It's turning out that the Eastern Orthodox are emotionally serious without being intellectually serious.

So many Catholic W’s I can’t keep track of them all

@Nick-ij5nt

28 күн бұрын

Is praying in Mosques with Muslims a "Catholic W"?

I can't believe this is so hard for people to grasp. The fact that language points to things that have a quality only in a relational context (up, down, left, right, light, darkness, father, brother, son, even words like roof point to a relational reality since a roof is called that only in relation to the whole architectural structure), I really don't get how is it so hard to understand that if in the natural world we have this reality in a temporal and material way that the cause of this very reality will be given by someone who is substantial relations instead of accidental relations or monolithic distinctions or modalist distinctions, just silly to me. Thank you for your work brother.

@AprendeMovimiento

Ай бұрын

@@FirstActualitya hypostasis in the Trinity is the substantial relation, in Latin you can understand this better since hypostasis means suppositum, in a suppositum you have qualities that are deposited in the suppositum, so the hypostasis is a union of qualities, in Christ suppositum you have divinity and humanity deposited in it, and in the divine persons you have the other relations deposited in each suppositum, so the only true distinction is relational and not in modes of being or acting since that would bring about modalism, that Father does the same thing that the Son does, only with a relational difference, meaning that is the Father doing that thing and not the Son nor the Holy Spirit, but the activity is one and the same, since God is just one pure act and not three acts.

@planteruines5619

Ай бұрын

so , are we talking about communal ontology

This is maybe the best video on filioque. The video makes it all make sense. It's mind blowing. The depth of the doctrine of the trinity. So beautiful. I sound like a clueless person. But I am at awe. Thank Godnfor Wagner digging old Latin book.

3:53 Total Jesuit Victory

This is the best video I've ever seen you do. Very clear explanation of relations of opposition, and your the use of Aristotelian terms, to show how the early Greek Fathers implicitly accepted the relations as the distinguishing marks in the Divine Persons, was excellent. The only thing I'd add is that it's sometimes helpful to contrast relations of opposition with reflexive relations, such as "identical to", which are not of opposition.

" Nah but Essence and Energies are really distinct like the persons of the trinity are really distinct, bro." "Nous, bro."

@TheChunkyCrusader

Ай бұрын

Which means they introduce infinite realities in God as the essence (rejection of true divine simplicity), energies, and persons are really distinct from each other in the Godhead introducing more than 3 "realities" in the Godhead

@Kevin5279

23 күн бұрын

​@@TheChunkyCrusader how's it going brother Kyle. Long time no see. Looks like we both migrated from Lofton's channel. Hope all's fine with ya

@TheChunkyCrusader

23 күн бұрын

@@Kevin5279 I'm doing fine. Hope you and Arthur are doing well. Honestly, haven't had the time to watch Lofton due to school and work, but I'm watching him a tiny bit more

So goated so fire like always. Ave Christus Rex et ave Maria, mater Dei.

Eastern Orthodox will deny basic doctrines found in both east and west (such as Filioque) then point to outliers to make their case. Pray for them.

@user-pu3ky1re7e

17 күн бұрын

God will not hear your satanic prayers

@hap1678

17 күн бұрын

@@user-pu3ky1re7e Ask God to humble your heart and to touch you with his grace and you will see the truth.

@UNITDW

11 күн бұрын

@@user-pu3ky1re7e be quiet schismatic heretic

@phylocybe_

2 күн бұрын

@@user-pu3ky1re7e” said the schismatic.

@user-pu3ky1re7e

2 күн бұрын

FILIOQUE IS THE BIGGEST BLASPHEMOUS HERESY AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT.

Was reading a part of Gregory of Nyssa's Contra Eunomius the other day and I took away three things: 1. Father's constitutive property is that He begets the Son 2. Gregory of Nyssa destroys Dyers critique of the same act not being able to do different things in God (e.g. create and destroy), St. Gregory of Nyssa refutes him with examples of same hand movement doing different works and other great examples. 3. Eunomius actually held to a kind of essence energy distinction which while maybe not identical is certainly much closer to EO neopalamism than anything the Cappadocians taught.

Oh no, are you saying that just as Rabbinic Judaism was re-formed against Jesus Christ, so Eastern Orthodoxy was re-formed against Rome? Both with contempt for their origins and traditions? How rude.

@harleymann2086

Ай бұрын

Interesting insight as to what is going on in the psychology of EO. Certainly worth of consideration.

@dailyDorc

29 күн бұрын

Honestly, the universal opposition to Catholicism is astounding sometimes. Like I've seen Protestants and Orthodox side with each other in their dislike of Catholicism, and it's like, wait a minute....

@john-paulgies4313

29 күн бұрын

Juda vs Israel.

@BryanKirch

24 күн бұрын

The EO missed The Church the same way the Jews missed Jesus. Proof that Jesus was the Messiah was that he conquered Rome and replaced it with his Church. The EO react identical to the Papacy Exactly as the Jews do towards Christianity. Too proud to watch their younger brothers rule.

@dailyDorc

24 күн бұрын

@@BryanKirch always makes me sad when people don't see the story of Rome for what it is. Christ's triumph over the empire that carried out the sentence

Pray for the Greeks. They emulate the same prideful arrogance as their “saints” such as Mark of Ephesus and Photius.

@mathieuconklin3146

Ай бұрын

Catholics venerate them too lol

@ronanjm

Ай бұрын

@@Twin2241nope

@Kepha3

Ай бұрын

@@Twin2241My Church venerates neither of them. The Eastern Churches shouldn't be venerating them but it's tolerated. I think it's problematic and the Pope should cease this practice in those churches, for they are/were schismatic-heretics and not holy men. Perhaps an argument can be made for Photius who is said to have been rehabilitated, but definitely not the heretic Mark of Ephesus who rejected a legitimate ecumenical council.

@hap1678

Ай бұрын

@@Twin2241 No we do not and they are not saints according to the church. This is kyle level objections, so low tier that it doesn’t even deserve a response but if we want to play this game your church venerates St. Aquinas and St. Francis Xavier and many other post schsim saints. All roads lead to Rome.

@Sicilianus

Ай бұрын

@@Twin2241 can you morons stop saying this

Devastating to Eastern Heterodox

To study the Church Fathers is to reject Eastern Orthodoxy

@dwong9289

Ай бұрын

@@bradleyperry1735 Not at all.

@Testimony_Of_JTF

Ай бұрын

​@@bradleyperry1735I just wanted to warn you in some years you will cringe when remenbering these comments. Take care

@SILLY_BILLY_777

Ай бұрын

​@@bradleyperry1735 they aren't they're genuinely under the delusion that any amount of justifying the filioque will solve the problem of subordination of the Holy Spirit in an essential manner

@dwong9289

Ай бұрын

@@SILLY_BILLY_777If the Son having the productive power subordinates the Holy Spirit. Then under your model the Son and Spirit are subordinated to the Father because He has the productive powers which they lack. If you just spent 10 seconds thinking you can see how bad this objection is 😭

@nit2266

Ай бұрын

@@dwong9289 if the Son has the productive power, then why doesnt the Spirit also have it?

I literally read the SVSPress version of the Five Theological Orations of Saint Gregory the Theologian, and the Trinitarian Chapters of Saint John of Damascus from an Old Translation by the Catholic University of America Press, and both taught Relation of Opposition. They conflate the teaching of these figures, that the Fatherhood, Sonship and Sanctify being not merely relational distinctions but truly a sort of quality of the Hypostasis with meaning that it isn't relational. It's both, held as such by the perfection of each Hypostasis of the Godhead in their nature. This idea that it one or the other to the Eastern Fathers is just absurd. While I am not Thomist and lean towards the Eastern Fathers, such as Saint Maximus, Saint John of Damascus and the Cappadocians, I consistently cringe when I see Eastern Orthodox try and insult the Thomist tradition or just compromise the Eastern Tradition just to own the Latins. It's revolting, and is foreign to even figures like Gregory Palamas, Photius of Constantinople and Mark of Ephesus. Eastern Orthodox Dogmatics has taken the Tradition of the Church to only decide on matters when heretics get it wrong, and warped it to basically means that anything the "heretics" (Catholics) say, they believe the opposite. It's this weird clown Magesterium, which while in the process, rejects views that they formerly held. The Immaculate Conception is the perfect example. The Eastern Orthodox Fathers, from Photius onwards, taught it. There is no debate on this. But as so as the Catholics say it's a Dogma, suddenly a common view of all the Pillars of Orthodoxy is a "Papist Innovation." They would have done this for the Assumption if it wasn't such a major feast of their Calendar.

We're finally getting some anti orthodox stuff. I am tired of their lies and how they slander Christ's true apostolic Catholic church.

@Warspite39

26 күн бұрын

I know right. We Catholics adore god together with the muslims! They need to start praying in mosques also!

@VictoireOuMort

26 күн бұрын

@@Warspite39 Orthodox patriarchs pray with muslims, and the russian ortho churches are subservient to the russian government, which allows islam as a state religion. And after Constantinople was conquered in 1453, the patriarch was literally appointed by the ottoman muslims and their puppet. And we went against what was agreed upon at the council of Florence. But keep coping orth-dog.

You need to do a series of videos going on the offensive against the orthodox position. They constantly force latins to defend their dogma but rarely are on the receiving end themselves. You can’t just let these truculent mouthbreathers attack the papacy constantly, you should be reciprocating the treatment.

Excellent video!

Can you do a video on action and operation in the Cappadocians? It would be helpful to see a thomistic interpretation of the beginning of “on not three Gods” or letter 234

great stuff as always

This was extremely clarifying, thank you.

Hey I just go the book "Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma" by Ludwig Ott. Any thoughts on it?

@Spsz6000

Ай бұрын

👍👍👍

@Mach15-20

Ай бұрын

Very good but not great. He’s not a true thomist.

@igorlopes7589

Ай бұрын

​@@Mach15-20why?

@Mach15-20

Ай бұрын

@@igorlopes7589 He errs on the doctrines of grace and free will. His views are not thomistic.

@igorlopes7589

Ай бұрын

@@Mach15-20 Ott's a molinist??

Hi Wagner may you list all the books quoted from which saints here east and west? So that I can read through their books? Please?😅

I don’t think you are really getting at the same point the EO apologists are talking about. The question is not “do Aristotelean models of how names can refer to relational opposition apply to the names of the persons of the trinity,” like obviously to be father relates to having a son, the question is if that is the primary mode by which the persons are revealed or not? If I say ‘the East’ I’m opposing it to the ‘West’ and implying the object I’m referring to exists in relation, but the intelligibility of the objects in question depends on prior understanding the map and the cardinal directions. Without the map the relation would be meaningless, so the intelligibility of a relational opposition depends on a formal context by which the relation can hold. The EO critique is not that once we all have a map we can understand what East and West mean, the issue is whether we first need the formal context of the single essence of God to make the revealed the persons intelligible. They would posit that we are first revealed the persons and the persons reveal themselves as father, son and spirit. It’s an epistemic priority question, ie does the essence or the hypostases of the persons take first place in the intelligibility of the persons. Once everyone is looking at a map everyone understands what East a West is as an oppositional relation, hence eastern fathers that can in the context of defending agaisnt ariansm or whatever employ the relational content of the names, the question is whether that’s what those things primarily (as in epistemic priority) are. I typed this out on my phone and very tired forgive any errors or clunkiness in explanation.

@john-paulgies4313

29 күн бұрын

When you get a chance, comb through your comment pls and edit it to your satisfaction. I like seeing genuinely sincere and intelligent interactions between perspectives like you're offering. My poor repost (I'm under-educated) is that your way of thinking _seems_ to lack a way of articulating the distinctions between Divine Persons as real rather than merely rational (i.e. Sabellianism?).

@bradspitt3896

28 күн бұрын

Of course no response to this. Another way to put it is in terms of intrinsic and extrinsic properties. Father is only father in relation to a son, but a sole Cause does not have to have an effect, or a source of light does not require something to be illumined for it to be light.

@shepherdson6189

27 күн бұрын

I find this critique a source of circularity on Orthodox arguments as it tries to debunk scholasticism through this epistemic priority as pre requisite to defining these relations of opposition since we all know we all operate in the realm of logic. Some will say that TAG is above logic that is if one is graced with the "nous", but claiming that doesn't even equate one has that grace specially when charity is absent in one's character. Can we honestly say Jay Dyer has the nous or those orthobros who are generous in commenting in a condescending manner about the Catholic faith has it? Defining it as a doctrine doesn't make Orthodox arguments any better than Catholics. The nous is a gift of God to those who are transformed into his image and likeness. Only the Saints might have reached that point. But definitely all of us arguing in this internet space hasn't got to that point. Until such time, God left us a church that can discern through its journey through age and has given us the gift of scholasticism to aid us in knowing Him.

Excellent thumbnails

@krkenheimer

Ай бұрын

it looks like the guy from breaking bad and pewdiepie

@user-tf8zg5ym8x

Ай бұрын

You're referring to Walter White

Agnus Dei

The rizz is strong with this one

That was really good.

Holy spirit proceeds from the Father.

@MilitantThomist

Ай бұрын

and the Son

@krkenheimer

Ай бұрын

and with the Son is adored and glorified

@danvankouwenberg7234

Ай бұрын

..and has spoken through the prophets.

@egonomics352

Ай бұрын

@@MilitantThomistproceeds from the Father.

@catholiccrusader123

Ай бұрын

​@@egonomics352 and the Son.

Insightful

Top notch from Wagner.

Could you please sometimes touch this topic? Is it better to be or not to be? (to exist ot not to, human or animal) Some utilitarists think it's better just not to be. What would be the Catholic answer ? (more phylosophically). Thanks

@dotdash2284

Ай бұрын

Existence is fundamentally good

@dainironfoot5834

Ай бұрын

@@dotdash2284 Sure, but why?

@dotdash2284

Ай бұрын

@@dainironfoot5834 my answer would be that God, Who is goodnes and love personified, identified Himself with the name I AM, telling us that He is ultimate being personified. Therefore God teaches us that in Him goodness and existence are the same as the divine essence

@john-paulgies4313

28 күн бұрын

What about existing is so bad that not existing is good? To me, it's prima facie absurdity. "Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness: that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter. Woe to you that are wise in your own eyes, and prudent in your own conceits." (Isa. 5:20-21)

Is the notion of modes heresy?

jesuit W

No one has to know any of this to be saved. Ww only have to know the only true God for everlasting life through Jesus Christm. Jn17:3

@christophersalinas2722

Ай бұрын

what is the source of this low church protestant aversion and hatred of anything theological?

@john-paulgies4313

29 күн бұрын

kzread.info/dash/bejne/e2d10quCnbqvZKg.htmlsi=Dppr-zHWceT1Qegy

@john-paulgies4313

28 күн бұрын

No Filioque, no Trinity: kzread.info/dash/bejne/e2d10quCnbqvZKg.htmlsi=Dppr-zHWceT1Qegy

God does possess un created operations.

The Categories is a work of speech not being as such.

jesuit dub

Lutheran here I almost became EO because of Jay Dyer but it started to crack and in my spiritual life i felt good but still something was up. It was like good with all the asceticism but soemthing was wrong. Came back to Lutheranism.

@zman42

Ай бұрын

L prot

@christophersalinas2722

Ай бұрын

Why Lutheranism?

@UnionSince452

Ай бұрын

You didn’t feel any draw toward Catholicism?

@USDebtCrisis

Ай бұрын

I'm a former Lutheran and I became Catholic because Lutheran theology is fundamentally flawed and lacks apostolic succession.

@UnionSince452

Ай бұрын

@@USDebtCrisis I was asking OP but Glory to God you came home !

St. Gregory Nazianzus the Theologians asserts that the Holy Spirit *hypostatically proceeds* from the *Father alone*, and that the Son sends forth the *manifestation* of the Spirit.

@dwong9289

Ай бұрын

No where does he say Father alone. You literally interpolated that.

@egonomics352

Ай бұрын

On the Holy Spirit Fifth Theological Oration

@dwong9289

Ай бұрын

@@egonomics352 No where does he say that in Fifth Theological Oration. You put "Father alone" into the text.

@katholischetheologiegeschi1319

26 күн бұрын

Literally the Luther "faith alone" move lol​@@egonomics352

@hap1678

17 күн бұрын

@@egonomics352 Wow you just straight out lied.

Your are POLYTHEISTS. The Holy Spirit has ONE SOURCE (THE FATHER) NOT TWO.

@dm16411

13 күн бұрын

Monarchical Trinitarianism is polytheism.

@manueljardimfernandes9456

3 күн бұрын

We agree. The Son is not a second source

@manueljardimfernandes9456

2 күн бұрын

@@dm16411 that’s incorrect. They just don’t understand why the Father is the monarch. The Father is still the monarch in Filioque

@user-pu3ky1re7e

2 күн бұрын

@@dm16411 Said the antichristian Noahide!