As A Christian, You Should Be a Catholic 

❤❤❤❤

Reading the Early Church Fathers helped me overcome my obstacles to becoming Catholic. What topics are the hardest for you?

@@NuLeif i am overcoming most issues i had And the ones i dont understand ive committed to accepting Gods wisdom and letting them go. Ive started again at Genesis, listen to Catholic and Orthodox teachers and life gets better and better. Yourself? What do u struggle with?

❤❤❤❤

I find 'revolution' or 'revolt' more apt than 'reformation'. A true reformation came afterwards at the Tridentine Council [1545-63], which reformed the church from within.

The separatists hate the word "Roman" but rely on the Letter to the Romans. Beam me up, Scotty!

@@HAL9000-su1mz letter to the Romans is specific to the local church has nothing to do with the worldwide Church

@@rjsledz Nonsense.

@EasternChristian333 "Churches" - Unfortunate phrasing I think. They all agree and are unified on doctrine and hold fast to the ApostolicTradition, the Magisterium and Sacred Scripture.

What we're saying is that the catholic church is the same institution as the one from scripture through an unbroken line of apostolic succession. Because we are Christians we should want to be like the ones of scripture therefore be part of the same church instituted by christ. Nuns aren't in scripture but I don't see the problem of women wanting to devote their lives to christ, cardinals are also not in scripture but are a form of practicality not necessity. Peter was the first pope, as the church has grown world wide of course he has seen a higher responsibility. As for priests/bishops read 1,2 Timothy and Titus presbyters are priests. In acts they baptized whole households which included babies. And for thousandth time saying catholics worship idols and Mary is a strawman. I hope this helps you see the catholic view, God bless.

Protestants need to defend their Protestant stance or beliefs because their conscience constantly tells them that they are wrong. As a Catholic my conscience doesn’t convict me for me being Catholic so no need for me to defend my Catholic beliefs. But Protestants bring up all kinds of scripture verses to try and justify their heresy. And the arrogance to tell us we need to prove to them Catholicism is right and yet thousands upon thousands of Protestant denominations are all legit? 👍 ok

Protestantism is heresy & the first attack on the Catholic Church in 1517, followed by Freemasonry in 1717 & Communism in 1917 Jesus founded His One True Church Mt 16 18-19 that became known as Catholic or Universal in 110 which codified your bible in 382. His Church is the fullness of Truth 1 Tim 3:15 & has existed for 2000 yrs, in spite of sinful men, proof of its divine origin No organisation, such as Protestantism can survive without hierarchy & a unifying authoritative interpreter, the fruits being confusion, division & scandal of 000’s of sects, resulting from personal interpretation, which is not of Jesus who willed unity Jn 17 11-21 No Protestant has ever been able to explain why personal interpretation, if guided by the Holy Spirit has resulted in 000’s sects proving that either the Holy Spirit is wrong or more likely, Protestantism! There are none so blind as those with a darkened intellect which the Holy Spirit obviously isn’t enlightening! Consider the damage caused to society by relativism, caused by there being many “truths” of Protestantism which have resulted in contraception, which until 1930, all denominations prohibited until the Anglican broke away in 1930, abortion, IVF, divorce, SSM, LGBGT, transgenderism etc. Protestantism has a lot to answer for!

Relatively speaking, the CC is in far better shape than heretical Protestantism!

@@geoffjs No1 thinks their church is bad.🙏

Much more complicated than that. Some in the east wanted Rome to move to Constantinople. Great idea, now that it is MUSLIM!!!

@HAL9000-su1mz yes, it's more complicated. But, by saying it's complicated, you can't excuse the RCC Pope's skipping biblical procedure. Even Paul withstood Peter when there was a dispute. There was no instant excommunication. There was also restoration. Something Rome did not pursue for centuries.

Well, no, that simply isn’t true. If the Pope anathematized certain eastern bishops then they had no authority to participate in papal election. The bishops who were not anathematized certainly elected a new Pope.

@@robertdolcetti450 Have you noted that a tiny minority of Orthodox come across almost exactly as Protestants? I believe it has far less to do with theology, and more to do with attitude and ego.

@@robertdolcetti450 Thank you for exposing one of RCC's biggest blind spots. The Pope is the head of the RCC. When the Pope anathamatized the Eastern churches, it was a unilateral decision and not done as laid out by Paul when rebuking a brother in Christ. Look to the Tanakh. Even the tribes would make a joint decision as to how they handled the Benjamites, it was not taken lightly not a choice by a single head over Israel. But what say you of Julius II or Paul III? Is the Pope blameless in all things? Or do you believe the story that the Pope is the only true vicar of Christ based on a story that the RCC says is true, but trust them bro, you don't need to research for yourself?

The One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church disagrees

Explain the Eucharistic Miracles in the RCC? The Holy Apparitions of Mary: Our Lady of Guadalupe, Our Lady of Lourdes, Our Lady of Fatima, Our Lady of Akita, Our Lady of Las Lajas. Who owns the Holy Cross, Crown of Thorns,Shroud of Turin, Veil of Veronica, Holy House of Loreto, Santa Anello(Wedding ring of Mary) Who owns relics from Mary and Joseph? RCC. You can't deny us. I know orthodox have Apostolic succession but look at the stats.

But Jesus is the Head of the Catholic church because popes are the successors right from Apostle Peter. And Apostle Peter died there in Rome, so pope build the church there where the Apostle Peter buried there in Rome.

battle of the false sick sad religions. i love it.

Litterraly not what orthodox post schims believed as showed by their action, they litterraly validate all Popes before them decided NOOO I WANT MORE POWER! Litterraly go read Iraneaus

The fear of the lord is the beginning of wisdom. Proverbs 9.

@@timothym2241 Yes, but only the beginning. ST. ALPHONSUS LIGUORI: “It is a great mistake to be afraid of God and to act in His presence like a timid and craven slave trembling with fright before his master.”

❤

Fear of the Lord is only the BEGINNING of wisdom. 1 JOHN 4:18: “There is no fear in love, but perfect love drives out fear because fear has to do with punishment, and so one who fears is not yet perfect in love.” @@timothym2241

@@timothym2241 Yes, but only the BEGINNING! 1 JOHN 4:18: “There is no fear in love, but perfect love drives out fear because fear has to do with punishment, and so one who fear is not yet perfect in love.”

He sought to replace one Pope but now has given birth to thousands.

Let's not forget that none of the Reformers were Protestant before separating from the Roman church. They were all deeply devoted, well educated, Catholics who saw something deeply wrong with the doctrines of the Romish church.

@@danielcristancho3524 No, they could not or did not read the Bible. Martin Luther split, accepting the Roman Catholic cannon. After a few years his various heresies were called out from the Bible, so he added the word "alone" after faith in part of Saint Paul's epistles and tried to remove 4 books from the New Testament and downgraded 7 from the old. Had he read the Bible and didn't have his own issues (being a rabbid anti Semite and hating peasants even more) he would not have left.

@@BensWorkshop ''No, they could not or did not read the Bible. '' This is ignorance. Are you telling me Wycliffe, Huss, Jerome, Luther, Knox, etc. were just a bunch of uneducated lunatics? You wish. All, and I repeat all were either teachers or priests in the Romish church. And as for scripture, there were stable boys who knew the scriptures better than Bishops. Your church outlawed the scriptures, that's a fact and kept the people in darkness as monks and priests taught them fables. That's why we call the period where the Romish church reigned supreme, the DARK AGES.

@@BensWorkshop ''Remove 4 books from the New Testament and downgraded 7 from the old.'' Yea, he did have a problem with 4 books in the NT, but in the end, HE DIDN'T REMOVE THEM. THAT'S WHAT COUNTS. As for the books of the Apocrypha, SPARE ME, those books do not agree with any of the 66 ACTUAL CANON BOOKS and they had been recently canonized in the 16th century. Strange they weren't canonized back when the ACTUAL books were compiled. Maybe there was something sinister about them. What say you?

I was overwhelmed by the same thought when I watched this video. Christ does not abandon or divorce his bride for a newer/cleaner/younger bride. ❤️

Then you have lost your salvation of Christ for a mere counterfeit which cannot save you.

@@NuLeif Christ's bride is clean, virtuous without blemish or a harlot.

@@hopenavajo1391 His bride is beautiful. He didn’t divorce her (schism) in order to marry another (second bride: protestant church options).

@@NuLeif the bride of Christ is pure,which is without any stain or blemish which keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.Apostate Protestantism has fallen and followed the apostate church(Revelation 17)

Correct. It is the one true church. Not the Catholic Church. Two major heresies: papal supremacy and filioque.

In that fact all Christians can find some root in the beginning. The only one that remained true was the Catholic Church in Rome. Same today as it was in the beginning. Just more little popes to deal with.

@@The_Patriarchy_Wrong, the Catholic Church is His One True Church Mt 16 18-19

Christ founded a CHURCH, both visible and invisible, and prayed it stayed one. His truth is absolute, and not what you want it to be. So He gave that church TEACHING AUTHORITY to always speak truth (John 16:13 and Matthew 16:18-19 among other verses). What He definitely DID NOT START were thousands of Protestant DENOMINATIONS that have varying degrees of the truth, but NEVER the full truth found in the church He founded. They were ALL founded by men, plus a woman or two. This is the point you are missing.

Beware of the sin of presumption, salvation is not assured, a heresy of Protestantism. Paul says that he works out his salvation with fear & trembling Phil 2:12 To deny His True Real Presence Jn 6:51 is another heresy which is why there is no salvation outside the CC for those who knowingly reject her. Jesus founded His One True Church Mt 16 18-19 that became known as Catholic or Universal in 110 which codified your bible in 382. His Church is the fullness of Truth 1 Tim 3:15 & has existed for 2000 yrs, in spite of sinful men, proof of its divine origin No organisation, such as Protestantism can survive without hierarchy & a unifying authoritative interpreter, the fruits being confusion, division & scandal of 000’s of sects, resulting from personal interpretation, which is not of Jesus who willed unity Jn 17 11-21 No Protestant has ever been able to explain why personal interpretation, if guided by the Holy Spirit has resulted in 000’s sects proving that either the Holy Spirit is wrong or more likely, Protestantism! There are none so blind as those with a darkened intellect which the Holy Spirit obviously isn’t enlightening! Consider the damage caused to society by relativism, caused by there being many “truths” of Protestantism which have resulted in contraception, which until 1930, all denominations prohibited until the Anglican broke away in 1930, abortion, IVF, divorce, SSM, LGBGT, transgenderism etc. Protestantism has a lot to answer for!

Realise that Protestantism is anti sacramental, thus cut off from His Grace, thus becoming secular with darkened intellects.

@@geoffjs You Catholics treat God like a vending machine; you plug in a Sacrament and expect a little packet of grace to be dispensed. But you always have to return for more and more Sacraments, because you never have enough grace to fully justify you. No matter how many packets of grace you get, you never seem to get rid of that ugly stain of sin. Too bad you don't know that God fully justifies the one who trusts in Jesus Christ as his Redeemer from sin, and that if you would believe in Christ with simple, childlike faith, you would be fully justified by the once-for-all sacrifice of the cross. Sacraments? We don't need no stinking sacraments... not when we have been blessed with every spiritual blessing in Christ! (read Ephesians 1).

@@rexlion4510You’re rejecting the Sacraments that He instituted, not very biblical as Protestants claim, like unbiblical sola fide, sola Scriptura, optional baptism, symbolic Eucharist, OSAS etc

If you understood the original Koine Greek, you would understand that when translated to English, the verb to "know" does NOT mean certainty. Read 2 Peter 3:15-18. You are relying on a poor interpretation of the bible...prevalent among Protestants who try to make salvation so easy. The true message of the bible says it is not easy. . Ask a bible scholar who was a former Protestant who converted to Catholicism, like Scott Hahn, or John Bergsma. Read a detailed explanation of that verse, or John 3:16, or Romans 10:9, from a CATHOLIC perspective, and you will realize you have been misled by false teachers.

If you think that's bad, you should hear me try to say "perspicuity" or "sacrosanctum concillum."

You have no idea how any language was pronounced in the 2nd century.

​@@midairfortress-revert I've never hearr Irenaeus pronounced any other way.

I think you should just relax. It’s no big deal! You knew who he was referring to, right?

The addition of “Roman” is meant as slander and to diminish the church claim of universality. From the beginning the church has been known simply as the Catholic Church which had its “headquarters” in Rome.

@@RedWolf5 And those who use the curse quote from Romans! BWAAHAAAHAAA!!!

Actually, the Catholic Church, one of the 23 rites celebrated within that Church is the Roman Rite. So perhaps Roman Vatholic is a bit specific.

@@markhischier2750 Actually, it's the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church, to be specific.

@@markhischier2750 Latin rite. Eastern Rite. The two lungs of belief.

Not true, don’t you know history? Orthodox broke from His One True Church in 1054 rejecting the papacy.

you are not submitted to Christ if you have rejected His bride.

@@midairfortress-revert I don't submit to Paganism. Turn from your worship of Tamuz my friend.

@@g.williams2047 Jesus founded His One True Church Mt 16 18-19 that became known as Catholic or Universal in 110 which codified your bible in 382. His Church is the fullness of Truth 1 Tim 3:15 & has existed for 2000 yrs, in spite of sinful men, proof of its divine origin No organisation, such as Protestantism can survive without hierarchy & a unifying authoritative interpreter, the fruits being confusion, division & scandal of 000’s of sects, resulting from personal interpretation, which is not of Jesus who willed unity Jn 17 11-21 No Protestant has ever been able to explain why personal interpretation, if guided by the Holy Spirit has resulted in 000’s sects proving that either the Holy Spirit is wrong or more likely, Protestantism! There are none so blind as those with a darkened intellect which the Holy Spirit obviously isn’t enlightening! Consider the damage caused to society by relativism, caused by there being many “truths” of Protestantism which have resulted in contraception, which until 1930, all denominations prohibited until the Anglican broke away in 1930, abortion, IVF, divorce, SSM, LGBGT, transgenderism etc. Protestantism has a lot to answer for!

Ok I will stay away from you.dadada.2984

You’re lost . Someday you’ll learn. I’ll pray for you.

PROTESTANTS CHURCHES ARE HERETIC

Nonsense. The Orthodox are shattered and fighting amongst themselves! Do you need the news stories? Good grief - you sound Protestant.

Not accurate. You have broken from the seat of Peter.

Orthodox litterraly said all Popes were valid until they contradicted us! you guys are lutherans without the Kabbalah

St. Peter was patriarch of Antioch before he went to Rome

@@dylanarmour6727 he was of jerusalem first too he just moved his office, doesnt mean he wansant pope btw, iraneus talks a lot about popery, and he was writtong against the first evidences or church splits by the orthodox, but trying ot make the pope not excommunitae them, he was talking to pope Victor

Tell me good sir: Where did you get that Bible? And how do you know with certainty that you have correctly understood its doctrine of salvation?

On separated churches and true Christians, Our Lord says (excerpts from Maria Valtorta's Notebooks 1945-1950, pp. 579 and 581): "Separated churches gave themselves a human constitution, preserving as regards the True Church only what they liked to preserve to call themselves 'Christian.' But to be Christians does not mean just to pray to Christ and preach Him in some way or other; it does not mean to be even more rigorist than true Catholics in certain matters. Yet that did not make them -- aside from rare exceptions -- 'Christians' but, on the contrary, made them 'Anti-Christians.' To be Christians means to form part of the Mystical Body (Eph 5:23) by belonging to the Church of Rome as Catholics and belonging to Christ by truly living as He taught and commanded to live (Matt 28:20). Otherwise, one is not a Christian in reality, not even if one is Catholic. Otherwise, people will be called Christians, but not be shoots nourished by Him (John 15:1-5). They will be detached shoots (John 15:6) which, even if they are not completely dry because a natural tendency towards Goodness make them act as just ones, are nevertheless branches that have replanted themselves on their own, in a PROUD way, and have produced a plant standing apart which yields fox-grapes and not good ones. To bear abundant and holy fruit, they must be grafted onto the True Vine. This is valid for both the individual shoots and those forming a life apart, the separated churches which have given their own constitution, conceived by their founder -- a man and not the God-Man -- cannot have that totality of spiritual life which only belonging to the Mystical Body maintains and protects against ever-greater separations, not only from the Body itself, but from the Truth and Light which render secure the way leading from the earthly Church to the Heavenly One." Why Our Lord said "Anti-Christians"? Our Lord said, "Whoever listens to you listens to Me. Whoever rejects you rejects Me and rejects the One who sent Me (Luke 10:16, John 13:20, Matt 10:40), and Whoever is not with Me, is against Me (Matt 12:30)." Our Lord is the Head of His Church, Mystical Body (Col 1:18, Eph 5:23). Therefore, whoever rejects the Catholic Church rejects Our Lord and becomes an Anti-Christian, rebelling against His Will that all, who believe in Him, be One (John 17:20-23) and follow His teachings which are taught by His Church integrally (Matt 28:20). Our Lord's words in Matt 7:21-23 -- "I never knew you. Depart from Me you evil doers" -- apply to whoever rejects His Church. Schism is not God's Will. Protestant churches did not even exist until Luther founded his in AD 1524, after rebelling against the Catholic Church and Our Lord, and separated themselves in a PROUD way against Our Lord, as the spirit of their master, the father of lies (John 8:44), leads them, the source of Pride and Deceit. How shall they preach unless they be sent (Rom 10:15)?

@@hyeminkwun9523 History shows us that Jesus didn't leave us a bible, the apostles didn't tell us which books belong in the bible, the church fathers never agreed on the 27 books of the NT through the 4th century, not only did they not agree but their individual lists of would-be NT canons were GROWING during this time, growing in numbers of hundreds of “inspired” NT writings. So, if it wasn't the Catholic/Orthodox church that compiled the 27 books of the NT in the 5th century with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and preserved it by laboriously hand copying them over and over throughout the centuries before the invention of the printing press, the “rule of faith” for many, please tell us, show us, who did? And if this church no longer exists today, what good is the text which came forth from her if she couldn't sustain herself?

@@srich7503 I'm not sure what your point is. The books in the Bible were determined by Council of Hippo in AD 393, later confirmed by Council of Carthage in AD 397, and used as a part of Church teachings together with the sacred oral traditions (2Thes 2:15) handed down from the Apostles. If one believes and trust in God, then there is no need to worry. For Our Lord and the Holy Spirit always remain with the Church and guide Her (John 14:16-17, 16:12),

I’m embarrassed for your ignorance & bigotry!

Since all Orthodox are not in communion with each other, one must ask, which Orthodox?

Orthodox church came to be in Constantinople in the four century, the chair of st Peter is in Rome, that goes back to Apostles Peter in Rome