Ethan Fetters
Region: US
Friday 07 August 2026 16:27:05 GMT
6130
276
57
19
Music
Download
Comments
TylerC :
The term “universal bishop” you read in English meant closer to “sole bishop” in the Latin, so there’s zero contradiction in the Popes statement with Vatican 1.
2026-08-07 17:31:54
33
stimwz :
Pope St Gregory I rejected that particular title especially when referring to the Patriarch of Constantinople of whom he also wrote “With regard to the church in Constantinople, who can doubt that it is subject to the Apostolic See?” He preferred the title “Servant of the Servants of God” which to this day is an official title for the Pope and “universal bishop” isnt. Because leadership in Christianity is meant to mirror Christ’s servant leadership. But them being a servant doesn’t undermine the fact they are to lead as our Lord who was the master and said “A servant is not greater than his master yet I am among you as one who serves”. In that same way Pope St Gregory objecting to the title doesn’t undermine the fact that he believed the Patriarch of Constantinople was subject to him. Pope Honorious was condemned for failing to condemn the monothelite heresy rather than teaching it from his office so he never formally taught heresy. And the decrees from the Pope not being reformable by the consent of the church is how all the ecumenical councils have been for all time. The canons from the first 7 councils were only binding once they were ratified by the Pope. This is why the east hasn’t had a council since 787 AD and the Coptics since 431 AD. They have no bishop with the authority to bind the entire church. A perfect example of this is Canon 28 at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD. The papal legate bishop Lucentius demanded the canon be rescinded invoking the authority of the bishop of Rome as ruler over the whole church. All of the eastern patriarchs accepted this, no one objected and they all signed this. Pope St Leo the Great then rejected Canon 28 when it was brought to him and it was never binding upon the church after that. Oriental Orthodox themselves will tell you that part of why they rejected Chalcedon was because it was teaching papal supremacy in this blatant way. After Pope St Leo’s Tome condemning Monophysitism was read, all the bishops east and west cried out “Peter has spoken through Leo”. There’s only one church today where Peter speaks through Leo….🙏❤️We’re waiting for you brother
2026-08-07 18:31:54
13
Leland ☦️ :
the Eastern Orthodox Church is the only Church of Christ
2026-08-07 20:31:49
6
𝕵𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖙𝖍𝖆𝖓 ☩ 🇻🇦 :
Brotha those are not good arguments
2026-08-08 09:07:48
10
Mondo Fishing Apparel :
This has been debunked so many times
2026-08-07 21:09:51
3
naode0 :
Every council since 431 doesnt line up with the early church
2026-08-07 21:38:36
2
Static Juice :
Why build your faith on man’s shifting traditions and foundations?
2026-08-07 20:34:21
1
john hamilton :
every pope calls self servant of servants and then acts like a king pretty much.
2026-08-08 11:18:13
1
☦️🇻🇦Servant of Christ🇻🇦☦️ :
this argument of the universal bishop is not ok, because the implications believed were that this meant he wanted to disqualify all the other bishops
2026-08-08 12:29:10
1
Trialflip🏵️ :
become Lutheran dude
2026-08-07 18:02:43
0
toma✝🇻🇦 :
this guy refuted himself
2026-08-08 20:35:55
0
Joseph Mark :
I would suggest all watch Eric Ybarra 's conversation with Cameron Bertuzzi on this on YT ..He goes to considerably lengths debunking the EO take on this..
2026-08-08 09:24:17
2
jnb3855 :
yo have you read any patristic writings, or any conciliar texts
2026-08-09 03:06:11
0
rona ✞ :
Bingo
2026-08-07 16:36:44
3
Andrew Bryson :
I can’t find it either, but I believe it became a moral and physical necessity.
2026-08-07 18:22:50
0
Max (Son of Charlemagne) :
What do you think of the prophecy of Our Lady of La Salette? That the Vatican would become the seat of antichrist?
2026-08-07 17:25:15
1
🇻🇦 ✟ :
“At the time when your Fraternity was advanced to Sacerdotal dignity, you remember what peace and concord of the churches you found. But, with what daring or with what swelling of pride I know not, you have attempted to seize upon a new name, whereby the hearts of all your brethren might have come to take offense. I wonder exceedingly at this, since I remember how you would fain have fled from the episcopal office rather than attain it. And yet, now that you have got it, you desire so to exercise it as if you had run to it with ambitious intent. For, having confessed yourself unworthy to be called a bishop, you have at length been brought to such a pass as, despising your brethren, to covet to be named the only bishop.” Gregory the Great, Registrum Epistolarum 5.18, New Advent He is not condemning Universal Jurisdiction but the implication of the title “universal bishop”
2026-08-10 06:47:44
1
Rich Lopez :
According to Fundamentalist commentators, their best case lies with Pope Honorius. They say he specifically taught Monothelitism, a heresy that held that Christ had only one will (a divine one), not two wills (a divine one and a human one) as all orthodox Christians hold. But that’s not at all what Honorius did. Even a quick review of the records shows he simply decided not to make a decision at all. As Ronald Knox explained, “To the best of his human wisdom, he thought the controversy ought to be left unsettled, for the greater peace of the Church. In fact, he was an inopportunist. We, wise after the event, say that he was wrong. But nobody, I think, has ever claimed that the pope is infallible in not defining a doctrine.” The rejection of papal infallibility by “Bible Christians” stems from their view of the Church. They do not think Christ established a visible Church, which means they do not believe in a hierarchy of bishops headed by the pope.
2026-08-07 16:34:18
1
Theguynoah :
Hey brother what that document is asserting is the only thing that can stop it is the Holy Spirit and not the church.The church does not operate on a majority consensus vote bc it has been the case where the majority is a heresy.The nuance is the Pope with his brother Bishops acting together in solemn pronouncement.It also is not denying the census fidelium.The Pope does not need a Juridical “consent” from the church although he always seek moral “Consent” in keeping with antiquity tradition ect.
2026-08-07 21:22:04
0
theo :
With Honorius I, he never defined the heresy of monothelitism, instead, it was his own private opinion. His successor, Agatho, did define dyothelitism, and he did this through an ex cathedra statement, which was infallible in and of itself, and thus had the authority to correct the error of his predecessor.
2026-08-08 12:45:43
0
Dinulescu Dinu :
Yes : you can not find, because you do not want to find 😂 Today, with a simple question to Gemini / Grok, etc...you can find it .
2026-08-07 17:22:42
0
☦ꙋ҄ҏҝє҃☦ :
Its also to note that this "inffalible" council made a falabe statement quoting 4th (Latin) Constantinople council of 869/70 which was anathemised by their own pope in true(Greek) one in 879/80. It wasnt until the 1100s that the west accepted the anathemised one&rejected the true one AND it was done by some scholars(not the pope or a council) who sought the right for the papacy fighting against worldly kings. So ask yourself which of these was infalible? Contradiction upon contradiction is what western heterodoxy is
2026-08-07 18:12:12
0
Joshua :
Learning towards Orthodoxy, brother? @Ethan Fetters
2026-08-07 16:47:37
1
To see more videos from user @ethanjohnfetters, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.
