St. Athanasius' Defense of Pope Liberius EXAMINED

St. Athanasius' Defense of Pope Liberius EXAMINED

DON'T FORGET TO SUBSCRIBE AND LIKE!

[susand]

What a complicated life Athanasius led!
And how saintly of him to be obedient to the pope, even when the pope is speaking contrary to his own will because of duress!
I am so glad we have such wonderful people waiting for us in heaven!

[kurtmurphy]

I am a Protestant convert and even though I don't always agree with Pope Francis he is still the bishop of Rome If you deny that you are a sedevacantist and you are automatically excommunicated from what I understand. you do away with the papacy just as Luther did.

[ThingsThatNeedDiscussed]

Another good one! Mike, you rock the Truth like Popeye rocks spinach! Cause your Michael the ‘splainer man! Toot-toot!

[scopeguy]

Pope Liberius is a saint in the Eastern tradition also 😂 oops

[mussmanword]

0:51 Did anyone else think of Booker T? 😂

[michaelrutz]

I would even question that Athanasius was excommunicated at all, because I read on New Advent: " Athanasius had refused to come, and Liberius on receiving new letters from the East had at once excommunicated him, and was now anxious to communicate with the Arian party. Duchesne thinks this letter was written in exile at the beginning of 357, and that Liberius had really sent an embassy (in 352-3), suggesting that Athanasius should come to Rome; now in his exile he remembers that Athanasius had excused himself, and alleges this as a pretext for condemning him. It seems inconceivable, however, that after heroically supporting Athanasius for years, and, having suffered exile for more than a year rather than condemn him, Liberius should motive his present weakness by a disobedience on the saint's part at which he had testified no resentment during all this stretch of time. On the contrary, St. Hilary's comment seems plainly to imply that the letter was forged by Fortunatian,  Metropolitan of Aquileia, one of the bishops who condemned Athanasius and joined the court party at the Council of Milan in 355."

So the "proof" might just be a forgery? Also, I noted in discussions that when it says "The letter has usually been considered a forgery since Baronius (2nd ed.), and Duchesne expressed the common view when he said in his "Histoire ancienne de l'Église" (1907) that St. Hilary meant us to understand that it is spurious. But its authenticity was defended by Tillemont, and has been recently upheld by Schiktanz and Duchesne (1908), all Catholic writers.", at least from radtrad viewpoint, one should note that Duchesne was suspected of modernism and Tillemont educated at Port-Royal, the bastion of jansenism in 17th century France?

Radtrads will take any proof they get, even from people they otherwise consider heretics, as long as they're useful

[jaredwilliams]

Thanks so much Michael! Will you do another video on Pope Honorius?

[nataliavinsensia]

There’s only One ABBA Father Jehovah in heaven (Matt 23:9)... He is THE Holy One.. why do you guys calling the pope as holy? The Ficar of Christ is The Holy Spirit, because Jesus said I will not leave you orphan, I will send The Holy Spirit to be with you..(John 14:18; Jesus says I wii always be with you till the end of time (Matt 28:20))... so who needs the pope? Pope is a regular sinner human being like the rest of us Romans 3:23; he was not born holy!!!