may not be a good husband, but he may actually be a good husband. Like he may actually be doing everything right, but she doesn't think that he's doing everything right. So then then then then obedience is hindered and obedience is contingent on the subject, right? Which means that the subject is actually the one that has the full authority. She determines whether she could obey him or not or she Should obey him or not. >> That doesn't work, right? That doesn't work. >> So you did mention consent. Um maybe I'll

just put this Elijah and we could talk about the head in relation to the members and then we can go back to our uh economy of sorts or our order >> but um can you explain the idea of consent that exists between head and members? >> Yes. Uh so let's talk about what it Isn't. I always like to do that and what it is. Uh so there's three definitions in Latin for consent. Uh, and it's the same word. It can mean three different things depending on the context. And this is where people get confused, especially

with my videos. When I when I'm using the word consent, they have to be careful because they think I'm using it in one of the definitions when I'm using it in another one. So consent can mean permission. I Have your consent. I have your permission. Um, it can mean agreement. Right? So I I you know, do you agree with me on this on this teaching? Do you agree with me? Right? That's different than permission. permission is different than agreement. Um, and then the last thing is it could mean consensus like you have like a consensus

of bishops saying A versus B, right? Um, so, uh, those are the three things. So, if you're not careful With how somebody's using the word consent, because the way that some people think I'm using it is I'm using it as consensus. I'm not using it as consensus. And I rarely ever use consent as consensus. Rarely ever. Right. >> So when they say Elijah Yasi says that the >> the pope needs the consent of the church. Oh, that means he needs the the pull the bishops and get the majority for him to act. No, that's not

what I'm Saying. And then they also think that I'm mean meaning it as permission that the pope needs to go and pull the bishops so that he can have their permission to act. Again, no, that's not what I mean by consent. What I mean by consent for for the most part most of the times is the pope is seeking the agreement of the bishops the belief because if he has the belief of the bishops in in totality. So if all the bishops Agree on something as Vatican 2 says that thing is infallible right because all

the bishops cannot agree on something and that thing be heresy because then the church has been falsified right since the church can't be falsified if all the bishops agree on on a teaching then the pope can just say okay that that that that's dogma now you can decree it as an ex cathedral which is what happened with ex cathedral and immaculate conception and the assumption Of Mary and those two situations >> he he pulled their pulled the bishops to get their consent to get their agreement and by agreement I mean is this what you believe

in your dascese. So if everyone is saying yes to the question if all the bishops are are saying yes to the question of yes this is what we believe in our dascese. So now he has the agreement of the church because the pope cannot decree anything that is his opinion or his his Will right he cannot impose his will. He can only decree what the church has always believed and or what the church now believes. That's what he can decree. And that belief is what we call consent. So that belief is going to be present

in the bishops and the way they practice, right? That's that's consent. >> And how does what is jeritical and what is moral and what is providential play into that? >> Sure. So jeritical meaning like the does the pope have a jeritical consent? Meaning does is there a rule that says the pope has to get the consent of the bishops in any sense in any of those three definitions for the for the definition to be valid. The answer is no. There's no jeritical rule that says the pope must go and consult the bishops that the the

pope must go and pull the bishops. There's no rule like that. That's the norm. That's how Vatican 1 Saw the pope acting. That that that's just kind of like assumed into the definition. that the pope would do that, that the pope should do that, that the pope must do that, but that must should and all that is a moral obligation. It's not a rule. So even if he doesn't do it, we we don't think that the pope's decree is going to be invalid because at the end of the day, if he doesn't do that and

he's about to decree heresy, like we said in the last slide, he would be Impeded and hindered from making that decree, right? And if he is going to uh act without consulting the bishops and he is going to decree something and if he decrees it positively and successfully then we know that the consent of the church will be behind his decree even though he did not pull the bishops right meaning that the bishops will also believe in that thing even though he didn't pull them. So just because he Didn't pull them doesn't mean he's going

against them. >> He could he could not pull them and still go with them. And I'll give you an example. I give this example all the time. uh Pope John Paul II before he decreed that that females can't be priests. Sakura Sakura something I always get it wrong. >> Mhm. >> Um he did not go and pull any bishops on that. But you can't tell me that that Decree was in in opposition to the bishops. Just because he didn't pull them doesn't mean he didn't have their consent. He had their consent already because that's the

belief of the church. What bishop at the time would you ask? Hey, do you do you ordain females in your dascese? Is going to say yes to that question. He's going to say no, I don't. Of course not. That's not the belief of the church. So, he had their consent without seeking their consent, Right? So, it's important to have their consent. It's not an absolute, right? Um because sometimes the pope can already know the consent of the church. Um and then providential. Providential is is something where God protects the church as a whole. So there's

not a time where the pope alone is going to be orthodox while the other bishops, the members, the body are going to be herodox, her heterodox or or heretics. Uh so providentially speaking uh the Holy spirit is always going to ensure that the whole church is infallible. So if the pope is going to decree something infallibly that the members are also going to be adhering to that dogma whether that's prior or post decree. So that's providentially speaking headed members will never be se severed so to speak. And Gasser actually says that explicitly. If you want

me to pull that pull that up, I can read that for the folks. >> You want me to pull up that what I have that thing? >> Um >> I think it is. It's on there. >> Let me let me see what you have. Let me see what you have. I'll know right away. [clears throat] Let me see. The relatio. There's uh no more inability separated from the universal church from the foundation it is destined to support indeed we do not separate the pope defining from the Cooperation and consent of the church at least in

the sense that we do not exclude this cooperation and this consent that's not the right one >> no I don't think I posted that >> okay go ahead put it up if you want to >> yeah so we're bishop guesser >> guys the amount of slides and work we've is unreal. Uh I don't I have it's like all over my laptop. I don't even know at this point. Sometimes I find stuff that I forgot About. Yeah. Yep. Yep. Yep. Okay. Let's see. Okay. Just sent it to you earlier, too. >> Really? >> Yeah. Yeah, I

sent it to you on WhatsApp. Remember that? I was on the phone with you earlier. >> Oh, that here. I could just I could just put it in the chat and we could read it. >> Okay, sweet. Actually, I think uh >> No, no, I got it, brother. Here, I'll Put I'll post it as a as a comment. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Okay, there you go. >> Where we at? >> There you go. It's coming up right now. >> I see it. Okay. Finally, this is from Gasser. So, uh this is Vatican 1 document. Finally,

we do not separate the pope even minimally from the consent of the church as long as that consent is not laid down as a condition which is Either antecedent or con consequence. So again, it's not judical. That's what he's saying. So that condition cannot be judical. We are not able to separate the pope from the consent of the church because this consent is never able to be lacking to him. Indeed, since we believe that the pope is infallible through the divine assistance, by that very fact, we also believe that the ascent of the church will

not be lacking to his definitions Since it cannot since it is not able to happen that the body of bishops be separated from its head and since the church universal is not able to fail. So there you go, the providential aspect of it. So when they ask us to go into the early church and find where the pope acted alone in opposition to the bishops, that's impossible. Gastra doesn't think that's even a possibility. So why would we even need to go do that? Yeah. [laughter] All right. So all right. So I guess guys, [snorts] so

the whole point here is to make it systematic, right, Elijah? >> Yeah. >> So obviously we're going to be dealing with his promise. We're going to be showing how the fathers taught infallibility, indeability, and universality and supremacy in the manner uh that is not to be confused with primacy. >> Yeah. >> So, just quickly guys, uh I know people always ask for biblical proofs of the promise. We could just, you know, put it right there. We're not really going to get into this because usually the people debating these things, uh let's are we going to

be honest, Elijah? They don't really much care for the Bible. do that. >> Well, I think it's not that they don't care for the Bible. I think it's just That it goes deeper than Protestant arguments between Catholics and Protestants. So, it's not like, "Show me where in the scriptures." Like, we already know where in the scriptures where it singles out Matthew, I mean, Peter in Matthew 16, right? It's already, we already know that. We already know where it singles them out in John 21. We already know where it singles them out in Luke 22. But

the question is how much of that singling Out equates to set authority. So that's what we're debating on. We all agree that Peter is special among the 12. Like Eastern Orthodoxy should believe that that's in their that's in their liturgies. That's that's in their canons that you know councils that that's in that's there right so we all agree that Peter is head and some some unique he has some sort of unique prerogative. The question that we have, the question that we debate is how much Authority does he have in his successors in Peter's successors. So

that's why it's not like we don't care about the Bible. So we already agree on the passages at hand. Now we need to debate on what the fathers taught about these passages, so to speak. All right. So uh as you guys know, we're going to be doing it in sections, right? So the promise is blue, the assistance is green, the vicor is red, and the body is purple. So we're dealing today with What is blue. Maybe we'll get through some of what is green. But this is for you guys to understand how to compartmentalize uh

what is otherwise pretty. Would you agree it's pretty complex? As much as we call it minimal, it's not like it's not minimal in in the the density of theology. Would you agree? >> Yes. Yeah. And and none of this is what I mean by minimal, by the way. Right. >> This this The name minimalist position should just be the official position of the Catholic Church on the papacy. >> Right. What what you're presenting is the official position of the Catholic Church. >> Right. >> Right. That that's just what we teach. Right. the And if I

can just take like about 60 seconds to explain why I call it minimalist, >> right? >> What folks think I'm doing is I'm trying to minimize the the Vatican 1 papacy so that I can cope so that I can go into the early church and find it by minimizing it first and then I can find it in the early church. It doesn't have to be as extreme. Minimalist has nothing to do with minimizing Vatican 1. Minimalist has to do with minimizing the maximalist interpretation of Vatican 1. >> Right? >> That's all it is. That's all

minimalist Is. That's it. I'm minimizing the absolutist maximalist interpretation of Vatican 1, which is ubietus um and >> straw man. >> Straw maning. So what what the maximalist is is what I mentioned earlier. Go into the early church and find me where the pope acted in opposition to all the bishops. That's maximalist to where they think that he Has that canvas, that blank check to do that, right? And so what I'm saying is Gasser did not see the pope acting in opposition to the bishops. As I just read, uh Pope Pius the 9th, who was

at Vatican 1, who was the pope that opened up the council, did not see himself as acting in opposition to the bishops. If he did, then he wouldn't even have all the council. >> He would never had all the council, right? >> Um he had he had the bishops there and they're they're working together on this, right? Uh so when I'm presenting the minimalist position, I'm presenting the position that is refuting the maximalist. The minimalist is again more so collegial, more so headed members. The head is working with the bishops. The bishops are working with

the head. U not on a jeritical sense that none of these is is a judical requirement, right? This is this is like this is what We think is is what the mor moral obligation of the pope is. But even a moral obligation of the pope means that if he goes against that moral obligation and he does try to be like a lone ranger, he would be sinning. So why would I go into the early church and find an instance to where the pope sinned and use that as an example to prove Vatican 1? It's ridiculous.

That's what minimalist is. And I hope people clip this and post it everywhere just so They understand what the heck I'm saying about minimalist because they think I'm trying to minimize Vatican 1 papacy. I'm just trying to put it in its proper context. minimalist position equals Vatican and papacy, >> right? Thank you. Uh so again the the doctrine is in is dense guys. It's deep. Um so he's telling you that why we call it minimalistic. It's almost like a counter measure to those who call the pope an autocrat, Right? They want to make uh the

pope an author authoritarian, a dictator of sorts when that would not be the Catholic position and effectively that would be a straw man of the Catholic position. >> Yeah. >> And so when we when we do these shows guys, we pro we provide you ways for you to understand it and to compartmentalize it to show you how the order works, right? Uh so to show you how the order Works, how you're meant to understand it. Um the vicar is the fourth in the order. You know, God is one, two, and three. God is his promise

and his assistance. All of these things are what make the pope. He's in cooperation with his assistance. God's assistance by virtue of God's promise which is uttered by God himself. >> And then can I quote something real quick? Um >> yeah, go ahead. This is this is uh this Is Cardinal Newman after Vatican 1. Listen to what he says. So he's talking about folks that are maximalists at his time like the obbyrus of of his time. And he says a few years ago it was the fashion among us to call writers who conformed to this

rule of the church by the name of minimizers. That day of Tyrannis Ipsy Dixie I trust is over. Bishop Fesler, a man of high authority, for he was secretary general of the Vatican Council and of higher Authority still in his work. For it has the appribation of the sovereign pontiff clearly proves to us that a moderation of doctrine he's talking about Vatican 1 moderation of doctrine. So he's minimizing minim they're called minimizers. moderation of doctrine dictated by charity is not inconsistent with soundness in the faith. Such a sanction I suppose will be considered sufficient for

the character of the remarks which I Am about to make upon definitions in general and upon the Vatican in particular. So in other words, what he's saying is uh that there is a sense to where the doctrine of Vatican 1 needs to be looked at in a moderate way, moderation of doctrine dictated by charity, >> and it's not inconsistent with soundness of faith. So I'm not presenting anything new. So the folks that are saying, well, where did this minimalist thing come From? I I don't see any theologian using minimalist or no bishop uses minimalist. That's

not the point. I don't care what you call it. Call it Vatican 1. I don't care if you call it anything you want. Call it I used to call I used to call it the hypetronine view. That's what I used to call it. >> Right >> now I call it minimalist. It doesn't matter. Like it's not the name itself that matters. It's what it is that Matters. That's all it is. Right. [snorts] >> Okay. Well, let me just read this. This is the general definition. I'm going to ask you if you concur with lumen is

that general definition which I'm sure you will but uh so I'm I'm going to read it and then we'll go forward. >> Sure. [clears throat] >> This divine promise of the Lord conferred onto Peter ensures particular carrorisms. These charrorisms are found Explicitly and implicitly in sacred church, sacred tradition and sacred rits. >> Yeah. The divine deposit of faith has clearly outlined in what manner our lord's promise bolsters the church right and they are infallibility now this is according to lumentium guys although the individual bishops do not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility they can nevertheless proclaim

Christ's infallible doctrine of infallibility you Said that earlier when I asked you would you call the pope infallible you're like well we'd have to qualify that statement. God's promise is infallible, >> right? >> And the and the pope is cooperating with that infallibility. >> So So in other words, all the eggs in one basket. >> It's not true. >> It Well, it's God. That's what those eggs are. So we're putting our trust in God's promise, in God's protection. So those eggs are not the pope, it's God himself, so to speak. Right? This is so even

when they are dispersed around the world provided that while maintaining the bond of unity among themselves and with Peter's successor members in head and while the while while teaching authentically on a matter of faith or morals they concur in a single viewpoint that's a single economy guys a single viewpoint as the One which must be held conclusively. This authority is even more clearly verified when gathered together in an ecumenical council, they are teachers and judges of faith and morals for the universal church. Their definitions must then be adhered to with the submission of faith. >>

Yep. Amen. Amen. >> So this would be a good definition of infallibility. >> Yep. And and by the way, I just sent you A private message. Uh the next line from Newman right after I read that is that and I think that's something that we should read. It's very short and >> where is it? In the side chat. >> Yeah, this in the side chat private. >> Oh, private. There it is. >> Yeah. >> Uh okay, there we go. >> So, right after what I just read from Newman, this is what he says. >> I'll

put it in the uh in the live chat And then I'll I'll pin it. >> Okay, sweet. I think this is going to be really slow but good for people. I'm sorry guys. Do you guys like this pace? How do you feel about this pace? Elijah. >> Um I told you I can talk about this for hours. So I think we're on slide four, right? >> Yeah. Yeah. Five. Yeah. >> Five out of five. >> Do you want to tell them how many how many we have? >> What did you go up to like 55

or or >> I'm not even done. Yeah. So >> all right. So the Vatican definition which comes to us in the shape of the pope's encyclical bull called pastor eternus that's Vatican 1 declares that the pope has the same infallibility what the church has which the church has excuse me to determine therefore what is meant by the infallibility of the pope we must turn first to consider the infallibility Of the church. >> Yeah. Yeah. So it it's it's the same protection in other words, right? God protects the church and he protects the the the church

from heresy. He protects the pope from heresy. So if if he can do one, he can do the other, >> right? >> So >> Right. >> It's it's the same infallibility. >> Perfect. Okay. So I I'm getting good Responses in the comments uh from this pace, man. Let's just take it easy. What do you think, bro? Let's take it easy. We don't got to burn We don't got to burn through it. I think it would be good if we go, you know, at a particular pace and uh >> even this is a 10- part series.

Whatever is helping people, let's just let's just do what it's helping people. >> Well, I mean, well, whatever. Like, we could do one a week. This is not a small Thing. This can be a whole course for you guys. >> Yeah. >> Um, so his promise of infallibility, uh, [clears throat] infallibility in tradition. This is patriarch John IV of Jerusalem to the Catholicos of the uh Catholicos of the Georgian monks. Right. So this is actually a very interesting quote. How did you feel when you first saw that I added this quote? >> Well, I thought

it was a I thought it Was either an exaggeration or a forgery. >> Mhm. >> At first, but then when you confirmed that it's real, I was like I was like, why haven't we been using this as apologists? because this is a very very powerful this is a slam dunk quote for me >> because it's the the Latin that you posted infallibilis you can't dispute that and that's it it literally says the word so >> yeah um I'll read it and I'll take your opinion on it and how you want to break it down and

you guys have questions like come on up uh we have sped up cath catholicism in the back uh you know what let's read this bring it sped up. I'm going to give you two three minutes. [snorts] Uh cuz I know who he is. A nice guy. So, but uh let's let's read this. Elijah, I'll get your thoughts on it and we'll go from there. >> Sure. [clears throat] >> To this St. Peter he has given the keys of heaven and earth. It is in the following he his face his faith excuse me that to this

day his disciples and the doctors of the Catholic Church bind and loose. They bind the wicked and loose uh from their chains those who do penance such as above all above all the privilege of those who on the first and most holy and venerable sea the sea of Rome are the successors of Peter sound In the faith and according to the word that's like Vatican and according to God right remember the same language and according to the word of the lord infallibilis infallible. So yeah, go ahead. I'll I'll >> No, I want your take on

this. What do you think about that, man? >> Well, okay. So, number one, what this is showing is that the sea of Rome is a divine institution. That's why it says According to the word of the Lord. According to the word of the Lord is a divine institution. It means divine means God institution is God instituted. Um, and then it's also quoting without quoting Matthew 16. So it's interpreting Matthew 16 in the same way that Vatican 1 interprets Matthew 16 in the same way that Catholic Church interprets Matthew 16. Right. >> Sorry. Yeah, >> that's

okay. So when it says according To the word of the Lord infallible, it's you are Peter and on this rock I will build my church. And he gives them the keys and he says the gates of hell will not prevail against it. Right? And that's why they that's why he's alluding to they bind the wicked and loose from their chains those who do penance. So uh bind and loose. Uh he actually says it right there in disciples and doctrine of the church bind and loose. So the binding and loosing is alluding to Matthew 16 or

explicitly going to Matthew 16. And the last part and according to the word of the Lord infallible is the promise as the fathers of the church tell us the promise of Matthew 16 applies to the sea of Rome and the church receives that promise in so far as it being in communion with the bishop of Rome. So that's how you are sure to have that infallibility as a Christian is you are in the communion with the Center of unity which is the principle of unity which is the pope. So that's how you know um so

yeah this is Matthew 16. So if somebody wants to ask me what passage and this will be my last point what passage can you point to that shows that uh infallibility was in the mind of of of Christ. Number one, I would point to Matthew 16. But now it's not no longer my opinion because now we can quarrel over over what Matthew 16 is saying, right? If we go to the fathers, They take Matthew 16 and apply it to the bishop of Rome. Not that's not the only way they use Matthew 16, right? That's that's

one way. And that's that's a a lot of them do uh see of Rome equals infallibility because of Matthew 16. That's that's how they uh that's that's the logic they use. But the importance here is, you know, a Protestant can say, uh, well, you're not using the Bible. You're just using the church father. No, I am using the Bible and I'm using the Church father to interpret the Bible instead of using you, John Smith, to interpret the Bible. So, I'm going to believe uh this this church father and the other church fathers that quote Matthew

16 and comment on it and apply it to the bishop of Rome versus a Joemo Protestant living in 2025 today. That's that's so in other words, just to kind of put a bow on it, it's not the church fathers versus the scriptures. It's the interpretation of the scriptures by the Church fathers versus the interpretation of the scriptures by Joshmo Protestant guy or even Eastern Orthodox guy. >> Right. >> I I don't think I can provide a better explanation than that. What are you doing, man? Trying to make me look bad, bro? What's going on here?

Is that was Is that what it is? Well, you did all the you did all the background work, so >> No, I didn't. That's You don't Now Now you're just inventing things. Get out of Here. [laughter] >> All right. >> All right. So, we got sped up. >> I'm coming up. >> Yeah, you we hear you. You're just not coming up on panel. You don't get to just get to hear you. What's up? >> All right. But yeah, >> please uh address your question to either Elijah or myself. >> Yeah. Um so, Elijah, just quick

quick question. Thank you for everything you Do, man. It's a pleasure to be finally talking to you. Um, just one question on um, obviously the Eastern Orthodox apologists love to use Pope Leo III in the addition to the creed and his quote denial of it. Obviously, you know, the thing about scratching it off and something like that. So, I just want to hear your response on what you know you would say to that. >> Sure. So you're talking about like his the fact that he didn't want to put it In the creed. >> Yes. >>

Okay. >> Yes. >> So uh and that's not a problem for us because um there were some creeds that had the filioquay and some creeds that didn't. Right. No no no one denies that. Right. So there was there was a point where there were popes that were chanting the filioquay uh in a liturgy without I'm sorry they Were chanting the creed without the filioquay. Okay. That's not a problem for us. The question isn't whether the filio belongs in a creed or not. That's the wrong question, right? The question is is the filioquay a orthodox teaching

or a heterodtox teaching. That's the question. So whether or not it's in a creed doesn't make it orthodox or not, right? Because we know that there were some creeds that had the filio in it as early as the Sixth century in the 500s in Spain. Right? And these are these are Eastern Orthodox bishops according to the Eastern Orthodox. The Catholics didn't exist until 1054 so to speak. So then the everybody in the first millennium was Orthodox in Eastern Orthodox, right? Nobody was Catholic. So there were there were some creeds that had the filioquay and some

creeds that didn't. So the question isn't about whether the filioquay should be in the Creed or not. Uh the question is is it orthodox or is it heterodox? If it's orthodox and the popes put it in the creed, then they have a right to do that. They have uh the authority to do such a thing, right? If it's heterodox and they put it in the creed, then Catholicism is falsified. And so that's kind of question begging. So let's say there's a pope who says don't put it in the creed in the 800s and then 200

years later another pope Says we should put it in the creed. That's not a problem. That's just that's just the way they're looking at it from from their history, right? One is looking at it in a different way than the other one. But they both both those popes, Pope Leo and the pope that uh wanted to impose that um both believed that the Fioquay was orthodox. both of them did as as as well as the predecessors of those popes going to Pope Gregory the Great uh you know Pope Cleo the Great going all the way

uh back to uh the the 4th century and the 3rd century popes those those were popes that held to the teaching of the filioquay right so again the question isn't whether it should be in the creed or not at least not not to pop Leo um he's saying you know don't put it in the creed but he's not saying that because it's a heresy if that's what They're insinuating that's not at all at all what he's what he's saying, right? It's Not his teaching. >> And I I would just go ahead and tell you to

read what Pope St. Pope Steven the 5th says in his seventh epistle directly addressing the question of the addition or the subtraction to the symbol. Now typically sped up the symbol in uh patrological language or petristic language often means the creed right. So the holy ghost is neither said to be begotten by the father and the son lest this imply two fathers nor begotten Lest this imply two sons but he is said to proceed. If they should say this, if they should, if they should say it is forbidden by the holy fathers to add or

subtract anything from the symbol, say this is what Pope St. Steven is telling you or Pope Steven the fifth is telling you, excuse me, the Holy Roman Church is the guardian of the holy dogmas. He's not the first to say that. Leo says that. Leo says he's the guardian. Marcian says of Leo, he's the guardian. Anatolius says of Leo the same thing uh is the guardian of the holy dogmas and confirms them because representing the prince of the apostles she does not vacasillate in anything concerning the doctrine the Catholic faith concerning the Catholic faith now

what's he's saying here sped up is the uh supposed amending of the creed is not amending of the theology ology therein. The language has to be interpreted specifically because of particular Heresies. The filioquay aids against the numotomaki, the spirit fighters. The filioquay was a measure we placed to go against the Macedonians and the enomians. And you'll see Pope Steven the 5th continue and tell you about the distinguish the distinction of language. As the Lord himself said, Simon Simon, behold, Satan has desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat, but I have prayed

for thee that thy faith may not fail. And do thou when once thou Hast turned against strengthen thy brethren? Now pay attention, sped up. This is the whole crux of the argument. The church that is at Rome guided to the faith all airing churches meaning even the yunomians the spirit fighters that's what we're talking about here the filioquay addresses them right it it protects the divinity of the holy spirit [clears throat] all airing churches and confirmed the vacasillation not by changing the holy Dogma but by explaining them to people who did not understand them or

were interpreting them wrong. The filioquay play touches not the backbone of the theology rather this language aids in uh upholding the divinity of the Holy Spirit. And this is the prescription Pope Steven V gives us. He tells us say this the church is in charge of the dogmas. She confirms them. And if she should so choose to give better Clarifying language, then that as well is to be held to. >> Yep. Well said. Well said. >> Does that help, Spedup? >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That was great, man. >> All right, man. Thank you very

much, Sped up. God bless you. >> God bless you, brother. >> God bless. God bless. >> Take care. All right. All right. That was pretty Good. That was a good question. Um, >> yeah, >> let's let's go back to the episode. Let's drop this and let's bring this back up. Oh, let me just tell people, guys, if you find it in your heart to donate, I have two QR codes on the screen. And that's all that's all I'll say. Let me say thank you to some super chats, Elijah, if you don't mind, brother. >> Yeah,

go ahead, brother. >> Um, Joey [snorts] 20 uh 20 gifted man, I love you, bro. I love you so much. Thank you for your your generosity. Um, Albert Mo, God bless you. Three brothers. Uh, YouTube, way better with DMA back in action. Love you, man. Thank you for coming back. Uh, Mina in the building 10. Love you, bro. Sister Smiley five, I love you, sis. Rosarium, my two habibis. I've seen plenty of stuff uh refuting setism. I can I hate that word. Uh but have not seen anything really regarding set of privationism. What would your

tops ar top arguments against this? Well, you'll find that the set privationists they like to abuse St. Robert Bellerin in the manner he understands formal and material papacy. Except when St. Robert Bellereman talks about what is formal and what is material in papacy. He talks about how God how God operates in the church and how the pope can be a material pope if God's operation in the church is passive. But what they do is they change it. They're like, well, he's the the Holy Spirit is rendering a passive uh operation in the church effectively post

Vatican 2. So it would be it would the burden would be on them to prove that um the pope is the papacy has been uh material since Vatican 2. I just don't Think they can actually prove that. What do you think Elijah? >> Yeah, that goes back to what we were talking about earlier. If if the subjects judge the you know the person in authority then that means the subjects are the ones in authority. So if they can if they can determine when he has fallen into heresy, then that means they had the full authority

the whole time. That's that's basically simple logic there. So Um yeah h how like who told them that the pope is a heretic? What authority told them that besides themselves? So now they are the authority. So I I don't I I don't take the set of aante position seriously. I don't do any apologetics against it. Um, that's for other people to do or set a a set of probation provisionism. >> That's not my thing. So, I I don't really have much to offer there. I just like to explain the faith to Catholics So they can

understand their faith and stay in the church. That that's what I try to do. >> All right. Uh, love these edifying lives. Learned so much. All for the glory of God. God bless you, True Seeker. Love you, man. Joe Ro, God bless you, brothers. Keep doing the Lord's work. God bless you, sister. Love you guys. All right, let's continue. Huh? What do you say? Because we got a lot. And we got a We're still touching on the Infallibility. >> Um over here we have Saint Nodius of uh Tickenum uh his writings in defense of Pope

St. Samus against the claims of the bishops of Gaul. They're pretty much trying to make their own cathedra and it's almost in line with uh St. Otatus. Yep. >> This kind of language is going to be almost in line with Saint of Tatus. But I'm pretty sure a lot of people have read Statatus. So I wanted to provide Something new and different. >> Yep. >> So uh do you want to read it, Matt? >> Sure. God per chance has to to terminate the cause causes of other men by means of men. But the prelet of

that Roman sea he has reserved without question to his own judgment. So I'm gonna pause right there. That's what we just said right now. Like you don't judge the bishop of Rome. And this is the first this is an Eastern Orthodox saint. This is not a Catholic homie. Right. This is this is this is an Eastern Orthodox person saying this. And I'm I'm being sarcastic in a sense. Uh I'm being tongue andcheek in a sense. Right. >> Right. But just know that this is not a to the Eastern Orthodox this is not a Catholic. This

is this is their this is their person right and he's saying the sea of Rome cannot be judged and the judgment Is reserved to go alone. So there's the question that was just asked on set of accountantism instead of privationism. There it is right there. There's the answer from from the church father himself right the subject cannot judge the person in authority. Continuing with the quote, "It is his will that the successors of the blessed apostle Peter should owe their innocence to heaven alone." >> Damn, man. That sounds crazy. >> And should manifest a pure

conscience to the inquisition of the most severe judge, God? Do you answer, "Such will be the condition of all souls in that scrutiny." I retort that to one was said, "Thou art Peter," etc., etc., and again that by the voice of holy pontiffs, the dignity of his sea has been made venerable in the whole world since all the faithful everywhere are submitted to it and it is marked out as The head of the whole body. Okay, so there you go people. So I mean it speaks for itself. There isn't really anything for me. I think

it's very clear. Number one, it's saying it's taking thou art Peter Matthew 16 and applying it to the pope alone. So it's a unique authority. It's it's not Matthew 16 applies to everybody. It can apply to all the bishops in one sense as Cyprien did. But there also is a sense to where it only applies to one Bishop and that's Peter, the successor of Peter, the pope specifically. And then it says all the faithful everywhere are submitted to it. That's universal jurisdiction. I thought that was an invention by Vatican 1. I thought that was an

invention by the dictatis pape. But here we have a what is this a fifth century or sixth century? When when did this person live? Um, >> I should have put the dates, man. Yeah, I was going to put the dates, but I'm like I got >> I I want to say it's probably the sixth century is my guess, but let's look. >> You can It's Inodius of Pavia as well. That's his That's his second name. Anodius of Pavia. >> Let's look it up. St. Anodius of >> 475 to 521. >> There you go. It's like

the fifth sixth century. There we go. So, there you go. In the middle of fifth or sixth in the the end of the fifth the beginning of the sixth century you have someone who is saying that the bishop of Rome can only be judged by God only God can judge me bro only God can judge me so that's um that's that's what he's saying so that's not what I'm saying that's not what James is saying >> all right any questions in the comments guys please put one if you are understanding two if you're not Understanding

put some questions in the comments let us know It's very important. Come on up. The link is posted. Tell your friends who aren't Catholic, who are just pmicizing that when they think they know things, tell them, "Now's the chance, man. Now is the chance." Right, Elijah? >> Yep. >> Yep. >> All right. So, now we have Pope St. Leo. It's almost like cheating to use Pope St. Leo. >> I don't, >> which is funny because I never use Pope Leo. >> I wanted to put a little bit of everything, you know? >> Here's Jerusalem. Here's

the East. here's Rome, you know. >> Yeah. >> Um, so this is actually a very long quote. Uh, but I thought I think it's fair to give true context. I I I can't Stand when people just take things out of context. Um, so I'll just read it and then you can cut me off. You can ask me to stop. Um, yeah, it is cheating, man. Pope St. Leo is like honestly if you can get through the fifth century of church history without becoming Catholic I'm impressed just the fifth century alone is devastating >> right >>

um So >> including Ephesus >> right well yeah fifth [clears throat] century so let me let me let me read uh brother >> okay >> for although in the midst of any dissensions whatever the liberty of the gospel was dispensable in the power of the Holy Spirit. That's the infallibility part. Acting through the services of the apostolic sea. Notice Guys, the rhetoric remains the same over and over and over again. I don't care if you're in Jerusalem. I don't care if you're in the East. I don't care if you're in Rome. The rhetoric stays the

same. The grace of God was made the more apparent by granting to the world that in the course of the triumph of truth only those perish who started the corruption of the faith and the church was restored to its unimpaired state. That war which the enemy of our peace Stirred up was ended by the right hand of the Lord fighting so successfully that in crisis triumph there resulted a single victory for all priests. Yep. >> One economy, guys. That's why I highlighted that. Okay. And only the darkness of heresy with its supporters was cast out

by the brilliant light of truth. Just as by the very belief in the Lord's resurrection, considerable assurance was given for the bolstering of the infant faith. Since some apostles Had doubts about the reality of the Lord Jesus Christ's body, citing St. Thomas the doubter. >> Yep. And just as all those in doubt had their uncertainty removed by examining visually and by touch the print of the nails in the wound made made by the lance. That's John 20:24-28 guys. So also now by the reputation of some men's infidelity, the hearts of the hesitant have been strengthened

and what caused blindness to some is now profitable to All men for their enlightenment. Here's where it gets juicy. Now, don't be scared to cut me off if you want to talk about something interesting here. >> Sure. [clears throat] >> As is our wish, let the city of Constantinople have its glory and under the protection of the hand of God. May it long enjoy your clemencies ruled. This is talking to the emperor. Nevertheless, things secular and things Religious do not have the same basis. You want to touch on that? I can stop right there about

Cesaro papacy. >> Can you talk about what people understand by Cesaro papacy? >> Yeah. The basically the the emperor is is what the pope how we look at the pope they look at the emperor which is ridiculous. [snorts] uh and and Pope Leo is distinguishing between the office of the secular emperor and the office of the religious who is himself the pope And the bishops u but he's I'm assuming he's only going to be applying it to himself in this case um knowing Pope Leo he's just strong language about authority having the authority so and

and this is actually uh actually this is a great quote by the way because a lot of Eastern Orthodox reputation of everything you bring forth from Pope Leo is that he looked at the emperor as also having that authority. And here you have Pope Leo making the Distinction even though the emperor does have the authority to govern and that's just to bring peace and order into the church. That's that's his that's that would be his purpose. He still has a distinction of office between himself and the emperor. That's that's a beautiful quote. I'm stealing that

for sure. >> Yeah. Okay, brother. Look, I didn't steal it from you or something. Uh things religious do not have the same Basis. Nothing erected is going to be stable apart from that rock which is placed in the foundation. The privileges of churches established by cannons of the holy fathers and fixed by decrees of the venerable council of Nika cannot be eliminated by any perverse act. Cannot be changed by any innovation. With Christ's help I must render. With Christ's help I must render. This is a very poetic way of citing divine assistance. With Christ's help,

I must Render unwavering service in the faithful uh in faithfully carrying out this task. That's a pretty crazy line. The task has been entrusted to me and it is marked down to my discredit if canonical arrangements set up under the guidance of the Holy Spirit teaching infallibility up and down here guys. uh by the holy fathers at the council of Nika for the governing of the entire church are violated with my convivants May it not be so and if the will of one brother has more weight with me than the common welfare of the Lord's

entire household. >> Amazing. >> That's a crazy line. >> Yep. >> What are your thoughts? Well, there's so much to unpack here. First of all, uh as we expected, he does distinguish between himself, well, between pope and emperor or between Religious and secular. And then he says, notice nothing erected is going to be stable apart from that rock which that which the Lord placed in the foundation. Who's the rock for Pope Leo? it's the pope, right? So, and then he goes on to talk about how the Holy Spirit protects the office of the church of

the of of of and not just the the not just his office, but it protects the office of the bishops as a whole governing for the governing of the entire church are Violated. Oops, I was reading and then you put that. >> Nope, sorry, brother. >> You're good, brother. You're good. governing of the entire church are violated with my convivants, may it not be so. And if the will of one brother has more weight with me than the common welfare of the Lord's entire household. So um Pope Leo is very explicit in the rankings of

how things operate in authority. So he he says that there are Some bishops uh there's bishops, there's patriarchs, and then there's like himself who was the pope. and he he has these like rankings and and there's passages other elsewhere that he writes about these rankings. So it's not just hey everybody's equal. That's that's not anywhere to be found in any of the church fathers that everybody's equal. Everybody's equal in authority, right? That's a novelty. That's an orthob interpretation of the fathers. But There's clearly a distinction of authority between uh bishops, patriarchs, and popes. Those are

the three uh levels of authority. And according to Leo, the highest is the pope. >> Elijah, I want to show you something, man. I think we got exposed, man. Someone exposed us, dude. We're finished. Pack it up, folks. We're done. It's over. Everybody pack it up. Uh Jerry Hulak Hilak. I mean, man, Catholicism started in 10:35. Elijah. Okay. And the great >> Yeah, man. And the great schism where Catholicism emerged from Christianity. Study your history and laugh at yourself. Time out. Doesn't hide the truth, Shame on you. >> Well, I hope Jerry comes and has

a has a cordial conversation with us. Come on. Come on up, Jerry. If you want, we'll >> big man. Come on. Um because this is this is what I was saying earlier and I'm being sarcastic saying this is an Eastern Orthodox because Catholicism didn't exist. I said 1054 but this guy says 1035. >> Yeah, man. >> Um none of these guys are Catholic, but they're using Catholic thought. They're using Catholic ecclesiology. They're using Catholic dogma. But none of them are Catholic. This is All just hogwash. This is all just uh what is it? A Byzantine

flattery. Even though this is a Latin person. >> Come up. Come up, Larry. Come up, Larry. What's his name? Is his name Larry? Come up, Harry. >> Uh, was it Jerry or Larry? >> Whatever. Come up. Hit the link. Come on up. Let's talk about it. >> Yeah, >> whatever. Harry, Larry, Jerry, what does It matter? >> Yeah. I hope he comes up. I I don't think he will. Um I mean, I know his kind, but I hope he proves me wrong. >> Come on, man. You could do it. I don't even know if he's

still here. >> You could do it, man. We believe in you. Okay. Well, let's continue. [sighs] Okay. This is uh Theodore Abuur of Haron on the councils. Man, at this rate, we're going to be here forever. uh the Holy Spirit would not have allowed an error in this matter to issue from the council of St. Peter that is the bishop of Rome and this [clears throat] because the council attributed to him its reflection on controversial matters of religion as we have shown you many times if he were to have allowed this then the Holy Spirit

himself in that he required people to obey the council would be the One who leads people into error that council issued. So before you go on, in other words, we're putting all our eggs in one basket and that basket >> is God. >> Is God. The eggs are are God. So that that's literally what he's saying. So it's so funny cuz like we we'll say something and then we'll quote a church father who is saying exactly what we're saying explicitly, but none of these guys are Catholic, by the way. >> All right. Far far be

it from this Holy Spirit to do that. Right. So I mean I don't think it's pretty self-explanatory. Let's continue guys. Um Elijah indeectability. This is according to mortalium animos article 9 by pope pas 11th. I'm just going to read it or actually if you don't mind brother read it. The teaching authority of the church which in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that Revealed doctrines might remain intact forever and that they might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men. is daily exercised through the Roman pontiff and the bishops

who are in communion with him. >> It's like a proper definition. Short and proper. >> I love it. Yeah. >> Okay. Um is anyone going to come up, guys? >> Oh, I got another Eastern Orthodox Person. Pope St. Bonafice. >> Another Eastern another Eastern Orthodox Pope. >> Okay. Do you want to read it? >> Yeah. Let's let's see what this Eastern Orthodox Pope says. He says the universal ordering of the church at its birth took its origin from the office of blessed Peter se of Rome in which is found both its directing power and its

supreme authority from him Peter as from a source at the time when our religion Was in the stage of growth. All churches received their common order. This much is shown by the injunctions of the council of Nika since it did not venture to make a decree in his regard recognizing that nothing could be added to his Peter's dignity. In fact, it knew that all had been assigned to him by the word of by the word of the Lord. In fact, it knew that all had been assigned to him by the word of the Lord, which

equates to Divine institution. So it is clear that this church, the Roman church is to all churches throughout the world as the head is to the members and that whoever separates himself from it becomes an exile from the Christian religion since he ceases to belong to its fellowship. I hear that some bishops disregarding apostolic right are attempting something new against the very precepts of Christ when they strive to separate themselves from the communion and to speak more Truly from the power of the apostolic sea sea of Rome. I quote this uh my debate I had

with uh with uh Sweden. Um it's >> you call that a debate brother? No, but I mean just to be respectful um this is devastating in so many ways. Number one, it's showing divine institution which Eastern Orthodoxy uh denies for the bishop of Rome. But this Eastern Orthodox pope Uh I believe he was in the fifth century if I'm not mistaken. >> Mhm. 418 415 and on. >> Yeah. He he believed in divine institution of the papacy. Uh universal jurisdiction, right? Um >> indeectability. >> Indeectability obviously, right? Because that's what you're proving here. Uh and

you have to be in communion with Rome to be saved. That's what he's saying, Right? So those who say, "Oh, well, you teach that people have to be committed with Rome to be saved, and then you canonize Polyomos." Well, here's your Eastern Orthodox Pope saying that you have to be in communion with Rome to be saved, right? So, this is not made up by Vatican 1. This is made up by an Eastern Orthodox pope named St. Bonafice in the fifth century. So, take it up with your own saints if you have a problem with that.

>> No, man. You can't do it, Elijah. You can't do it. >> Yeah. Can't do it, man. Over here we got uh Pope Bagius II to the schismatic bishops of uh Istra. This is epistle one called ad delem. All right. This is Pag just a second. I just want to get through these real quick, bro. Um I think we'll stop at the blue today. What do you think? >> Perfect. >> Yeah. Is anyone else in the back? Because I can't see who's in the background. >> No. And if anyone wants to come up like Harry

come up Harry come up. What's his name? Larry. Larry. Larry. We don't even remember your name, man. That's how >> insignificant you are. Come up. >> He's in the chat. I just He said Lo, watch your mouth. That's him, right? >> I don't know. Listen. Come up, man. Click the link. Barry, come up. Barry is Barry. What's his name? He says, well, he says, "I'm in Saudi and it doesn't work for me here." >> That's a lie, bro. There's internet in Saudi Arabia. Come on, Perry. >> Yo, Perry. Come on, Perry. >> Yeah. I don't

know, man. When When you posted that picture of me, I felt like I didn't have internet. [laughter] >> We living in a tent. >> Yeah, exactly. [clears throat] [laughter] >> All right, let's read. All right. >> [clears throat] >> For you know that the Lord proclaims in the gospel, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has desired to have you, that he might sift you as wheat. But I have asked the Father for thee, that thy faith failed not, and thou, being once converted, con confirm thy brethren. Consider most dear ones that the truth could not have lied,

Nor will the faith of Peter be ever be able to be shaken or changed forever. It's a pretty explanatory. What do you think, brother? >> Yeah, I mean they they where where does papal infallibility exists in the first millennium? It's nowhere to be found. It was first uh found in 1054. I I don't I don't know. Like it's just it's just paring each other just Repeating the same talking points. It's like have you read the fathers? It's everywhere. Like here's here's an example. I don't even want to continue reading it. Shall I? Yeah, I'll just

continue. For although the devil desired to sift all the disciples, the Lord testifies that he himself asked for Peter alone and wished the others to be confirmed by Peter. Notice guys what Pope Pelagius II is Doing. Christ confirms Peter and Peter in Christ is the confirmer of the apostles. He's teaching that order that we were talking about earlier. It's but in his own manner of course right from God to his promise and his assistance in his vicor and on to the members. This is the economy and would you agree with that's the economy? >> Yep.

Absolutely. So Pelagius II, Pope Pelagius II is making the same claim. For although the devil desired to sift all the disciples, the Lord testified that he himself asked for Peter alone and wished the others to be confirmed by him. >> Can you um I'm sorry to interrupt, but this is a very funny comment. >> Which one? >> Rosario. >> Which one? Elijah definitely. >> Yeah. >> [laughter] >> Don't do it. >> Yeah, man. I'm gonna make the next thumbnail even worse. He inspired me so much. >> I love it. [laughter] >> All right, let's continue.

uh wish the others to be confirmed by him and to him also in the consideration of a greater love which he showed the Lord before the rest was committed the care of feeding the sheep and to him Also he handed over the keys of the kingdom of heaven upon him he promised to build the church there's the word promise and he testified that the gates of hell would not prevail against it we Rome I should have highlighted this guys we Rome have judged it necessary through our present epistle to exhort with tears that you should

return to the heart of your mother, the church, and to send your satisfaction with regard to the integrity of faith. >> Wow. >> Pretty, you know, I I like what it does that those lines I've highlighted, they're pretty devastating for indeibility. But notice notice how they keep quoting the very passages that Catholics quote to prove the papacy and they quote the same passage passages to prove the authority of the bishop of Rome. >> They all had the Peter syndrome just like we did. These Eastern Orthodox Popes >> flattery, bro. >> Flattery. Latin flattery. >> Latin

flattery. What about this guy over here? Is this going to be Latin flattery? Uh St. Theodore the stud of Constantinople to Necratus. Necratios. You want to read this one, brother? >> Yeah. Uh, I witness now before God and men, they have torn themselves away from the body of Christ. From the supreme sea, sea of Rome, in which Christ placed The keys of the faith against which the gates of hell, I mean the mouths of heretics, have not prevailed, and never will until the consummation according to the promise of him who cannot lie. Let the most

blessed and apos apostolic pope Pascal rejoice therefore for he has fulfilled the work of Peter and I quoted this one as well with uh with with Sweden. Um [snorts] notice that like there's so much in These quotes where they say where where is the Vatican one papacy in church? Where is it in the first millennia? Where's papal infallibility? What do you want these fathers to say in order for that to be evidence for papal infallibility or primacy? Like what what do you want them to say? What kind of evidence are you looking for? Like that's

what I that's what boggles my mind. Maybe because I've read the fathers and I know like what they say is Very explicit. So when people say, "Oh, it's nowhere to be found." It drives me insane. And I always ask, "What counts as evidence for you so that I can go and get it for you?" Because I know it's there. It's everywhere. So just tell me what counts as evidence to you. Right? That's the question that I have for them. Um and a lot of them say nothing would count as evidence because it's not a true

doctrine. So they already assume that it's not true. They've already Determined it. Right. And are we noticing everybody in the comments a trend here? How I'm going to be stressing that economy, Elijah, because it it's the understanding of paper minimalism. That economy, right? >> Yeah. Uh, are we understanding what's going on here, guys? [snorts] It's it's it's all over the place. It's all over the place, guys. I'm going to we're going to continue Showing you that it's all over the place. There's an economy. There's a specific manner in which this is meant to be understood.

>> Yeah. >> Whether you're an eastern, whether you're from Jerusalem, whether you're from Rome, you know, um, >> consistent. Look over here. Say Maximus the confessor to the abbott Theasios About the Roman prelets. >> Yeah. >> Do you want to read this one? >> Yep. [clears throat] >> Go on full screen because it's a little bit smaller than the others. >> I'm used to reading the small letters. You know how my slides are. >> Yeah, brother. I galacoma. Go ahead. [laughter] Oh, you got to ruin my eyes, man. >> Exactly. Uh, all right. Let's see.

So, For in faith he who is weak waxes exceedingly strong, and the gent gentlest of warriors emerges supreme. How much more is this the case with the church and clergy of Rome which from of old up to this time as the eldest of all the churches under the sun has the preeminence overall having undoubtedly obtained this canonically both from the councils and from the apostles as well as from their supreme principality because of the eminence of her Pontificate she is not bound to produce any writing ings or senotical letters, just as in these matters all

are subject to her in accordance with priestly law. Having thus by these words shown no fear, but having disputed with the clergy of the imperial city with all holy and becoming assurance as firm ministers of the truly solid and immovable rock, that is the greatest apostolic church. They seemed to calm them down, and preserving humility and Simplicity, they acted with prudence, making known to them at the beginning the firmness and orthodoxy of their faith. >> I mean, maybe he's lying. Lord, forgive me. Maybe he's lying, bro. You think maybe it's just flattery flattery? What do

you think? >> Uh, I think I heard a Well, I didn't say new. I wouldn't say new one, but I was going back and forth today with Craig Truly on Twitter and I quoted >> St. Maximus the confessor. It wasn't this quote and he said St. Maximus was just being pmical. >> Huh? >> He he was >> against the East then because I don't see Paul PMICS here against the Pope. I'm confused. So the quote that I that I provided showed that he believed that Rome had divine institution and that it had Infallibility so to

speak. And Quig Julia said he that he was just being pmical because at the time Rome was the only Orthodox sea which is question begging to me. Of course it's the only Orthodox sea. That's the point. it will always be at least not either by itself the only orthodoxy or on the right side of history right so [clears throat] that okay so that means that there's nothing that we could Show that would prove the papacy because there's always going to be some sort of sophistry sprinkled in there as to why they say these things oh

they say this they say these things because they're trying to get something out of the pope they say these things because the pope was the only orthodox uh he because he was the only Orthodox patriarch at the time. Okay. So then then then what can I show? If quotes and words are not enough and You're just going to put assumptions and intentions into their hearts that are not there that you're just going to assume that and there's nothing I could show you that's going to prove the papacy to you. You've already made up your mind

that no matter what you see, you're going to explain it away with sophistry. Right. [snorts] >> Right. So This is the uh idea of supremacy. We're at supremacy, guys. We have this and two more slides and then we'll probably end for the day. Um literally only touched on the blue segment today, right Elijah? >> Yep. >> We can actually make this into one, two, three, three shows just for every color. blue, green, and red. Up to you. >> Look, let me let me tell you how stupid I am. I just realized that your colors Are

matching. Like when you quote in your like you quote blue, it's going with this slide's colors. >> Well, you're not stupid. I I I >> I didn't know that. That's actually really cool. >> I do that for the for everyone to understand, right, bro? to be honest >> to give him a very good uh >> and are you guys understanding because apparently I did it for your understanding and the guy who knows more Than pretty much everyone on this topic didn't understand so now I'm worried so [laughter] does the color coding work for you guys

>> it so I was like I'm like reading your quotes and I'm like I wonder what what logic there is or what method of madness there is to the colors that he's using and I just realized that there There is a method to your madness. I love it. >> Okay. Cuz I want I want people to get it right. I want them to understand how to Compartmentalize these notions that are in a weird way factoids. >> Yeah. >> The papacy is the fact. These are like factoids there there in present, >> right? >> You know,

I want you to be able to compartmentalize it. have a mental imagery of that downward economy and that upward economy and cooperation and how to understand each notion carefully. Uh man I failed guys I failed. I have People saying to be honest I didn't know uh sometimes the color are not explained beforehand. The guy I explained it beforehand >> must have zoned out. >> Okay. I don't know man. See look I'll give him a quick little >> like I'll just go you know like what show them >> to show them. Boom. You know >> this

is inspired right here. This is Inspired. >> Which one? >> It's a masterpiece. This is these slides. These are These are masterpieces. >> These are masterpieces. >> Andy, I'mma get you back. Andy, don't worry. Persuaded apologetics. Okay, I'mma get you back. Don't worry. [laughter] But for the precious salvation, not only of the east, but of three parts almost Of inhabited world, redeemed [clears throat] not with corruptible gold or silver, but with the uh precious blood of the lamb of God, according to the doctrine of the blessed prince of the glorious apostles, who see Christ, the

good shepherd, has entrusted to your blessedness, that's uh Pope Simus, you have not only uh received the power of binding, but also the that of loosing in accordance with the example of the master those who long Have been in bonds not only the power of uprooting or destroying but also that of planting and rebuilding as Jeremiah or rather as Jesus of whom Jeremiah was the type citing Jeremiah 1 verse 7 to2 if my memory serves correct [clears throat] you are not ignorance of this mal you are not ignorant of this malice whom You whom Peter

your blessed doctor teaches always the shepherd not by violence but by an authority fully accepted the sheep of Christ which are entrusted To you in all the habitable habitable world. We urge you then to tear up this new decree that weighs over us as Jesus Christ, our our savior, but also our head tore up the old one on the cross. What do you think, brother? So, um I noticed that you quoted from Butler in Karafi, >> right? >> Um I just remembered I've been talking to Karafi. um today and he's going to come on and

and I'll comment on this in a little bit. I just wanted to to mention he's going to come on to William show uh with with me and he's going to go over the um the Arabic cannons of Council of Nika. >> I have them. >> Yeah. So, it's it's he he talks about them in his book. It's on page 500 and something in his book. Um, I think 575. I can't wait for that show because I'm gonna be like a student just listening to him because those are very underrated and I don't know why we

don't utilize those >> because they're the Trullia of the world are going to site that they're eighth century retro versions, 9th century retro versions. >> Well, he has something up his sleeve. So, that's why that's why I can't wait to see what he has to say. according I Mean as far as this goes um notice here where he says which are entrusted to you the sheep of Christ which are entrusted to you okay so that's an illusion to the pope has the duty to govern right so if if someone something is entrusted to me it's

under my responsibility to take care of it right and if if I I encourage encourage folks to read Pope John Paul II's utum sit the encyclical if you want To understand how the papacy the authority works and is supposed to work you read that encyclical because what we are accused of is the papacy is a lorded over type of papacy lorded over type type of authority I should say >> right >> but it's it's a service it's a service type of authority so the pope is the servant of the servants of God. That's his official

title. And so he is to serve. So when he sees a patriarch Teaching heresy, it's a service to the church to step in and deal with it. It's not a lord it over. It's to take care of the flock that that patriarch is responsible for. If he's teaching heresy and that novelty like Ntorius was teaching, Pope Celestine can step in and say, "Hey, Ntorius, you are teaching heresy. You have 10 days to repent or else I'm going to kick you out of the church universal, excommunicate you." That's a duty of His. That's an authority that's

of service. It's not a lorded over because I know better than you or because I have more power than you, I can do this. That's a false way of understanding the papacy. It's a service of for the church. So the flock that is entrusted to the patriarch of Constantinople are being led astray. The pope has a responsibility to step in and say no more. You're out. Right? So read that encyclical. Very good uh encyclical. Uh let's continue over here. We have St. Sirill of Alex. >> This one is an oriental Orthodox saint or bishop. So

>> saint and bishop and pillar of Orthodoxy and champion of Ephesus. Yes. >> Yeah. This guy is not Eastern Orthodox. This is Oriental Orthodox. So >> please make sure people know you're joking, brother. [laughter] Yeah. Before you throw them off, please. >> They're like, >> don't worry. They understand perfectly because of the colors that we're using here, >> man. You're you're okay. I'm never Next, guys. You're going to have the most boring slides. Just white with black words. >> Now, let me let me just say this. I wasn't joking about this being genius and a

masterpiece. That wasn't a joke. I love that you did the color thing. I Didn't know that that's what you did. And once I found out, I was like, "This guy is like, this is really cool. This guy's smart. I love that you did that." So, I'm joking. like I think you should continue doing these color things because I can look at the slides and then see what you color coded and I can go back to the slide with the colors and say, "Okay, so this is what he's trying to prove. This connects to this." I'm

I'm joking about this being Ridiculous. This is actually really cool. I'm going to probably start doing this myself. >> I just wanted like again it's a not an easy we might call it minimalism, but it's not >> Yeah. >> simplistic. Right. >> Right. Right. >> Yeah. All right. So this is sirill uh pretty famous serial sends greetings uh this is um let me just read it appeals To pope uh for a decree regarding the stories of Constantinople. Yeah. >> Seral sense greetings. It would be more agreeable if we could keep silence, but God demands of

us vigilance and ancient church custom. It's a key word. Requires me to inform your holiness. Guys, ancient church custom in 431. >> I don't know what that means. Uh >> I love that. I was unwilling openly to Sever communion with him until I laid these facts before you. He's restricting judgment because he has to wait until Celestine approves guys. [snorts] >> Yep. Dane therefore to decide or decree what seems right whether we ought to communicate at all with him or to tell him plainly that no one communicates with the person who holds and teaches what

he does. Further, The purpose or pol policy of your holiness ought to be made known by a letter to the most religious and god-loving bishops of Macedonia and to all the bishops of the east. For we shall then give them according to their desire the opportunity of standing together in unity of soul and mind and lead them in to content earnestly for the orthodox faith which is being attacked. >> I like the uh Jojo there. Hope Jerry is not colorblind. >> Well, Jerry's sister. Yeah, I'm not I got to be nice, man. I gotta be

nice. You got to stop me, Elijah. Don't let me say the next statements. Stop. >> Well done, brother. Well done. >> Thank you. >> Okay. So, what do you say of this? >> What do I say to this? >> Self-explanatory. >> Uh, kind of. Do you mind if I unpack it Real quick? >> Yeah. No, that's why you're here, brother. >> Um, so Craig Trullia, uh, he writes about this in his book and he says, >> horrible book >> that, uh, I'm going through it. Uh, you know, I'm going through it. God willing, I'll be

responding to some of it. But um but he he says that because the whole church agreed with the excommunication that it's it's a consilier infallibility So to speak or consiliarism, right? It's not just the pope alone, right? This right here like the whole the whole situation of Pope Celestine, Serial and uh Notorious is the minimalist position played out explicitly beautifully, right? Because the minimalist position is that the pope can do something as far as his authority goes. By his authority, by my authority of Peter and Paul, by my sea, my my authority, I can do

this. I can excommunicate Another patriarch. However, the minimalist position is that that act has behind it the mind of the church. And so here he says, "For we shall then give them according to their desire the opportunity of standing together in unity of soul and mind together." So just because the pope is doing something in his own authority doesn't mean he's the only one who believes what he's doing. >> Right? >> So that's the minimalist position. That's not consiliarism. Consiliarism doesn't see a pope acting in his own name, excommunicating another patriarch in his own name.

Right? It's no one else's name but himself. It's the pope's authority, the sea of Rome as excommunicating from the universal church the patriarch of Constantinople who was a highranking patriarch Plet. Where is that ecclesiology where a pope or anybody can excommunicate another Patriarch from the church? It's not a just a separation between the pope of Rome and the Constantinople patriarch. It's not just that. It's not one of those things. He is kicking him out of the church as a whole. Like this is a universal excommunication. Everyone must recognize this. That's why he says further the

purpose or policy of your holiness ought to be made known by letter to the most religious and god-loving bishops of Macedonia and to all bishops of the east. Why is he saying that? There's a reason. Because it's like, hey, you guys need to know that you can have no communion with this guy because the bishop of Rome excommunicated him, >> right? I I think it's perfectly said. We have one person backstage, Elijah. We're going to read the last quote and then we're going to bring up uh the sister Ari. >> Okay. >> Who's going to

have a question? [snorts] [clears throat] Uh now this is Pope Galatius to Emperor Anastasios on the on the summit of authority in the world. [snorts] Okay. Now I want everyone to understand that this is a pope talking to an emperor. Guys, so when you read this, read it in context. I'll read it. Elijah, feel free to stop me. >> Yeah, go ahead. If it is fitting that the hearts of the faithful show submission to a universal gathering of priests rightly handling divine things, how much more should consent be given to the bishop of that sea

which the supreme divinity both will to be preeminent over other priests. This is devastating and the universal church's subsequent piety has continually celebrated In every Christian century. The authority of the apostolic sea has been in charge of the universal church and is confirmed both by the series of cannons of the fathers and by a manifold tradition. Wow. I think that hits everything we're talking about, right? >> Yeah. A lot of these quotes hit multiple things, right? It's not just, hey, we're going to prove infallibility here. We're Going to prove divine institution here. A lot of

these quotes are just packed with so much of what Vatican 1 is getting at and what the Catholic Church is getting at. Right? So in every Christian century, the authority of the apostolic has been in charge of the universal church. That's universal jurisdiction >> right there. >> And is confirmed by both by the series of cannons of the fathers and by a Manifold tradition. Okay. So, let's let's talk about something here um real quick because this is very important. What I what I hear the objections are, "Oh, well, this is just a pope. You can't

quote a pope because of course they're going to say this about their authority." But hold on, this is not just a pope. I I don't think this is a saint in the Eastern Orthodox. I don't think they accept Galatia as a saint. But we can we Can look at other saints who say more explicit things than these who are saints in their Eastern Orthodox church and even in oriental Orthodox churches. So it's it's it's unfair to say, "Oh, it's a pope, so you can't use him." No, this is not just a pope. This is a

Eastern Orthodox bishop. >> This is a you know, this is a bishop in your own church. This is from your own patrimony. We're quoting from your own Petristics. These are your people apparently, right? I don't think they are, but I'm saying that's from their perspective. So, you can't say, "Oh, you can't use the popes." In addition to that, we have Eastern Christians that you've quoted that speak in similar manner about the popes. So, what's left? What else do we need to show? Um, the other thing I I hear is, uh, well, the East didn't accept

the authority of what these popes are Making. >> Sure. Right. And that's just hogwash. >> Well, you know what? We didn't We only got through what, brother? 18 slides in two hours. >> Oh, wow. It's only 18. >> Yeah, brother. We haven't touched the green section yet. I'm going to go over the color coding for you again. Okay. >> Cuz apparently apparently you didn't get it. So, [laughter] >> I really fa I really failed, guys. I Failed. >> Yeah, that's okay. So the blue guys, we just went over what is guaranteed by the Lord's promise.

That's all we did today. What is guaranteed? So and when you know like the typical question like hey Elijah is the pope himself infallible himself. >> Yeah. >> What's your answer now when you see this chart and how you understand it today? Can we give them an answer? What's your Answer for that? >> The answer is no. He's only infallible by virtue of the Lord's promise. >> Yes. >> Right. So, you understand why we did we're doing this, guys, right? Because we want you to be able to answer these questions in the most specific way.

>> They they want you to trip up on those words. They want you to say, "Yes, the Pope is infallible." They want you to Provide no qualifications. They want you to make a statement which seemingly presents the pope as an autocrat. >> Yep. [snorts] >> They want to trap you. >> Now when they ask where does infallibility what is infallibility is proper to his promise in which the pope cooperates in >> Yep. >> by virtue of his divinely uh assisted office. Easy. You guys know how to answer every question now just with this chart. But

we're going to give you the evidences when we go forward in the green section. I'm going to show like a little bit, you know, I'll just give them a little, you know, I'm going show them how I changed the color in the green section. Right. >> There you go. >> So, I it's it's kind of I don't I failed, you know. Thank you, Elijah. You Made me self-conscious. I appreciate it, brother. >> Well, did you mention that in the beginning? No, I think like three times. >> Oh, you did? Okay. Wow. [laughter] >> Let's Let's

ask [gasps] Okay, let's bring up uh the sister Ari. >> So then we failed not listening. [laughter] [gasps] >> I love it. >> That's hilarious. >> It's Elijah Farquad. [laughter] >> I had [clears throat] to I had to. >> Oh, I like Listen, I I troll William all the time, so I had to do it. >> We should use that one on the next one. >> I will. Yeah, >> it's your finish, sister. Put it in the group chat and then I'll use it. >> Yes. >> Okay. Absolutely. I will. Um Yeah. I was going

to do one on James, but I couldn't find any pictures of him cuz Yeah. >> But >> but anyways, my my question my question is for Elijah is um was there strong a defense from the Bible to prove the papacy? But I'm talking about evidence that it's only that we're only supposed to be under a leadership like the pope and not a group like the orient claim because they like to use um one Peter 5 verse 1 to3 to say that you know they they they have their own bishop patriarchs or whatever. So what would

You use from the Bible to to dis to I guess to to prove that it's it's only supposed to be one? So that's a good question and it doesn't matter what I would use, right? Who cares what Elijah would use? But over and over and over in in these slides, the fathers of the church themselves to prove the authority of the pope use three passages. And if you can go to that slide if you don't mind where you have the scriptures. Um >> Oh yes, the blue one. >> Yeah, the blue one for sure. That

blue one. The blue one, huh? Are you sure? >> The blue. >> Actually, I have a lot of a lot of scripture in the other colors. Oh, >> okay. Well, let's do the blue ones. Um, and why are these notifications popping up from my YouTube? X out. X out. Okay. Okay. So here's here's what the fathers and if you if you go back um Ari and and listen to the quotes that we're quoting They were consistently quoting from these three passages not Ephesians but Matthew 16, John 21 and Luke 22 to single out Peter. And

you notice something about the fathers they take the scriptures very seriously. So the fact that Christ singled out Peter in these three passages is where the authority comes from of singling out Peter from the apostles of having a unique authority amongst the 12. Right? It's not equal authority. It's a unique authority. It's a authority of responsibility that he has over the other apostles so that divisions may not arise. Right? That's what they say. There's a head of the 12. They say there's a head. So, how could they be equal if the fathers of the church

are taking these passages saying they're saying that there's 12 apostles and Christ set out one as the head? If you have one as the head then they're not equal anymore. So that divisions may Not arise. And his point is if they were equal all 12 of them then divisions would arise because then you look to which head when six disagree with the other six. So which head do you look to? So according to the logic of the fathers, Christ set out one as the head so that you look to that one head. When divisions are

there so that when you know you're looking at two sides, you're like, I don't know which one's right, which one's wrong. Christ set up a Office to say look to this petrine sea and that's where you'll know where the truth is. Right? So let's unpack these. So Matthew 16, it's Christ giving this authority to Peter alone, right? He says, "You are Peter and on this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades or hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven and whatever you

bind on earth will be bound in heaven. Whatever you loose on earth will be Loosed in heaven." That's what he tells Peter. He says that to him alone, right? He gives him the keys alone. He is the rock alone, right? in so far as that passage John 21 uh is about feeding the sheep or feeding the lambs. Feed my lambs. Second time, do you love me? He said yes I Lord do you know you know that I love you? He says feed my sheep. And then he says the third time feed my sheep. Right? So

this is what they use to prove universal Jurisdiction. This feeding of sheep is the responsibility that the pope has over his flock and his flock being the church universal. So they use John 21 to show that the pope has this jurisdiction and unique to himself because this was said to no one else but Peter. Okay. Matthew 16 is used to show that that Peter has the keys and he can open and shut with those keys. He has the authority over the over the the the church. John 21 shows that he has Universal jurisdiction. This is

distinct from infallibility. Where do they get infallibility from? Obviously from Matthew 16 as well because whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven. Whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. That's infallibility. What what you say is true. That's what he's saying >> because because So hold on. Can I object to that? >> Sure. Sure. Cuz I also cuz I've also Heard I've also I've seen them use Matthew 8:18. >> Yes. >> I've seen them also use um Ephesians >> uh chapter 1 verse 22- 23. >> Yep. >> And then um

Acts 15 um Acts 15 6-19. >> Yeah. [clears throat] >> So >> Okay, sister. >> Let me just comment. Go ahead, brother. Go ahead. >> No, no, go ahead. Yeah, I'll go after you. Um, so, so real quick, so I I was actually going to allude and this is why if you go back to the those passages, I I was going to allude to that because I I was getting to that point that you're asking because I knew that was going to be your next question. Um, is that Matthew 18, right? And this >> they're

next to each other right here. A brother 16 and uh 18. Matthew 16. So if you want to use it there, >> this this only makes sense in Catholic ecclesiology because Catholic ecclesiology is the only ecclesiology that has both the authority of the bishops together. So when you you were quoting passages that show that the bishops are have authority or that all the apostles have authority or the apostles are the foundations or whatever you want to bring to the table, we would say amen to Acts 15 collegial. It's a it's a council that they held

Collegially. Amen, sister. Like, this is what we believe. We have this ecclesiology. We have councils. Our ecclesiology isn't pope alone all the time. What I'm trying to show you is that there's a distinction here because in Matthew 16, Peter is singled out. That's the papacy. In Matthew 18, all the apostles are there. That's collegiality. We have both in our church. They don't have both. So, but then what are you going to say when when We quote John 21 where he singles out Peter here and there's nowhere else where he includes all the apostles and saying

feed my sheep feed my lambs tend my sheep even though they have that responsibility in their dascese all the bishops have that responsibility but Peter alone or the bishop of Rome uh who's a successor of Peter alone has a responsibility in the whole church right and then you get to Luke 22 and that is also Peter alone. Where else is he Saying this to the apostles? So again, there's two two things happening. The papacy, which is singling out Peter. He has a unique authority to govern. And then you have the collegiality passages. So as Catholics,

we say amen to both. As oriental Orthodox, you can't say amen to both because there is no ecclesiology where there's one patriarch or one bishop that governs the church. But the fathers that we're quoting are using these passages to show the uniqueness of Peter and his successors. So now let's look at Luke 22 real quick. And I assigned to you as my father assigned to me kingdom that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on the thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel. Simon, Simon, Behold, Satan demanded to have

you that he might sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail may not fail. So they take those passage that passage the fathers and they say because his faith May not fail that means infallibility for the sea of Rome. That's what they say. We read these quotes today like that's what brother James uh has in his slides here. And when you have turned again strengthen your brethren. So how can Peter strengthen his brethren? He strengthens his brethren according to the fathers in these passages by teaching. when when

divisions arise in the church they look to the pope to strengthen his brethren and so that's Why when they when divisions arise the patriarchs will write to the pope to solve the matter right that's why what we write to you say serial writing to pope celestine what should I do should I have communion with him what say you you tell me so these this is only this is only existing in our ecclesiology and I dare anyone to show me a father where it takes Luke 22 or John 21 and applies it to all the bishops,

right? Or even Matthew 16, it's it's mostly used for Singling out the bishop of Rome. But you can use Matthew 16 to say all the bishops have that authority, but only in their local dascese. It's only singled out as a responsibility of universal jurisdiction for the bishop of Rome. Does that does that make sense? >> Yes, that that does make sense. Oh, anyways, and again, I'm not I'm not asking for me. I'm just I just wanted to play heretic today and just um [laughter] >> people cuz I know a lot of people always about the

oriental view and the Catholic view >> and all stuff. So I decided what's up? >> I want to show you over here Acts 15:7. And after that there had been much debate. Peter rose and said to them, "Brother, you know." Oh, what happened to her? Did she drop? >> Looks like it. Yeah. >> Yeah. [gasps] In the early days, God made choice among you. She's back. Uh That by my mouth, the Gentiles should hear the words of the gospel and believe. Okay. So, first thing, sister, that you need to understand is that he says by

my mouth. That's a very odd statement if you guys ask me. By my mouth. What do you think about that one? Uh Elijah, why does he say by my mouth? It's funny what the fathers say, sister. >> Yeah. >> Because everything that we taught Tonight, I'm just going to keep showing you some cool stuff just from Acts 15 alone. Okay? Because over here we find that in Acts 15, Ari, the Holy Spirit is protecting. For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon no greater burden than these necessary things. The

Holy Spirit is active in the council just like what we've been teaching all day, guys. Now here's the thing is that brethren Simeon has related Acts 15 11-14 Ari St. James stands up and he does not moniker Peter. I don't know where she went. He does not moniker Peter in his converted name. He actually monikers Peter in his Seemetic name. Interestingly enough, every other verse calls him Peter except that verse in Acts 15, >> right? >> Because the topic of the conflict was Judaizing. >> So why not appeal to St. Peter as Simeon In a

semite sense, right? >> Yep. >> Y >> now why I want to say that that's important because of Acts 16:4. St. James confirms what is uttered by Peter. The very same thing Peter says that it is by his mouth where it was pleasing to the Holy Spirit in acts 16:4 Ari says that Peter delivered a dogma Dogmata Acts 15 teaches that Peter utters something James confirms what Peter utters and we thereafter learn that what Peter uttered was a dogma. >> Yeah. And and and brother, if you don't mind, can you highlight a comment that needs

to be noted by Manuel Paloo? >> Paleologos. Yeah, there you go. >> Okay, this is very important. Um in Luke 22, which is the passage we just read, our Lord says that Satan demanded to have you. So when it says you here, it's plural, >> right? >> So So let's read it in in a country. Satan demanded to have y'all that he might sift y'all like wheat, but I have prayed for you alone. >> Yeehaw. >> What? >> Right. >> Right. Sorry, I had >> No, you're good. I like your Indian accent a little better,

but >> Okay. Okay. >> But I have to say, [laughter] poor Mark, man. Poor Mark. I love Mark. Um, [laughter] but notice notice >> what are you doing? >> Notice the the the juxosition like y'all y'all and then you. So the the y'all is the negative, but he prays for you, right? That your faith may not fail and When you have turned again, strengthen your brethren. There these are the passages that show people infallibility according to the fathers. Again I I started this question answering this question by saying who cares what I have to say?

Who cares what I have to quote? We have the fathers who quote these passages to show the uniqueness of the authority of the bishop of Rome. That's where they go to. So that's where we go to. >> All right. All right. Well, I hope you guys were edified. Um I really do. I I man I I I thank you so much Elijah for coming here. We went a little longer than two hours. I usually have a strict two-hour cut off but this was pretty good man. And >> I think this could be like something of

a of a really good angle. I almost feel like if if the enemies of the faith watch this, they might just convert or want to debate you on, you know, Steelmans instead of straw mans. Um, >> I think if they watch this, they they won't want to debate even more because what we're presenting is very strong. But what can you say to this? And I think this is why they won't debate is because they know [snorts] what we have at our disposal, right? And then when you mix that with the whole minimalist thing, then it

becomes an irrefutable position. And if anybody thinks it's refutable, then my door is open. Let's Do it. Thank you for for having me here, James, by the way. I appreciate it. It doesn't feel like two and a half, two, two hours and 15 minutes at all. >> We always have good shows, you and I, man. They're always very enjoyable. >> Praise the Lord. Um, look, uh, guys, uh, where can we find you, Elijah? Um, sorry, let me cut you off real quick. Sorry. Can the mods put my email in the chat? Divine Mercy [email protected]. Anyone

who is in need of today's slides, not giving you the green, I'm not giving you the red. I'm not giving you the purple. I'm not giving you yellow. Only the blue. If anyone is in need of today's slides, just email me. I think everyone that emailed me for the last slides, they got them right away. The moment I saw the emails, I responded. If you guys can confirm um Uh that you received them, that would be great. Okay, so Elijah, where can we find you, man? Mods, get to working. Like Elijah's uh links, please put

them in the chat. Uh this guy needs more followers. Um so yeah, go ahead, brother. >> Yeah. Yeah. Uh, if you just type in Elijah Yasi on on YouTube, my channel should pop up. It's called Underground Catholicism. Um, I got some shows coming up. I haven't posted them yet, but I have some really really good stuff coming up against Obby Petrus, Craig Trullia, hopefully Jay Dyer. Um, going against uh Craig Julia's book, some shows that he's done. Um and again like let's let's just deal with the arguments and not attack um the apologists, right? Let's

just let's just do that, right? That that's that's all we ask. And if we're going to have debates, Uh let's be cordial. Let's be respectful. All that stuff. Let's remember that Christ spirit, right? That's that's what we have to remember. And instead of being arrogant and trying to humiliate each other, right? Yeah. Okay. Well, uh, guys, is there any way they can support you? How do they how do the the people support you, Elijah? >> Uh, just pray just pray for me. Just pray for me. Pray for my family. Um, Pray that I have more

time to do to do stuff like this because I own a business and it's I have three kids. I have a wife and it's just difficult. And two persons, >> two persons, right? That helps a little bit because you know right now one of me is sleeping sleeping. [laughter] [gasps] >> Oh man. [clears throat] Oh man. [laughter] Okay. I don't It's It's not good when I make myself laugh this much this much. [laughter] >> All right. All right. Uh guys, um I'm I'm going to mention I'm I'm officially I've discerned for over a year about

uh going full-time. Uh I will be going full-time in ministry, which means and you guys are seeing a trend. I've I've gone live like [snorts] four times in the last five Days. Um and I will be continuing this trend. I will be going live tomorrow night uh on another topic. Most likely be reviewing Williams uh cross exam with that uh Nadir who blasphemed too much and therefore his Allah and his Muhammad are in hell and because he blasphemed I will say that I will step on Allah. Um sorry that's very rude of me Elijah. I

know you're probably not used to that kind of language. Um, But yeah. [laughter] Um, so if you guys find it in your heart to donate, there's some QR code on the page on the screen here. Scan them. Do what you got to do. Our boy Mania has putting uh the links and God bless you and I love you guys and thank you for everything. >> Um, >> God bless you. [clears throat] Brother, you want to start this time the hour of Father? >> Yes. >> Did you do the Our Father last? >> I did the

Our Father. >> I will do the Our Father. Yes. I will do the Our Father. This time you can do the Hail Mary. >> Sure. >> Okay. In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen. Our [clears throat] Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed be thy name, thy kingdom come, and thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those

who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from all evil. Amen. >> Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, mother of God, pray For us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen. In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen. [clears throat and sighs] I just want to remind everyone that

Giovani consumes chicken blood every single day. Okay, that's all I want to say. Pax Christy Omnibus. [music] Oh, there was many. [singing] [singing] >> [music] [singing] [music] [music] >> We are Yeah. [music] [music] >> [music] >> to all the Sh. Salvagina.