Papal Authority and the Early Church - Fr. Ray Ryland 

Thank you priest Raylan for your presentation is very informative and enlightening may the all Powerful Holy and Sacred Trinity bless you with an abundance of Truth Graces and Virtues and also protect you till the end of your day’s Amen Alleluia Deo Gratis Hosanna In Excelsis Deo Gloria In Excelsis Deo 🙏🐑🕊️🔥✨

A few quotes from some of the early Eastern churches and councils regarding the primacy of the Pope; Constantinople St. John Chrysostom, Patriarch of Constantinople (c. 387) And if one should say, 'How then did James receive the throne of Jerusalem?,' this I would answer that He appointed this man (Peter) teacher, not of that throne, but of the whole world. (Chrysostom, In Joan. Hom. 1xxxviii. n. 1, tom. viii) John Cassian, Monk (c. 430) That great man, the disciple of disciples, that master among masters, who wielding the government of the Roman Church possessed the principle authority in faith and in priesthood. Tell us, therefore, we beg of you, Peter, prince of Apostles, tell us how the Churches must believe in God (Cassian, Contra Nestorium, III, 12, CSEL, vol. 17, p. 276 The Council of Ephesus (431): "There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the Apostles, pillar of the faith and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the Keys of the Kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race, and to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins; who down even to this day and forever both lives and judges in his successors. The holy and most blessed Pope Celestine, according to due order, is his successor and holds his place." (Acts of the Council of Ephesus, session 3 Macedonius, Patriarch of Constantinople (466-516) Macedonius declared, when desired by the Emperor Anastasius to condemn the Council of Chalcedon, that 'such a step without an Ecumenical Synod presided over by the Pope of Rome is impossible.' (Macedonius, Patr. Graec. 108: 360a (Theophan. Chronogr. pp. 234-346 seq.) Emperor Justinian (520-533) Writing to the Pope: Yielding honor to the Apostolic See and to Your Holiness, and honoring your Holiness, as one ought to honor a father, we have hastened to subject all the priests of the whole Eastern district, and to unite them to the See of your Holiness, for we do not allow of any point, however manifest and indisputable it be, which relates to the state of the Churches, not being brought to the cognizance of your Holiness, since you are the Head of all the holy Churches. (Justinian Epist. ad. Pap. Joan. ii. Cod. Justin. lib. I. tit. 1). Let your Apostleship show that you have worthily succeeded to the Apostle Peter, since the Lord will work through you, as Surpreme Pastor, the salvation of all. (Coll. Avell. Ep. 196, July 9th, 520, Justinian to Pope Hormisdas St. Maximus the Confessor (c. 650)
How much more in the case of the clergy and Church of the Romans, which from old until now presides over all the churches which are under the sun John VI, Patriarch of Constantinople (715) The Pope of Rome, the head of the Christian priesthood, whom in Peter, the Lord commanded to confirm his brethren. (John VI, Epist. ad Constantin. Pap. ad. Combefis, Auctuar. Bibl. P.P. Graec.tom. ii. p. 211, seq.) St. Nicephorus, Patriarch of Constantinople (758-828) Without whom (the Romans presiding in the seventh Council) a doctrine brought forward in the Church could not, even though confirmed by canonical decrees and by ecclesiastical usuage, ever obtain full approval or currency. For it is they (the Popes of Rome) who have had assigned to them the rule in sacred things, and who have received into their hands the dignity of headship among the Apostles. (Nicephorus, Niceph. Cpl. pro. s. imag. c 25 [Mai N. Bibl. pp. ii. 30]). St. Theodore the Studite of Constantinople (759-826) Writing to Pope Leo III: Since to great Peter Christ our Lord gave the office of Chief Shepherd after entrusting him with the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, to Peter or his successor must of necessity every novelty in the Catholic Church be referred. [Therefore], save us, oh most divine Head of Heads, Chief Shepherd of the Church of Heaven. (Theodore, Bk. I. Ep. 23 St. Macarius of Egypt (371) The Chief, Peter. (Macarius, De Patientia, n. 3, p. 180) Moses was succeeded by Peter, who had committed to his hands the new Church of Christ, and the true priesthood. (Macarius, Hom. xxvi. n. 23, p. 101 Antioch Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus in Syria (450) I therefore beseech your holiness to persuade the most holy and blessed bishop (Pope Leo) to use his Apostolic power, and to order me to hasten to your Council. For that most holy throne (Rome) has the sovereignty over the churches throughout the universe on many grounds. (Theodoret, Tom. iv. Epist. cxvi. Renato, p. 1197)

“...And as the patriarch has authority to do all he wishes in a fitting manner in such things as are beneath his authority, so the patriarch of Rome has authority over all patriarchs, like the blessed Peter over all the community, for he who is in Rome also keeps the office of Peter in all the Church. He who transgresses against these things the ecumenical synod places under anathema” (Memra 9; Risha 8) Mar Abdisho of Soba 14th century canonist (from the Assyrian Church)

Recommended: “One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic: The Early Church was the Catholic Church,” a book by Kenneth D. Whitehead.

Thank you for all this detailed history! I am thinking the detractors here did not watch this! These "Deep in History" presentations are so helpful as we continue to defend Jesus' beautiful and unified Church and walk with many who are coming "Home".

I love Fr. Ryland! Great Lecture!

The St Maximus the Confessor quote and St. John Chrysostom quotes were dynamite.

Great channel with wonderful speakers.

This presentation is on point.

The council upholding the pope reminds me of how Jesus states that we are to handle disagreements within the church. First to go to the person individually then in a group then finally the church will throw them out of they don’t listen even to them. Just makes sense that the pope and therefore the church in general does the same.

Yes ive read those in the Office it is so obvious!

I didn't know Fr Ryland passed away.... Oh my....

95 : Clement / unity and moral to corinthians 190 : Victor / excommunication letters 257 : Sixte II vs Paul of Samosata 265 : Denys vs Denys 343 : Julius I cancelled local councils that condemned Athanasius versus arianism

What are the verses of the universal Church in Scripture? Thank you!

I think this could have been better, if it had addressed the Honorius question

And so we came to ROME

That Henry VIII joke totally got me 🤣

Why wasn't Papal supremacy stated in the Nicene Creed?

0:35 who has the keys to hades and death. Jesus or Peter.

The Orthodox didn't protest the papacy until the pope declared himself infallible which I disagree with also

well Dr. Hayes...the bible came from the Catholic Church so I think that trumps whatever opinion you have...you quote from Our book...so...enough said...it is you who have corrupted any opinion coming from the bible and Tradition

I have nothing against papacy, but East and West have such a different mentality that you can't unite them under one theology- Western Theology. West is based on juridical principles of Roman Empire ("Sin is an offense to God's Justice which needs to be compensated"), these principles lead to such concepts, as "Merits", "Supererogation", "indlugence" and so on, building a sense of self-indulgence, egocentrism and even arrogance in humans. When one starts looking for God's "reward" for each of his virtues, a guarantee for his place in heaven for 300 "our father" prayers a day and starts seeing himself as a saint just because of some merits that he (according to his own opinion or his self-provoked visions) gained -> all this leads to a spiritual death of a human. When one starts seeing himself an "achiever" in God's a eyes instead of a mere sinner and this sense of "achievement" is backed by some spiritual "legitimacy" -> we all know what will be the end of such story. Pharisees and Scribes are saying hello. Apart from all this, I personally have nothing against Roman Supremacy and papacy as a leader of the world christianity. I only see that losing its connection with the "Church Fathers" and eastern theology would destroy that necessary fundament that all christianity is based on (this is what happened to protestantism). I have lots of Catholics as friends and some of them are catholic priests and there is already lack of unity within the Catholic Church for such questions as "salvation", "spiritual life". Some of them still adhereing the classic juridical point of view from St Anselm, some of them look for a "modern" way of describing things (s. works of E. Schillebeeckx), some are latin traditionalists, some adhere to the eastern concept of seeing sin as "illness that Jesus cured". That's quite confusing for believers, since there's no anymore a defined way of seeing things nowadays.

mans teachings to man..blind leads the blind..

St. Peter, janitor of heaven, pray for us

In all love and respect, Catholics claim 'apostolic authority.' Yet, in Paul's time, some of the churches he founded had gone astray - in only a few years! Why do Catholics claim that it cannot happen to their church - after thousands of years? In fact, I think it has! Please allow me to explain. First, I bring to mind the Apostle Paul's fierce and stern warning, that even if he, Paul, were to preach a different gospel, he should be accursed; how much more, then, should we be aware of institutions, such as the Catholic church? Moreover, when the Catholic church teaches that, in order for the possiblity (not certainty) of being saved, a person must partake of Catholic communion and be baptized Catholic, they are in contradiction to Paul's gospel. That is, Paul preached, "Whoever calls upon the Name of the Lord shall be saved (Romans 10.13)," while Catholics teach, "Whoever calls upon the Name of the Lord, is baptized Catholic, and partakes of Catholic communion might be saved." I have asked innumerable Catholics, is this not a different, therefore damnable, gospel than what Paul taught? The Catholic response, so far, has been disturbing. Most pass over these posts, unconcerned. Others will quote Scripture that, I suppose, 'contradicts' the words of Paul, as if saying, "Well, there is more to it than that." However, so far, no Catholic has had the integrity nor courage to answer a simple question, "Was Paul wrong? Is it false to say that whoever calls upon the Name of the Lord shall be saved?" You can insert the sound of crickets here! No real answer! For example, "Catholic Truth" says that I am cherry picking, yet will not reply as to what Romans 10.13 actually means. One Catholic admitted, 'Yeah, it seems like a different gospel. I will have to look into that.' Yet, he was never heard from again. Others will say that my 'interpretation' is invalid - yet, I am not interpreting anything. I am simply comparing what Paul wrote to what Catholics teach. Are they not different? If you were me, which teaching would you follow? Which teaching do you follow? To whoever reads this, if anyone reads this (as Catholics rarely answer these posts), I hope that you will consider the words of Paul and not place unrestricted confidence in what your church teaches. Remember, on that last day, Christ will judge us as whether we kept His words, not those of the Catholic church. That is what my Bible tells me. That is what I believe. Jesus Christ is the light of the world.

What does one do with a Pomtiff with Marxist leanings and kisses the Sunni Imam on the lips and wants to unite Catholicism with Islam and a Pontiff trhat embraces an idol like Pachamana? I hope someone can give me an answer and not sweep this under the rug. I am a Protestant of 30 years now but yearn to come back to my Catholic roots and I loved Popes like Pius X,Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict but what is going on with this current Pope?? He gives me chills and puts the vrakes on me coming back to the Church.

Protestans all way say that all chritians are the rock not only St.Peter

We believe in the Pope as the first among equals That's what my Eastern Orthodox says The rest of the argument was political and geographical

To be a true and legitimate pope however, you have to posses the Catholic and Divine Faith like St. Peter. That's a condition to hold the Papal Office as many Doctors say. This condition is in no way met by the Pos-Vatican II Popes.

This is fallacy. It isn't true that Pope had decisive role in doctrinal matters. I'm ex-roman catholic. I converted to Holy Orthodoxy. I think that this is One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. I'm so happy because now I belong to the True Church. 😊

What a bs argument...

The bible is the only authority. you need to be saved.please listen to ex Catholic priest Richard he is able to expose Catholicism

Ray Ryland, So you are saying that the RCC has no God given revelations, YOU ARE RIGHT, because there is no one in the RCC with any God given authority to decide anything about God, His word or His revelations.

papacy has as much 'authority' as my dog does. there is no other Authority than the Holy Spirit - see John 16:13. this system is blasphemous and of Satan.