Forwarded from โ๐๐ฅ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ธ๐ก๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฅ๐๐๐ค ๐๐๐ โ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ค
YouTube
Hail Mary in the bible ? PROVING the Hail Mary from the bible and Apostolic tradition
in this video I prove the Hail Mary from both the bible and Apostolic tradition
find us on telegram @CATHOLICAPOLOGETICSANDPOLEMICS
find us on telegram @CATHOLICAPOLOGETICSANDPOLEMICS
Forwarded from โ๐๐ฅ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ธ๐ก๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฅ๐๐๐ค ๐๐๐ โ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ค
โ๐๐ฅ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ธ๐ก๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฅ๐๐๐ค ๐๐๐ โ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ค
https://youtu.be/A2rXQ-1vBIU?si=dOQ1gPEFSnHDLkde
Subscribe to our Official YouTube Channel
GUYS... THIS IS A SCAMMER LARPING AS ONE OF OUR OUR CHANNELS .
Kindly note that our Channels 1)@prothate1 and
2)@CATHOLICAPOLOGETICSANDPOLEMICS
Will never DM you asking you for money or anything
Kindly note that our Channels 1)@prothate1 and
2)@CATHOLICAPOLOGETICSANDPOLEMICS
Will never DM you asking you for money or anything
๐2
Forwarded from โ๐ฃ๐ ๐ฅ โ๐๐ฅ๐
A Craptist channel posted this
Did they forget that the Europeans who took part in the reconquista were Catholic?
They would hate them and align with the Muslim had they been there
Did they forget that the Europeans who took part in the reconquista were Catholic?
They would hate them and align with the Muslim had they been there
๐10
Forwarded from โ๐๐ฅ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ธ๐ก๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฅ๐๐๐ค ๐๐๐ โ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ค
THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH ๐ป๐ฆ IS TRULY ONE HOLY CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC..... AS WE PROFESS IN THE CREED . ๐ฅโ ๐ป๐ฆโค๏ธโ๐ฅ
Eastern Orthodoxy is NOT ONE , NOT HOLY , NOT CATHOLIC, And Although It is APOSTOLIC.... it's unfortunately SCHISMATIC.
EASTERN ORTHODOXY has Ordained Women deacons, it has Permitted divorce and remarriage , it has allowed Contraceptives with "no dogmatic Objection" Although the Church fathers and the true Catholic faith were clear that Contraception is A sin . Recently it has come to Light that Orthodoxy allows animal sacrifices as well . Something which again the Church , the ecumenical Councils and THE HOLY BIBLE have condemned
Eastern Orthodoxy is NOT ONE , NOT HOLY , NOT CATHOLIC, And Although It is APOSTOLIC.... it's unfortunately SCHISMATIC.
EASTERN ORTHODOXY has Ordained Women deacons, it has Permitted divorce and remarriage , it has allowed Contraceptives with "no dogmatic Objection" Although the Church fathers and the true Catholic faith were clear that Contraception is A sin . Recently it has come to Light that Orthodoxy allows animal sacrifices as well . Something which again the Church , the ecumenical Councils and THE HOLY BIBLE have condemned
๐11
โ๐ฃ๐ ๐ฅ โ๐๐ฅ๐
BIG PAGAN/PAJEET L
Pagans will always LOSE
Forwarded from โ๐๐ฅ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ธ๐ก๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฅ๐๐๐ค ๐๐๐ โ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ค
St Basil himself says that the creed of Constantinople 381 added to the nicene creed and even was open to additions about the incarnation.
Well well well, I guess the consensus of fathers support the addition of the Filioque after all
Well well well, I guess the consensus of fathers support the addition of the Filioque after all
๐ฅ4
Forwarded from โ๐๐ฅ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ธ๐ก๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฅ๐๐๐ค ๐๐๐ โ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ค
โ๐๐ฅ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ธ๐ก๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฅ๐๐๐ค ๐๐๐ โ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ค
St Basil himself says that the creed of Constantinople 381 added to the nicene creed and even was open to additions about the incarnation. Well well well, I guess the consensus of fathers support the addition of the Filioque after all
Firstly , Constantinople 1 Wouldn't be an Ecumenical council unless a Pope Validated and RATIFIED IT as a Council .It would have been a Mere Synod without Papal ratification
So what gave the Orthodox easterners the right to Add the the Latter half of the Creed to the existing Nicene Creed.
(Because the Creed we recite today is the Nicene-Constantinopolitan creed) .
If an Orthodox considers adding one word to the Creed to be "another creed," then wouldn't removing large chunks of the original Nicene Creed also qualify as "another creed"? If an Orthodox were to retort, "But the filioque clause is heretical, so it corrupts the Creed," then the Orthodox condemn themselves for being in communion with the Western Church, which taught the filioque. As Orthodox author Edward Siecienski notes, "by the late sixth century the filioque achieved a level of acceptance in the West bordering on unanimity,.
The Numerous Church fathers accepted the Filioque as well... the Orthodox have No reason to Reject it
So what gave the Orthodox easterners the right to Add the the Latter half of the Creed to the existing Nicene Creed.
(Because the Creed we recite today is the Nicene-Constantinopolitan creed) .
If an Orthodox considers adding one word to the Creed to be "another creed," then wouldn't removing large chunks of the original Nicene Creed also qualify as "another creed"? If an Orthodox were to retort, "But the filioque clause is heretical, so it corrupts the Creed," then the Orthodox condemn themselves for being in communion with the Western Church, which taught the filioque. As Orthodox author Edward Siecienski notes, "by the late sixth century the filioque achieved a level of acceptance in the West bordering on unanimity,.
The Numerous Church fathers accepted the Filioque as well... the Orthodox have No reason to Reject it
๐3
Forwarded from โ๐๐ฅ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ธ๐ก๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฅ๐๐๐ค ๐๐๐ โ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ค
Our divine Redeemer has established only one visible Church in this world. That Church is the one indivisible, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. The individuals, which make up the Universal Church should be one in faith, in the sacraments and governance. She shines in the world as the Kingdom of God unified in faith and in the sacraments and consequently as the One Spouse of Jesus Christ. In order to be unified with this Church neither you nor I, who are the children of Oriental Churches, need reject our ecclesial traditions, liturgy and our spiritual patrimony. The foundation stone of the Church, namely Peter and the architect of the Church Paul have their resting place in Rome. Holy Father Pope represents these apostles as the founding Fathers of the Church of Christ. So for you and me and for our Churches, it is necessary to remain in communion with the Church of Rome
~Venerable Mar Ivanios
(Metropolitan of the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church ) in full Communion with Rome ๐ป๐ฆ
โค6
โWe Orthos arenโt heretic like the Latinsโ
Orthos: โThe prophet Mohammed is an apostle. He is a man of God, who worked for the Kingdom of God and created Islam, a religion to which belong one billion people....Our God is the Father of all men, even of the Moslems and Buddhists. I believe that God loves the Moslems and the Buddhists...When I speak against Islam or Buddhism, then I am not found in agreement with God....My God is the God of other men also. He is not only God for the Orthodox. This is my position.โ
PATRIARCH PARTHENIOS OF ALEXANDRIA
(Orthodoxos Typos, Issue Number 854, Athens, Greece;
statement made in May, 1982)
Orthos: โThe prophet Mohammed is an apostle. He is a man of God, who worked for the Kingdom of God and created Islam, a religion to which belong one billion people....Our God is the Father of all men, even of the Moslems and Buddhists. I believe that God loves the Moslems and the Buddhists...When I speak against Islam or Buddhism, then I am not found in agreement with God....My God is the God of other men also. He is not only God for the Orthodox. This is my position.โ
PATRIARCH PARTHENIOS OF ALEXANDRIA
(Orthodoxos Typos, Issue Number 854, Athens, Greece;
statement made in May, 1982)
๐คฎ16โค1
Forwarded from โ๐๐ฅ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ธ๐ก๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฅ๐๐๐ค ๐๐๐ โ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ค
WHY THE CATHOLIC POSITION IS CORRECT โค๏ธ and why the EASTERN ORTHODOX are wrong
*What the Catholic Church Actually Teaches:*
๏ปฟ
รรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรร
รรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรร
รรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรร
โใSo what's the issue with Palamite theology? ๐
*Catholic Teaching: We Can Truly Know God's Essence, Though Not Comprehensively*
The Catholic Church holds to *divine simplicity**:
*Key Points:*
โ ). *God's essence is real and knowable-though never fully comprehensible.*
- We can know that God is and what He is*, by **analogy* and *grace* (not univocally, and not exhaustively).
- By grace (especially in the *beatific vision), the soul is elevated* to see God's *essence directly* (cf. *ST I, q.12*).
โ 2). *Revealed names of God (Wisdom, Love, Truth, Justice)* reflect His essence, not just operations or effects.
โ 3). *Grace is a real created participation in the divine nature* (2 Peter 1:4), giving us true knowledge of God, even now.
โ 4). *The beatific vision* is the direct vision of God's essence, as defined at:
- *Council of Florence (Denz. 693)*
- *Benedict XII, Benedictus Deus (1336):*
> "They see the divine essence with an intuitive and face-to-face vision, without the mediation of any creature..."
Result:๐๐
*What the Catholic Church Actually Teaches:*
1). *God's essence is not *comprehensible** But it is *knowable analogically and TRULY.*
> *St. Thomas Aquinas (ST I, q. 12, a.1):*
> "We cannot know what God is, but only what He is not; and how other beings stand in relation to Him."
YET in a.12, he also affirms:
> "By grace, we do know God Himself, though not perfectly."
So:
- *We don't comprehend* God (that's total grasp).
- *But we can know* real truths about Him-even aspects of His essence (e.g., that He is Being Itself, Truth Itself, Goodness Itself).
๏ปฟ
รรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรร
2). *We know God's essence by participation* Sanctifying grace gives us a *created participation in the *divine nature* (2 Peter 1:4). That includes the *intellective vision* of God in heaven (*beatific vision*) and *true supernatural knowledge* of God now.
> *Denzinger 1000 (Council of Vienne):*
> "The soul truly sees the divine essence."
(Though not in this life, except through extraordinary mystical grace.)
รรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรร
3). *The Catechism affirms both mystery and real knowledge*
> *CCC 43:*
> "Even when He reveals Himself, God remains a mystery beyond words: 'If you understood Him, it would not be God."
But also:
> *CCC 36:*
> "God... can be known with certainty by the natural light of human reason."
> *CCC 299:*
> "God created everything according to His wisdom. Hence creation reflects His truth and goodness... and is destined for His glory."
These are statements about *God's essence* being *partially knowable**, since we know that God *is Wisdom, Truth, Goodness, etc.
รรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรร
โใSo what's the issue with Palamite theology? ๐
Eastern Orthodoxy (esp. via *Gregory Palamas) asserts a real distinction* between: God's *essence* (utterly unknowable) - God's *energies* (uncreated but knowable)
Catholicism agrees with the *mystery, but rejects a real metaphysical distinction* within God-since that would violate divine simplicity.
Instead, Catholic theology sees these as *virtual* or *rational distinctions* based on how creatures *experience God, not divisions *in God Himself. The Catholic Church teaches that while we cannot fully comprehend God's essence, we do know real truths about it-especially that He is *Being itself*, *Goodness itself*, *Wisdom itself*. These aren't created intermediaries or mere effects-they are who God is, and we can know this truly, albeit imperfectly. To say otherwise is to make God utterly unknowable, which collapses into agnosticism or apophatic despair**-which the Fathers *never taught*.
NOW here's a *clear, forceful contrast* between the *Catholic* and *Eastern Orthodox* positions regarding God's Essence, what we can know about Him, and the implications for theology and spirituality:
รรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรร
*Catholic Teaching: We Can Truly Know God's Essence, Though Not Comprehensively*
The Catholic Church holds to *divine simplicity**:
God is not composed of parts, energies, or attributes added onto an essence-**He is* His essence (e.g., *Deus est Ipsum Esse Subsistens*, "God is Being Itself").
*Key Points:*
โ ). *God's essence is real and knowable-though never fully comprehensible.*
- We can know that God is and what He is*, by **analogy* and *grace* (not univocally, and not exhaustively).
- By grace (especially in the *beatific vision), the soul is elevated* to see God's *essence directly* (cf. *ST I, q.12*).
โ 2). *Revealed names of God (Wisdom, Love, Truth, Justice)* reflect His essence, not just operations or effects.
โ 3). *Grace is a real created participation in the divine nature* (2 Peter 1:4), giving us true knowledge of God, even now.
โ 4). *The beatific vision* is the direct vision of God's essence, as defined at:
- *Council of Florence (Denz. 693)*
- *Benedict XII, Benedictus Deus (1336):*
> "They see the divine essence with an intuitive and face-to-face vision, without the mediation of any creature..."
Result:๐๐
Forwarded from โ๐๐ฅ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ธ๐ก๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฅ๐๐๐ค ๐๐๐ โ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ค
God is a *knowable mystery. We will never exhaust* His essence-but we will *truly behold and know it* in heaven. Even in this life, we know Him really, though imperfectly
รรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรร
*Orthodox (Palamite) Theology:
### โผ๏ธ Key Points: ๐๐
โ 1). *No one-NOT EVEN IN HEAVEN-can ever know or see God's Essence.*
โ 2). All interaction with God is through His energies, not His essence.
โ 3). Deification (*theosis*) is union with the *uncreated energies, but not with the essence* of God.
โ 4). This is used to preserve God's *transcendence and unknowability, but it risks positing metaphysical division* within God.
โ โ RESULT โผ๏ธ:
God remains forever hidden in His essence, even for the saints in glory. The beatific vision, as understood in Catholicism, is denied. Saints experience the light of Tabor, not the essence of God.
รรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรร
รรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรร
*Orthodox (Palamite) Theology:
God's Essence Is Absolutely Unknowable-Now and Forever*
Following *St. Gregory Palamas* (14th c.), Eastern Orthodoxy developed a *real distinction* between:
- God's *essence* (*ousia*) utterly and eternally *unknowable*
- God's *energies* (*energeiai*) - *uncreated operations* by which God manifests Himself to creation
### โผ๏ธ Key Points: ๐๐
โ 1). *No one-NOT EVEN IN HEAVEN-can ever know or see God's Essence.*
โ 2). All interaction with God is through His energies, not His essence.
โ 3). Deification (*theosis*) is union with the *uncreated energies, but not with the essence* of God.
โ 4). This is used to preserve God's *transcendence and unknowability, but it risks positing metaphysical division* within God.
โ โ RESULT โผ๏ธ:
God remains forever hidden in His essence, even for the saints in glory. The beatific vision, as understood in Catholicism, is denied. Saints experience the light of Tabor, not the essence of God.
รรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรรร
Forwarded from โ๐๐ฅ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ธ๐ก๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฅ๐๐๐ค ๐๐๐ โ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ค
Why This Matters:
- Catholicism teaches a God who is *intimately knowable, even in His mystery-who lifts us into direct communion* with His very Being.
-whereas The Orthodox Palamite view *locks God away* behind an eternal metaphysical veil. Theosis becomes interaction with what God does, but not union with who God is.
That's not the God of Moses, who said "I AM"*, or of Christ, who said *"Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God."
> + "This is eternal life: that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent." - John 17:3
> *"For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; THEN I SHALL KNOW FULLY, even as I am fully known."*
> - *1 Corinthians 13:12 (RSV-CE)*
### + What This Implies:
"Now... dimly": In this life, our knowledge of God is limited, mediated by faith, symbols, and grace.
"Then... face to face": In glory, we will behold God directly, not merely His effects or energies.
- *"I shall know fully": Paul isn't saying he'll become omniscient, but that his knowledge of God Himself* will be complete in its mode, appropriate to a creature united to God by grace.
This verse *flatly contradicts the Palamite idea that God's essence is forever unknowable even in eternity. Paul speaks of *a future state* where the veil is removed and the soul sees God Himself-face to face.
> As St. John says: *"We shall see Him as He is."* *1 John 3:2*
๐3