The Catholicism or Orthodoxy DEBATE: Tim Gordon vs. Jay Dyer | The Rift

Well, just like the tech issues that we recently had where our entire system shorted. Sorry about that. Sometimes confusion comes into our lives. We often don't understand the reason why we live. We don't understand the purpose of our existence. And we're trying to find out exactly what it is we're supposed to be doing here.

Now, many Americans have decided that, you know, the way that we find out who God is and what our purpose is is through Christianity. But when you approach Christianity, it's not as simple as you think. Sometimes you look around you, there's Protestants, there's in there, there's evangelicals, there's the uh mainline denominations, then you go out and then there's Orthodox, there's Catholic.

But if you notice today with the gay flags in front of churches and the pastrices, the female pastors and the weird ideology, a lot of young people are finding out that the modern church perhaps may not be the best version of Christ's holy church. In fact, maybe, just maybe, the people of the past knew a little more than we did.

When looking back in history myself, I found there's two churches. There's the Catholic Church, we'll call it in general, and the Orthodox Church. They both claim to be the true church. One follows the papacy, it looks like the other one doesn't. And yet at the same time, when you ask either of them, really, where should I go to church? They'll say, well, most of them like you should go to Catholic, but you know, you can go to Orthodox. He has an Orthodox say you can go to Catholic, but you should go to Orthodox. So why do we have both then? Which one is true? Which one is the way to be a part of Christ's eternal body to be a part of the moving living breathing unit of Christ?

Joining me today to discuss the true church whether it's Orthodox or Catholicism. We are talking to experts in their field, Jay Dyer. He's a podcast host, author of many books and an avid reader. Jay Dyer, welcome back to the show. Let us know who you are. uh for those that are just joining for the first time, you want to explain a little bit about what it means to be an Orthodox or what what that even uh you know defines itself as and a little bit about uh where people can find your podcast.

Yeah, Jay Dyer, I um have been Orthodox since about 2017 and uh prior to that was Roman Catholic for many years, pretty dedicated Latin massgoer, was raised Protestant in the reformed Baptist in the reformed tradition. Um and uh yeah, I I would say that what Orthodox Christianity is is we believe it is the um church of the first millennium still preserved and still holding to those cenodal traditions uh that are essentially found within any of the uh canonical orthodox churches throughout the world. So um we think it is the church uh that Christ established. We think that it doesn't change. uh there might be political geopolitical issues that happen, but the fundamental constitution and beliefs of the church do not change. And so we take uh truth to be the most important category over things like numbers and things like that. And uh me personally, you can find me at jaysnalysis.com and uh fourth hour host of the Alex Jones show for the last five or six years. And I write for the Sam Hyde show. Yeah.

Jack of all trades and also an incredible guy behind the scenes. He's the real deal by the way. And uh joining me to represent Catholicism, we're find out a lot about it. Timothy Gordon. He's also a podcast host. Uh pretty influential in his field and all around. I'd say you consider yourself a theologian. Correct. You hear me? Yeah. There we go. There it is. I was scared for a second. All right. I'm a toistic philosopher. Uh trained trained graduate philosophy, but but I taught theology for many many years. And yeah, the the Roman Catholic Church is uh the centerpiece of of what I do. Uh physics, metaphysics, ethics, politics. That's what my podcast is on. Uh rules for retrogrades is the name. And I try to clarify I try to clarify the issues because the Catholic Church receives so much attention. There's so much myth and disinformation out there. A lot of it's u genuinely confusing to people and it's a a big tent. We have orthodoxy that always has to be separated from the chaff of heterodoxy and there's been um some confusion. Some of it is legitimate confusion and some of it is uh confusion that has been stoked by media and opponents of the church. But a lot of it's been legitimate uh in the last 60 years. So, I try to be a voice of clarity, a lay voice of clarity, and that's what I do on my podcast, the rule rules for retrogrades. Uh, Timothy Gordon. Awesome.

We'll be uh talking a little bit about their podcast later on um and the rules in just a few moments. My name is Elijah Schaefer. It is approximately 7:45 p.m. Eastern time in the United States. We are usually live right now, Monday, Wednesday, Friday at 7 p.m. Eastern time. We usually don't have our production booth blow up in the middle of things. But if you want to know this, we can do what we should always do and we'll just blame the Jews. No, I'm totally kidding. That's not what we're going to do. Uh we're uh Thank you guys for joining. We are going to be reading the super chats periodically throughout. So you send them in. I see uh Rachel Wilson's in there for $20 saying to you guys, much love to Tim and Jay. Much love to Elijah for hosting. America will become Orthodox. America will become holy. Will it? Let's talk about that and so much more here. Another episode of The Rift live right now. Let's start the show.

[Music] [Music] Welcome back to the Rift. You can find us at rifttv.com. New articles every single day on culture, politics, and religion. Also, just a little announcement. If you're joining us for the first time, this is a new network. just launched a few weeks ago and this is one of our shows. So, we're hammering out some of the details. We have a couple new shows launching including Joel Webbin uh who's a uh Protestant is coming on and doing a new show for our network. We're very excited about that. Plus, Sarah Stark has a new channel. If you don't know, it's Sarah uh Stalk on YouTube. She's also launching a new program and we also have a new White House show with the Gateway Pundit and Jordan Conradson. We're launching uh on September 15th. So, God is good. We got our security clearances for the White House and we're very happy to be here.

Anyway, joining us today are my guests Timothy Gordon and Jay Dyer. They're both uh infamous, I should say, in their own right and have both come on this show previously to discuss what it means to be Orthodox, what it means to be a Cath Catholic. And so, if you want to watch those episodes, you can go back. You can type in their names and you can find them. They're very, very, very good, very developed uh individuals and thinkers. Let's go and let's talk about um what we're going to be doing. So, we're going to be mainly t covering three topics today. Uh, one one topic is going to be whether Christ did or did not establish a visible head of church. We're talking about apostolic succession in its own way. What really defines the church? You know, the um orthodox and Catholic disagree on that. Plus topic two, we're going to be talking about the Holy Spirit. Does or does not uh hypothetically proceed from the sun. So, we're going to kind of talk about the trinity, talk about what's going on there. Um, this is a very interesting topic, especially for me background in Protestantism. And then number three, we're going to talk about the divine essence is or is not absolutely simple. and for the affirmative position not composed of any parts or potencies.

Now, in the middle of these topics, we'll have a normal structure. There will be an opening statement. There will be a rebuttal. There will be a cross-examination and a closing. This is a very formal debate. So, if you're not familiar with that style on this channel, we're trying it for the first time today because these are academics. They are not like myself. But in the middle of these topics, we will have a little bit of a break. So, uh these will be a bit uh lengthy. You might want to take out notes. And um we will also be asking a few other questions uh more relevant to the culture and topics and what their responses are as the uh Catholic and the Orthodox Church. All right, Jay, we'll start with you with your opening statement. Our topic number one that we are discussing whether Christ did or did not establish a visible head of church. We're talking I believe the correct phrase apostolic succession. I know you guys believe in the uh I know you guys believe in in uh uh they believe in in the in the papacy, right? And you don't. Correct. We agreed on uh divine uh divine simplicity or act as purist first. So my information out here we know that I have I have the opposite on my on my on my end. So let's let's go to that. So you said uh we'll start with the we have as topic three but we'll go to uh we'll go to that one uh second or you have that one second or third. Which one? Uh the uh visible head of church. Uh it's all over here. So I just have this one. All right. Let's go let's go to let's go to topic uh we'll change topic three to topic one here. Let's talk about the divine essence is or is not absolutely simple. Go ahead your opening statement.

Right. So if I look at scholastic dictionaries from Roman Catholic texts, we see that for God or for uh philosophy or scholastic philosophy in general, pure act is defined as simple for perfection without any imperfection. It is free from any potency in the strictest sense. It is therefore unqualified perfection of existence without any passive or limited potency. And this is from the dictionary scholastic philosophy. Aquinus says something very similar and as does the student uh excuse me the one of the premier to the last century in defining who god is there is this beginning point that comes from helenic metaphysics. uh we would not as orthodox necessarily agree with every uh you disagree with every usage of the word pure act. But what we would say is that when I look at that definition and I compare it to the teaching of say Maximus the confessor in his famous 200 chapters, he begins the work by saying that God is not in himself as in in as far as it is possible for us to know any kind of first principle nor is he in an intermediate state nor is he an end nor is he any other concept for he is indefinite, immobile and infinite since he is infinitely beyond any substance any potentiality and any actuality. So notice there he is not pure act in himself. He is not actuality in himself. He goes on to say in section four, God is not therefore a potentiality nor is he a first principle. Nor is he an actuality nor is he a first cause. And he's citing from arisatilian categories and definitions there. He goes on to say though that in another sense we can call God these things. And the reason for this is that for orthodox theology there's two very crucial key distinctions or a name ways that we dis that we name God that are distinct. We name God first in terms of the intrinitarian life or God in himself and in that way we do not positively predicate of the divine essence. So even though Tim will agree with me that there is a via negativa orthodox theology has a different conception of what apophatic theology is. So when we speak of the divine essence, we do not speak of it as identical to anything much less identical to pure act, first act, act as purist etc. The divine essence is unknowable, imparticipable, unapproachable and it is therefore strictly speaking aphatic. How do we know God then if God is aphatic in this sense? Well, he's not only essence, God is also person. And as St. John Damascus says multiple times in on the Orthodox faith, the key to all heresies is to confuse the distinction between nature and person. For the Orthodox church, that distinction is as quote real or as strong as the distinction between the persons themselves. So while in Tim's philosophy he would agree agree that the father and the son are really distinct that real distinction is somehow not applicable to anything else in the triad be it God's attributes operations or the distinction between nature and person itself which is conceived of as only mental or valitional in toistic philosophy and I would argue that in Roman Catholic theology that holds as well because the fourth Lateran council accepts the uh Peter Lombard definition of what simplicity is known as identity thesis this is Denzinger 432 that person and essence are essentially identical, but they're only mentally or rationally distinct. Thus, God is his essence. So, notice for them, God is first and foremost essence. But the orthodox position is very different. And Maximus goes on to describe the way that we do speak of God in positive catavatic categories. And that is because the energies are positive and known to us. Those energies are his operations. Where does this come from? Is this something that the medieval Byzantines made up? They just came up with this idea that energies are these things that God has that are other than him and they're these other deities, these polytheistic parts of God. Absolutely not. In fact, we would argue that the only way to have divine simplicity consistently is to adhere to the divine simplicity of God, yes, but also that his operations are really there and really different from him. How do I know that? The Capidosians made a classic analogy for how this is the case by looking at the difference between a man is nature and the work of nature and the product of nature. Allow me to quote St. John Damascus briefly here for that specific distinction. John Damascus says that observe that energy capacity of energy and product of energy and the agent of the energy are all different. or the orthodox church we call these things the difference between nature person will essence and operation or energy and the effect of that energy energy is the efficient and essential activity of the nature so notice that's the first statement from John Damascus the same statement is made by uh St. Gregory uh excuse me St. Maximus in his at theios 63 he says that god's supernatural energy is the identical energy that the father the son and and the spirit possess that also the saints are deified by uh St. Greg Nissa says against yomius too the common nature is identified by common energy St. And Greg Nesta says again, the essential invisible God becomes visible by his energies. He is not visible in his essence, but in some of his operations and to quote St. Ser of Alexandria, things with the same energy are acknowledged to be of the same essence. So energy proceeds from essence and is the proper signifier in work or operation of that nature or essence. Now natures don't operate. Persons with natures operate. And this is why for John Damascus in book three section 15 there are two wills, two energies but one divine hypotheasis working in and through those two wills and those two energies. Now to shift out of the philosophical definitions and statements that we have and I would add that that definition by the way is accepted at the six ecumenical council where the confession of St. Sponius pulling from the explicit teachings of St. Maximus, a confessor on essence and energy, two wills, two operations and by the way many energies to cite John Damascus in book one that is accepted at the six ecumenical council as the teachings christoologgical definition again it's called the the confession of St. You can find the Oxford text available on Amazon. Thus, even in the Petristic teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, 3 minutes from the early few centuries, excuse me, from the early uh uh seven seven centuries in 686, excuse me, 681 at the sixical council, uh we have the affirmation of the teaching of St. Sophronius and St. Maximus that John of Damascus encapsulates in his later text of on the orthodox face reflecting on the essence energy distinction which is seen most clearly in believe it or not triadic speculations but in christologology. In other words, it is the uncreated energies that St. Sirill says deify us in this life through feeding on the flesh. I'm going to be interested to hear how a person who believes in the real presence that is the body, blood, soul, and divinity present in uh of Christ in the Eucharist, as the Roman Catholic Church claims to confess, how this is possible given that in the Orthodox conception, it's only possible given that the uncreated energies as St. Ser says in the two letters to Sensus, deify the flesh and thus make it the thing that we participate in to be deified. He says in the two letters to sixensus and this is reflected in the teaching of the council of Ephesus by the way in the anathemas that we do not eat the flesh and blood of some man but the deified flesh of the god man made divine not by the divine essence but by his unccreated energy and immortality. So St. uh serial of Alexandria the fourth the third ecumenical council of Ephesus is pretty explicit when we get into the actual teachings of how we participate in divine life. On the other hand, in the Roman Catholic Church, uh if I read from the teaching of Ludwig Aught, Ludwig says that the the grace that we receive in the Roman Catholic Church in their in their in their belief, sanctifying grace is a created supernatural gift really distinct from God. In other words, the very thing that you are participating in, which by the way, point number one says is a creation. Point number five says, is a participation in the divine nature. I'm pretty sure the divine nature isn't a creature. So, I don't know how we participate in God if the thing that we're participating in is a quote created gift really different from God. Again, quotes from a famous Roman Catholic dogmatic manual. Uh lastly, I would say that there are a couple more examples that I think are very difficult for people who deny this distinction, particularly when it comes to what are called theophanes. Theophanes are manifestations of God in the Old Testament. I'll give you a few that uh I think are really problematic. Uh how much time do we have? One. Um you can have you can have a couple more. I got a couple more examples and then I'll be done. Okay. Uh so in uh Numbers 12 we read that the Lord said to Moses, Aaron, Miriam, come you three to the tabernacle of meeting and they came out. The Lord came down in the pillar and in the cloud and he stood in the door of the tabernacle and called out to Aaron and Miriam. Now notice that we have this theophanic manifestation in the Old Testament where God comes down and specifically said to stand there. Uh when we go back to the situation in Genesis in Genesis 31, we read that uh the angel of the Lord who identifies himself as the I am. The God who appeared to you at Bethl is there talking to Jacob. And that same I am that appears in time and space is also talking to Jacob and calls himself the form of God. This is out of the Septuagent text. The form of God was seen by Jacob. And then we have another statement that it is the I am that he wrestles with because Jesus at the end of John 1 says that he is the gate, the doorway to heaven, the ladder of Jacob. And the angels descending and ascending on the son of man signifies and shows that he was the one wrestling with Jacob. Jacob wrestled with an actual form or being in time and space that manifested in an energetic manifestation as the church has always taught. But after tomisism and after the middle ages, the Roman Catholic Church moved away from this and decided instead that these manifestations are rather created uh images, holograms, angels, etc., whatever imagery you want to use. They're not the uncreated energies of God in time and space. Why? Well, because of divine simplicity. It's not possible for God to be present in time and space in these ways because God would then undergo change. But I want to remind them as I close on this point that this theophony argument is actually the basis and the predication the presupposition for the doctrine of the incarnation. It is not the divine essence that became incarnate. It is the second person who according to Philippians 2 willfully limited himself to step into time and space in a mode of being that the father and the son did not enter into. So the reductionist act as purist position will undercut not just theophanes and the real manifestations of the glory of God in time and space. Leviticus 9 says it's the glory of God that appeared. God's glory is under creature. John 17. Thus this refutes the Roman Catholic simplicity position.

And uh just to clarify, so thank you for that. Um since you guys do have a bit of a a rigid uh structure, do you prefer to do an opening statement and then do rebuttals after? Do you want to rebuttal him and then do an opening statement? I'll do I'll do opening statement. Okay. Let's go ahead and uh so so representing the Catholic side if you're just joining the stream. Shout out as well to uh in the chat Crucible Andrew said $100 super chat. We're not going to do weird sound effects for this. We'll keep it very very serious to the point. But he also said thank you Andrew for that. He said Andrew Wilson here. Thank you very much for hosting this. And uh Andrew's Orthodox, correct? I think correct. So that's uh that's cool that you're tuning. I appreciate it. I saw your uh your wife there too. So go ahead, Timothy, your opening statement. You have a 10 minutes give or take since he took an extra two minutes. We'll give you two if you need it. You have 12 minutes on the clock. Uh go ahead.

Pure act is the basic expression of God's perfection, all powerfulness, his assay that means he's self-subsicing, his necessity, his eternality, his simplicity. So God as pure act according to classical theism western western definitions of God uh- which which has included uh broadly speaking it's even included a lot of orthodox thinkers eastern thinkers over the last 2,000 years. It is the most basic expression of who and what god is. So when you think pure act because this is the term of pure metaphysics think pure being. By pure being we mean being without any becoming or potency mixed in. U there are no nonactualized potencies that are mixed in with the person of who God is. Now um just so we are clear Jay told me last time we debated that mistaking a single aspect of God's reality means uh in the context of of Islam worshiping a false god rather than worshiping the true God. I would say I hope for for um all of our sakes, Jay's sakes here too because he's a he's a friend and he's a good guy that uh this isn't true because mistaking God as being uh a composite of act with passive potency is the most fundamental mistake you can make as to who who God is. Passive potency means something else can change you. And uh we have to talk about passive potency today. the fact that uh Jay has asserted on multiple occasions that something else can change God through this term passive potency. Um so there's uh some basics of classical theism. One, God cannot change. This is in Malachi 3:6. It's reflected in uh James 1:17. God can't change. This is a basic pillar of classical theism. God cannot be affected by anything else. It's reflected in uh Acts 17:24-2. Thirdly, God cannot fail to be what he is. The principle of necessity only applies to him in this sense that he is utterly perfect and he cannot be anything other than what he is. This is reflected in in Matthew 5 48. Now, if God were not pure act, and by this we just mean pure being. There are so many equivocations that uh are going to be made here on terms. I just mean pure being. Thomas and the arisatilian lexicon that he's working out of just means pure being with no becoming possible. The basic definition between a creator and a creature is there's only one creator. He's got to be pure being itself outside the categories of time and space. Anything inside the categories of time and space has to be a mixture, a composite of act and potency, form and matter, substance and accidents. There are seven modes of composition and anything inside the categories that was created by God has to be a creature who is a composite of these things. But God has to be immutable. Meaning he cannot change. He cannot change because he's outside the categories. He must be eternal. Uh Nika actually anathematizes anyone who says that he's anything other than the eternal. Meaning there's no change in God. meaning God cannot exist prior to X and after X that would that would earn one the anaizations of Na he can't be composite and if if God were mixed in the way that Jay is saying act with potency in in any manner he would be composite I mean there's a composer behind God because um one would have to be composed of their parts by some posterior principle and that composer itself would be God not God so he has this is Why? He has to be simple. Uh passive potency means uh that that something else can change God. This always implies temporality. So God would not be perfect. This is a complete and total rejection of all classical theism. That doesn't make it good or bad. I'm just stating it from from the outset that that classical theism requires God to be pure act for him to even uh obtain all the properties that we're talking about. Now what what Jay will say is that God transcends logical categories. If God truly transcended logical categories, for one thing, this would require that we predicate being univically. And for a Roman Catholic, we never predicate being univically. We always predicate being analogically. So that that's not true. Because we predicate being analogically, we can actually talk about God in one way and one way only. That's what the analogy is. Um, but if it were true that we predicated God unifically and uh and he transcends logical categories, then there would be no debates. We wouldn't be able to do what we're doing right now. Wouldn't be able to identify God, name God. There would be no dogma, no councils, no scripture, anything that's important to uh Catholics or orthodox. So we we there's an absolute equivocation on this idea of analogical versus univical predication of being. Um now that because there are so many different terms between the east and the west I will say this there is unintentional equivocation meaning good faith equivocation between the eastern thinkers and the western thinkers on what pure act is and what it requires but in in some sense in the sense of meaning being pure being without becoming. We have affirmations of of one sense or another of pure being by even eastern thinkers like Gregory of Nissa, Maximus the confessor, Athanasius, John Damosine, even Gregory Palamus uh though he he puts forward a kind of alternative theory the the hardline distinction between God's essence and energies and re more recently scholars like uh Dr. Bradshaw admits that God must be pure act. Now uh I'll just run through a few of these in against Unomius 2. We have Gregory of Nissa saying except for the divine essence nothing is uncreated meaning the divine essence alone is uncreated. This is good because for God to be God uh for there to be a real distinction outside of the Uzia of God would be to pause at a second God. Uh Gregory of Nissa also says and again he's you he's operating on an eastern equivocal definition. So I'm not saying that he means exactly what Thomas means but he means the important part of it that God is pure being and that if he were any bit of potency passive potence he would have to be inside the the 10 categories of existence. He says the untouched and formless God is free from all composition and likewise the only begotten. So this proves a couple important things at once that because God is the untouched and formless God free from all composition that means any of the seven modes of composition most importantly potency. Same thing with the sun. Um that's Gregory of Nissa. Maximus the confessor says God is the active and inexhaustible state of all actualization. The important aspect of what he's saying is that he is being. God is pure being without becoming. No becoming mixed in, no potency. Maximus also says, "For it is not natural to contemplate any change in God." Of course, this has been anatized right at the beginning at Nika to say that there's any change in God in whom we cannot conceive of any movement whatsoever. So there can be no ad mixture of change in God. And again, this is ba basically obvious to everyone. Uh St. Athanasius says God is holy what he is. He means no potency, no division. I'm just demonstrating here that there are Eastern thinkers who are operating out of the basic existential fact of God as pure act. St. John of Damascus says God is uncreated, immutable and not composed. So composing doesn't just mean act potency. It means any of the other six modes of uh possibly composing God. Now we can reduce this to a syllogism to prove it since we're debating after all. This comes out of suma theologia 191. Basic first premise. Whatever has passive potency can be changed or moved from potentiality to actuality by something else. By definition, this is what passive potency is. Uh second premise is God can't be changed because we all agree on on that premise. And the conclusion is therefore God has no passive potency. This it's important to note for logic nerds that this can be propositionalized. You can use symbolic logic to prove that this is true. I I won't go through the symbolic logic, but it's important that people know this ought to be sacrian for any of us. Whatever has passive potency can be changed or moved by another. We don't agree that that can be done with God. Since God can't be changed, it's been anatized at Na. we have to say God has uh no passive potency and and Jay has said otherwise uh multiple times recently in the last year or 18 months. So uh there's a a simple way of explaining this to people uh the analogy of an automobile since we're using all these terms composition pure act uh potency whatnot composed of parts is how automobiles and all things operate. Think of your car, a drive shaft, the wheels, the windows, the the chassis, whatever. They are dependent on an external assembler. Uh, a composite is ontologically posterior to its parts. If God had parts, he would depend on a composer, a god behind the god. Uh, this is not a mere logical category. This is a a fact. This is a a an existential fact. It contradicts hisity meaning he is self subsistent and his necessity to say otherwise. Now where you know Jay Jay I think is equivocating or misunderstanding toism is on several of the terms they're they're just real terminological differences that I think of good faith are eluding. Now he will confuse platonism, neoplatanism and aristoism. These are three separate systems that disagree radically and they have informed um Christianity at different parts. But the Catholic Church is informed by aristoism which I said predicates being analogically which in which goes right to the heart of what we're going to be debating with with palamus later. Um we we don't use platonism which uh predicates being uniqually. I know this sounds uh absolutely insane. The terms are are bizarre, but it's really really important because for us to even be able to speak about God, we have to predicate being analogically. That means we have to be in in aristoist mode. Um Jay has said before he thinks that Aristotle and Thomas made being a genus. They explicitly reject this in Plleonism. Um uh so the the toistic predication is never univical being is never a genus. This goes right to the heart because of these equivocations. Um there are some basic terminological difficulties, confusions, equivocations on that he makes on essence versus nature and these are very technical and matter very much. Energies versus accidents, act versus operations. like pure act doesn't mean God is pure action. It means God is pure being. And this confuses the matter and I think that might literally be all that we're debating at the end of the day because God is pure being and even Eastern thinkers accept it. Uh passive versus active potency and relations of opposition versus contrariety. All of these together mean that um I don't necessarily think Jay is intending to say that God is not pure being without any becoming. We have to get to the heart of the matter.

All right. And I have time on that. I'll be adding another minute clock for a rebuttal because he went over a little bit there. Um I was saying, you know, it's funny cuz I was I was trying to uh you know, execute some things you were saying and um Grock went just as complex. He was like the onlogical exigency of Catholicism with dogmatic corpus. I was like, wow. When you got two people here that are speaking at a level of of uh AI, I'm uh I'm asking the question, you know, this is a very complex debate. This has been going on for what in in many ways well over a thousand years uh right now as we're talking. And um that's kind of an interesting point is that you know people that are Protestant are not used to these complex deep discussions. You know, things are like what do we want to do today in Protestantism? And sometimes it's like let's all be gay pastors and everyone's like yay. And it's like okay. But you know people have been thinking about some of these topics for for for centuries, you know, even for millennia if you look at the actual topic here. And when we talk about what's important, um I just want to remind you guys if you're watching that um take notes and uh rewatch, rethink, relisten, and uh try to understand the the complexity of their arguments. Also, uh Crucible Andrew Wilson for another $100 said, "And here's another." He also yelled out, "Say my name." was I don't know why. We'll just say your name. Andrew Wilson in the chat. It's good to uh see you here. We're very very happy to have you. He also uh sent another chat for $100. He said, "Here's the last one. Take these guys out to dinner, Elijah, and yourself. Love you all." Yeah. And I would um I don't know if you guys are free afterwards, but we'll we'll check that out. Uh if you're just joining for the first time, don't forget to like the video. Don't forget to subscribe. It's very important that you do. And uh I want to jump into um what what I believe to be the most important part, which is give them a chance to respond to each other. Uh particularly before we do that though, just a reminder to uh check out one of our sponsors for today, redpillthreads.com. They are a t-shirt company, but they're not just t-shirt company. They're our merch company that has shirts that actually align with our values. So these are not just like MAGA t-shirts. When you check them out, you know, it's actually kind of crazy. Like they have, you know, Hollywood on Fire basically mocking uh Gavin Newsome. They also have, you know, a Disney t-shirt, but the Disney uh castle has a Star of David or Ba Met, whatever you want to call it, on top and it says propaganda instead of Disney. And so there's so many other t-shirts they have. Plus, they also have the Burger King guy with his mouth open in a cartoon and a meme style. They have a uh I think they have like a monkey skull and it says something like uh fully developed or something. I don't even know. And then they also have the comment ping pong pizza t-shirt, the brands. So, it's basically provocative shirts of all the right-wing memes and culture that we've created over the last, you know, decade or so since we've sort of emerged out of 4chan. And they put it right on t-shirts. You can get 10% off today at redpillthreads.com. Re i l t h r a ds.com. Use promo code rift for 10% off. Check it out, guys. It even just helps if you click the link in the description as uh we are a new network, a new channel. And uh if you want to know what Rift TV is, just a shout out. We're the first mainstream network developing from funding from only western people, only western countries and uh we are not being uh defined by any Zionism or any sort of outside influence that will try to destroy our core message which is to save Western civilization that starts now and here with what we're discussing especially with Christianity.

Now uh let's go over to Jay Dyer. Uh I want to give you an example here. Jay is representing the Orthodox tradition in this uh in this discussion. You have uh six minutes on the clock. Um if you want to use I'll give you the minute. Do you want to use the minute here? Do you want to use a minute on the cross-examination or the closing statement? Like I I can tally your minutes up. Uh I'll go and use it here because he he touched on a lot of things. Okay, cool. You have six minutes on the clock. Uh your time starts now.

All right, I'll work through this. So um the first thing that he said that was a basic theological mistake was that he identified God and the divine essence with a say of course all the three persons have a say or self-existence or are autotheos in that system if they are identical to the divine essence except that he's not aware of capidosian theology nor the theology of Constantinople one which accepted unanimously with uh explicit decree the necessity to follow the Capidosian dictim that the father is identified as Autoos. So to identify the divine essence as autotheos is actually to introduce the later christoologgical and trinitarian heresy that the Calvinists introduced that the son and the spirit are also thus autotheos because they share the same divine essence. So he's not aware of that. That's a classic theological problem. Um next I didn't say that uh God changed. He's confusing the idea of what orthodox call reciprocity with the idea that God undergoes change. What we mean by that is that if you read the book of Amos, for example, God says he's going to destroy Israel. Uh Amos comes and prays and says, "Lord, please don't do this." And God says, "Because you prayed, I'm not going to destroy Israel." That does not mean that God can't uh excuse me, that God underos change. It means that he is willingly condescended to engage in a creaturely reciprocity. That means that God is first and foremost a divine person in particularly the person of the father or the monarchia of the father which is a crucial orthodox doctrine upon which all of this is built whether it's the essence interction or these other distinctions. So no it is not the case that creatures cause the divine essence to change or anything like that. In fact I said that there's two ways that we can name God. I guess he didn't hear that or he just wanted to do the quote mine from the eastern fathers ignoring by the way all the places in those eastern fathers where they actually make the arguments against his position. For example, I specifically cited Maximus pointing out that the same energies that God possesses are the same energies that deify the saints. He says in at theios, which thus means that Trent is wrong when the council Trent says that we are justified in baptism by the righteousness not that God has himself but by the righteousness by which he makes us just. And uh again to to cite Nissa again common nature is identified by common energy. If you read on the holy spirit by St. Basil you'll notice that the way that basil proves the holy spirit is fully divine with the father and the son is because he possesses the exact same energy or operation because energy and operations signify nature. Now interesting in the scriptures when we read about the gifts of the Holy Spirit in the book of Corinthians when Paul talks about the spiritual gifts he calls them the gifts of the inner gaya of the spirit the energies of the spirit Tim could look at Strongs 17:53 and he would see all the multiple uses throughout the New Testament even places in the septuagent where inner gaya is used many times over and that leads me to the other issue he doesn't seem to be aware aware of in scholarship which is if he could read MueL Renee Barnes's book Dunamis in Gregor of Nissa where there's this idea of this discussion of the power of God and this is the Capidosian uh dictim to utilize first and second actuality to help explain how it's possible for God to create and yet to be perfect and to not undergo change. So to say that God possesses first and second act and that he doesn't always actualize all of his powers does not imply any imperfection in deity and rather it implies God has a free will. If I was a tomist or a Roman Catholic and I identified the act of creating with the divine essence as they do and with divine providence then there's a necessary creation and a necessary providence and a necessary world that occurs because those things are isomeorphically identical. This is called the modal collapse argument. So that also refutes uh Tim's um reductionist position. people could look at Radigawitz's uh famous Oxford thesis on simplicity in the Capidosians. Moving on, he noted that uh as he went through his quote mind of the Eastern Church fathers, he sort of tried to fit this into a aristoist scheme. Well, um, if you was able to look into the scholarship on the Capidosians and the transition from the Capidosians into, uh, Sirill and Maximus and John Damascus in a very very recent, very well-known text by Yawan Zach Huber called the rise of Christian theology in ancient metaphysics, he would know that the Capidosians were not working with a two-tiered cause effect uh, arisatilian scheme. They're working more so with a neoplatonic scheme. I'm not advocating for neoplatinism. saying that when the neoplatonic uh philosophy is used by the Capidosians and thus that model and that uh tendency to speak that way is accepted particularly at Constantinople one which by the way is called close and had out of communion with Rome which is the council that defines the trinity. It has nothing to do with aristoism. And so this is a kind of a revisionist anacronistic approach where they will take things and reread the toistic positions into quote minds from the church fathers because as I noted uh as Gregor of Nisso says the invisible god becomes visible by his energies. He is not seen or known in his essence but in his operations and that's from on the biatitudes section 4. So divine energies are what come down to us. It is not the mere created effects but the actual participation in the attributes, energies and life of God. That's not a created thing. Jesus says in John 17, he came to give us a share in the glory that he had with the father before the foundation of the world. Thus, it is a real participation in unccreated glory. God's glory is not a creature. The glory in the grace itself is what we partake of. So he says that I engage in uniblical predication. I never made an argument that human terms or or conceptions aren't univical to the attributes. In fact, I would agree with analogical predication. It's just that the analogies do not match up to the divine essence. They they match up to the energies. Hence, Basil says in letter 234, what God's essence is, we do not know. But rather, it is his energies, his operations that come down to us. Exactly what Nissa says.

Jay Dyer, that was the rebuttal. Now, obviously, uh you can both rebuttal his uh opening statement and his uh his rebuttal here. a few of his points. You are going to have five minutes uh on the clock. Please with the rebuttal try to keep it within the u direct timing. Uh if we're in halftime, you have an extra 30 seconds bleed. Go ahead, Timothy.

In Strongs, since Jay uh cited it, um energeta in in Paul means God's activity and grace, not specifically not a metaphysical part of God distinct from his essence. This would this would dispute the entire position. The Catholic theology captures this through unccreated grace. That's that's our position. God himself at work in us. And without it does all of this without dividing him into essence versus energies. So it's it's sounded by that quote as if it was essence energies n nothing of the sort. Um, the Orthodox move from a

Biblical usage of energeta, which again I I warned you there would be this equivocation time and time and time again because energeta is a word in the Greek that's frequent here to metaphysics. Energya means something very very different in the in the distinction between essence and energies. Um, it's a a strong extrapolation in strong.

I think the most important question that that Jay frequently asks sincerely, I I've heard him ask it sincerely many times. I'm not being facitious here, is he? He'll ask uh and this is really at the heart of the matter. Why if if there's a real distinction between uh if Catholics allow a real distinction between the p the three persons, why can't they abide a real distinction between the divine essence and the energies? Which is a a it's a fair question.

The answer is uziological which means when we're looking at the single essence of God the uh the one thing which absolutely must be worshiped u this has been affirmed at uh Nika 2 worship is latria worship proper to the divine essence alone we are talking about god's one uzzia uh real distinctions within that can be made by what we've called uh relations of opposition between the three persons that because in proper theology the three persons are inside that divine essence that Uzziah uh this does not enable or rehabilitate or allow extra uziological distinctions between God's essence and energies because the the entire point of the essence energies distinction is that there is a real distinction and they don't they don't have what we call virtual distinction Anyway, there's a real distinction between God's and his energies, his operations that and and they're uncreated both.

Whether you're talking philosophy or classical theology, anything that's uncreated is God. Anything that is on the other side of creation is God. So if you have an Uzuza that is the divine essence of God and something else that's uncreated, you're talking about you must be talking about two gods. Anyway, this is why we don't allow that distinction. Any distinctions within the single divine essence, the relations of opposition between fatherhood and filiality, affiliation, uh these are fine. These make sense. Relations of opposition make sense from within what we know to be the trinity within the Uzia of God. The father is not the son is not the holy spirit but they're all the the the same substance of God. Uh but you can't make you can't distinguish between two unccreated realities outside of space and time without positing uh a new essence. So it's an uziological answer. It's very basic and hopefully you see that uh uh the former is possible because monotheism requires one Uzuzzia of God whereas the latter would require seemingly two divine uzzas. They won't say it. They won't say that the position is two divine Uzias because it's one divine essence and then something else uncreated. But it's required. It's necessarily follows. Incredible.

So um you know in the midst of this you actually are under time by 45 seconds. Can I So, uh, if if you want to keep going. Yeah, I would just say, uh, there's there's, um, scriptural evidence against, uh, the essence energies distinction, too. Uh, I'll jump into the, uh, theophanes that that Jay has been talking about in Exodus 3 1-6. Uh, at the the burning bush, God himself speaks. It's not that God uh, uh, some energies of God speak. God himself speaks. It's a direct quote. A pillar of cloud and fire. The Lord went before them, not a separate energy. It's a fact. The Lord himself, the substance of God, went before them. It's a direct quote. In Isaiah 6 1:5 in the vision, Isaiah saw the Lord. Did not see some likeness of the Lord. Uh in John 12:41, this is applied to Christ. At the transfiguration, the apostles beheld Christ's glory participation. Yeah. So, so this is important because when we're talking about the divine essence, we're talking about the divine essence. When we're talking about some work of God, we're talking about something that's distinct. Okay?

So, Jay, I don't know if you were laughing at him or you're laughing at his arguments. I don't I heard you chuckling a little bit over there and I I couldn't help but uh but notice. And so, you know, as you cross-examine and you go into this, you'll have exactly 5 minutes uh to respond here. The clock starts now. Go ahead. No, but wait a minute. You need to stop. So, hold on. So, I can crossexam and interrupt, right? Uh yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. I just I just wanted you to do a little bit if you is that how you would like that is that how you'd like to do that that section like to What were you going to say? Oh, no. I was going to say, I didn't know if you wanted to go back over what he was just saying right now and then uh jump in there a little bit, but uh uh well, what we had agreed to was cross exam where we can where I cross-exam him and I can interrupt and cross exam. Correct. That's cool. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Totally. Interrupt within reason. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, yeah, I'm intentionally just going to interrupt every 5 seconds. No. Um yeah, that's funny. I'm glad that you mentioned Exodus 3 because it was actually next in my notes because um I don't know if you're familiar with Exodus 23 because God goes on to describe who that being is. You said the substance of God went before them. Are do you think that the substance of God is the angel messenger? No, I think I think that God entered into I believe that the uh theophanes represent uh a creation of God. Are they the substance of God or they represent They're not the substance of God. You said the substance of God went before them. Yeah. No, I I didn't mean it that way. Okay. But in Leviticus 9, it's said to be the glory of God that comes down. Yeah. I It was an equivocation. Yeah. I'm just saying God himself. Yeah. So, it's God himself or a representation because that's a big deal. We believe it's a representation. Okay. In Leviticus 9, what comes down in that theophony is called the glory of God. Is is God's glory a creature? Yes. God's glory is a creature. Yes. God's you're a polytheist. No, you called the divine the divine glory is a creature. No, because it's created. Yes. God's glory is created. Like I said, like I said at the beginning, well, this is the Catholic position and you know it's the Catholic. So God's Jay's laughing at it to pretend that this isn't a a 1,000-y old dispute. Are you sure about what you're saying? God's glory is created. God's glory is it eternal? Yes. So some So there's eternal So you're a pletheist? No. God's glory is eternally created. No. And this is a game. You said it's eternal creature. It's not a game. Okay. This is why it's idolatry. Let's do 15 second blocks. It's not a game. No, it's created. You said that God's glory is eternal and it's a creature. That's the angels are eternal and and a No, they're not. They're created. No, they're they can be eternal with God like a footprint in sand to use Augustine's term. Yeah. Yeah. Are they created exilo? Well, of course. Yeah, they're created. They're not eternal. They're not uncreated. But with regard to glory, it can since it's uncreated. Since it is created, uh, which one is it? Since it's created, Jay, no, it's not two gods. So, in John, because it's uncreated and it's separate from the divine essence. You just messed up. Then is it two gods? I don't believe that the that the glory is a creature. You you messed up by saying that God's glory is eternal. It's uncreated. It's the glory that Jesus and is it separate from the divine. Why you interrupting me? It's my time to interrupt because I'm asking you back. Is it separate? You don't ask me questions in my cross- examination. All right. He's correct on that. Yeah. Sure. All right. Yeah. So, let's let's leave the question of a few minutes. In John 17, can I clarify my answer quickly? If he allows you. Okay. So, be we say it's not polytheism because it's created. It's that simple. God's glory is a creature. God's glory is a creature. Wow. You understand that in Ezekiel the son is identified as the glory. Is the son a creature? No. This is an equivocal definition. How? Because yeah, woman is the glory of man. That doesn't mean that she's uh this the univical predication that you're talking about is the glory of the father. The son in this analogical sense can be the glory of the father. That doesn't mean so when Ezekiel God's glory as such is uncreated. Mhm. Inudaththolics. Okay. In Judges 6, it says that Yahweh turned his face to Gideon. Was that Yahweh really in time and space? I don't. You don't know. Yeah. I'm not sure. Well, maybe you should have looked into the theophies if you wanted to talk about you. Let's talk. Well, you've already admitted that God's glory is a creature, right? That's polytheism, which you analogy. You want uh I mean I never disagree with anal analogical predication but you No, I don't mean analogies. I mean when God turns his face you think that uh a theophony means requires logically a body. Did Jacob wrestle with Jesus? It's a theophony. Did he wrestle with Jesus? We say this is a created uh participation. So the the son prior to the incarnation was created. No, this is less. But you said it was a creature. It's less than divine. So now you're a polytheist again and there's multiple gods less than the creatur. I can't be a polytheist, Jay, if I keep saying that these are creations. I'm only a polytheist god separate from the divine essence. You're calling God and they're called Yahweh. They're called Yahweh. That means they're not creatures. Yahweh is uncreated. His glory is uncreated because he had it forever in the triad in a triadic relationship. You said God's glory is a creature. You just messed up big time. That's idolatry. That's I'm done. All right, that's time. And yeah, I was going to add another 30 seconds onto the clock then. Anyways, you still have 30 seconds here for him interrupting you uh with the questions. So, you have an additional minute on a future uh category if you'd like to, especially in the closing or on a separate topic. Uh we'll go ahead and we will switch over. Wait, hold on. I have more time or he hasn't? Um no, I'll give you an extra minute because of him interrupting the questions. You have 30 seconds left and I'm going to give you an additional 30 seconds onto a uh either to the closing or on the section of the next topic. Let's go over to uh Timothy. Uh go ahead. You have 5 minutes on the clock. You can begin your questioning. Okay. If the energies are not the divine essence, there's a real distinction between them, but they're still uncreated. How many such uncreated realities are there in God? Basil says there's infinite energies. So there are infinite uncreated existences. Do are they essences of their own? They're energies, hence they're not essences. Oh. So what are they? But they're uncreated. So they're the operations, the attributes and the thought wills or ideas of God. So there are infinite there are infinite uncreated things. No, I'm asking you. Yeah. God is one and many. But except so when we go to worship God, we worship infinite things. Yes. God's infinite. I don't know if you know that. No. Do you worship an infinite number of properties? When we say God is infinite, infinity is an infinite number. Can I worship the energies alone without worshiping the divine essence? No. Because every person who acts in the every every act of God is triadic and thus includes all of God. But then how are they really distinct? Because God does different things. What does that mean? Creating isn't walking on water. No. If I can't worship them separately. In other words, if there's not a passive potency potency in them that is receptive of my worship, God's divine essence, his energies, I can't worship them separately. So why call them really distinct? No more because because if you guys had virtual distinctions the way you should here, this wouldn't be a problem. But because you say it's a real distinctional problem collapse is why we don't have this is not modal collapse. Why am I telling you why we don't have that? No, I know. But but then they're not really distinct. You just said they're really distinct. distinct because they can't be they are really distinct because the father and the son are really distinct and you don't have a problem with that. I don't have a problem with that because that's all within one. Do you have a problem with constant energies are the operations from that one usia? They might be the operations from but they're different from the usa. Mhm. Distinction applies to the substance. You're with me? Right. So like when we make a distinction about a thing, we're making a distinction about the substance itself. philosophy 101. Yeah. Yeah. Sure. Okay. So, that's what I that's why I asked why can we call them really distinct when they're they're somehow outside the US. They're different from it. They're really distinct. They're not virtually distinct. But I mean, do you want to end? Do you want the Capidoshian answer? I want your answer. Right. Well, I'm going to say what they say because I agree with them. They say that just as a person works, he's not identical to the work and persons do different works. Okay. But that's a nonsense term. You can't say it's really distinct are nonsense. That's fine. I'm just saying it doesn't work out. Why? Because when something is distinct, no, not because when something is distinct uziologically, that means that we would have to act upon it, it would it would receive passive potency about the persons. No, because they're the same. Do you think the persons aren't consubstantial? They're really distinct. No, they're really distinct within an Uzia. Oh, I don't believe that. You don't believe the persons of the trinity are within the same Uzi. I don't start with the essence. I start with the fathers because the monarchical doctrine. Wait, you don't believe that the three persons are substantial? Start with essentialism. I'm not asking where you started. Do you think that the persons are consubstantial? Yes or no? Of course, they're consubstantial. Okay. I don't So they're not uziologically distinct. That's all I'm saying. I don't have your metaphysics. No, I don't have your metaphysics. But the point is they can't be distinct if we're talking about two separate things. The persons are not two separate. The three persons are not two separate things. I never said the energies are separations of opposition. You said the energies are separate, not me. They're not separate. Is my If I work, is it separate? No, you you screwed up there. No, I didn't. You're just saying I screwed up. I said the energy. I never said separate. Is it consubstantial or not? I said the persons are consubstantial. Yes. The energies aren't consubstantial with the essence though. For distinct. Okay. But then I can't worship them separately. Then the same applies to here's another one. The divine essence is eternally unknowable. Do we fulfill our final end in the beatotific vision? We don't believe in the botific vision because we believe in a resurrection purpose of light. Okay. When we look at you believe we we see God in the end. We don't see God. That's not our union with God. The uncreated energies and we have a body. So I don't believe in a neoplatonic satiating of the intellect. You're a platonist. I'm not a platonist. Uh on the bottoic vision. No. You know it's from origin. Yes, it is from origin. So you don't believe that we can fulfill the purpose of life and see the divine essence ever. Right? Nissa says no one sees the divine essence ever even in the escaton. Even in the escaton uh okay I said we see the divine energies as the capidosians say we see the things around God not his essence. What do you think the things around God are? If God has passive potency explain to me how he can be immutable, eternal, perfect. You're in 30 second bleed right now. 30 seconds max. The divine essence is unchanging, unalterable, but I don't reduce the persons and their actions to the essence. And so it's not a problem for me. And that's I I answer with reciprocity. You're just saying there is a circular uh object that's planer that can be orthogonal. I mean, explain. No. Divine revelation. Explain it then. Yeah. So God can be changed with passive potency. I never I said that he condescends to have reciprocity identity with creatures. That doesn't make sense. 10 seconds. I'm sorry you don't believe that prayer, right? God answers prayer. No, I I believe something can be acted upon which you've said several times in your podcast. I never said the divine essence passive potency. How could he still be immutable? He has the divine essence doesn't change. God condescends to have reciprocal relationships with our prayers. That's what I said. I'm glad you don't think God answers prayers. So again, you have a pagan metaphysical system. All right, that's the time question. Now, uh, what I want to know from you guys in the chat right now, if you heard, uh, the cross-examination ones in the chat, if you think that Jay is cooking and that you think that he's winning right now, in terms of just truth, and I don't want to hear just the orthodox pros, I know how you guys are. You guys will just be like, Jay wins. Jay wins. So, one's in the chat if you think theologically his uh, arguments are more sound. Two in the chat if you think that Timothy's uh, arguments and cross-examination was more sound. That means even if you're Orthodox or you're Catholic, you don't have to vote for your home team. One's in the chat for for Jay. Two's in the chats. Before we do the closing statement, I do want to just read a couple super chats here reminding you guys that Humpluru one said, "Tim is based. Jay is based. We should be Catholic Republic and the Orthos should build the churches." We also had from Daniel Ward 79 said, "Thank you, Tim Gordon, for defending the one true church that Jesus founded on the uh prince of the apostle St. Peter. May all Eastern Orthodox become Catholics so we may be in one holy, catholic, and apostolic church." We also read the ones uh here from Maximus uh Desimus said, "Keep my name out of your mouth, little boy." Shout out for our supreme leader Jay Dyer. Christ is king. All right, we're going to give uh uh one more minute here to read a couple super chats before we get to the closing statements. Uh servant uh Necrosis 33 said, "Huge respect for Jay. Keep it up, my brother." Now, uh the Aldo Han also said, "Tim makes me sleepy. Elijah is using Grock. This is the most rigorous debate I have ever seen." It's true. I don't use I don't use AI, but I had to use AI to look up some of the stuff you were saying in real time. Also, we have uh Mr. Fista said, "I'm too subted to understand any of this, but Orthodox have better hats, which settles it. A tree will be known by its fruit. Come home, papus." So, it looks like we got a pretty good split in between there. All right, let's move into the closing statement. Just so you guys know, watching at home, we will be taking a 5minut break between each of our topics. So, you can use the restroom, you can breathe, and it might be a couple minutes. Uh so, don't go anywhere. We're going to start with uh our closing statement. If you guys are, gentlemen, are you prepared and are you prepared to to go? All right, Jay, uh you're going to have 10 minutes on the clock. You do have an extra minute. Would you want to use it here on a future uh topic? Uh we'll save that. Okay. Wait, are we doing closing statements for each topic? Um well, that's the the format that I was handed here. Unless you'd like to do a closing statement overall. I thought we were doing overall, but what I I defer to you if you want to do that's going to be really I'm just saying why don't we just do brief. Yeah. Why don't we just why don't we just do a three a threem minute uh uh wrap up because I think that's for a lot of us uh just a reminder because this is an internet debate. While there are a lot of theologians, some people may have gotten lost in there. So maybe we'll keep uh to understanding to help us understand what your final statement was. You have three minutes on the clock. We'll make it brief and we'll have a complete one at the end. Go ahead Jay, your time starts now. Yeah, I want to uh remind everybody that again I think uh if you are familiar with biblical theology, the petristic teaching um nobody believes that the uh glory of God is in any sense a creature or uh created. In fact, it is the uncreated immortality and light that Paul talks about at the end of Timothy in which God eternally dwells. That uncreated light and glory was manifested in Matthew 17 on the mount of transfiguration through the human nature of Christ. And so it is precisely this crucial mistake that's made uh amongst the uh the Catholic friends of ours that they think that this in some way will violate these basic metaphysical principles. But in fact we have a reverse system that we derive our uh theology first and our metaphysics second. This is what allowed the church fathers to be um pretty fluid with the way that they appropriated the philosophy of their day. As the Zakuber book notes, the church fathers are able to in some places pull from aristheian logic text, but for the most part they utilize a lot of neoplatonic argumentation, at least up until John Damascus, who then does use a lot more arisatilian argumentation. So what that shows is that for us, it's not a question of Aristotle versus Plato, but rather divine revelation as father Florovski says, which comes first and foremost. And that's why for example when Aquinus in uh on Derat when he talks about uh the section on divine simplicity when he rejects John Damascus's essence energy argument which shows by the way that John Damascus is actually making the same essence energy arguments that I'm making which is precisely why they were present in all the Capidosians why it was present in St. Sirill and it's even present in uh St. Athanasius himself if you read uh Florovsky's essay on creation and creaturehood about the essence center distinction in St. St. Athanasius even you'll notice that Aquinus's rejection has nothing to do with what the actual petristic teaching is. In fact, he says in on the contrary, moreover, Rabbi Mymanites notes that the names of God do not signify intentions added to the substance of God because every accident signifies an intention added to the substance of its subject. Therefore, the foregoing names do not signify an accident in God. We simply don't have the two-tiered metaphysical collapse structure that he has, which nobody in the first 700 years of the petristic teaching has either. So the attempt to categorize the energies as accidental or in some way hearts or something like that was never an argument that I made, nor did any of the Eastern church fathers make it. And in fact, if you read the disputation with Purus, which is the theology of St. Maximus that goes into the confession of St. which is accepted at the six ecumenical council. That whole treatise it's about 100 pages is a treatise utilizing all the same essence energy arguments that I make against the monotheite monophysite position that is accepted in the confession of St. Synronius at the six ecical council and even Pope Agatho in his letter admits two wills and two energies in Christ. And so when Paul when Tim said that inner GA means something very different in the Bible, it's not metaphysical. He then goes on to give this elaborate uh story about what it's all really meaning. doing the very opposite of what I'm doing, which is looking at the text when it says that Moses walked up on the mountain and God's glory was shown to him. His goodnesses, and by the way, it's plural there. The goodnesses of God are shown. And yet Jesus says in John 5, no one saw the father at any time. Well, it's not the energies that are manifesting in time and space. It is the person of the son who is the face of the father in time and space. And it is his energies that are manifesting. So he misunderstood especially when he was talking about the angel of the Lord who is obviously the person of Christ in time and space in these theophonyies. So I think that the theophanes really clenches the whole argument. All right, that was uh 40 seconds over but we'll give you the minute bleed. Go ahead. I'm going to put uh the same amount of time then that he had. Let me reset the clock. You'll have four minutes since he had four. Go ahead, Timothy. Give us your closing statement on the uh topic here on the simplicity. uh you see the the devastation to the EO position when you look at scripture on the beatotific vision in first John it says we shall see him as he is that would mean the divine essence at the end of time uh blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God this is Matthew 5:8 they shall see God not not the works of God or the energetas of God um they will not see his energies they will see God himself This is the pro. This is the the teiology of the good life. This is what we're promised. And and they say otherwise. They say we will never see God in his essence. All we can ever see are the inner gayas of God. Same as what we see on earth. It's absurd. Um if we never see God's essence, we never reach full union with him also. So this is really really important to draw out. It's it's absolutely uh theologically and teologically devastating and it's a fatalistic worldview. very very important. Um, now glor when Jay was asking me about glory and he was spitfiring questions at me. Glory is a created reality. The way we experience it, the way we're talking about it, the way it's predicated analogically, it's uh glory in our soul, in our intellects, and um our participation in it is created and therefore the way we we interact with God's glory. Again, this is a virtual distinction because it it involves the way that we uh receive it and interact with it um in the mode of the receiver, us creatures. It's of course has to be created. A created glory has to interact with creatures as it exists in God. It is uncreated. But we don't know glory from the side of God because glory from the side of God remains uncreated until the botific vision. Um the most important thing he was asking about the theophanes and um Jay's claim he'll say the theophanes are this easy easy proof that that passive potency can exist in God which is a nonsequittor. It's absurd. Says there's a distinction between the inner unrevealed aspect of God his essence and what he reveals and manifests to us his divine personal energies. Um, a theophony, like I said before, it's a it's a created sign or instrument of uncreated presence. Um, the change is in the the medium, not in God himself. So, this does not even begin to prove that God is not pure actor that God can change. Particularly, I thought Jay was going to come on this uh first segment and distinguish, well, God can change because he has active power, active potencia. Well, that's true, but he's the unmoved mover. He can he can act on things without them being acted on him. But he he came on and defended uh God as passive potency. And this just doesn't begin to be shown by the fact that uh the theophanes uh uh have uh taken place as signs and instruments that are created. Um worship is something funny. Worship belongs to the divine nature alone. This is from second constant noble. But not if we take Jay at his word, worship second Constantinople belongs to the divine nature alone. So that that's really important. I mean the the the most the heart of this issue is whether or not passive potencies can be allowed within God. And this would simply destroy all of classical theism uh God would change. He wouldn't be immutable. He wouldn't be eternal. This is anathematized at Nika. If God had passive potency, he wouldn't be simple. wouldn't be perfect. I I mean I'm I'm restating what I said in opening because it's so very basic and it's so devastating to what we believe about God if we believe that God if we were to allow ourselves to believe that God had passive. You say I still have a minute. Uh yeah, if you want to you want to have the minute on the clock right now. All right. Give me one moment. Let me reset the clock. Give you a minute and uh go ahead and take that. Yeah. I just want to address in this minute the fact that I mean he doesn't seem to be aware that the theophanes are called God. They're given the name Yahweh. They're worshiped and they're presifiers of the incarnation. So he's literally saying that these signs and symbols can be worshiped. So he believes that you can worship creatures. Then he turns around and contradicts himself because he says that only divine nature can be worshiped. the triad is worshiped and it doesn't say only the divine nature is worshiped but we worship God in triad. That's the actual definition of the council. It doesn't say only the divine nature. So I think it's just it's just kind of insane to me that that like how far removed from divine revelation that position actually is. And again, as I said in Philippians 2, if God is a being that is reducible to pure act, then it's not possible for the self-mping or the uh limiting to occur in the incarnation when the son according to Philippians 2 in the Kosis passage willfully limits himself. A being that is pure act according to his definition reducibly would undergo change via Philippians 2. And we don't believe that. Can I have a minute to respond to that? Uh no, we're you're you're over on that one. I I you can actually still in the other topics if you if you'd like to you can always address technically if you like to take a little bit of time to to bring back some points. I do want to remind you guys we're going to take a break here in a second. So that if you're just joining right now in the live stream we are in the middle of debating some of the core dogmas theological concepts depending on where you come from and what wording you like to use of orthodoxy and Catholicism in terms of the church itself. Not the orthodoxy of religion, orthodoxy of faith or the gospel but of the uh approach and of the church. That being said, um, if you guys are sending super chats, uh, I just want to remind you guys a couple things. We have a few more people in here. Uh, Mista also said that it's a little bit too much beyond him. We also have some win Titus Win, uh, Hadrien. We also have, uh, El Chemist said, "Depending on Gordon's performance tonight might be Jay's third conversion to Catholicism and second denunciation of the Orthodox Church. Curious to know which way the wind swayed him tonight." Sigilus said, "Orthodox equals divine person. Catholic equals divine robot. We also have uh Cervant said, "Hard past on trusting a church founded on forgeries." I'm not sure. That's an Australian. Shout out to my Aussies. Um I just got banned from Australia, unfortunately. Uh I don't even know what the currency ARS is, but uh Buddy Pee 973 said, "Tim has been forsaken. Everyone got to donate to the stream or y'all are Yakubians." Really? We're all Yakub made us. I remember you said that, right? Yeah. You were all created in the image of Yakub. Well, you're learning the right religion now. Finally. Yeah. And uh and Grand Canyon's a portal. That's what they say. Uh Techno said, "Uh, let's go not one step back." There you go. We also have a few more that we'll we'll read in a moment, but let's join. Let's jump into a quick break. We're taking a couple minute break here. Just a uh reset. They're going to reset their books, their notes, and we're going to come back just to make sure I have it correct, by the way, from you so that we don't uh make a mistake again. Um for the uh next topic that you wanted to cover, we are able to get into the uh Christ did not establish a papacy or did you want to go into the Holy Spirit does not have uh Do you want to go to the Holy Spirit question? Was that papacy or filio? What do you want? He went first. You can pick the next topic. Uh be going first. I'm fine with either, but but Filioquay would be would have more of them. All right, let's go there. Segue. All right, so we'll be back talking about that in just a moment and we'll be starting opening statements with Timothy Gordon uh representing Catholicism. We'll see you in just a few moments. Take a break and we'll be right back in the uh rumble section that just says, "Imagine Elijah trying to process all this when he couldn't even get the sound started to start his live stream." Absolutely fantastic. All right, we got a great debate going on today directly between Jay Dyer and Timothy Gordon. If you're just joining live today, we are live on Rumble X Facebook and on YouTube. We can also find us on Instagram and Elijah Schaefer.locals.com. Make sure that you join us if you want to know where we've been. I've been very sick. I was in El Salvador shooting content and then uh I end up picking up a stomach bug from a taco stand. I love the country, but don't eat pork from strangers uh in developing countries. That's just a little a little tip for tat there. Uh we're going to be jumping into our next topic today on the overarching discussion of orthodox uh orthodoxy as in the church itself and Catholicism as in the church and the dogma. If you're joining me today on YouTube, make sure that you like the video right now and subscribe. We are a brand new show still working out the kinks. just a couple months old and uh absolutely fantastic and excited because we are a network rift.com not influenced by outside countries like Israel and that's our claim to fame here and so we really appreciate that. All right, we're going to jump into uh the uh topic here uh specifically about the Holy Spirit and um you know we are asking ourselves does it or does it not hypoatically proceed from the sun? So this is a very complex topic. It's going to get intricate. It is going to get absolutely uh in incredibly in many ways incredibly technical. And so again, I encourage you guys to please have your uh your notes out and be ready to discuss. Our guests are have agreed to doing 10-minute opening statements and uh they will have a minute bleed if they so choose. We're going to start with Timothy Gordon. The time is on the clock. You have 10 minutes. You can start now. So the second question tonight is nothing less than the unity of the trinity. Does the holy spirit proceed from the father alone or from both the father and the son together as one eternal source. This is called the filioquay. It means and the son. The catholic position is that the holy spirit proceeds from the person of the father through the person of the son. Uh brief historical note u there's a semantic dodge that that happens with orthodox the narrative proves how absurdly reactive the orthodox position is against the Catholic position early on there are a couple of thinkers uh one is named Fodius the other is Michael Serularius who was the uh patriarch during the schism who mistakenly thought that the Catholic filioquay meant a polyarchctic generation of the divine essence, meaning that both the father and the son like generate the essence as it comes to the spirit. Um, which has never been the Catholic position. It's the Catholic position has always been monarchic. Um, the father alone generates it. Uh, through the son it comes to the holy spirit. So, so together these thinkers who are separated by about 250 years, Fodius and Serilarius together reduced the Eastern Orthodox position to the view for for a time that the spirit proceeded from the sun only economically or um temporally. By the time they realized their error in interpretation in the late 13th century, the Eastern Orthodox, they're already committed to schism. And so even though they became willing to admit that the spirit proceeded from the sun eternally and this is an eternal relationship they maintain some linguistic distance from the Catholic position which is called hypothatic procession. And it means a procession from the person by use of nonsensical language like eternal manifestation which is either a distinction without a difference from the Roman Catholic view and we were the same all along or else it's nonsensical here. I'm I'm on this one topic of three. I'm very willing to be persuaded. But it it seems just like a semantic dodge. They don't want to have the Catholic view. By the time the Eastern Orthodox realized that Fodius in around 800 and Serilarius around 250 years later badly misunderstood the filioquay and created this whole stink. They decide it seems they decided to employ the semantic dodge rather than admit the error of these two thinkers. So it it depends what's being said. If the father alone truly spirates truly spirates the spirit then um it becomes nonsensical. would deny that all the father has belongs to the son which is a quote directly from from scripture from John's gospel. It severs the eternal relation of the spirit to the son which u again Jesus says all that the father has I have. In this sense, scripture strongly supports filio, which is the father gives the divine essence to the holy spirit through the son. Uh the spirit is called the spirit of the son in Galatians 4:6. In Romans 8:9, Christ breathes the spirit in John 20 22. This is an image of external procession. Uh I think I think they'll say it's strictly economic, but um he's breathing the spirit in its eternal relation. When Jesus says all that the father has is mine, John 16:15, nothing is excluded from the sun. Uh the river of life in in final book of the Bible uh revelation uh 22 verse one, the river of life flows from the throne of the father and the lamb. This has only one possible meaning that I can construe most condemningly and there is a lot of equivocal language here and again there I think there's the least difference between our two positions uh of of all these three topics by far I would say that the eastern orthodox thinkers or eastern thinkers of the first millennium many of them largely support it. Sirill of Alexandria says, "Spirit is from God, in the Son, and through the Son." That's an Eastern thinker. St. Maximus the Confessor says outright, "The Latins are correct. They mean from the Father, through the Son." Uh, St. Basil and and Gregory of Nissa both say almost identically, all God's works are from the Father, through the Son, in the Spirit. St. John Damosine gives an amazing image for all of for anybody out there that's trying to think about it. This is an amazing image and it captures both the the uh medium and the substance of the way the I believe the filioquay works. He says the father is the source, the son is a river, the holy spirit is a lake. The spirit quote proceeds from the father and rests in the sun. St. Gregory of Nissa writes, "Every operation which extends from God to creation has its origin from the father proceeds through the son and is perfected in the holy spirit." This is very very close very close to our view. None of these views because of the abstusity of the topic are going to be identical particularly in the early church. But it's very close to what we're saying, a hypoatic procession, a procession of the father through the person of the son to the spirit. But still only the the spirit only gets the divine essence from one source. That source is the father alone through through Jesus. As a reminder, Aanius says the holy spirit has to the son the same proper relation as we have known the son to have to the father. So a nice uh relation of proportion. The Holy Spirit is to the son as the son is to the father. Gregory Nazi said, "If there ever was a time that the father was not, the son was not." If ever there was a time when the son was not, then the holy spirit was not. Showing uh eternality through temporality. And St. Epipanius of Salamus says, "The spirit is from the father indeed, but he is not without the son. For if the spirit is of the father, he is also of the son. where the son says he will receive from me. Ecumenical councils support this. It it was um not crystal clear until the fourth lateran council. The spirit receives equally from both Leon's two which takes place is supposed to be the reunion council the first reunion council in 1274 from the father and the son as from one principle one spiration. there's equivocation on whether or not there there's one principle at at times there is just one principle one spiration through the sun Florence in 1439 which actually was the reunion council the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church did uh uh unify at the Florence Council where uh the Orthodox position 31 out of 33 delegates said you are right on Filioquay and on the papacy says spirit eternally from both one principle one inspiration. Now scripturally the spirit is sent by both the father and the son in John 14 26 and in John 16:7. Logically speaking this holds if the son cannot spirate he is less than the father which is a semiaranist error. Unity requires it as well. Filioquay preserves the trinity's unity. Denying it divides the father and the son. So I would say this that you have to take this historical look at the filio way. One because it's so dense, but also because um the historical account is is really really important. It seems that by the time the Orthodox realized we weren't we Catholics did not the Latins didn't have the the position on the filioquay that they were attributing to us they did not want to admit that u the position had been correct all along. So until this misunderstanding about what western fathers meant began the eastern fathers were comfortable with eternal relations between the spirit and the son. Um it's called the Aanatian model after all and Athanasius is an eastern father. This is uh the eastern formulation of the hypothatic procession though they don't use the term hypoatic. In the sixth century the formulation begins getting put into the western non- Roman creeds which makes the I guess east feel threatened. There's a lot of natural tension at the time. In 803 Charlemagne enthusiastically adds it to the creed. Frankish priests at the time say the creed this way in the holy land. And then in 869 this important date uh Fodius of Constantinople says the creed is heretical. He thinks that it means the holy spirit's essence in the creed comes from two sources. This is just wrong. It's an embarrassment. He thought that the Catholic position was one of polyarchia. And it's probably why we're disagreeing about this today is because there's an error made and a misinterpretation of the Catholic position that's factual with no account ever given for it by uh Fodius or his people. He thinks it means the Holy Spirit's essence in the creed comes from two sources uh to repeat for people out there for those whom this is new. Bodius says the spirit has no eternal relation with the sun which is not I believe the orthodox position today even only a historical temporal economic relation is is what Fodius was willing to say because he knew he didn't want that Catholic view in 1054 Michael Serilarius revitalizes Fodius's overreacting misunderstanding of the filioquay are we at time yeah we're at time okay and and uh I would say that this is a a history of a misunderstanding without account ever taken. All right, going over uh in the chat. You know, remember you guys uh at any point if you uh think someone's cooking, it's always one in the chat for Jay, two in the chat for Tim. We're going to go over to Jay Dyer at the Orthodox position on the Filioquay if I'm even pronouncing that right. I used to pronounce that differently. So, sorry for that. But, uh, go ahead and uh, and uh give us your opening statement. Yeah, thank you. Um, give you a second to set up your notes here and uh, do you want to do you want a a couple seconds here? Uh, no, I got it. Okay, I'll uh start your timer uh whenever you're ready. Let me know when you're ready to begin. Right. So the orthodox doctrine is again um going to flow out of the teaching of the capidosians and particularly Constantinople one which is the second ecumenical council. Keep that in mind because second ecumenical council was called closed and confirmed outside

of communion with Rome at the time. St. Mitius of Antioch was the presiding bishop. He died outside of communion with Rome and, uh, a few years later, Rome eventually accepts that council as the dogmatic definition of the church, supposedly.

Um, I want to, before we get into this, uh, well, I'll just start here. In the orthodox view, following the Cappadocians, there's a famous dictum of Gregory of Nazianzus. "Everything that the Father has, the Son has likewise, except the causality." You'll notice that nowhere in that discussion did you hear a clear, a clear explanation of what the Father is as the sole *arche*. The Father is the principal fountain, the source, and the, uh, unoriginate beginning point of the Trinity. Thus, his hypostatic property in orthodox theology is precisely to be picked out as cause. That's why, uh, if you heard in the first part, he made the huge mistake of calling the divine essence *auto-theos* or of himself or of itself. It is the Father alone, according to the Cappadocian and Constantinople I teaching, that is God of himself. Why? Because the Son and the Spirit have their origin in the Father, and particularly the Father's essence. The Son and the Spirit thus do not possess, and cannot possess, the Father's hypostatic property. And so Tim doesn't seem to be aware of what the creed teaches when the creed says, "I believe in one God, the divine essence." Oh, no, it's actually "one God, the Father." Tim appealed to monotheism, apparently not being aware of the fact that the word "monotheism" is a 1600s term. Maybe he's not aware of the term that was used explicitly in the creed and amongst all the Church Fathers, East and West, for many years. And that is the *monarchia* in the Greek. The *monarchia* of the Father is the beginning point of orthodox Trinitarian theology, particularly Exodus 3:14 when God says, "I am." 14:15, "I am that I am." As St. Maximus, excuse me, as St. Gregory Palamas says, he did not say "I am essence." He said, "I am," as in "I am He." Thus, the Father is the beginning point of all Trinitarian theology. And contrary to Latin metaphysical essentialism, we don't begin our Trinitarian theology with the divine essence. The Father's hypostatic property, since it's what picks him out as the one God, as the cause, the source, the *arche*. This is the Cappadocian 101 teaching, cannot be shared. As the Cappadocians noted, whatever is a hypostatic property is unique to and individuates that person. Whatever is not is common to all three. Otherwise, there would be some form of subordinationism in the Trinity. If there were to be a power, an attribute, a property that two persons have that one lacks. You'll notice when Tim gave his explanations, he explicitly affirmed the very thing that Photius pointed out. He says he's, uh, read Photius. It doesn't sound like he's actually read it to me. I think he's read some Roman Catholic websites that cite it. I've read it actually multiple times through. So I know the *Mystagogia* very well. He actually talks about the manifestation of the Spirit in the *Mystagogia*, which Tim says they don't talk about. They missed this and had to make it up later. But wait a minute. Tim said, "If one cannot *hypostasize*," or if the, he said that if, if one of them does not *hypostasize*, they're less. The Son has to be able to *hypostasize*. Tim, maybe you didn't realize that in the, in the *Mystagogia*, that's actually an argument that Photius makes that the Spirit doesn't *hypostasize* or generate. So by your own argumentation, if the Son is not equal to the Father because he doesn't *hypostasize*, then the Spirit has to also *hypostasize*. But nobody teaches the Spirit *hypostasizes* or generates a person. So by your own argument, you subordinated the Spirit, which is the very argument that's made in the *Mystagogia*, which tells me that you didn't actually read the *Mystagogia*. I'm going to quote you again. "If one does not *hypostasize*, then they're less." That's what you said. I said, "If the Son doesn't *hypostasize*, he's less." Sorry. Uh-huh. So the Spirit does he? No, he doesn't, does he? So by that, but in John's Gospel, he says, "I have everything the Father has." Yeah. Except the causality, as the Cappadocians and Constantinople I teach. So he's quoting the scripture. You're quoting the Cappadocians. Well, uh, scripture. Oh, wait a minute. So, is Constantinople I the dogma of the Roman Catholic Church or not? Because it says you have to follow the Cappadocian teaching on the Father as the sole cause. S-O-L-E cause. Now, isn't it interesting that Roman Catholic scholars themselves have discussed, by the way, Basil talking about eternal manifestation in Edward S. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. *J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J

A second rebuttal, but a closing, because there's a miscommunication or an intentional dodging. But I am going to stay completely unbiased in the moderation. I'll leave the chat up. I want to know from you guys in the chat. Uh, we'll switch it up though. One's in the chat if you think that, uh, Timothy answered the question and, uh, that he answered it according to what he said. Two's in the chat if you think he's lying, dodging. I guess you could use different words depending on what you think and agree with Jay. And someone's asking the chat if you're accusing me of agreeing with both of them. I'm neither Orthodox nor Catholic. So you guys can all hate me 'cause I'm neither, and I don't have a, uh, I just articulated what the view is. Yeah. So, so I articulated what our view is, which is not correct. It's, you've given that answer four times in active. All right. So let me, let me go to this. I'm going to, I don't think you know what inspiration means because you, you said he's a cause. He's a cause. I, you said that, you said that if I said that when you're sputtering out sentence fragments in the cross-examination, I never said, I never intended to say the Spirit's a cause. Is that why you got silent and had to think about how to talk your way out of it? I got silent 'cause I'm trying to talk over being. No, that's not true. The Holy Spirit doesn't have the power of the Son, right? To cause? No. So, he's subordinated. So, he's lacking a power? No. No. We say he's not subordinated because he is a passive, but he doesn't produce a person. Right. On your view, is the Son subordinate to the Father? There is subordination in the Trinity. Yeah. Role subordination, not ontological subordination. That's called monarchia. Yeah. Yeah. Except, yeah. No, that's not true. You're picking who's subordinated. Either the Holy Spirit or the Son together. No, that's a logical entailment. Does Jesus say that he worships the Father and he does the Father's will? Does the role of subordination role? No. No. So, you don't know basic Christology that the Father has is mine as well. Does he say, "You, the Father"? Let me come here. Let me come here and ask you a question because from somebody who's not as well-versed in the nuances of this debate between Catholics and Orthodox, it would just, at a structural sense, seem like perhaps you're avoiding answering something directly to avoid being seen as crazy or to not be seen as insane. Kind of like if somebody, you know, asked someone like, "Oh, are you, you know, a good question like, are you a white supremacist or something?" And you know, it's sort of like a question if you answer it, you're kind of screwed either way. If you say no, people are going to get mad at you because you don't like your race. If you say yes, they're going to call you an extremist and try to disqualify you. So, it comes across like there's a little bit of that moving around that at all. You're saying I'm lying because? No, no, he's saying it out questions. I'm saying I'm saying I'm saying to me, I'm saying I'm I'm getting the dancing. I'm not saying that's lying. I'm saying that like maybe there's a more direct way you want to answer it that you're not saying. He's saying I don't know what he's saying. You're lying about because I don't, I don't understand because he keeps changing what he says. He said it three times. I don't know if you're telling the truth. I want to listen to me. What are you talking about? Spitting out cross-examination. You spit out in a cross-examination though. You're harassing the witness. When I said, "Here's our view, two active spirators, one passive spirator," you're like, "Well, what is that?" I was like, "That's our theology." And then you were like, "That's a dodge." That's not a dodge. Two active spirators. We have the Father, the Son. I thought the Father generated, not spirated the Spirit. The F. Wait, the Father generates the Father generates the Son. He spirates, right? Yeah. What I was, what I was trying to get out is the passivity of the Spirit. And then you said, you said that's a cause. I said that's not a cause. So, how many causes are there? There's one. When that's who the Father. Okay. But he gives causality to the Son, right? He gives the ability through the Son. So, how many causes is that? It's one. But he gives it to the Son. Yes. This is hypostatic. This is hypostatic. What does the Son contribute that the Father doesn't to the to the spiration? Well, I mean, are we just going on extra cross-examination? Oh, so he doesn't want to answer. I know. So, no, I was, I just, I just said that we could take the conclusion as, as a little extension to see if you guys could further explain your position only because as someone who's trying to understand your position. Let's just move on. Go ahead. Go ahead with it. As, as trying to understand the position, I'm thinking about the audience. And if you were, let's say, a Protestant sitting here and you're not familiar with the, you know, consequential dogma from Catholics or from Orthodox, I'm sitting here like trying to actually understand what you're saying. And I am not accusing you of lying. I'm actually accusing you of doing nothing. But I'm saying to me, I'm like, okay, I don't, I wouldn't know if you were jumping around from what he's saying. Are you trying the Orthodox view of the Trinity from what he said? Um, that's a good question. So, let's, let's do a quick, because if you're being objective, if he's saying you're lying, something I wouldn't know if you're lying, right? I wouldn't know if you're dodging him or if you're lying. I wouldn't know. He said he lied. I'm not saying he's lying about the Catholic position. I know that he's representing the Catholic position. I'm saying that in the course of that discourse, he's lying about what he previously said, saying, "No, I never said that." When he did say that, the cause part. Yes. Okay. 'Cause that's what I thought. Okay. Then I got confused. I thought he was saying that you were not representational. And if you said, "Is it a cause?" And I said, "Yeah." Yeah. Yeah. So, half the time I'm brushing you off. I don't. That's not the. That's what this was all about. I was saying the Roman Catholic point of view. Well, it's not a misunderstanding. The Roman Catholic point of view, I said all along, we have these two. I mean, it's an upside-down triangle. And, uh, all I was saying is it's subordination. Uh, he he's accusing us of subordination just because I cited John chapter 16 where Jesus says, "All the Father has, I have as well." And he's saying, "Well, then he cannot, the the essence, the divine essence cannot come to the Holy Spirit through the Son." That's not what I said. You don't even understand the argument. I'm making a very clear argument. You're intentionally, you're intentionally not understanding it because it's basic and it's basic. Have you actually read? Have you read? Have you read? Did you read the Mystics? He said, "Answer." He's not. No, no, we're going to cut that there. And by the way, to the people saying, I'm trying to understand because if you don't know, I'm just saying in a very basic sense, I'm like you guys. Part of the reason why we're hosting this debate and I think it's very important is personally, I'm very interested in understanding what church I should go to, whether Catholic is a church to join and to become a part of, whether Orthodox. And a lot of you guys are searching this too. I don't think a lot of you guys who are Catholic or Orthodox may be wanting to, you know, revert or convert, whatever you want to call it in your language into the other, uh, you know, order. But for myself, you know, just because I started attending a Catholic church, I've been to an Orthodox church before too for a while. I've gone to a Catholic church and sometimes they aren't always, uh, very open about exactly what they believe. There's a lot of disagreements. So, kind of the point of this is someone like myself to sit here and try to make sure if he's saying he's lying, I'm just asking what he's saying he's lying about. Is he saying about what he said previously or about the Catholic's position? Because I'm interested to find out to make sure I'm getting the correct position. And if if that's the correct position, I appreciate it and your position. However, I do think in a quick, in a quick, uh, uh, summary, like if you could do it in like one paragraph, just what is the official Orthodox position on this on this topic? Because there's a lot of back and forth. And then you, you go, is this the closing statement? Correct. Correct for the section. Why state it succinctly what the Catholic position is? Yeah. Yeah. I'm just saying, but, but in an end summary and make sure you restate it just for people who are are new to the stream or who got lost in the argument and the tit for tat. What, what was it? And if you could finish, and then we'll have you, we'll have you close as well. Yeah. So, essentially, what I'm taking issue with is the idea that he said if the Son does not spirate, he's subordinated because he's not having all that the Father has. So, I ask, does the Spirit spirate? And excuse me. Yeah. And then he says he's a passive. He passively spirates. I say, who does he spirate? He says he is spirated passively because he receives spiration. Well, that's what passive means because he thinks that being spirated is spiration, which is a basic blunder. No, moving on. I'm, I'm doing my talk, so you hush, please. Moving on. He says, "Yeah, I mean, I'm sorry that you just did so bad in this section, dude. It would have helped if you'd read the Mystics, but you didn't. I explained passive spiration. You didn't read the." And you said, "We'll explain the internal stops. Let's tell them to stop. We'll keep it. You, you go here and then we'll switch to." You can make fun of me all you want and yours. All right. Let's keep it. Let's keep the personal attacks out and let's go and just explain the facts. And then we'll go over to Tim. He'll explain the facts as well. So, I understand, you know, he's got a lot going on. He's busy. I don't, I fault him for not reading the stuff that I send, but it's been multiple years where I've linked and sent him these texts, which he hasn't read. If he had read the Mystics, he would know that one of the first arguments in the Mystics, and it's stated multiple times over. It's also repeated in the Epideic Treatise of St. Irenaeus, by the way, um, centuries later. The same argument that to say that there's subordination because the Son doesn't have the power of causality becomes a problem because the Holy Spirit now lacks that causality. To talk about passive spiration and to equate that with, to equate being spirated with spiration is just so silly. I don't even know how to respond to it. It's fundamentally stupid because spiration is what picks out the Holy Spirit. Generation is what picks out the Son. They're called hypostatic properties, and for Orthodox, we relate them to the Father in relations of origin. That's the Orthodox teaching of the Cappadocians. It's restated. You want to read Lossky's paper called "The Procession of the Holy Spirit in Orthodox Doctrine." You can also read a Roman Catholic that talks about this and it meets all my points by Yves Congar. He wrote an essay about Augustine's relations of opposition in the Cappadocians, which also makes all of my arguments. So, again, our position is that the Father is the one true God. He is the sole *arche*, the *monarchia*. It is the teaching of Constantinople I. The Cappadocians don't teach the *filioque* precisely because causality is the hypostatic property that is not communicable. And again, the argument that the Son becomes the cause imbalances the Trinity and creates a dyad because no one teaches that the Spirit is a cause. And so he lacks causality in both the Roman Catholic and the Orthodox model, but we're consistent because we don't give the Father's unique hypostatic marker and property of being cause to the Son. Uh, and just to ask you simply, do you feel like he, uh, dictated correctly or at least to what you know to be the actual position of the Orthodox Church on this issue? Yeah. Okay. You do. So, I just want to make sure that that's so we're clear because the chat, you know, was a little bit all over the place, not not knowing what was going on. All right. So, then going over to Timothy also to Jay, please don't interrupt. We're going to just keep this a straight, a straight, uh, uh, diatribe here. So, if you want to go ahead and and give your position, you have four. One of Jay's tricks is he'll laugh at the Roman Catholic position, which, which he knows what it is, and then he'll ask for a term to be identified, like, like passive spiration, as if it's being made up *ex nihilo* or something. And he'll say, "Well, well, how does that relate to Orthodox theology?" And I was saying, "Well, it doesn't. That's the tension that exists between the Orthodox and the Catholic position." And he laughs. And then all of the, uh, the bots in chat say, "Oh, okay. Good score." I would go back to the heart of Trinitarian theology for Roman Catholics, which really has to do with *Actus Purus*. The fact that the consubstantial Father, Son, Holy Spirit relate to one another oppositionally, and this is within the substance. He was making fun of the term *ousiological*. That just means they all relate within one substance. There's nothing uncreated outside the substance of God, the divine essence, Father, Son, Holy Spirit. They relate to each other with a distinction, a distinction of operation. Jay had this infamous debate with Christian Wagner where Christian Wagner was getting him to admit essentially that he didn't understand what a relation of opposition was. I brought this up today and I was saying, "Okay, have you ever played paper, scissors, rock?" The reason I did that is because paper, scissors, rock proves that conceptually, at least at the very least conceptually, uh, if you're trying to win paper, scissors, rock, triadic relations of opposition do exist. Just because there are three couplets doesn't mean that there is not individual tension or opposition or dichotomy between AB, BC, and CA. This is absolutely nonsensical. It was an embarrassment that Jay said this, and I was saying, "Okay, that's fine." When when I brought this up with him earlier, he said, "Well, prove that that exists for the Trinity." I'm just proving that it's conceptually possible. So, it's an embarrassment to say that, to deny that the relations of opposition which characterize the Catholic view of the Trinity, which work very, very well because then we don't end up having to posit an uncreated, uh, uh, energy outside of God that is not created, not a creature, but is really distinct from God, which is a nonsense term. It means two gods or more, infinite gods, as Jay said earlier. Infinite, uh, divine energies. You said infinite divine energies. You're going to say I'm. That's not a lie. That's an absurd. What I said. Jay, though, we'll just. I'm saying that's an absurdity. We avoid this problem by saying we allow distinctions within the substance of God. We don't allow distinctions within God, uh, uh, that would be concerning or, uh, about another essence. Essence-energies distinction, and this all boils down to relations of opposition, which Jay, I, I still not clear on his position whether or not he just didn't listen, whether or not relations of opposition can exist within a threesome, within a triad. Can they? You think the Trinity is a threesome? It's three. Do they, do they exist? Do what exist? Can A, B, and C oppose one another within the triad of the Holy Spirit? Empiricist number theory. Dyad relates to two, not a triad. Well, well, dyad is always two. That's not what I'm asking. There's no opposition in a triad because opposition is a dyad. No, there can be opposition within individual constituents of a triad. Okay. So, for for all time, I want this on record. This says the last. I mean, again, how much time do I have left? Uh, technically here on the clock, you have, you have 10 seconds. But I'll give you an extra 30 seconds if you need them. All right. So, within a triad, so people know whether we're talking mathematically here, individual constituents can maintain. 30 seconds. Can maintain their opposition, their contrariety. This is a matter of simple fact. And Jay said, as a matter of simple fact, that can't even happen. When I pressed him on this, he said, "Oh, well, that's only within the Trinity." You lose. That's wrong. No. Yeah. That's wrong. I'm saying I. It's very, very simple. You thought because two go into three that relations of opposition can't go into three. This is central to understanding correctly. Stupid, dude. Not even what I said. That's what. What did you say then? I said that dyad in patristic numbering, temporal, right? It's counting by division. Do you know what that is? Of course. Versus what? Counting by identity. No. So, you don't know those things. But that's not what. No. It was my question. Well, I'm explaining to you that you don't know how dichotomies exist, how patristic theology counts triads. If you had debated the Muslims, you would know because I have to do this with the Muslims, and you're like a Muslim because you don't know how there's two different ways to count. There's two different ways to count. You told. You told Christian Wagner's debate because you don't, you nor him understand this point. If you'd read Congar on this point, he says what I'm saying. I, I don't have to have read Congar on because the dichotomies can. Here, you want to play paper, scissors, rock. Dichotomy is not a relation of opposition, says Elijah. Do you understand? Is not a relation of opposition. It's not. All right. I'm quoting you. Dichotomy is not a relation of opposition. That's the most absurd thing I've ever. For a second, you have, you have, you have a choice. I'm going to give you guys a choice here. We can either A, we can continue arguing this, but then we're going to have to skip the third topic altogether due to the timing of the debate. Uh, and what's what's going on here? No, I want to do the papacy. Okay. So, then, so then if that's, then we're going to agree to disagree on what that is, and we can talk about things later, but I think we're going to leave it there. Okay. We're going to take a couple minute break here. Before we do that, I want to read a couple more of the super chats. Remember, if you guys are leaving super chats, we'll read them as we go along. We appreciate you guys doing so. We have, uh, Jay Bentley said, "Tim, I'm sure you're a decent guy, but you're a suit." Late night tweaker said, "Threesome is crazy. It's nothing said in regards to spiration. When you sprain an ankle from the force of a ball, would the force sprain? Would the ball sprain? Would the ankle sprain? Active and passive spiration." Josh also said, uh, uh, *filioque*. Is that how you spell it? Or like, how do, how do you, how do you say that? *Filioque*. Is that fine? Yes. No. *Filioque*. *Filio*. Okay. I didn't know, uh, I didn't know how you pronounce that one. Says the spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, but what he's arguing is from the Father through the Son. That's not what the *filioque* says, though. Lame semantic argument from RC's. Uh, Maximus Decimus says, "Someone give Tim a pillow to bite on 'cause Jay is going in dry." That has a weird statement. Um, Tia Gowanowski, uh, said, "If you can prove the Holy Ghost is from the division, you win the debate because Christ says otherwise when accused of expelling the demons in the name of the Prince of the Demons, he says Satan is divided against Satan. St. Augustine says, 'Spirate means to breathe. The Spirit breathes on whom he wills. Y'all are fools.'" Everyone lost, apparently. Uh, True 41C said, "Found I was the Father today because I was fathered. Got to find my non-existent child now." Late night, two girls said, "I really like the mod, by the way. Votes Jay 74%, RC is 26%. Orthodox is extreme minority in the West, and we won. This will carry far and wide. Thank God." Uh, Maximus Desmos also said, "I'm interested in, I'm telling us what his Pope did in Chile." Uh, we also have, uh, Quantum Merritt said, "Shout out to Tim for restoring masculinity to Christianity and re-emphasizing the importance of patriarchy in the family. He's a good dude." We also have, uh, said, uh, Gordon, you said the Spirit is a passive spirator. Does this passivity imply a potentiality in the Holy Spirit? Hold on. Are we going to super chat questions? No, I'm, I'm just, I'm just reading some of these right now because we'll do some questions at the end. I'm trying to skip the questions for right now. Uh, uh, they also, they also said, uh, Maximus said to Tim, "We will never accept your dumpster cult. You should apply more lube because Jay is going in dry." What is it with these sexual references? Um, Six of Spades said, "Jay, Catholics can't address these arguments. You are obviously a big meanie." Um, and then we'll leave this one as well. Uh, Cervant Nickario said, "Let's all submit to Pope Katy Perry instead, just get along." All right. That's a. Can I say that? Um, so say what? I'm not going to argue with him. I just want to say that for those that are interested in what I'm talking about because it can't be cashed out in two-second answers. Uh, I shared two things on my Twitter. They can check those two articles out. What I'm talking about. All right. Yeah, we did have to moderate some very gross stuff in the chat. So, let's avoid the, uh, derogatory, uh, sexual nature of, of comments unless, of course, you're on our, uh, locals. You can sign up there on locals at lieshaver.locals.locals.com. If you want to support this channel as we grow and you want to join, we usually do, uh, an extra segment every single time as well on here. And shout out to Andrew Wilson of The Crucible. We'd love to have you on for some debates. Again, stick around 'cause Monday, we're also having Joel Webb on who's representing the Protestant position. He may be, we're trying to set up a debate between him and Adam Green and some of the guys who say that, you know, Jesus is a Jewish myth and that, basically, he's, you know, irrelevant. And so we're trying to set that up. So, uh, encourage you to check that out. Go again. Go to eliga.locals.com. I don't know if we have the thing to pop up, but, uh, it would be good if you guys, uh, could meet us there. We'll, uh, in a second. Yeah, you can find that. The links on the screen and the description. We'll be back talking about the papacy, apostolic succession. This is an interesting question of mine. I'm just going to say this like before I come out and say this. I, uh, from my history and what I've known about the papacy, that's this is the issue that is most confusing to me because of that one time when some Pope got excommunicated, the other Pope came in, then he conquered that Pope. And who's the Pope? And how do we even know who's the real Pope? Is do we need to follow the Pope? Is the Vatican corrupted? Or there's a lot of things we need to discuss. We'll be right back. Don't go anywhere. Like, share, and subscribe to this channel. We are on Rumble, YouTube, Facebook, and on X. We'll be right back. I've decided to take a different approach to my life and, uh, not go to Israel and not kiss the wall because I'm not Jewish. I, uh, I am a, uh, once practicing, uh, evangelical, raised that way, turned to atheist, then returned back to the church to Pentecostalism, and then fell back into sin into vice, and then went back to the church to try to get help. And it was an absolute horrific show of, uh, people, is all I can say. And I became very disillusioned. And then as I've gotten older, um, man, people were talking about Jay-aging. You and I have the same comments. Like, you guys are getting old. Unfortunately, we are, and that's what happens. I don't know what our excuses since the guy with the most kids in the room looks the youngest. So, that's the problem. Uh, but, uh, but in the end, what I'm saying is that, um, it's come down to the fact of like these questions. You know, the Bible talks about not getting lost in like arguments just about words and names, right? So, we don't want to be arguing for the sake of arguing. A lot of people, especially in reformed theology, um, even in this Catholic, Orthodox debate, can just argue for the sake of arguing. But I don't think there's anything wrong with searching, and, and, and it's part of the masculine spirit to fight, right? And to come against, uh, to come against falsehood and things that are untrue. And so, in the spirit of not of debate, but in the spirit of of truth, right, spirit of God, this, uh, this is an inspirational one to have these guys out here to really seek the truth. And we were talking a bit off camera, um, as they're just getting their notes together and preparing for our topic three for a second. Um, I just wanted to inform you guys, you know, that we were, they're kind of explaining to me, um, where they, they misunderstood, or where I, where I was misunderstanding them, I should say, and the differences of what they believed about the, uh, Trinity. It's very fascinating, and especially someone who's not from either discipline of, uh, theology or orthodoxy, and not as the church itself, but the Orthodox belief of our, uh, very, very precious faith of Christianity. It is nice. Um, and it's a reminder, just to remind you guys, like myself, you know, let's remember to never always just get caught up in the words and the meanings of words, but to remember who it's about. It is about Christ. It is about our God. Um, and the Spirit, it's about, you know, depending on what you believe or, or the, uh, iterations of what you believe. Also, remember that you're living it out. And I, as somebody who's not fully living it out, but wants to, um, and admits wholeheartedly that I struggle, you know, with with sin and vice at times in my life, like many men before me, uh, do want to know how to walk in the spirit of God in order to be an example for my, my beautiful sons, uh, to lead my wife, and, uh, to, uh, be a good friend, you know, and a good brother. And so, um, we're going to be, uh, they're gathering their notes here for just a second and gathering their voices. So, uh, you know, I appreciate you guys that are in, in the chat. And it is important, you know, and like you said, yeah, words matter. All these things matter. Yeah, of course they do. I said it's not that we can't argue these things. It's just that, you know, sometimes people can get, you know, so so into arguing that they forget that what the point of it is. It's like government. They get so into fighting for their party to get into office that once their party gets in office, the party doesn't do anything for the people, and then they're just happy that, you know, their party's in power. It's like, but what are they using the power for? So, I just feel like this is very helpful for me because I want to know, am I doing the right thing? Am I part of the right church? And I think, uh, uh, Jay and Tim are ready now to begin our discussion on their third topic for tonight, which is absolutely, uh, fantastic. So, uh, as we go on, we will, uh, move on to this next topic, which of course, we're talking about what I, what I've heard it called as apostolic succession. Um, this idea of, is there a handing down of the church? Is there a visible head of the church? Right? Who is, uh, at the head, right? And so, let's begin. And let's, someone Elijah won in the comments. It's like, you say nothing. That's how a woman wins an argument, really. They think it's, they think they win, but if they just shut up, you know, think we'd like them a lot more sometimes. Anyway, [Applause] we'll leave it at that. All right, let's, uh, go ahead and, um, we'll leave this up, uh, because we gave each of you guys an opportunity here. So, I'm going to go ahead and, uh, and, uh, give you guys a chance. I will ask Jay. Jay, would you like to go first, or would you like to give Tim the opportunity to go first on this question? You have the choice because you were first before. Okay. All right. Jay Dyer, I'm going to ask you this. Uh, Christ, did he or did he not establish a visible head of church representing the Orthodox position? You have an opening statement. I will give you 10 minutes on the clock. Let me res, let me reset it here for a moment. Your time will begin in just a second here. All right, for everybody that's here, it's Jay Dyer. You can find him here on YouTube and on Rumble and on X. Your time begins now. You may answer the question. Right. Well, the real issue here is, of course, uh, the Vatican I definition of the papacy, not just the question of did Jesus establish, quote, "a visible head." Because for the Orthodox Church, we would say that all the bishops, as many of the Church Fathers argued apologetically in the first few centuries, all the bishops are actually Peter, something that St. Cyprian said. So, there's no specifically unique, uh, special role that Peter gets amongst either the college of the apostles, nor amongst his successors, other than canonical privileges, which, for example, Canon VI of Nicaea says is equivalent to other patriarchates. Not only that, at the Council of Ephesus, I don't know, I've never heard Tim talk about this. I don't know if he knows about it or not, but the, uh, Church, uh, at Ephesus granted through the ecumenical council *autocephaly* to the Church of Cyprus. That means that it's autonomous and independent. This is usually unheard of in the world of Roman Catholic apologetics. They're not aware of the fact that there were *autocephalous* independent churches. And that's because the Roman Catholic Church developed eventually to have a monarchical, autocratic position, which isn't just about indefeasibility, infallibility, or universal jurisdiction, or a kind of papal autocracy. It actually went much further than that in the 11th century with the Gregorian Reforms to where the papacy became a de facto world emperor. Now, the canons of Chalcedon say that civil, uh, rulership and authority and power is forbidden for clerics to have. Not only did the Roman bishop go beyond this, the Roman bishop actually, in the *Dictatus Papae*, in 1090, declared itself to be the only church founded by God, the only one that could be called universal, the only one that could reinstate and depose bishops, the only one that had the right of, quote, "the imperial insignia," the one in which all the princes in the world should kiss his feet, the one, uh, alone who may depose emperors, etc., etc. Really extreme, by the way, and can never err and will never err unto the end of the world. The problem is that *Dictatus Papae* and those claims in the next few centuries are actually based on known, famous forgeries. Now, again, I want to promote my buddy George's book, *Errors of the Latins*, Volume II, is 300 pages just on all of the infamous forgeries, whether the Simancas forgeries, whether the Gallican Decretals, or whether the Donation of Constantine, and many, many others. All of these really contributed, even according to Congar himself and other Roman Catholic scholars, to, uh, leading to this, uh, evolution of the papacy into a geopolitical world power. Now, you might say, "Well, that's not a big deal. I mean, come on, Middle Ages, there was a power vacuum." Ah, but wait a minute. Did you know that a few centuries after *Dictatus Papae*, in *Unam Sanctam*, the last paragraph of this, uh, bull by Pope Boniface VIII in 1302 states that not only must you be in communion with the Roman See to be saved, you must also believe in the, uh, worldly temporal power of the Roman bishop to be saved. Now, nobody had ever heard of this doctrine before. And so, how are we going to defend this? Well, that's where the forgeries come in. You must also believe that the Pope is the *quid ad omnia*, the universe's super-being to be saved, which nobody else believed or required for salvation prior to this. This is a new doctrine. Now, not only is this a new doctrine, I'm going to show definitively from the Roman Catholic teaching and from their own dogmas that this is actually now no longer held. But wait a minute, maybe this one didn't count. Maybe this is one of those things that I can throw in the "not dogmatic" bin, as you're going to see they arbitrarily do all the time. Well, actually, in the *Syllabus of Errors*, when I come all the way up about 900 years later from the time of *Dictatus*, all the way up to, uh, Pius IX in the *Syllabus of Errors*, which is attached, by the way, to Vatican I, we read that in paragraph 76, the abolition of the temporal power of the Roman See is possessed, that it possesses, that it would be great for the Church to get rid of this, condemned. So, the proposition is condemned. And there's others that relate to this as well. Interesting, because, uh, John Paul I was the first Pope to cease to use the papal tiara, that is the three-tiered tiara, which signified all levels of his power and authority, including temporal power and authority. But when we come to the documents of Vatican II, we find the exact opposite of this. Not only is the temporal supremacy of the Roman bishop, which was for centuries necessary for salvation, discarded, we're actually told that, quote, "In the Church in the Modern World" document, Jesus didn't actually come to bequeath any political mission to the Church. It was only religious. That's paragraph 42. We read, for example, uh, in "The Church in the Modern World" over in section 82, that the promotion of a world government is really the only solution in terms of internationalism, globalism, and entities presumably like the UN. It doesn't say the UN, but it mentions surrendering power to international organizations. And then on paragraph 84, it actually says the exact same thing. So, the papacy, you see, in the next page, says that all Christians and non-Christians can work together in, in, uh, human institutions for a, uh, an end to war. So, now we're going to have an end to war through entities like the United Nations. And if we slip over, flip over to the religious liberty document, chapter 2, it says the Vatican declares that human persons have a right to religious freedom, that everyone should be immune from any coercion by any individual or social group or any human power at all in religious matters. Interesting, because that exact phraseology and terminology is actually condemned in the *Syllabus of Errors*, numbers 55, 77, and 78. So, in John XXIII's *Pacem in Terris*, we're told that we can now begin to work towards a globalized government. This idea basically makes its way into the documents of Vatican II. And we're even told that the state should in no way at all coerce, and it should, first and foremost, respect people's liberty. Now, maybe you think that sounds good. Maybe you think, "Oh, that was a Cold War thing, and maybe they needed to promote religious liberty for the Cold War." But remember, for all of these centuries, all the way up until the *Syllabus of Errors*, you are required for your salvation, not just to believe in the Roman See in its spiritual supremacy and universality and availability, but also as a world emperor. And Pius IX condemns anyone that would dare go against that. Next, I would point out that in these same documents, we are told, for example, in *Mortalium Animos* of Pius XI, "The Catholic Church, the Apostolic See, has never allowed its subjects to take part in any of the assemblies of non-Catholics." A few paragraphs earlier, on before 14, it talks about how pan-Christians should be condemned. Ecumenical ceremonies and religious events are in no ways lawful for Catholics to be a part of, that is paragraph nine. So, 1928, it is always universally the Roman Catholic teaching that you cannot be involved in these ceremonies, rituals, and rites of, at that time, Protestant groups. But now, in the post-Roman Catholic world, the Apostolic See has supposedly actually made itself part and party with other world religions, including Pachamama and other such bizarre ceremonies that took place at the Vatican. In fact, Tim, on his own website, on his own, excuse me, on his own channel, has talked about how, in his view, he thinks it's heretical that, uh, the approval of communion for adulterers was given by Pope Francis. And we can, of course, list a long litany of problems with Francis. Now, I'm sure that we're going to hear, "Too *quoque*," that you have corrupt bishops, too. Orthodox have ecumenical bishops, but we don't have everything hinging on one dude, his infallibility, his indefectibility, and his universal jurisdiction. In fact, the Vatican itself, in the *Chieti* document, paragraph 19, admits in the very last section, "Appeals to the Bishop of Rome in the first thousand years," it's talking about expressed the communion of the Church. However, the Bishop of Rome did not exercise canonical authority over the churches of the East." Now, this is on the Vatican website. I'm not saying they're dogmatic statements. I don't need to say that they're dogmatic statements because essentially they're admitting the collegiality and the co-equality that the Orthodox Church has been arguing for the last thousand years against the Roman Catholic Church. Now, that was *Chieti* in 20, I think 16. And then a couple years ago, there was a part two to *Chieti* called the Alexandria document. In the Alexandria document, you have all the things that I've been talking about admitted by the Vatican, including paragraph 1.3, the false decretals and the Donation of Constantine contributing to this geopolitical world power of the papacy in the Middle Ages. Again, it has now been discarded. So, I want to know why is it that it was necessary for me to believe in the, uh, universal geopolitical *quid ad omnia* doctrine of the papacy to be saved in the year 1400? It wasn't necessary in the year 500 because nobody taught that or believed that in the year 500. And then now again, we're back to it doesn't count and you don't have to believe that anymore because the Vatican now says that religious liberty is the highest of all of the, excuse me, religious liberty is the goal that all states should, uh, pursue when it comes to the role of church and state. You have 45 seconds. And lastly, I want to, I want to talk about, let's see, I got through G80. Uh, no, I'll go ahead and stop there. I think I've got to taught *Papae*. Yeah, that's that's all my statements. Okay, great. And, um, you know, obviously, uh, there's a lot of, a lot of questions here. So, the, the Catholic position, I feel like, is more well understood by people, but like I mentioned, you know, it is very, very hard, especially, just, just so you know, for myself, you know, some, some of the nuances of of how we know that the papacy is, is divine or that it's been passed down apostolically and there hasn't been, you know, bribes and confusion. I think I'm not, I'm not convinced, and I know not a lot of, you know, some people aren't. And just to clarify, um, this isn't siding with the Orthodox or anything, but, um, you know, sometimes I meet a lot of young Catholics and they, you know, believe in this very, very strongly, but then don't know about some of the nuances. And so, I hope you can answer some of our questions, you know, during this time or or understand them. So, uh, you have an opening statement. I'm going to give you, I gave him 10 minutes and 30 seconds. So, let me, uh, add an extra 30 seconds here to the clock. Give me a moment. Uh, I appreciate it. Arguing the Catholic position here on the, is that, is that correct to call the apostolic succession here? Is that or was slightly different? Is the papacy a little bit different? The papacy is a special instance. Yeah. Okay, great. Uh, you have 10, 10 minutes and 30 seconds. Timothy Gordon. You can find him on YouTube and all across the internet. Your time starts now. Well, Jay's right. The Church is synodal. The prompt to this section that I didn't hear one word from Jay on is, did Jesus establish the Petrine office or the papacy or something which is a chronology 2,000 years old? It's either a yes or a no. And if it's demonstrated that Jesus established a papacy, then it doesn't matter what might have happened 1800 years, 1900 years into the papacy, for better or for worse. Um, what would matter? I, I guess at that point, Christianity would be destroyed. It wouldn't be Roman Catholicism that would be destroyed if and only if Jesus established a pontificate to head his one Church. And that's the fact. When Christ built his Church, he didn't leave us with a theory of unity, but with a living office. Because again, synods require heads. The rock, the keys, the shepherd, all of these have meaning. From the first century to today, that office has always been recognized in the Bishop of Rome. The question tonight and third prompt is very simple: Did Christ intend a church with a center of unity, or did he intend a circularly premised epistemology, question-begging federation of 14 or more churches that fractures whenever disputes arise? And where you define the councils as being ecumenical when we accept them. But the accepted councils are how we know they're ecumenical. That's that's the Orthodox way. That's the way. Anytime you have a synod without a head, there has to be a visible sign of unity, or else it doesn't make any sense. Um, remember throughout this debate, if Christ established the papacy, which was universal to all of Christianity for over a thousand years, which is why Jay won't address the point in time that Christ established or didn't establish the papacy, and the papacy is later disproven, then it's Christianity that is false, not just Roman Catholicism. So, that's really, really important. I hope that that point resonates with people. Either Christ did or Christ didn't. We're going to assess that. I'm going to assess that tonight 'cause that's the prompt. Um, and by the way, yes, all bishops can be said to succeed Peter in a sense. Many of the Petristics say this, but Rome succeeds him in a special way. The debate is not whether or not the Church has visible unity, but where that unity is concretely safeguarded. The papacy, the good Popes, the bad Popes, the mediocre Popes, it's concretely safeguarded there. Uh, Jesus wants all to be one so that they could believe in John's gospel chapter 17. And Orthodoxy simply doesn't have it, which is why Jay won't address this. There is no oneness, no one holy, catholic, apostolic. You can point out, uh, incoherencies that you believe in here in the papacy, but if Christ established it, then that disproves all of Christianity. The Catholic position is that I'll, I'll show it tonight. Christ established the papacy as a perpetual principle of unity. The Vatican II document, uh, restates this. Orthodox often will affirm papal primacy but deny universal jurisdiction, which is a nonsensical distinction. The question is, did Christ intend a merely honorific primacy or a juridical universal one? In other words, can the Pope actually, uh, make decisions for all of the churches around the world? There are three scriptural foundations for the papacy. It's Matthew 16:18 and 19: "You are Peter, on this rock I will build my Church. I will give you the keys." Um, there's Luke 22:31-32: Christ prays uniquely for Peter among all the 12 that his faith may not fail, so that he alone may strengthen his brethren, confirm his brethren. Um, John 21 is the third papal scripture. Peter is entrusted with universal shepherding. He says three times, "Feed my lambs, feed my sheep, tend, tend my lambs." This triad shows, uh, uh, something jurisdictional. It's analogical language. So, let's go to the Petristic testimony because once again, we're trying to assess whether or not Jesus actually established the papacy, not whether or not Pope Francis.

signed the Chad document or whatever, 2,000 years later. We're trying to say, did Jesus establish this at the beginning?

Well, in the most, and most people don't know this, it's been either hidden from them or they've been brainwashed. Clement of Rome, before the year 100, uh, successor, direct successor of Peter, intervenes authoritatively in Corinth while the apostle John is still alive in Ephesus. This is the earliest known exercise of Roman authority. He intervenes, Clement of Rome. This is the year 96 AD, and it's a, a well-established thing, though most Christians know nothing of it.

Ignatius of Antioch, just 11 years later, one of the earliest Petristics, calls the Roman church the one presiding in love. The way we, this term "presiding," comes from this idea of presiding in love, in his letters to the, letter to the Romans. Irenaeus, less than a century later, in 180 AD, insists that all churches must agree with the Roman church because of its preeminent authority. Direct quote in *Against Heresies*: "preeminent authority."

Have, have you ever heard Irenaeus, uh, cited this early on, before even, uh, the year two, almost halfway before the Nicaean council, the first ecumenical council? You have three of these guys saying "preeminent," "presiding." Uh, one of the earliest popes intervenes in Corinth in 251 AD, Cyprian of Carthage. Though he clashes with Pope Stephen, he still calls Rome the "chair of Peter" and the "principal church from which sacerdotal unity has arisen." Principle, P, P, A, L. Um, this is all before Nicaea. People don't know it, and it's a shame that they don't know it.

What they also don't know is that among the ecumenical, now, there's this, this circularity operating within Orthodoxy because they don't have a principle of unity or oneness on earth. They'll say the councils are ecumenical when we accept them. When we don't like them, we won't accept them, and we know because they're not ecumenical. So it's a, a classic, uh, question-begging or *petitio principii*.

The first ecumenical council, Nicaea, 325, uh, has, uh, Canon 6, which Jay referenced. This actually, I'm glad he brought it up. It presupposes Roman primacy as a precedent for, uh, the Alexandrian and Antiochian, uh, uh, patriarchies. Um, it's a, a precedent for them. The, uh, it's really important. It grounds Alexandria's authority by appealing to Rome's customs as the standard. So, it's not saying that they're equal. It's saying that Rome has primacy. Complete misreading of this. Rome isn't local. So, it would make no sense to, to compare one of the Eastern churches to Rome. Rome is the standard-bearer. It is an established, faraway authority. Rome primacy, not equality. That's right there. Canon 6, Council of Nicaea.

Nicaea also establishes the four marks of the church, which the Catholic Church alone really claims, as far as I know: one, holy, catholic, apostolic, orthodox. Can claim, uh, because they have sacraments and and real bishops, they can claim two of them: holy and apostolic. But they can't claim the other two. One, certainly, I've never, I've never heard of it, maybe I'm wrong. But, um, the Federation of Orthodox Churches can claim two. Um, at the Council of Ephesus, which is the third ecumenical council accepted by both Catholics and Orthodox, what happened is you had an appeal to Rome, to the, to the Pope, to excommunicate the Patriarch of Constantinople by another, uh, Eastern father, the head of the whole, sorry, "Holy and blessed Peter, it is written, the prince and head of the apostles, the pillar of the faith, the foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ, and that to him was given the power of binding and loosing sins, who until this day and forever lives and judges in his successor." So, it's not just Peter alone, in his successors. He binds the head of the whole faith. The head of the apostles is blessed Peter. This comes directly from, uh, that third council, Ephesus. The head of the whole faith, the head of the apostles is blessed Peter. This is not an honorific. This is Cyril of Alexandria, who's the one writing the Pope, asking him to excommunicate. What would become the number two in the church, says, "We rely on the authority of the blessed apostle Peter, Peter, on whom the church was founded, and whose successor the blessed Pope Celestine is." He writes directly to Pope Celestine and says, "Your Holiness, who holds the place of Peter, the prince of the apostles." They're all princes in a sense, but Peter is prince of princes. "Has rightly judged this matter and condemned notorious." In what honorary sense would you appeal to someone and say, "Fire this guy, excommunicate this guy," which is an extra important firing? You wouldn't. It's absurd.

At the Council of Chalcedon, the very next council, um, after Pope Leo's tome is read, uh, it says, "Peter has spoken through Leo," showing that there's a lineage, a very direct lineage, and it's Peter the prince. Leo is now the prince. Because, by the way, at this fourth ecumenical council, it shows the epistemic flaw in Orthodoxy. You know that it's circular. The councils are ecumenical when we accept them, but only the accepted councils are ecumenical. There is another group, the Oriental Orthodox, who broke away, and they never accepted the fourth ecumenical council. We have a, we Catholics have a way. We agree with the, the Eastern Orthodox. This is a valid council. We agree with each other about that. We have a way to show it. We have a visible sign of unity. We know that synods all have heads. The Orthodox can't. The Orthodox, the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox are still at odds over the fourth ecumenical council. Constantinople III, uh, "Peter is prince of the apostles, who continues the promise undefiled to the end." Nicaea II, "primatial authority." Jay agrees with this council. U, "primatial authority everywhere on earth was given by the Redeemer of the world himself to the apostle Peter." Constantinople IV, it's their council. It reads the letter of Pope John VII. "The chief of the apostles Peter has the authority of universal binding and loosing." This is, uh, indisputable that at the time of the founding of the church and the immediate chain of evidence thereafter for the next seven councils, you have, uh, a universal appellate jurisdiction of the Pope, which is why he could excommunicate and he was being, uh, sought for excommunication.

All right. Are you going to complete your thoughts there? Because I think we, we probably should add on the time right there. What's that? We should probably end on the time. You're already in the bleed. You're hitting towards a minute. If you want another minute, you're going to have to concede a minute on the next round. Uh, no. That's fine. Okay. I'll end there. All right. So, the opening statements, I want to, one in the chat if you think that, uh, you know, we're, we're getting to a point to where you think that, uh, Timothy had a better opening statement right there, or two in the chat if you think Jay had a better statement. Let's go right into the rebuttal. We'll read some super chats after the rebuttal. Um, I think we'll just go to, yeah, we'll go to Jay. Jay, uh, from that opening statement, you're writing down some questions. Uh, give me your best rebuttal. I'm going to reset the clock to put it down to five minutes. Let's try to keep it tight at five and not go over in any bleed. You can have a 30-second bleed if you need. I'm resetting it to a standard time. Uh, you can begin now.

Yeah. Now, the reason that I didn't go into the question about Matthew and and the passages in the book of John or Luke or whatever is that, uh, we don't, uh, disagree that there's apostolic succession from Peter. But I don't know if he's aware of it. Peter is actually called the father of three Sees. In fact, you can read Pope St. Gregory the Great in his letter number 40, where he talks about the apostolic See being three chairs. So, as late as Gregory the Great, in his day, he's still calling Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria the Petrine See. So, nobody disagrees that Rome is first. And he cited St. uh, St. Irenaeus and *Against Heresies*, but he didn't tell you why he says that it is given this honor and authority. He says it is doubly apostolic, Peter and Paul. Maybe he's not aware of the fact that by the time of Vatican I, they actually reject the position of the argumentation of St. Irenaeus that you cannot say that Rome has its supremacy because of Paul in any sense. So, even though Paul is honored still in Rome because he was martyred there, the only reason that Rome has this supposed indefeasibility, uh, its, uh, universal jurisdiction and so forth, is supposedly because of a Petrine tradition and charism. However, Pope St. Gregory the Great, who himself was a Pope, still doesn't have a problem still talking about there being three Petrine Sees. But of course, Roman Catholics never talk about that because they don't give you the context behind these comments and these statements. Let me read what Canon 6 of Nicaea actually says. It says, "Let the ancient customs in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis prevail." Now, note the references to customs. There's no reference to a divine charism, to divine law. It's only to ancient customs. That in all of these, the bishop of Alexandria has jurisdiction since the like is customary for the bishop of Rome. Likewise in Antioch and other provinces. He just assumed that Rome was a universal, and so it's, it just doesn't really count. But the jurisdictions are being likened to Rome. And his argument is just that, well, but yeah, but of course everybody knows that Rome was universal. As jurisdictions, really, because he's not aware of the fact that the appellate structure and the, the synod and canons of Sardica actually prove our position. Because what Sardica says is not that the Roman bishop has the final say. Rather, they actually say that the Roman bishop could be appealed to, as well as other patriarchates and bishops can be appealed to and were appealed to, and he can order a retrial in that jurisdiction. It is the opposite of the Vatican I papal autocracy position. Allow me to read his own Vatican statement from the *Catechism* document, which he should have read: "Over the centuries, many appeals were made to the bishop of Rome from the East. In disciplinary matters, such as the deposition of a bishop, an attempt was made at Sardica in 343 to establish the rules for this procedure. Sardica was received at the Council of Trullo in 692, which his church rejects. The canons of Sardica determined that a bishop who has been condemned could appeal to the bishop of Rome, and that in the latter, if he deemed appropriate, might order a retrial." Oh, that's not the autocratic Vatican I view that he was arguing for, that he hoped would be the kill shot. Rather, that this could be conducted by the bishops in the province neighboring that person's bishop. Appeals regarding these matters were also disciplinary matters were also made to Constantinople and to other Sees. Oh, dang. That's synodal. That's collegial. By the way, Athanasius and people who are in these situations, if you read the letters of St. Basil, as I mentioned earlier, he wasn't aware of the Meletian schism. Uh, and as Denny notes in the chapter in *Papalism*, Constantinople I was had called and closed outside of communion with Rome. And in fact, later centuries later, Rome accepts Constantinople I retroactively. That's a problem for his position. But out of all this, I would remind him that he seems to not be aware of Pope Vigilius and the really strong case that we have there. As Ubie brought up to Ibara, if you remember Abara saying, "I haven't found actually a good answer to that question yet, but I will come up with it eventually, maybe." Why is this, why is Vigilius such a key point? Vigilius submitted to the ecumenical council after reversing his position four different times. So, wait a minute, let me get this right. Vatican I, which says that the Roman bishop is the head of all the churches, has universal jurisdiction, even though his own Vatican documents like the *Catechism* document admit that the Roman bishop didn't have universal jurisdiction the first thousand years. Now, Vigilius has to submit to, and does submit to, the ecumenical council's judgment and being removed from the dipics. That's a problem position for him and for Erica. I don't have to prove every single specific to prove to disprove Roman Catholicism. All I need is one dogmatic contradiction or one papal failure, such as Vigilius submitted to a council, which shows that Vatican I is false, that ecumenical councils are inferior to and always subordinate to the Pope, to prove his position is false. Just like when he tried to cite other examples like, well, uh, Orthodox don't have any position that's really consistent. Wait a minute. Later in 649, condemned Monothelitism and was intended by Pope Martin to be an ecumenical council, and yet it was not accepted as an ecumenical council. And there was another council that happened called Constantinople III, where they themselves decided to condemn the positions based on investigating the theology of St. Maximus. It's not Pope St. Martin that is the key deciding figure of Constantinople III, which, if the Vatican I papacy position were true, he would have already solved the issue. Rome has spoken, case closed, supposedly, we're told, right? But he also doesn't seem to be aware that if he'd read on the history of Chalcedon, Rome has spoken, case closed, isn't actually because Leo is the standard and test of orthodoxy at Chalcedon. If he'd read any of the academic literature on it, he would know that even his Roman Catholic scholars admit that Cyril is the standard of orthodox orthodoxy at Chalcedon, and Leo is checked against Cyril by Chalcedon for many weeks, excuse me, many days, investigating to see if the tome matches up to Leo. Now, I disproved his position by pointing out one dogmatic contradiction amongst many, which was that for centuries, you had to believe in the temporal supremacy of the Roman bishop. You didn't have to believe it for centuries before that, and now we don't have to believe it anymore past Vatican II and the religious liberty and ecumenist pronouncements. That's a contradiction.

All right, I'm going to give you an extra minute because he took an extra minute. Go ahead. Uh, Timothy, I'm going to reset the clock. Give me one moment to add an extra minute and reset. Okay, you have six minutes on the clock for your rebuttal. Uh, go ahead.

There's absolutely no dogmatic contradiction. Uh, so Vatican II, we have, uh, an ecumenical council that happens after the fall of the Holy Roman Empire, after the fall of all of the confessional states on earth. So, only the confessional states are bound because, of course, secular states can't be bound by the Pope. The Pope can tell them what to do, but they're not going to do it. This was always the context of this discipline. It's a discipline, anyway. By the way, the Pope has only in the last thousand years identifiably spoken *ex cathedra*, meaning making doctrine, twice. Twice. Count them, twice. One in around 1850, one around 1950. And in both of those cases, the Pope pulled all of the bishops first because this is what's consistent with the papal power going all the way back to Peter. Um, he pulled to make sure that he did not make an *ex cathedra* statement, or in 1854, and then in 1951, the only two *ex cathedra* statements that would disprove the papacy by being wrong, he pulled all of the bishops because there's collegial brethren. And then he made, he named the third and the fourth Marian dogmas *ex cathedra*. So, Jay's always just skipping over the fact that the Pope is only infallible when he speaks *ex cathedra*. This is a most fundamental claim. And by the way, Popes can be heretics. Whether you're talking about Honorius or, um, you know, other problematic Popes that were borderline heretics throughout the way. Most of the, the majority of Catholic scholars think that Popes can actually be heretics. They just can't contradict themselves when they're speaking *ex cathedra*. And this would be really clear if Jay had read the *relatio* of Bishop Gasser at Vatican I. It's very, very, very consistent with the collegial papacy of the previous 1800, uh, years. Now, there are, uh, I would say in executing Matthew chapter 16, Luke 22, John 21, there are Eastern scholars, Theodore Studites, Abu Kar, who executed exactly the way that we do. Antioch and Alexandria also succeed Peter because Mark went on to Alexandria. Peter used to be at Antioch. It's very, very, very clear that we're not reading into the text. Now, the question at hand is, did Christ establish a binding, unifying papacy? I, I've shown through the scripture, through Petristic scholars in the first two centuries, that he did. The one of the very first Popes after Peter literally was exercising a jurisdiction. At several of the ecumenical councils, you had an appeal to the appellate jurisdiction of Rome. I'm not just going to sit here and repeat the quotations from the Acts of those councils where they're saying "Rome alone," um, knowing that doctrinal unity requires a visible sign. So, like I said, the original argument is, if Christ established a papacy, then if that papacy should fail, all of Christianity fails. That's just a fact. Now, if he didn't establish the papacy, then that wouldn't be the case. But pointing out historical difficulties, even if I granted them, which I don't, later in the timeline, doesn't accomplish what Jay claims it does. Uh, so if Christ established the papacy, then prevailing would require not that Catholicism is false, but Christianity is. Remember, like, back to the future too, when Doc explains to Marty, uh, by use of a chalkboard, why they wound up in an altered 1985, because the source of the problematic timeline lay at the very beginning of the story in 1955. If you want to disprove the papacy, you have to go to the beginning of the story and show that Christ didn't establish a papacy. You can't just sit and, if you're a Christian, anyway, you can't sit around and point out what you don't like about Pope Francis's shady document. Not a magisterial document, by the way. Definitely not infallible. Um, he can't point at, uh, any, any of the documents that Jay is going to tonight to get to the beginning of the timeline. In the case of Christianity, the papacy was from the very beginning universally accepted, occasionally grudgingly by the East, but they accepted it for a thousand years. I mean, this should be more compelling to people that are passive standards by what, why was it accepted for a thousand years, over a thousand years, and then it was just okay not to? They just hope you don't see that fact. Um, there's a brute fact established beyond any doubt. Not, not even Jay's going to disagree with me. Was accepted for over half of the timeline of Christianity. And now they just whistle past the fact that it's no longer accepted. Instead, Eastern Orthodoxy, you'll never hear a defense of this because it's a coherentist rather than a foundationalist position. Jay's not trying to build anything. He's just trying to poke holes in the papacy. They insist on a popless ecclesiology, one with willful blindness about its own thousand-year acceptance of the pontificate until they didn't want to anymore. Whose epistemology, which is really just conciliarism, a a valid council's ecumenical. We know that it's ecumenical because we deem it's valid. Destroys itself for all to see. Like at Chalcedon, when you had the Oriental Orthodox break away from the Eastern Orthodox, they still don't agree about much. It's a circular rule of faith, and you're never going to hear them build this up, the circular rule of faith, because it's indefensible. Their hierarchy can and does fall into heresy. This is not just *tu quoque*. They're not bound to accept ecumenical councils. The councils are ecumenical when we accept them. And the accepted councils are ecumenical. This is the rule of faith. If you really press on Orthodoxy at all, there is no epistemological framework for determining which councils are ecumenical and why. That's not true in Roman Catholicism. In Roman Catholicism, we have this visible sign of unity. Three scriptural passages, several of the, uh, of the early fathers interpreting them exactly the way we do. And with no living visible authority or sign of unity, how is the Eastern Orthodox believer to know which councils to accept? They simply won't tell you this. Well, because it's just true. You just have to accept that it's true. It's a question begging. Roman Catholics have the, the papacy to tell us. And no, we don't just accept the papacy blindly. We accept it because Christ established it. So, circularity ends up being embraced as a kind of theological mystery because this is the last resort. Um, um, for example, the rejection of Florence. Florence was the reunion council in 1439. 31 out of 33 of their delegates at Florence signed it and said, "We were wrong about the *filioque*. We were wrong about the papacy." And then they went home and 10, 12, 14 years later had a revolt and under duress were forced to undo it. And you ask them, "How do you know that council wasn't ecumenical?" Because we didn't like the outcome. It's that simple.

All right. I want to hear us. Ones in the chat, by the way, if, uh, if you think that Timothy Gordon had the better rebuttal, and I like to see twos in the chats if you think Jay Dyer had the better rebuttal. We'll be giving them a second to get ready for their cross-examination. Just to read a couple of the super chats here. Tia Guinowski said, "Orthodox were actually the first Protestants." Monian said, "Just said they want to tell you Gordon that the Orientals and Assyrians don't have autocratic popes. Their head bishops are first among equals, just like the EO position. The 4th century. They didn't have RC papism in mind either." Orthodoxy Frenosis said, "Roman Catholicism has the papacy. Orthodoxy has the church. Only one heals." Taint Nothing said, "Tim, that's just a fact. Gordon." We have Lauren Fur said, "Popes can be material heretics but not formal, and we've certainly had our share of material heresies in the last six decades from popes. Plays on the right thing. Also, the Pope is a local metropolitan and universal bishop. The canonics of Nicaea is simply referring to the Pope's metropolitan duties. No contradiction." We also have Orthodoxy Chloricquin. "Orthodox and Muslim countries have zero World Cups and a debate. God doesn't, uh, like, uh, schismatics or heretics." Hayes Undead 2366 said, "Jay, despite being the oldest, is still the best EA masterclass rapper on this show. Appreciate all the work, Jay. You're killing it as always. Jamie owes you an octuple espresso shot. I can witness that. I did. I remember he was here and he asked for coffee and like most people, he put a little milk in your coffee. Some people say it's gay. It is gay. It's very popular to be gay today, but milk is good in coffee. And then, um, he said he just wanted coffee and proceeded just like, just shoot, like double espressos into a cup of rice. He just ate like bitter dark espresso that burns his throat. It's the kind of man that he is. It's good stuff. Um, you should have seen the way his wife was looking at him, was just down in that coffee. What a, what a Chad." Clevetto Antiquity said, "As prot with the following J1." Ask, "You're not even done." Safar 777 sent $50. Thank you so much. I said, "Why does a Pope wear a little hat and kiss the silly wall?" That's more of a rhetorical question, for sure. Mike Anson 2393 said, "Wind Tim, the greatest moment of 2025 would be to see you and your wife come home to the Orthodox church. May God guide your journey, bro." We also have a couple here. Another Australian said, "Can confirm life essence from Mr. Fista is still spirating from Joe Rogan. He has not passed away yet. Jesus will not take him until he has fought Liver King." We also have Edgy EB1610 said, "Rock, paper, scissors, lizard, Spock. It's all so clear now." Um, and then we have Nathan Slippery said, "If a woman is raped, she is passively raping the man." Tim's theology. All right, we will, uh, Okay, I'll just read one more. Saf777 also said $20 and said, "Why does the Pope pray in synagogues and mosques?" There's a lot of questions about that. All right, we are going to go to, uh, the cross-examination. We will start with Mr. Jay Dyer. You will have five minutes on the clock. Give me a moment here. Let me reset the clock. You may begin.

Yeah. First, I want to note that, um, he seemed to be saying that there's only guidance and infallibility when it comes to *ex cathedra* statements. He must not be aware of the fact that Vatican I says that all things are divinely revealed and to be believed, whether in the word of God handed down by the Church in solemn judgments, which would be *ex cathedra*, by her ordinary and universal teaching, which is proposed for belief as having been divinely revealed. So, do you agree that you also have to believe the universal ordinary teaching and the *ex cathedra*? Both under the charism. You have a submission in mind and will that's religious, but it's not, it's not protected by the charism of infallibility. Universal ordinary isn't universal ordinary. Are you talking about councils or popes? Universal ordinary teaching, teaching of popes is not, is not infallible. That's what Vatican I says. No, it doesn't. Yes, it does. You want me to read it again? No. Vatican I. I'm going to read it again. I'm going to read Vatican I to ordinary council. Universal ordinary teaching. There's three tiers. Do you disagree with your own theological manuals that talk? Of course not. That talk about the three tiers? No, that's that's really fine. Okay. So, there's ordinary magisterium, there's extraordinary magisterium, and there's universal ordinary magisterium. So, I think you're confusing the ordinary and the universal ordinary because we're talking papal magisterium. That's the only magisterium. No, papal. Only the papacy is magisterium. No. So, you think that *ex cathedra*, he thinks *ex cathedra* means, which guarantees infallibility. I'm not asking about that. That's extraordinary only to. No, I'm asking you about Vatican I saying that universal ordinary teaching is also part of the charism. It's part of the charism. It's not protected under, uh, infallible. Oh, so the charism isn't infallible. No, no. So, the, see, so you just refuted it again, man. You're doing it again. When you slip up, it's my fault. No. Do you think that *ex cathedra* teachings by the Pope, the sole papal teachings that enjoy the charism of infallibility? Vatican I says that the Vatican I does not say that. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is talking about the Roman See. Two things that are, that are protected by the charism. Extraordinary and *ex cathedra*. You're wrong on this. Ordinary. You're just flat wrong. Ordinary and universal is all bishops, not just Pope. You're wrong. Do you understand? Straight up wrong. Your own, your own manuals teach that there's three. It applies to the bishops at council. There's three. I know that. What are the three? What are the three? Read them to me. Well, I thought you knew. No, I do know. What are they? But you're trying to say that *ex cathedra* is, is, uh, that *ex cathedra* is not the only way that a Pope can speak from the chair with the charism of universal. It's called universal ordinary magisterium, and it's not the ordinary magisterium. No. Yes. You're just, your own manual says it right here. You're lying. Show it to me. Ordinary magisterium is the regular teaching of the bishop. I'm not lying. Can I see it? I'm going to read it to you. The ordinary teaching of the bishop. That's or tell me what ordinary magisterium is. You don't want to let them see it. Who wants to see it? I want to give it to me. Tim Pool situation. Yeah. So I can explain to you what these are. Ordinary magisterium. Individual bishop, groupings of bishop, Bishop of Rome. This is ordinary. This is not protected by it. Okay. Extraordinary magisterium. There's no *ex cathedra* protection. Issuing a solemn definition while gathering medical. Is it protected? Yes. That's what I'm arguing. That's the college of. No, you're talking about the Pope. I said that's not the Pope. That's the bishop. And you said that it's not the bishop. Hold the Bishop of Rome issuing a solemn definition. You know that two of the. He wants it back. He wants it back for. Can I read this one? Two of the. You're deflecting. Two of the three are protected by the charism. No. Yes, they are. One of them. One of them can. Pope speaking. Councils are protected. The Pope speaking, but there's only one way that speaks *ex cathedra*. Read the bottom one. Jay, read the bottom one. The universal ordinary magisterium, according to Vatican I, is said to be ordinaries. Pope. Stop interrupting me. Stop. I'm reading it to you right now. You have to read the whole thing. All right. All right. If, if he thinks you're interrupting, then, then we'll stop for a second. Well, furthermore, all things are to be believed with divine Catholic faith contained in the word of God. Yes. Written or handed down. Yes. Which the Church either by solemn judgment. That's *ex cathedra*. That's not *ex cathedra*. Yes, it is. No, it's not a solemn judgment by the Church. So, judgment. It's religious submission in mind and will. No, you're misunderstanding. This is talking about *ex cathedra* or the universal ordinary magisterium as divinely revealed. To bishops. Both of you. Talking about bishops. This is

And the loosing, which is what the keys signify, is literally said to the entire college two chapters later. Yeah. No, you didn't know that. No, I did know that. But binding and loosing is given the third ecumenical council and the sixth ecumenical council. It's affirmed as given to Peter alone. Primatial authority everywhere on earth. Sorry, this is the seventh ecumenical council. Uh, primatial authority everywhere on earth was given by the redeemer of the world to the blessed apostle Peter. Through the same apostle, the holy catholic and apostolic Roman church has till now and will hold for all time primacy and sovereign authority. Are you, how does that square with your interpretation? Right. Because that language is also used. Matthew 16 is applied in the seventh ecumenical council to the emperor. No, the the emperor doesn't have the binding and loosing. The emperor can forgive sins. No, I'm saying the council also uses that terminology for the emperor. So, it doesn't prove what you think it proves. It does prove what I think it proves. Everywhere on earth, the the emperor can can confess sins. Can be a confession. If you don't understand that, I'm saying I don't believe that. I'm saying what the council also says. The council, primatial authority. It says that the keys in Matthew 16 also applies to the emperor, which I don't believe, but the council also says that. Where does it say that? Uh, it's brought up in the Ubiara debate. No, I I mean, where does it say that in the coun? You read me something? I don't have the documents with me. No, but you can look it up. So, so you think that I, I just want your best estimate. You think primatial authority everywhere on earth because we're talking about the the. Are you aware of the passage? Well, hold on. I know what it says. We're talking about the passage that I brought up, the three, the three passages, particularly the keys. Everyone on earth given by the redeemer of the world to the blessed apostle Peter, uh, through the same apostle, the holy catholic, apostolic Roman church. How about that? It doesn't give it to to the empire the way would be the analog for the emperor. It's only given to the Roman church, hold now and for all time through privacy and sovereign authority. How, how does that score with your interpretation? Because like I said, the keys is used at times in that flowery language to say it's a flowery language. It is. I mean, the entire debate between Ubie and Abara was about all primatial authority everywhere on earth is flowery. Yeah, it is primatial authority. It's, it's spec. Have you, have you heard the term? I'm a trained attorney. This is how we describe the terminology that's used in the ecumenical councils for the patriarch of Constantinople is similar. How about council of Chalcedon? Uh, Peter has spoken through Leo. Are you aware that they examined the tome against Cyril? Yeah, of course. Oh, so Cyril was a standard? No. So Peter spoke through, through Selial authority. Well, you're retroactively, retroactively saying that you're retroactively reading the seventh back to the fourth. How, how about this? Is this flowery language from Ephesus, the third council? It is. The head, the head of the whole faith, the head of the apostles is blessed Peter. Is that a legate? It's, it's in the octa. It's, Is it Philip delegate? No. Are you sure? Oh, I think it's in the octa. I mean, I could, I could check. Yeah. Do you think that every statement? So, you think that every statement from a legate is dogmatic? Interesting. Because nobody else believes that. Of course not. It has to be in the octa. So, the Pope's legate just said it's in the octa. The Pope's legate say something and you think that that's now dogmatic. The head of the whole faith, the head of the apostles is blessed Peter. So, what excuse is it? Is it that it's, but none of that proves Vatican 1. I wasn't trying to prove Vatican 1. What I was, This is my cross. I was trying to prove that Jesus instituted the Orthodoxy. The Orthodox don't disagree with that. Jesus instituted the papacy. And you're saying the Orthodox don't disagree with. What does it mean at your own council? Doesn't mean what you say. What does it mean at your own council at 87, Constantinople 4, at your own council that the chief of the apostles Peter has the authority of universal binding and loosing? Just explain that to me. The same way that your documents of Vat of the Vatican explain those things. Explain it. I just want to know. I believe it. What universal binding? As your Vatican documents explain it? Can you, can you unpack what that means? It sounds like you're appeals are made to the bishop of Rome, but they're also made to other bishops. And as Cyprian says, all bishops are Peter. But the power of universal binding and loosing. But that same flowery language is also used of other patriarchs. And what do you mean flowery language? This is appellate jurisdiction language. This is literally the language we use in America. Appellate jurisdiction argument according to the Chi doc, excuse me, the Alexandria document. The Chi documents proves my position because appellate jurisdictions allow for retrials in the local jurisdiction. It proves your position that he has an honorary, uh, uh, non-jurisdictional power. No. Are you, are you aware what the Peter in Rome? No. Sardica allows for Constantinople to say the chief of the apostles Peter has the authority of universal binding and loosing. That is also. No, you're not listening to what I'm saying. That terminology and that phraseology is also used of the emperor and it's also used of other patriarchs and bishops to do the same types of things. Okay. In John, that's insane. In John 21, Jesus tells Peter three times, "Feed my sheep." He repeats it. Feed my sheep. Feed my sheep. I give an orthodox interpretation. Why would Christ entrust the universal flock to one man if his role was just honorific? It's not. What do you mean it's not? You're just assuming that those passages teach Vatican 1 and the universal jurisdiction. I'm talking about Vatican. Vatican 1 wouldn't happen for 1800 years. You're obsessed with it. I'm asking literally because that's not what's in. You think Vatican 1 had happened at the time of John 21? Obviously not. No. Jesus tells Peter three times. He tells Peter three times back in whatever the year 30. That's because he did not feed my sheep. Why would he? But I'm just asking why would he entrust the universal flock to. That's just your assumption that the entire scripture. Where does it say the entire universal flock is there? Um, the whole flock, not just the local church. Because he's not referring to the local church. That's why he says it. Why does he say it three times, Jay? What's the meaning? Because Peter denied him three times. Duh. But okay, bring it. So it's not Vatican 1. No. So why, why, what is the authority of Peter denying him three times and this being undone three times? The authority of it. I don't know what that means. So you, you think that Christ is not entrusting universal flock to to one? Timothy was in Ephesus. Timothy was in Timothy was in Ephesus. Peter isn't over that, right? And and the authority of universal binding and loosing is just flowery. Jesus gives the keys to Peter and that's just flowery. You should have watched the Ubia Aaro debate because they talked about all the flowery language. I've, I've seen it. Mh. Uh, and it's, it's absurd to just say anytime you don't like that a a power is given, you say it's flowery language. No, it's not. I see it too. Primatial authority everywhere on earth. That's flowery. That's flowery. It is because you tried to you tried to tried to cite legates as dogmatic. No, no, this is nice too. The councils often earlier the legate. Pope. Why would Pope Hadrian be read and stuck into the octet at Na? Think that saying that primatial authority everywhere on earth has been given by. Does this strike anyone else's answer? Can I answer his question? Some people in the chat were saying Jay likes flowers. That's what that's what that's what they're saying in the chat. I don't. I'm not going to have an opinion. I'm going to take other side of this. Can I answer? Yeah, you can answer and then we should probably cut that off and go to the the conclusion right now. Yeah. Uh, so I'm not trying to say that every statement is flowery language. I was specifically talking about some of the statements. Let me give an example where Basil says when he's talking about the Malian schism, he says that the church in Antioch is the head of the entire body and the whole body listens to the head. Nobody believes that the bishop of Antioch is the head of the entire universal church. It's one example of the flowery language which came up multiple times in the debate between uh Ubie and Abborah and other debates. So all I'm saying is that the case in Matthew of Matthew 16 in the seventh ecumenical council doesn't go very far because it also applies to the emperor in that in the acts of that council, which I don't accept. I'm just saying that they use that terminology and they cite that text for the emperor. What I'm also saying is that do they cite it in the same way though? Do they cite it in the same way where they're saying primatial authority where he's a confessor of sins? No. What they say is that the gates of hell will not prevail against the empire nor the emperor. So they're citing Matthew, but nobody believes that because the the empire fell, right? But I'm just saying that Matthew 16 in the councils can be used and it doesn't necessarily prove the Vatican 1 position, which is what you have to prove. I'm not talking about Vatican 1. I'm talking about the whole, the entire. It was like a three-line specific quote and you're saying, well, they said basic the later Pope Hadrian thing. Can I address that? Yeah. Okay. So I do agree with you that over time and if you read Sashinsky's book on Orthodoxy and the Papacy, he discusses this. By the time of Pope St. Gregory the Great, he admits and agrees to the pentarchy at the same time as pentarchy is accepted by Rome, Rome is also making more and more grandiose and grandeur related statements and claims. I agree with you that those claims are there and they're being made. But from an Orthodox perspective, just because the Pope at a council says that, we don't necessarily think that it's true because the Pope said it and it's in the council, right? It could be the acts, it could be flowery language and we don't accept everything that a Pope says, even even at a council. So the the real issue epistemologically is how do you say that this is not uh flowery, uh sorry, circular reasoning? In other words, what I kept repeating in my opening, the councils are ecumenical when we accept them. And only the accepted councils are ecumenical. That's why you guys have 14 churches. That's why you can't meet the first mark of the church. Let me. You have three patriarchs of the sake. You have three in your church. All right. For the sake of this, but you can't meet the one. There's one head. There's one visible sign of unity. That was God telling us to get to the closing. All right. So, in in conclusion on that, let's end with a conclusion both to look, I'm going to we're going to cut down to the five-minute conclusion because it's almost midnight and there's there's a kid in here. So, I was like, got to go to bed. Um, but so, so we'll cut out five minutes and then I'll go through some super chats. Uh, we went through most of the super chats though that were out there. If you if you I read some of the $2, $1 super chats, but I was mostly keeping it the $5, $10 and $20 and up uh super chats. And um I thank you everyone who gave the super chats. That was really appreciative uh of you that were there and we'll try to uh make sure that we we get to them somehow um because there was just just too many. But I really appreciate it. Don't forget subscribe to this channel if you don't. We are live Monday, Wednesday, Friday uh at 7:00 p.m. Eastern time right now. We have special shows on Tuesdays and Thursdays as well that are live, but they're pre-recorded. We're having some new shows start on the on the channel, including uh Joel Webbin, who's, you know, been working with these two guys as well, doing a theological show trying to bring Catholics, Orthodox together to fight, uh what's going on in this world together to be masculine, and to take back our countries, lead our families, and to repopulate this world. Am I right? Uh that's a good idea. Plus, you can also uh join local, support this show directly if you want to because every time on that we do this show live, we end up having live segments. If it's a special show, sometimes we don't. Kind of put it all out there uh at Elijah Schaefer.locals.com. You can follow us on Rumble, YouTube, wherever you want to. But I greatly appreciate your support. And um let's go into this. We'll go ahead and we'll start uh with Jay. Let me put some time on the clock here. I'm I'm going to go a little shorter and we're going to try to stick to it. Please to summarize it due to uh the the simplicity of that. I'm going to give you six minutes instead of 10. Uh let me reset the clock. Uh if you're ready to go, this is the conclusion. Both of this segment and of the show. Yeah, you have the clock. Yeah. Um, so I'd like to address a couple things that did come up here. There's a really good book, by the way, because a lot of these comments, a lot of these quotes need to be addressed in terms of the context and a more more sort of spaced out. There's a great book called Papacy and the Orthodox by Edward Sashinsky. He's the same person that was a UNA and became Orthodox. He wrote the book on the filioque. He also wrote this excellent book on the history of these disputes. And he actually begins with the Petristic era or excuse me, of the post-apos period with Clement and Ignatius and talks about how for example, uh for the last 60 plus years, even the Roman Catholic Church no longer utilizes things like Clement because they don't actually demonstrate what the claims of Vatican 1 uh claim. The claims of Vatican 1. For example, if you read Satis Cognitum, which is uh Leo the 13th's description and definition of what is supposed to be understood in terms of papal supremacy, Satis Cognitum says that it has always at all times been understood that the Roman See had the claims that Vatican 1 has about it. So in other words, there's no there's no development of doctrine. According to Satis Cognitum, it is clearly that the Roman See was indefeasible, infallible, and had universal jurisdiction. Now, he likes to say that, well, I don't have to accept these statements from the Chiade document because, well, it's just not infallible. Of course, there is no epistemic criteria for the Roman Catholic for what is actually infallible because Tim knows that it's more than just a few ex cathedra statements. You also have to believe all the dogmatic teachings in the ordinary universal uh magisterium. And in fact, there's a whole list of. I'll give you guys the list of these. You can look them up yourself since we don't have time to go through them. Denzinger 1683, Denzinger 1698, Denzinger 1792, Casty Kenubi 104, all say that the position is condemned. If you say you only follow the ex cathedra magisterial statements, that is a condemned proposition. And it's funny because you actually heard him seem to be arguing that tonight. Now, in regard to just let him let him let him conclude, please. Sorry. Please, we have four hours because universal ordinary magisterial teaching would be much broader and would bind him and everyone else to a whole bunch other things. And that's precisely what the point of Vatican 1 was to say. Now, all I needed was one dogmatic contradiction, which I think we saw with the geopolitical power claims that were necessary for salvation for 900 years. He said, "Oh, it's just a discipline." That's his way to get around this doctrinal contradiction. But again, I will go back to the famous instance that Ubie brought up to Ibara, which Abara didn't have an answer to, and which I will re reassert again, uh, from the Papacy and the Orthodox, Pope Vigilius submitted to the ecumenical council because he was threatened with excommunication and removal from the dipics, and that's where he landed. That's where he ended up. That's why Vigilius is such a strong argument against the claim that Jesus instituted this universal supremacy that was from all times at all times everywhere infallible, indefeasible from the earliest days. That's what he has to prove. That's why he was deflecting into these passages that don't actually prove that. They prove merely that there's those passages which can be read in an Orthodox sense or in a Roman Catholic sense. He has a system that he has to defend. He tried to say that it's all coherence theory or so that's I don't hold to secular coherence theory, so he doesn't know what he's talking about. The position only requires one contradiction for the whole thing to fall apart. And you can read the most recent Richard Price text on the case of Vigilius, and when Richard Price was on Reason and Theology and they interviewed him a few years ago, and he said that the Pope did not have universal jurisdiction in the first millennium, just like the Chi document says the Pope did not have universal jurisdiction in the first millennium. That means Vatican 1 is false, and that's why Vigilius disproves the papacy, and there's many more. Honorius. What? Two minutes or we're done? No, you two minutes. Okay. There's many more. There's also the case of Honorius. Honorius is not just condemned because he uh supposedly uh fibbed or failed to condemn. It's actually because he wrote a letter to a bishop. So notice the status of the text. It wasn't ex cathedra. It wasn't magisterium. It was a letter to a bishop where he affirmed Monothelitism, and he was successively condemned for by in the East three councils, including the seventh ecumenical council. So, Honorius becomes a a heretic explicitly. Most Roman Catholics, except for a few, will admit this now today. But that means that the Pope isn't indefeasible. And yet, Vatican 1 claims that the See of Peter is indefeasible. It is never failing in its truth and in its faith. And yet, tonight we've seen in just a handful of examples, and I can give many, many more, that it is in fact failing. And that's why we don't put our hope in a geopolitical world ruler, which now calls for open borders and all of that, who used to say you had to believe in his quiz outside Iraq lean algeb powers to be saved. Now you don't have to believe it's just a discipline handwave it. No, no, no, no. The papacy is a geopolitical tool. And if you go to my channel and watch all of my old videos, you can find the lectures where I've walked through David Wimhoff's excellent book showing that the CIA also bought into and helped to buy out the papacy through Operation Gladio. There's multiple texts from multiple Roman Catholics even on that. So what are we looking at with the papacy? Is it really a center of unity or is it a tool of inclusive capitalism, socialism, World Economic Forum, all the stuff that you see Vatican 2 promoting with the internationalism, a new world order, etc. explicitly in the church in the modern world texts. That's what the papacy actually is. The papacy is not your friend. It is a spiritual cancer and it does not produce the thing that it claims to produce, unity, holiness, and truth. All right, that was ladies and gentlemen, Jay Dyer of the uh Orthodox tradition. We get a round of applause there. Absolutely fantastic. Uh, end to his rebuttal. Before we put the ones and the twos in the chats, I'd like to turn the time over. It was almost exactly six minutes, like one second over. Uh, over to Timothy Gordon. Just want to clarify you're ready. Yes, you're good. We need a second. Okay. Uh, go ahead. In the terms of defense of the Catholic tradition, give your defense and conclusion. You may begin. Well, it's very clear to prove whether or not, uh, I think the prompt of this question was Jesus instituted the papacy. We have to check whether Jesus instituted the papacy, the three gospels that I read and what eveners thought of them. What all of the early church thought they meant. Even if power would be a grandized or used in, um, um, ways that that Jay objects to later, you can't object later in the timeline, you have to object earlier to show that Jesus didn't establish the papacy. Here are, and Jay objected as Orthodox do to my exegesis of those three papal scriptures, but except here is, uh, Abu Kar. These are all Eastern thinkers before the schism. If he meant by these words in the gospel only St. Peter, the church would have been deprived of comfort and would have had no one to deliver her from those heretics whose heresies are truly the gates of hell which Christ said would not overcome the church. Accordingly, there is no doubt that he meant by these words, nothing other than the holders of the seat of, uh, St. Peter, who have continually strengthened their brethren and will not cease to do so as long as this present age lasts. So, is it multiple people? Yes, it is the people who inhabit the chair of Peter. Now, here's Maximus the Confessor. All the churches of Christians everywhere have held the greatest church there to be their sole base and foundation since on the one hand it is in no way overcome by the gates of Hades according to the very promise of the savior. They're referring to the same scripture, but holds the keys of the orthodox confession and faith in him. And on the other hand, it shuts up and locks every heretical mouth that speaks unrighteousness against the most high. Um, this is Theodore Studite. I witness now before God and men. They have torn themselves away from the body of Christ, from the supreme See in which Christ placed the keys of the faith, the supreme See, against which the gates of hell, I mean the mouths of heretics, have not prevailed and never will until the consummation. Note all, all of the the continual themes which ring the same in all of these thinkers executing the one passage according to the promise of him who cannot lie. Let the most blessed and apostolic Pope Pascal rejoice therefore, for he has fulfilled the work of Peter. This is, uh, Theodore Studite, an Orthodox scholar says of this. The same time we find St. Maximus the Confessor and Theodore the Studite expressing the view that Rome was in a unique sense the chair of Peter that would never fall into heresy. This is, uh, cleaner work and it's simple and straightforward because the establishment of the pontificate by Jesus was simple and straightforward in the first Christian century. And I read you all of these places where for the first thousand years, the Orthodox accepted the papacy, and you have heard not a word, not a single word from Jay tonight as to how they accepted the papacy for the last nearly thousand years. They haven't accepted the papacy. And of course, because this is an indefensible, uh, uh, relinquishment of a, of a millennium-old position, it's a, a relinquishment of the fundamental pinnacle of the faith, the fundament of the faith. Uh, St. Peter, as many, many Orthodox, Eastern scholars say, before the schism, he is the foundation of the faith. He's the prince of the apostles. Flowery language, yes. But I, I read from multiple councils that the establishment of the papacy in these three passages is, uh, uh, accepted in both East and West. And of course, this always brings us back to the fact that in both East and West, there was a pontificate for a thousand years, and there was jurisdiction being exercised. Uh, as I said, the first time we debated, if it's just an honorary power, if it's just an honorary, uh, role like being a knight at a round table and you're the first of honor, then you are not appealed to for an excommunication, you can't fire anyone. Dwight Shroo can't fire anyone in the office when, uh, he's left in charge as a kind of first among equals. That's true enough. Well, it, um, within the first four councils, there are appeals being made to the Pope. In the first three councils, appeal being made to the Pope to excommunicate the eventual number two in the church. I don't know what else that stands for. And I've, I've tried to see it that way. I can't. I've heard nothing coherent tonight that would answer the question, what do those three papal scriptures mean? I've read Orthodox scholars, Eastern scholars, and and Orthodox scholar cleaner work who, uh, exegesed him exactly the way we did. Um, even if you ignore Clement of Rome because it's inconvenient. Ignatius of Antioch calls the Roman church the one presiding in love. Ala a presidenteus, that all churches must agree with the Roman church because of its preeminent authority. Is preeminent authority flowery language? No. It's hierarchical language. It's jurisdictional language. Cyprian of Carthage says, while he's clashing with Pope Stephen, he still calls Rome, who he's not happy with at the time, the chair of Peter and principal church from which sacerdotal unity has arisen. This is how the Roman Catholic Church stands for those four marks, one, holy, catholic, apostolic, established at the very first ecumenical council. The oneness requires a visible sign of unity on earth. All bishops can be said to succeed Peter in a sense, but Rome succeeds in a special way, and I think that way has been, uh, made clear by these three, uh, scriptural foundations of the papacy. Ladies and gentlemen, Timothy Gordon of the, uh, Catholic persuasion. Uh, I think we're just having a little on our soundboard there. It's fine. You're not going to get cheer. Not on purpose, but, uh, we actually have a, a new one sh, a new shipment on the way. Looks like our board actually shorted completely. So I'm surprised it worked this whole time. Fantastic stuff. So appreciate you guys. Um, with that super chat in mind, I want to read a couple of the super chats here. I am Wenaman said, "The Catholic Church says the Orthodox have legitimate apostolic succession, possession of true sacraments and Christ. If you have what we need, have you wait, if you have what need, have you for the Pope. Interesting. Every day I'm struggling says there's a difference between accepting go old Rome's orthodoxy and, uh, schismatic universal supremacy. Tim, you complete bad faith actor. They said complete said War Thunder said Tim is the Byzantine Empire and Emperor Basil the First infallible? The gates of hell shall not prevail against your Orthodox empire. The bishops to Basil the First at the Eighth Ecumenical Council. Is that true? Uh, I was I miscited. It's the eighth and I was saying seventh. So I was incorrect about that. I should have said the eighth. All right. Late night tweeter said, Orthodox again with the 74% versus Roman Catholics 26%. An absolute devastation for the Roman Catholics. I like, I didn't know this was such a battle. Like, is this, this is a whole new world for me. Like I just knew the churches and stuff. I, I didn't know. Um, Jay's ready to go. He's like, I got. No, I'm just, I'm trying to get my. I don't want to keep you too long. I'm not trying to. No, no, no. I got, I got to read a few of these chats. It was, it was like, it was intense, dude. What? It was intense. Yeah, it was over four and a half hours. I don't think I've ever done a four and a half hour debate. So, um, neither have I, actually. Uh, neither have I. I'll read a few more of these. I want to make sure I read the super. I got, I got to appreciate you guys as my super chatters. I love you guys and, um, you know, you guys really come and show your support for for Tim and for for Jay, and that's why you're supporting here, and I appreciate that because, yeah, it does cost money to to host these things and I don't know if it fully paid it back like with the super chats, but it definitely helped, you know, and that's really, really, really fantastic. So you guys understand the importance of independent media, and that's very, very helpful. Thank you. Iconic. Matt said, "If I, as a pizza maker, put pepperoni on a person's pizza and then give them the pizza, does that make the person someone who puts pepperoni on pizza passively? Does it make them a passive pizza maker?" Okay. Even I think that's funny, and I don't take a side there. Um, play paper scissors rock for it. Is there something to the paper scissors rock instead of rock paper scissors? Yeah. Why do we say paper scissors rock? I don't know. My wife tells me that's crazy. Rock. Is it rock paper scissors? I always thought the the two diads and then the monad, right? In terms of syllables. I just thought it was like, you know, like that's what I said. Like it's like give me job hands. That's what it sounds like to me. That's what it's a job blow. Give it to me later. All right. Anyway, I shouldn't have said that. Rock, paper, scissors. I'm tired. Rock, paper, scissors. Uh, Protoc also, uh, said something very, very interesting here. Said, uh, said, uh, when Tim sees an old guy with a t-shirt, "Greatest Grandpa," he takes it literally and starts talking about how his grandpa was the best. So, okay, that's, uh, that's some interesting things there. Um, that being said, you guys, these people are are crazy. Uh, War Thunder said, "Tim, is Emperor Leo infallible? Is Emperor Leo infallible?" "I am confident of the pity of your heart in all things and perceive that through the Holy Spirit dwelling in you are sufficiently instructed, nor can the air delude you." St. Leo to Emperor Leo. Is he infallible? That's a simple question. Is EMP is Emperor Leo infallible? Is the Emperor infallible? Yeah. Are you being serious? No. No. What do you mean asking me? I don't. I mean, I'm talking to the goofball in chat. Yeah. Of of course not. Dude, the word guru thrown around tonight was diabolical in itself. Um, they also said one sounds like there's a sincere attempt at coherence. Other sounds like talking to a theological lawyer. We also had, uh, uh, one shot A7 said, "Go get him, Jay." You should have made people state what their what their faith background is for a for a comment. Yeah. But then they just lie anyway. So they'd say, "Oh, I'm a Catholic." But but, uh, um, Oh man, there's there's so many here that we're not going to be able to get to tonight. Really sorry. Um, but actually got, actually we did get through most. Also, it was funny. I, we saw there was like ARS 500 and I was like, "Oh my gosh, what is that?" And it turns out that's an Argentinian. It's like 38 cents. It's like 30 cents. I got that the other night. I'll give. I wanted to give Jay credit. So he said it right the second time. Ordinary universal magisterium refers to all bishops with popes. He did say it, and my understanding is that's covered by the charism. Well, let me read a couple of these things. Uh, Freedom Freedom Works right now just sent $200 in US. The soundboard just isn't working. I'm so sorry. We usually give like, can you, do you have some confetti at least for them? That work? There you go. That's. Think about this. You go $200, get some confetti. Well, have you ever given more than that to the government? It gets confetti in in brown people's weddings and their families while they're sleeping. That's what we get with our with more money than that. It's not confetti. It's their brain matter of their children. Anyway, um, that's what we pay for. Can't have your roads fixed because you got to kill brown people in other countries through the US military. I don't like it. It's not a good thing. But people, we pay for that. It's not a good thing. Anyway, darkness aside, he said, "If Orthodox believes in the papacy, papacy, why don't they have one? Why can't they agree on the sinful nature of contraception? Why would they interpret the Bible themselves without an interpreter? If they're wrong, their souls are on the line. I think their problem is authority." I guess that's that's coming from a Catholic to repeat that. If Orthodox believes in the papacy, why don't they have one? Why can't they agree on the sinful nature of contraception? Why, why they interpret the Bible themselves without interpreter? If they're wrong, their souls are on the line. I think the problem is authority. So, they're saying without the apostolic papacy, then you're wrong. So, like, I mean, I don't know. I guess it's like a sin of a sin of transgression or something. I guess you're going to hell for it or something. I, I, I mean, what, what is, what is the question? I'm trying to think. I mean, your soul's on the line. So, like, why do you have a problem with authority? I think that's what he's saying. You have problems with authority. Well, yeah. I mean, we just have, we have different authorities from what they recognize as authorities. Um, to answer it simply, but if you want a specific answer on divorce and remarriage, we made a whole documentary on this, or at least my friends did. Lewis and Ubie, you can go to Ubie Petrus and watch the documentary at his channel about divorce and remarriage where you'll see that Pope Gregory II in the Roman Catholic Church allowed for it. The Basil, the canons of St. Basil that the Roman church accepted allowed for divorce and remarriage. So, a lot of these things that they have huge issues with, they don't even know their own history on it. And, um, you can also look up, uh, the interview with Dr. David Bradshaw on the question of sexual ethics and the issue of contraception on Ubie Petrus's channel as well. So those, they're really involved questions. It gets into like Aristotelian medieval theology of, of, excuse me, of philosophy of purpose and secondary purposes and biology and all that. It's just too much to answer in one response. So we made that documentary. Yeah. Okay. That's interesting. Uh, and by the way, Escap said, "Jay is the Pope of the future. Christ is King." And, um, I think we'll leave it at that. Shout out to everyone who, uh, who gave that that I wasn't able to get to tonight. I really appreciate it. Um, if people want to find you and follow you guys, Jay, what is the best way people can support your work? The links are in the description, but obviously you got social media channels. People probably know you and hear and, uh, they may want to support you. Yeah, you can go to my website and all my archive stuff is there. I'm also on Rockfin, a free speech-based platform. You can find me on Twitter, YouTube, all that stuff. Um, and then usually on Fridays with Alex Jones, although we're waiting to see, you know, where that's going to go with his court stuff. And then, um, the Sam Hyde show. Um, uh, yeah, check it out. Yeah. And of course, Timothy Gordon, how can people find you and follow you? Same thing. Uh, yeah, Twitter, YouTube. Uh, the usual stuff. I'm Timothy on Twitter and, uh, Timothy Gordon on YouTube. And the show, my show is called Rules for Retrogrades. Wow. I've never seen so many defeated people at the end of the show. We all. It's like we all lost at the end. Four and a half hours. I'd like to say that this was the best Catholic debate I've ever had. So, you actually did, I mean, better than Trent or any of the ones I can think of. So, this was actually a this was like an intense session. So, this was the best Catholic debate I've had. Thanks. And and good job. We remain, uh, friends or, and I, I appreciate you coming out and doing it again the second time. You know what? This was very good. Uh, I think in the chat, you know, I was going to say this, you guys both did a fantastic job. Uh, I think that that the work that you did, uh, there was the work that you guys did here and the way that you were able to talk this out was probably above a lot of, uh, people's IQs, including my own. And I appreciate that. Um, and it's always good here to to be able to to hear it out and to learn something. And I like to say that with debates or with conversations, the key thing is is that hopefully you learned something constructive tonight. Like that's what I hope to everyone. You learn something constructive and that your views were at least challenged, right? Because pride, pride, uh, and haughtiness, you know, can become a very, very, very, uh, big stumbling block in in the hearts of men, and especially sometimes, you know, you get over like some of your sins and vices, and then you can become like deal with ego and pride and issues that end up, you know, blinding you from from, you know, being humble and seeing the face of God. Without holiness, you not see the Lord, and, um, we have to really check our hearts at the at the gate there of heaven and see, you know, really what, what's going on in our, in our lives and our hearts and our minds, be honest, because the, the mind is ruthless. It's deceitfully wicked. Who can know it? Uh, but God himself, right? He knows. He knows us. So I would say this to Jay. Uh, you know, it's, it's a couple things. Um, Jay knows more about the filioque than any Christian layman that I know that I know of in the public space. So I was stepping out there. Uh, he did well in in that second one. I was stepping out there to try to do it. That's not my area. He did very, very well. And, uh, and I'm not taking anything away from him in the second section. Uh, I, I, you know, I think I'm, I'm strong on on Actis Purus, and, uh, I would just give it to him legitimately. I'm not, I'm not dodging giving credit, but it's a bit like anyone that has to go debate, uh, Nick Fuentes or something like he's going to have his people in the comments. So there, there's always that, you know, he, he's, he's got his people who show up, and that's good. You need your people. And I like a lot of, I like a lot of the Ortho Bros. I like where they are on a lot of stuff, but, you know, Catholics, we have our own problems. They don't, they don't stay up later than 10. And, well, good job in the second section. Uh, I'll, I'll give you that. Um, there's a lot that can be learned about the filioque from from the tomes of knowledge of Jay Dyer on the filioque. But, well, I think in the end, we can conclude this. Was last statement should all become Mormon? So that's what I got from this. You know, there you go. We should all become Mormon. It's a good idea, right? No, I'm kidding. Uh, anyway, thank you guys for watching. Shout out to my guest today, Jay Dyer, Timothy Gordon. Follow them wherever you can. Shout out Win Super Chatters. Shout out Win Joey. Uh, and to the rest of you guys watching, have a great rest of the week as always, and may God bless the United States of America. I'm signing out. [Music]