As a protestant approaching my 70th year (and nearly 50 years as a follower of Christ) I have been recently struck by the power of the arguments for the Catholic doctrines - Bishop Barron and Pints with Aquinas and now "The Council of Trent" ... I am at the point where I feel compelled to take the step to embracing the Catholic faith - especially since I have been convinced of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist... Thank you for this video in demonstrating that the dogmas of the Roman Catholicism have their roots in the earliest Church fathers ... and of course to Christ himself. Bless you for that.
Before you do that, remember that the Bible never says that the Virgin Mary never sinned and that she remained a virgin her whole life. Not even once. Enjoy the liturgy but don't accept dogmas without biblical basis.
As a convert, Ignatius of Antioch's writings influenced me so much that I left Protestantism and became Catholic. Ignatius is my patron saint. Absolutely love him.
Please study the book of Acts Catholic isn't the way Jesus is the way Prayer and reading the bible is where the truth is Seek the face of God in fasting desperately calling His holy name Jesus. When you get a chance read this book "Unseen hunds" by Nona Freeman
St. Ignatius of Antioch was a disciple of one of the apostles, so it would be impossible for him to pick up "traditions of men" from the apostles EDIT: For everyone in the comments,, it has been 3 years since I wrote this. My choice of words is bad, but given the perseverance of the Church I would still hold that it would be extremely improbable that Ignatius would have continued the bad traditions of men.
@Pedro Lourenço Pedro, When you were catholic? My friend, becoming part of division is not the will of God. Jesus founded just one Church, the Catholic Church. Remember, adopting the unbiblical doctrine made up by Martin Luther, contradicts the promises made by Jesus, who is God, to be with His Church until the end of times and that nothing will be able to destroy it. Who must we believe? I say, we must believe God! Jesus founded JUST ONE CHURCH, the Catholic Church. The word Catholic originates from the Greek adjective καθολικός (katholikos), meaning "universal" or "everywhere". Not thousands of divided churches and sects around the world. Jesus tells you exactly how many churches are to be, in: JOHN 17:20-23 20. “I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, 21. that THEY MAY ALL BE ONE; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22. The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that THEY MAY BE ONE even AS WE ARE ONE, 23. I in them and thou in me, that they may BECOME PERFECTLY ONE, so that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them even as thou hast loved me. ●THE TRUTH CAN ONLY BE ONE. JOHN 16:13 13. When the SPIRIT of TRUTH comes, He WILL GUIDE YOU INTO ALL THE TRUTH; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. Furthermore, St. Paul does not even mention Scriptures as the foundation of truth for all Christians. This is what he, inspired by the Holy Spirit, clearly teaches: 1 TIMOTHY 3:15 15 if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is THE CHURCH of the living God, THE PILLAR and FOUNDATION OF THE TRUTH. May God bless your discernment.
I had left the Catholic Church in my teens due to some Protestant influences in my life and a lack of understanding of Catholic teachings. Reading St. Ignatius got me on the journey back to an Apostolic tradition, and I've been attending Orthodox churches as I rediscover the richness of the ancient Christian faiths.
@@capybarafan1238 Nice argument. Can you tell which “church” I devote myself to by the following claim? Jesus is Lord. Tell me please. Am I Protestant? Am I Catholic? Or Am I Orthodox?
@Christos Kyrios totally right, and reading Ignatius we can see that transubstantiation was totally not believed by Ignatius, maybe either literal presence or spiritual presence, but not transubstantiation. Ignatius (Letter to the Romans, Chapter 7): I take no pleasure in corruptible food or the pleasures of this life. I want the bread of God, which is the flesh of Christ who is of the seed of David; and for drink I want his blood, which is incorruptible love. Ignatius (Letter to the Trallians, Chapter 8): You, therefore, must arm yourselves with gentleness and regain your strength in faith (which is the flesh of the Lord) and in love (which is the blood of Jesus Christ). I don't see any romanist trying to demonstrate the subtantial change of love in blood or faith in flesh hshshs. And we would like to bither romanist, we could say that they are wrong even showing how Ignatius put the FAITH equal to the BODY of christ. And he don't put works as blood hshshs oops romanist have a problem🤦🏻♂️🤣
@@matiasgamalieltolmosuarez790 Transubstantiation is literally what he is talking about. The bread and blood of Christ? That is literally what he is talking about
@Eucharist Angel I’ve seen a million links. With all due respect, I’m not reading more articles in which I’m sure I’ve given months of research. Conversion didn’t happen overnight. In your own words, can you expand on your “deluded” remark?
@@quiricomazarin476 That is a lie from the pit of hell. Mary like all of us was with sin, had other children, was not assumed into heaven and is not a queen
@@sammygomes7381 OH look.another brainwashed heretic protestant who will stand before Christ & be judged by blaspheming his Mother & calling Christ himself a sinner. Luckily we Catholics made the Bible which refutes protestant man made false traditions & beliefs ...sad they will go to hell for promoting a false gospel & spreading lies of their father from below.
Your sentiments at the beginning regarding your desire to be “just like the first Christians” was exactly the thing that drove me to join the Church as well. 👍🏼
Ignatius played a key role in my conversion to Catholicism. When I fìrst read his letters, I was so astonished by them that I was convinced that the reformers had never read them.
@@joecastillo8798 Trent is a biblical hack shill for the monster that is Rome. Killer of innocents,molesters of children and truly not of God. Rome will soon be thrust into power briefly and burned with fire by her suitors.
Ignatius was the second Apostolic Father I read (after Clement). I fell in love right away and began to see the historical foundation of the Church. I was baptized and confirmed this last Easter Vigil. My patron saint/confirmation name I chose was St. Ignatius of Antioch. Such a great saint
@@lukasg9031 well, really it’s called a confirmation name, but it can show a relationship with the saint, like a patron saint. But, yes, patron saints are more career focused. So it may not be completely right to call him my patron saint
Amen. (354-430 A.D.) St. Augustine: “The CATHOLIC CHURCH... the SUCCESSION of PRIESTS… BEGINNING from the very SEAT of the APOSTLE PETER… to the PRESENT episcopate (office of Bishop).” “I should NOT believe the gospel EXCEPT as moved by the AUTHORITY of the CATHOLIC CHURCH.” (Cont. Epist. Manich. Fund. n. 5 p. 269)
I could understand the Reformers dislike of Rome , but their are multiply Eastern Churches whose belief are only nuanced differences with the Pre Vatican 2 Church. The Liturgy’s translated into English is remarkably similar in all ancient Churches I like to to refer to the Ancient Churches as classical and Protestants Churches as Neo Christian’s. I’m not saying Neo Christian’s are good people and saved . The only belief I criticize is once saved. That’s a teaching that sounds like it came directly from the Serpent . Just confess that Jesus is God , Just Eat the fruit. Doesn’t James caution that the even the fallen ones believe the same.
@@hoponpop3330 Why did the Reformers dislike Rome? Maybe Rome burnt one to many people at the stake or maybe God sent the reformation as Christ told us His church would not fail to the gates of hell.
@@itruck96 Are you talking Catholics or non-Catholics? How many Christians did the Catholic church kill for refusing to convert to Catholicism. How many people will they send to hell for following a false gospel? Neither you nor I have the answer to those questions.
There is nothing better than going to Mass and thanking the Lord for the sacrifice he made (during the consecration on our knees) and also thanking him for dueling with us and feeding us with his body as the sacrificed Lamb which we must eat through the Eucharist. And Even if I’m not worthy to receive him, if he only says the word, our souls shall be healed. Thank you Lord Jesus Christ!
@@doktorenko because of his resurrection can we receive Him in the Eucharist, and because of the resurrection that food is eternal life. The “sacrifice” of the mass is a sacrifice we are giving on the Altar. Not God’s sacrifice happening again.
Ignatius (Letter to the Romans, Chapter 7): I take no pleasure in corruptible food or the pleasures of this life. I want the bread of God, which is the flesh of Christ who is of the seed of David; and for drink I want his blood, which is incorruptible love. Ignatius (Letter to the Trallians, Chapter 8): You, therefore, must arm yourselves with gentleness and regain your strength in faith (which is the flesh of the Lord) and in love (which is the blood of Jesus Christ). You could argue about literal real presence (lutherans, anglicans, orthodoxs, Moravians, etc.) or spiritual real presence (calvinists, etc.) but transubstantiation is totally out of Ignatius epistles, you cannot force the epistles of fathers of the church to support a dogma that was created years before even from the separation of west and east. 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤣
@@matiasgamalieltolmosuarez790 I agree. It’s more a symbolic and still entirely real presence. The best of both worlds lol. Did you interpret something in these comments as arguing transubstantiation?
@@thomasbrodrecht6137 I totally agree that Christ is truly presence and spiritual presence. And even entirely presence, but always with the purpose of remembering his death and resurrection, the problem with transubstantiation is that they are trying to explain a mystery and with a focus on the "superpowers" of the roman clergy over other churches, and that´s very sad for the worldwide Christianity And nop these comments aren't arguing transubstantiation hshshs sorry my comment was direct for the guy of the video, my bad
Sadly however, many protestants think it makes more sense to follow their own interpretations of scripture over those of men who literally lived in the early days of the Church.
@@BaniLogrono The book of Maccabees tells us to pray for the dead that they might be "loosed of their sins". Also, the veneration of Mary has been a feature of the Church since the earliest days. We know this through tradition and through early christian art. We also know that there are angels and that scripture doesn't say we can't call on them for assistance or protection. Christ himself said he could call down legions of angels if he chose to.
Ignatius of Antioch (also known as Ignatius Theophorus) wrote the Epistle to the Smyrnaeans circa 110 AD, John died around 100 AD. Ignatius was recognized by all the other Bishops alive who were also consecrated by the other Apostles to be legitimate. Very unlikely for a legitimate Bishop at that time to be inventing or "modernizing" theology apart from what the Apostles taught. Especially when Jesus promised to send the Holy Spirit to protect the the Church.
@@kelechukwuanozyk7605 Do you have definitive evidence on the exact dating of either the Epistle or Ignatius' death? I think at best we can only make approximations. Still good to edit the main post to reflect on the approximate dates.
@YAJUN YUAN I'm sure it's the Latinization of the name, since in Latin there are declensions for names. Which are special suffixes for names. These special rules for names are required for certain sentences to make sense in Latin grammar. And the -us suffix is usually applied to masculine words and names ending in o in the last syllable like Theophoros. Like in the genitive it would be Theophori (which in english would be like Theophoros'), and in dative it would be Theophoro (which in english would translate roughly as him being the recipient of an action or state). Without this declension many of the sentences would not make sense in Latin. During canonization processes the names of people are adapted into Latin but the original language name is also preserved. Though this may happen with the other sacred languages such as Ancient Greek and Biblical Hebrew. The purpose of this latinization and recording of the original name is in order to immortalize the name. Given that all languages change across the centuries in pronunciation, grammar, etc. But the sacred languages don't change since they are dead languages which were tied to the cross.
@YAJUN YUAN I know a little. The most literal translation would be Deipara, then Dei Génetrix or Dei Genitrix. Mater Dei, is appropiate to refer to her, as a title used in many prayers would come to be as (Mother [of the God]), but it is not as literal of a translation, as it is common in languages. Mater Dei and Dei Génetrix are the most commonly used.
I've been diving into the Patristic Fathers for a long time now and I am absolutely in love. They always had this aura of sternness and grumpiness for some reason, but when you read their words you find a wealth of joy and charity.
@Eucharist Angel actually, the martyrs in heaven are those that died in defense of the Eucharist, Faithful Roman Catholics. Those that deny the Eucharist are damned. Just like the satanists that hate the Eucharist. You hate the Eucharist and so do satanists, get a clue buddy. You are literally in the same boat as actual active satanists. There literally is no other way to look at this, even though you try.
@Eucharist Angel except those you are deeming innocent aren’t actually innocent. Btw, Protestant built America dropped two nuclear bombs on Japan and the only survivors that walked away and lived whole heathy lives were Roman Catholics. The blood of the martyrs is on Protestants hands, not Catholics. You should read about the atrocities committed by John Calvin Protestant England’s abuse on Catholics in Ireland and France. Also, the seat of Peter has Gods authority to condemn people to death. Truth & Life App Acts 5:3-5 3 But Peter said, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back part of the proceeds of the land? 4 While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal? How is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God." 5 When Ananias heard these words, he fell down and died. And great fear came upon all who heard of it. The ones that believe they are doing Gods will and actually making martyrs is Protestants. Sorry Truth requires defending, first by conversion and when necessary, by force. Truth & Life App 1 Timothy 3:15 15 if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth. A bulwark is a fortification that defends those inside from those outside, in this case those that have the truth Catholics from those that think they have the truth Protestants. Christianity isn’t a religion of pacifism. It’s a religion that fights, just like the those that followed Moses to the promised land. A war Catholicism and Christ ultimately win.
@Eucharist Angel actually, you haven’t proven they were innocent. So, you’ve proven nothing. I have proven the Holy Spirt has given Peter and his successors the right to condemn heretics to death. Truth & Life App Luke 22:36-38 36 He said to them, "But now, let him who has a purse take it, and likewise a bag. And let him who has no sword sell his mantle and buy one. 37 For I tell you that this scripture must be fulfilled in me, 'And he was reckoned with transgressors'; for what is written about me has its fulfilment." 38 And they said, "Look, Lord, here are two swords." And he said to them, "It is enough." Not to mention the numerous cities that those that followed Moses destroyed. Same pattern, sorry, Jesus Christ started the Roman Catholic Church and He’ll see it successfully to the end.
As a recent convert myself, I relate 100% with this video. St. Ignatius flipped my mind. I'm much more of a devout catholic than I ever was a protestant. And I was in missions in China for over a decade, yet now I've thrown all that away, to join us the one true church. I only wish I had seen this earlier. Much earlier. Trent Horn also was a pivotal point in my life. Especially his debates with James White. God bless you, my brother.
@@timcarr6401 Starting in 2004/5 I worked with the underground churches in China for quite a few years. I also hosted evangelistic cell groups that were disguised as something completely different, for safety. And since I’m also a translator/interpreter, I assisted other preachers that came to help the churches in different regions. I left China by mid 2018.
@@guidohlizzi06 So it was an interdenominational organization? You said you threw it all away. Was the mission you were heavily involved with just a waste of your time in your current way of thinking? Didn't you feel that you made any inroads with folks? People that didn't know the Lord became believers; didn't they? After all those years investing so much of your time, energy and devotion! Maybe you have since lost your focus. You say you were a Protestant -- of what variety?
@@guidohlizzi06 You were doing a God-honoring work. You led people out of darkness into His marvelous light. The Lord blessed your endeavors. There is nothing to be ashamed of. You evangelized and mentored new believers. You can do the same in America. At the end of your days the Lord will tell you "Well done, my good and faithful servant. Enter into my kingdom."
Really? It wasn't the Protestants who murdered millions of people in the dark ages of killed thousands of people as Cortez did in south America. That was absolutely the Catholic Church.
Here's a lesson for you about history. See if you are a Catholic after you read your own church history. Here's a few things you aren't taught in your local Parrish Mary had five biological sons besides Jesus and the Bible even names them,the Catholic Church murdered millions of people in the name of your religion and that's fact, your church was founded by the Roman emperor in 312 AD and that's a fact,and your church helped Hitler carry out his final solution and even helped the Nazi leaders get to south America to Argentina and Colombia by what was called the rat line where the Vatican leaders forged passports for those Nazis and that is an absolute fact. What about the news of bishops and priest having homosexual orgies and you abundance of gay priest. Yeah I guess that's something to run to.😀😀😀
@@haroldcounts7460 who are Mary's other biological children? If you want to judge a religion, you should judge the best of what it produced, not the worst. I'm well aware the history of the Catholic Church is bloodstained and broken, as with any other religion. But this should not deter one from the truth of its teachings. Remember that even from the beginning, we had Judas who betrayed Christ. But for the sake of addressing your point, if you want to look at works, why not also look at both sides? You point at the evil doings but have you looked at the tremendous good the Catholic Church has done? How many souls she has saved? Just search up the number of hospitals, schools, social welfare services, outreach and charity organisations around the world that are Catholic. Search up the amount of art, music and beauty that had Catholic origins.
@@noeltan1455 Noel I'm not saying everything the Catholic Church has done is evil,far from it.what you said about their blood stained hands and we should look at the good part is like saying Al Capone was a killer but he financed soup kitchens in Chicago during the depression. Just because someone gives out food or water doesn't make them Godly. When the RCC moved thru the world it left poverty and destruction.What True God would be a party to killing another person for simply reading or owning a Bible of all things during the dark ages or like helping Adolph Hitler in his final solution? That absolutely happened and the church tries to rewrite their history and it's shameful. Do me a favor and study about Cortez in south America,that destruction was santioned by the Catholic Church. Read about pope innocence,he was a cut throat killer who ordered multitudes of people killed in the name of the church he ran. I'll tell you this humbly I personally can't see why anyone would ever go in their doors after the horrible hurt and damage they did against humanity. All their horror is readily available on the net and much of in the RCC own archives. It's definitely nothing in going to be a party to. Read in the Bible ,revelation 17,the whole chapter and you can see the end of that work. It's tells us how that women was dressed,where she sat which is Rome and Rome is the only city that can be described in this context and even told how and why she will be destroyed in God's anger.read it slowly.its not a pretty picture.
@@noeltan1455 here's the answer for your question. In mark 6: 1-3 names the boys who were with Mary when she went to find Jesus when He was close to home. In Matthew 13:55-56 Matthew tells the same story as mark did telling the name of Jesus brothers and his sister's being with Mary. In the context it absolutely says they were her children and not in a spiritual sence. Think about this if when Jesus was told about his brothers and sisters in a spiritual sence it wouldn't make sense here, mark and Matthew both named the brothers and then mentioned the girls but never named them.when the men with Jesus said is this not the carpenter and here we have his brothers and his sister's. In the book of acts Paul mentioned Jude as being the Lords brother and Jude wrote the book of Jude and he himself said he was James brother and both James and Jude were mentioned as Jesus brothers in both passages mentioned. Those brothers were Marys sons regardless of RCC doctrine as well as the in named sisters and that is right out of the Bible.
Jackson Castelino Ignatius cannot hear your prayers! He is not Omnipotent, Omniscient, etc. Only God can hear our prayers, and he is not happy you ignore him and pray to someone who is not God.
@@jacksoncastelino04 You do not know what you are saying! The expression "God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob," was coined by God himself. Any bible student would know this!
@@jacksoncastelino04 Truth & Life App Matthew 22:32 32 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? He is not God of the dead, but of the living." Peter had the power to do miracles. Paul had the power to do miracles. Demons have power and God has never removed it, why do you think Peter or Paul are any different? Especially when Jesus taught the exact opposite? Truth & Life App Matthew 25:20-21 20 And he who had received the five talents came forward, bringing five talents more, saying, 'Master, you delivered to me five talents; here I have made five talents more.' 21 His master said to him, 'Well done, good and faithful servant; you have been faithful over a little, I will set you over much; enter into the joy of your master.' Gods servants have power allotted to them by God. Not only that, they are one with God and have inherited everything Jesus has. They aren’t just playing harps on clouds and completely ignorant and indifferent to what’s going on here. They are living and working just as God is living and working.
@@bugslayerprime7674 Brother the Eastern Orthodox don't have an unbroken succession there anymore. In 1724 the Eastern Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch settled for Full Communion with Rome. The Ecumenical Patriarch of the time decided the election was invalid and appointed a replacement, which I'm pretty sure he didn't have the authority to do. The line is held by the Catholics now. Unless you follow the Nestorians. Or think that Constantinople has Papal powers, your pick.
As a Protestant, I ran into the wall of Ignatius. I lost. I can’t in any good conscience say I know Christianity better than the disciples (Polycarp as well) of John. Today, I am Catholic.
Welcome home! “There are many other things which most properly can keep me in her [the Catholic Church’s] bosom. The unanimity of peoples and nations keeps me here. Her authority, inaugurated in miracles, nourished by hope, augmented by love, and confirmed by her age, keeps me here. The succession of priests, from the very see of the apostle Peter, to whom the Lord, after his resurrection, gave the charge of feeding his sheep [John 21:15-17], up to the present episcopate, keeps me here. And last, the very name Catholic, which, not without reason, belongs to this Church alone, in the face of so many heretics, so much so that, although all heretics want to be called ‘Catholic,’ when a stranger inquires where the Catholic Church meets, none of the heretics would dare to point out his own basilica or house”- St. Augustine of Hippo (Against the Letter of Mani Called “The Foundation” 4:5 [A.D. 397]).
I'd say St Ignatius of Antioch living at the same time as the Apostles. He went scorched earth on the Eucharist and the Catholic Church being the Church that Jesus established in Matt:16. He was also personally taught by Apostle John
Thank you so much for this talk. I knew very little about the Church Fathers, now thanks to you I feel more Catholic than ever. Blessings from Argentina
As a recent convert and now theology student the one thing that really convinced over and over is to find me one, just one Church father or leader of the Church, Catholic or Orthodox in any way for 1500 years who says the Eucharist is just a symbol or memorial and not truly the body and blood of Christ. As a former protestant the other question that no one could ever answer was if the Catholic Church strayed away when exactly was that?
@@wishyouthebest9222 John 6:53, John 6:56, John 6:57. Jesus said this and later this- Luke 22:19 -20 Matthew 26:26-28 Why is it hard to believe that God's own son fully divine yet appearing in all ways to be man, could not also, as he said to the disciples, be bread and wine? What Christian would put such limitations on God? Consider also 1 Corinthians 11:20-34. The fullness of God's truth and grace are found in the Apostolic Church, the Catholic church, not in its imperfect human stewards but in spite of them.
This was tremendously helpful! I’ve actually had prots outright deny Ignatius of Antioch actually even existed. To have the quote from the prot “scholar” that you included is so valuable. Thanks, Trent!
I love how apologist will iron man their argument by saying "this protestant/catholic scholar even said this supporting my opposing view!", makes for an interesting argument. I have to ask though, if they know about the supporting evidence for the supposedly damning and strong argument, why are they still protestant/catholic?
@@Walker-ie8dm Many times, prots have to be brought slowly along. Just because they may see an argument has merit regarding one particular subject doesn’t mean they’re ready to convert. They may still have disagreements about other aspects of the faith.
@@Walker-ie8dm It’s very similar to how we as Catholics recognize that prots have it correct when it comes to some of their beliefs like The Trinity, Christ’s divinity, etc, (which they of course got from the Catholic Church to begin with) but they have it all wrong when it comes to papal authority, apostolic succession, The Eucharist, etc, etc, etc.
@@TheBadTrad I myself am a protestant but I've been doing a lot of research and I'm going to start reading the scholars books and all of that. I'm not like most protestants though, I don't believe in sola fide or a 66 book canon (and torah observant but that's a whole can of worms). I started with learning what exactly Catholics believe (from Catholics themselves) and now I'm starting on the WHY and HOW. I'm giving everything a fair and honest shot but I haven't found anything undeniable yet, this whole debate is not as clear cut as many would believe.
Fear? On the contrary. The writings of Ignatius, as well as those of the other Church fathers for the first two to 300 years of church history, played a massive role in why I very confidently left Eastern orthodoxy, and very confidently dismissed Roman Catholicism with it. The first 300 years of church history are simply nothing like modern-day Roman Catholicism or Eastern orthodoxy. Selective quote mining from the church fathers can trick one into becoming part of one of these organizations, but reading them fully and in context, and with a heart that is truly seeking the truth, not only leads one away from modern Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox traditions or practices, but often will outright condemn them. Praise God for His Word, and glory to Him for the saints throughout church history who remained faithful to Him in the face of the myriad man-made traditions that have plagued this world since even the times of the apostles themselves. I pray you all genuinely and humbly seek the truth in the most profound sense of the word, for God will surely being such a one to Him in all truth. That truth is not to be found in the papacy, which is a wicked and vile thing of satan. One simply cannot put the papacy (with its sheer, blatant, rabid hatred of God and His law and His Gospel-- and its love for the world and its ways) in even the slightest place close to God. It is a wretched, stinking abomination from the pit. May the Lord have mercy on those who equate the papacy with the Church.
I was at the heterodox, watching the doctrinal waves of the sea. The Catholic Church said I needed to listen to Ignatius, Justin, and Irenaeus, so I did, and got into the boat with them and sailed off. We landed at the Orthodox, and I went to Ignatius church. Tradition states that St Ignatius sat on Jesus’ lap when the disciples were trying to forbid the children to come to Him. ☦️
We can appreciate the Orthodox Church, for sure. Only thing is, is that both orthodoxy and Catholicism holds to the 7 ecumenical councils; and with that, the 7th ecumenical council demands being in communion with the the 'Bishop of Rome'- Successor of Peter. So the fact that Orthodoxy has strayed from doing so; is in complete contradiction to what they hold to; which is that very council.
@@DjSostre7 This is patently false, because it presumes the Roman Catholic dogmas in Vatican I of papal supremacy and infallibility--which the first millennium Church did not believe or teach (I would invite you to share the canon or exact section of the 7th Council that allegedly professes that all apostolic See's must be in communion with Rome in order to remain canonical). The Catholic Church, on the other hand, is rife with contradictions. Just to name one, your point that we both believe the first 7 Ecumenical Councils--that isn't actually true. Catholics don't hold to them the way the Orthodox do. When Pope Leo IX introduced the heresy of the Filioque into the creed centuries **after** it had already been infallibly agreed upon **in** an Ecumenical Council that no one was ever to change the Nicene Creed once it was solidified at the 2nd Council, he effectively contradicted the Council with that very action. So, how can Catholics claim to affirm it? At the very least, they'd have to say that the Council wasn't infallible when it declared that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone, because two contradictory statements can't both be infallible.
It would appear then that a protestant is one who desires complete independence to make up his own mind about what Christ actually taught. In this way he finds the freedom to ignore the lawful authority of the Catholic Church and substitute therein his own opinions.
My EO priest said that when Protestants join the church, they give up autonomy for Apostolic authority. It's definitely a trade-off I was happy to make.
@Eucharist Angel I mean Paul sure does. 2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. And Peter tells us that prophecy is not open to multiple interpretations, so it would be wrong to assume I can interpret scripture however I want. 2 Peter 1:20-21 knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
The didache is earlier and congregations called their own leadership based on their diligence in following the commandments of Jesus, their dedication to teaching what had been passed down, their willingness to serve, and the confidence of the congregations. It was such a widely used and approved of document that it almost became canon.
You're so right about Ignatius of Antioch. When I first read him and Polycarp, right there and then I knew it was impossible to stay Protestant. At first I thought orthodoxy was the way to go, but eventually came back home to the Catholic Church. Thank God for these early apostolic fathers and their writings.
@@Bible33AD it took me a while, but two reasons in particular. First I was born and raised in the Catholic Church. Even went to Catholic elementary school. Then, the Orthodox position on the papacy seemed weak. Though they acknowledge the Pope as leader of the western church and first among equals, they attribute to him more symbolic authority. In the times of Jesus, the first apostles and the early church, when one spoke about authority, it wasn't at all symbolic, as we see for example, with the British monarchy, but real authority. That pretty much clinched it for me.
@Phillip Hickman “Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2-7:1 [A.D. 110]). Because he clearly states that the bread and wine is literally the flesh an blood of Jesus.
John 6:41-58 [41]Meanwhile the Jews were complaining to each other about him, because he had said, 'I am the bread that has come down from heaven.' [42]They were saying, 'Surely this is Jesus son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know. How can he now say, "I have come down from heaven?" ' [43]Jesus said in reply to them, 'Stop complaining to each other. [44]'No one can come to me unless drawn by the Father who sent me, and I will raise that person up on the last day. [45]It is written in the prophets: They will all be taught by God; everyone who has listened to the Father, and learnt from him, comes to me. [46]Not that anybody has seen the Father, except him who has his being from God: he has seen the Father. [47]In all truth I tell you, everyone who believes has eternal life. [48]I am the bread of life. [49]Your fathers ate manna in the desert and they are dead; [50]but this is the bread which comes down from heaven, so that a person may eat it and not die. [51]I am the living bread which has come down from heaven. Anyone who eats this bread will live for ever; and the bread that I shall give is my flesh, for the life of the world.' [52]Then the Jews started arguing among themselves, 'How can this man give us his flesh to eat?' [53]Jesus replied to them: In all truth I tell you, if you do not eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. [54]Anyone who does eat my flesh and drink my blood has eternal life, and I shall raise that person up on the last day. [55]For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. [56]Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me and I live in that person. [57]As the living Father sent me and I draw life from the Father, so whoever eats me will also draw life from me. [58]This is the bread which has come down from heaven; it is not like the bread our ancestors ate: they are dead, but anyone who eats this bread will live for ever.
Luke 22:13-20 [13]They set off and found everything as he had told them and prepared the Passover. [14]When the time came he took his place at table, and the apostles with him. [15]And he said to them, 'I have ardently longed to eat this Passover with you before I suffer; [16]because, I tell you, I shall not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.' [17]Then, taking a cup, he gave thanks and said, 'Take this and share it among you, [18]because from now on, I tell you, I shall never again drink wine until the kingdom of God comes.' [19]Then he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, 'This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.' [20]He did the same with the cup after supper, and said, 'This cup is the new covenant in my blood poured out for you.
The Catholic/Orthodox schism only happened because of men’s pride. Although the rites differ, this is absolutely normal (even within the Catholic Church there were different rites until Trent), it wouldn’t be an excuse for the schism. The original Great Church shouldn’t never have divided. I see Orthodox believers as my dear brothers. We all believe in the Eucharist and Apostolic Tradition. We should be reunited. Protestants are my second degree cousins.
Trent became a Catholic 20 years ago through intense study and personnel introspection. I became a Catholic 25 years ago because I got outed one day counting the collections. Been involved in RCIA and CCD ever since. Viva Ignatius.
Love Trent Horn he's a smart guy He knows the Church Father's & I love CATHOLIC answers 😊🛐📖🙏🙏🗝️🗝️💯 Catholic God bless my Brother's & Sister's in Christ & my Catholic Brothers 🗝️🗝️🙏📖🛐👍
The Doctor of the Church who converted me from protestantism and who is my patron Saint is St Robert Bellarmine. During my time through a year of conversion St Robert Bellarmine just kept popping up all over the place. I didn't need to go back to the Early Church Fathers (though I did) I just had to go back to where the world went wrong.
Lovely, back to where the world went wrong - referring to the so called reformation period. And people say its the dark ages when the world went wrong, the time when the world was actually a haven if you live in the christian part of the world.
@@vinceschenden7349 Wow Vince, way 2 much! St. Irenaeus: (189 A.D.) 156 years AFTER Christ: “CHURCH… @ ROME… Every CHURCH… agree with this Church… its pre- eminent AUTHORITY.” (Against Heresies 3:3:2)
Yes, thank you for ur reply. I originally heard the 30k+ figure on my local Catholic radio station quite a few yrs ago. In an attempt to answer u, I found an article online from Live Science by Donavyn Coffee, updated July 29, 2022. It said there were 200+ Christian denominations in the US and over 45k worldwide. Does it mean less that I can't name at least 30 off the top of my head? If u say so. But why did u equate my comment (from a yr ago) with the breaking of the Commandment against Bearing False Witness? YOU could have easily looked this up yourself. Did u even watch the above video? @@JeP-lz4ti
I’m still on a journey revisiting the faith (cradle Catholic turned Protestant), and the very early quotes from St. Ignatius of Antioch, combined with the belief he was a disciple of the Apostle John, have played a vital role in my reconsidering everything I’ve learned to this point.
God bless you on your journey, and lead you to act of your free will and conscience. If you have ever been led to believe your soul is being kept by your Church's connection to God, remember that this is not a fear of those who abide in Christ. Taste and see the goodness of the Lord; of what He has promised even down to the Sacraments and the wickedness of those who may exalt him, and I hope you can see your life In Him without the burden you may feel from a lifetime of understanding and communing with even righteous attacks against His Bride, in whom many promises were fulfilled. Live close to your faith, whichever path you choose; and then good Protestant theologies are not nor will be shackled by Sacred Tradition. They will unite to help defend you from shallow labels accusing Catholics, and poor shepherds in Rome who cannot convey and yet also can never change the substance of good teaching, and bring you to many more joys in the full and wild promises of Christ! He has made disciples and apostles out of all of us, and He has come to offer us His comfort in the world. He has not gone to abandon His Servant, who still proclaims Christ Alone is King. Rejoice!
I don’t know my church preference yet, I’ve only been on my journey for a year. But the orthodox and catholic folks don’t seem as angry, so that’s a plus.
I would definitely disagree with the Orthodox not seeming angry, at least online that is kind of their stereotypical reputation. However, there are bad and good in all groups of people. I highly recommend you look at Presbyterians and Lutherans, especially since they teach a law and gospel distinction and are very good about teaching assurance of salvation. May God help you with this discernment. God bless.
Fortunately, most Protestant scholars today accept Ignatius as one of the important church leaders of the second century. His writings are a worthwhile read. There is nothing in his writings that is antithetical to Protestant doctrine held by many denominations. And there is nothing in his writings which are directly supportive of those later Roman Catholic traditions with which all Protestants have the most difficulty (primacy of the Bishop of Rome, veneration of Mary). Those Protestants that followed in the line of Calvin and the Swiss Reformed tradition have taken issue with his more literal interpretation of the Eucharist; they regard the Eucharist as merely a symbol. But many other denominations find Ignatius's description perfectly in line with the Biblical doctrine, accepting that in the connection of signs, faith, and Holy Spirit there is a spiritual interaction of some kind. As for episcopacy, there is still disagreement among denominations as to how an overseer/episcopos and an elder/presbyter should be chosen. Also, many denominations hold the older New Testament view that those roles were to be held by the same person or persons in the local body. Ignatius was of course writing at a time when the number of believers in certain areas had grown significantly, and it made sense to split those roles. Still, the idea of the early church was not of hierarchy as we think of it, but of circles of greater service in shepherding the souls of the flock, and the flock responding with respect for God's gracious provision of servants.
While being introduced to the Apostolic Fathers generally is what drew me away from Protestantism, it was St Ignatius specifically whose words were most influential for me.
I have been a devout Roman Catholic since 1961, but I renounced my Roman Catholic faith in 2022 for two chief reasons: one, the Roman Catholic faith is not aligned with the Bible; and two, I was spiritually liberated by the book I read entitled "Altar of Secrets: Sex, Politics, and Money in the Philippine Catholic Church" by Aries C. Rufo. I am now a happily born again Christian . . . much better because its Bible-centered! The Word of God, the Bible, is true food and real drink (John 6:63) not transubstantiation. The eucharistic mass is a memorial of Christ's passion and death on the cross.
@@r.e.jr.1152 Believer of satanic cult of sola scriptura a man made tradition invented by a devil possessed man, will not know until the gates of hell prevail upon their heretic church which is bound to vanish and many churches are dying in an unprecedented rate.
@@r.e.jr.1152 Establish on 16th century. Bible doesn't support that teaching, early christian, apostolic father, church father never know sola scriptura
Which Catholic Church is the Main Authority? (110 A.D.) “The CHURCH… which holds the PRESIDENCY (Main Authority)… the ROMANS.” (St. Ignatius Letter to the Romans, 1:1, 3:1, 4:3)
How do you know that? If that is true, shouldn't the RCC's teachings always align with the teachings of the Bible? Or, better yet, how about this: What is the Gospel of Jesus Christ according to the Roman Catholic Church? "...what must I do, that I may be saved?" (Acts 16:30)
As a Lutheran I don't have a date for the apostasy of rome, rome is still a part of the body of Christ, but many of the traditions therein obscure Christ. That being said, listening to catholic apologists may only convince me to become Eastern orthodox, which would mean abandoning the western mind towards clarity.
Not that there weren't signs of it earlier on than this but the 9th century is really when western theology started to diverge and go its own way apart from Orthodoxy. That's when you start seeing the office of the pope demanding that the filioque be added to the Nicene creed on nothing more than his own authority, apart from an ecumenical council.
: Actually, White often refers to Ignatius in his debates to 'prove' the deity of Christ. However, White frequently underplays the different recensions and interpolations and possible anachronisms.
I know that nobody will see this, nevertheless, "In the New Testament, Ministers, Bishops, Pastors, deacons etc, are required to be married. God's Word (the Bible) is crystal clear on this subject. "An overseer (Bishop), then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach..." 1 Timothy 3:2 The Roman prohibition of marriage for it's clergy, mandated in the twelfth century will go down in history as one of the most spectacular man made disasters ever.
This does not refer to 'required' marriage. Bishops, deacons, etc.. have never been required to be married. It refers to not being divorced and remarried or not being in polygamous marriages. You are also dead wrong about priestly celibacy. Marriage does not miraculously save men from sin and bad behavior, as you can see from the many badly behaving married orthodox and protestant clergy. These married clergy must also split their attention between their family and the church. In practice this means most of their attention is on their family.
I love how Protestants cite the shaky foundations of some of ignatius’s letters to conclude that all of his letters are forgeries. If that’s proposition is true, than Christian’s have no reason to trust any writing that was purportedly written by Paul or Peter. Btw, I’m a former Baptist who is converting to Catholicism right now with my wife and children. So, I am not without perspective on both sides of this, and I am not trying to be nasty to Protestants.
I read Michael Holmes' third edition. His translation is a version of Lightfoot's work that has been revised three times. This text has gone through similar processes as the NT itself, and I see no reason to doubt its historicity. What was most shocking was: 1. The deity of Christ. 2. The real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. 3. Threefold Holy Orders. 4. Somewhat implicitly, Rome has a special status of leadership. What is most interesting is that St. Ignatios does not try to introduce novelties. These things are taken for granted. Both by him, and he writes as if everyone knows this stuff.
@@YardenJZ glad you realised the deity of Christ, the JW NWT Bible is a fake... its altered, and is not true to the manuscripts and sadly its taken away so many people
I often tell JWs who I talk to on the street to read Ignatius, Polycarp and Justin Martyr regarding the deity of Christ. I wonder how many of them actually go and do it though 🤔 clearly it's not just a biblical doctrine but it's one that was passed on to the disciples of the apostles and their disciples and so forth. It didn't just appear out of thin air at Nicaea.
@@skippy8696 It could not have been passed on by the apostles as the apostles never preached, we had to eat Christ nor how to turn the bread into Christ. The apostles preached we need to believe in Christ as they responded to Christ in John 6:68 that Christ has the "word" of eternal life. The apostles understood bread was a metaphor for the word of God, in those days the Torah. In Jewish thought, bread was equated with the Torah, and "eating of it" was reading and understanding the covenant of God (cf. Deuteronomy 8:3). For example, the apocryphal book of Sirach states, "'He who eats of me will hunger still, he who drinks of me will thirst for more; he who obeys me will not be put to shame, he who serves me will never fail.' All this is true of the book of Most High’s covenant, the law which Moses commanded us as an inheritance for the community of Jacob" (Sirach 24:20-22). Quoting from Sirach here is not endorsing it as Scripture; it only serves to illustrate how the Jewish people thought of Mosaic Law. It is important to understand the equating of bread with the Torah to appreciate Jesus’ real point. In the Jerusalem Post, both in articles on the Torah and in articles on the Gospels, we have discussed again and again and again that “food is a metaphor for knowledge” and have seen in example after example that: “each type of food represents a different aspect of knowledge”. Hence: “bread” is a metaphor for: “the word of God”, “figs” are a metaphor for “knowledge about God”, “milk” is a metaphor for “easy to understand spiritual teachings
Very good expose. History is so important in verifying one's Faith. Without an historical trail, how does one know that his beliefs are the same as the Apostles?
Love all your comments Brother's! Right know I'm doing my own research for Defense of our faith. Starting with St. Pope Damasus 1. Recently head butted with a Protestant. He left speechless. This motivated me document and prove Jesus left us a Church and the church gave the world the Bible.
Thank you so very much for being so informative on Saint Ignatius of Antioch. I have read many of his letters and teachings. And when these are presented to protestants they are stuck for words very very nice.
Where have I heard this argument before? I don't like the argument it makes, so therefore it must have been a forgery or a late addition. So therefore it can't possibly be true!
@@sterlingteall3462 I wasn't exactly arguing that, but I was in that chat. I said that if the SSPX does not recognize Francis as the true Roman Pontiff than they are in schism.
@@sterlingteall3462 your comment made me look this up. Curiosity etc... It seems it's complex. See the link from EWTN www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/sspx-masses-14267
No one explains as well as you do. I loved this, I’m signing up for your podcasts. Since my time in RCIA, I find your voice soothing & comforting, it means I’m going to learn new things.
First of all, thank you for sharing this video and your thoughts! Ignatius of Antioch is one of my favorite Fathers (after Augustine and Evagrius). I find Roman Catholicism compelling and I've wrestled with converting for many years. But the irony of my journey is that Ignatius doesn't push me closer to Rome. On the surface he seems to be advocating for apostolic succession (AS) and the authority of bishops. But I think it's easy to miss his emphasis when potential converts read his epistles. We encounter his stark statements about bishops and AS and think that's what he's highlighting. I would argue, however, that those themes are secondary. His main concern was the preservation of the gospel's truth. In early 2nd-century Antioch, the church was combatting the Judaizers and the Docetists. When the Christians encountered these ideas, they would ask, "How do we know what's right"? Ignatius's response: "Listen to the witness of those who walked with Jesus." Now this next comment is conjecture. If Antioch's bishop wrote to us today, I would imagine he still give the same imperative, "Listen to the ones who walked with Jesus." And that testimony is faithfully preserved in the Word. I don't think that precludes bishops and priests, but since Ignatius was only a generation removed from Jesus it made sense to appeal to the living memory of the apostles. In our time, however, the apostolic linkage via succession is far too removed. But the Word, containing the eyewitness testimony of Jesus' followers, doesn't suffer that removal. Thanks for reading through my thoughts! I'm very much a layman on this discussion, so I imagine I've missed something and I'm definitely open to hearing other perspectives on this.
Very happy to hear your views friend. Would you mind if I also shared my opinion with you. If you look at the context of preserving the gospel truth one of your statements will seem contrary. These issues are very essential that's why he wrote about them because he believed that these issues were the core of the faith that needed to be preserved from being lost I also imagine that Ignatius wouldn't say "Listen to those who walked with Jesus", by his time many of them were already dead. I think he would say "These are the things that John faithful disciple of Our Lord Jesus Christ taught us". I hope you get my point. I also think Ignatius can lead you to Rome perhaps if he hasn't guided you that far he can guide you to someone who can Try this Ignatius --- Polycarp (Ignatius's Friend) --- Ireneaus (Polycarp's disciple). Then read what Ireneaus says about the faith in Against Heresies. When Ireneaus debates the gnostics, he argues from scripture then wishing to vanquish the enemy appeals to a more direct and powerful authority Apostolic Succession (AS) then when he decides to cite that authority as a witness, he does something special. He appeals to Rome as the grand catalogue of AS using the witness of Peter and Paul as the foundation of her primacy and authority
I would like to assist you in whatever way I can to wrestle it out completely. If you consider my assistance any worthy just reply this post and I think I could provide books as well as some of my own personal insights (if it can help) about any controversial issues you may have
this video only really argues against a minority of protestants though. traditional anglicans, lutherans, even calvinists, are not "afraid" of Ignatious. Why are we pretending that traditional protestants are unaware of the Fathers
I love Ignatius. Do nothing without the approval of the Bishop. However, a Bishop is God ordained. His letter to the Philadelphians is my absolute favorite apocryphal work.
After watching videos of Protestant youtubers(living waters, wretched) I was convinced that Catholics are not saved, but after doing my own research on catholism, I now agree that Catholics are not damned. Planning to convert to catholism, I'm currently a member of the Presbyterian Church, but I'm sceptical my father would agree with my decision as I'm just a teen.
You are very blessed to see the truth at such a young age. May the Holy Spirit show you the way and give you the words and the courage of your convictions.
Thank you, brother, for this fine introduction to St Ignatius of Antioch. You have confirmed my suspicion that bishops were a very early fixture in the Church and acted in a supervisory role above the presbyters. While I am not Catholic capital c, I affirm the unity of the holy apostolic and catholic small c faith!
I'm an evangelical Christian and I believe in the real presence of Christ in the eucharist and I respect early church fathers. I believe we could have koinonia together.
The Eucharist is blasphemous in the fact it crucifies Jesus at mass. Jesus died only once. The Eucharist is not literal, it's meant to be symbolic. Hebrews 9:28 - So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. And no priest, supposed saint, nor Mary can be an intercessor between man and God. There's only one intercessor, Jesus Christ.1 Timothy 2:5&6- For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
@@stanleybroniszewsky8538 You make Jesus Christ very lonely! You eliminated people that Jesus loved! You really don't know how to love. You forgot that God is Love. Could you eliminate your mother because you don't need her anymore? For you're already an adult? You may say Jesus Christ alone died for mankind's sins on the cross. But you forgot and eliminated who were at the foot of the cross: Mother Mary and John The Beloved! They were entrusted by Jesus Christ to each other spiritually. "Woman, that is your son, son she is your mother." They were not blood related. Study historicity and trace your Catholic roots. Never stay as victim of Luther for long! Wake up!
Fun Fact: I used to know an old Landmark Baptist pastor friend who claimed that the church he pastored could be traced back to St Ignatius, and obviously to St John.
@Eucharist Angel Truth & Life App Matthew 28:19-20 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age."
Since scholarship well into 2000s debates the date and authenticity of writings of Ignatius it is seriously dangerous to rest one's eternal salvation on this uncertainty. Only safe to rest on teaching of Jesus and his apostles.
I think he offered a strawman. Protestants know quite well that there were offices of Bishop, elder/overseer, and deacon in the church. They know their Bibles and its right there in the Bible. I'm just beginning to read the fathers. I've read the Didache, Epistle of Barnabas, 1 Clement, 2 Clement, and I'm reading the Shepherd of Hermes now. None of these suggest the Catholic structure. For instance, the Bishops were to be chosen by the local church community. With this context in mind, Ignatius wasn't referring to a head bishop over the church but rather "your" bishop. In everything I've read so far there is no Pope like figure mentioned. No Peter as head of a line of succession. No Roman Catholic Church. No mariology. Nothing on the nature of the Eucharist. No praying to saints. No infallibility of the Pope. No confessing your sins to a priest for absolution. I know these things will be spoken of by later fathers but its absent in these works I've read so far.
Um. You don’t seem to realize that many bishops, including the bishop of Rome himself, was chosen at times by “popular acclamation” *into the Middle Ages*? Acclamation is otherwise known as winning the applause round. You say it like it’s some earth shattering gotcha.
