POPESPLAINING - version: quick draft simplified for children Goal: prove that God and the Bible tell us to submit to the Pope and the Catholic Church. WHO THIS IS FOR: anyone who wants to follow the Bible or Jesus, but does not submit to the Pope and to the Roman Catholic Church. INDEX: ARGUMENT 1 - THE CHURCH IS FOUNDED UPON PETER. PETER IS THE STEWARD (THE SECOND-IN-COMMAND) - PETER IS THE NEW (AMPLIFIED AND PROTECTED) ELIAKIM ARGUMENT 1.1 - PETER=ROCK ARGUMENT 1.2 - PETER, THE ROCK AND STEWARD, UNTIL THE CONSUMMATION OF THE WORLD ARGUMENT 1.3 - JESUS IS THE CORNERSTONE AND ULTIMATE FOUNDATION, BUT THE CHURCH IS FOUNDED UPON THE ROCK WHICH IS PETER ARGUMENT 2 - PETER FEEDS THE SHEEP ARGUMENT 3 - THE CHURCH MUST BE UNITED; PETER (THE POPE) KEEPS THE CHURCH UNITED; HE IS THE POINT OF UNITY; THE POPE IS INFALLIBLE ARGUMENT 3.1 - THE CHURCH IS AN INSTITUTION ARGUMENT 4 - THE BIBLE IS NOT THE ONLY AUTHORITY; THE BIBLE AFFIRMS THE AUTHORITY OF THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES AND ECUMENICAL COUNCILS ARGUMENT 5 - CHURCH FATHERS AND ECUMENICAL COUNCILS - THE ENTIRE CHURCH FOLLOWED THE POPE IN THE FIRST MILLENNIUM ARGUMENT 6 - SUCCESSION ARGUMENT 7 - THE CANONIZATION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT ARGUMENT 8 - FURTHER DESTRUCTION OF SOLA SCRIPTURA. JESUS AND THE APOSTLES ARE AGAINST SOLA SCRIPTURA ARGUMENT 9 - THE WORD «CATHOLIC» IN THE BIBLE. EKKLESIA KATH HOLĒS ARGUMENT 10 - REGARDING IMPECCABILITY ARGUMENT 11 - LIVING AUTHORITY; SOURCES OF AUTHORITY, NOT LIMITED BY THE SCRIPTURES ARGUMENT 12 - THE SEVEN SACRAMENTS MISCELLANEOUS NOTES - Rites, intercessor, Unity, The Holy Spirit and Divine Guidance. MINI-ARGUMENT: HAVING FAITH IN GOD MEANS TO DO THE WORKS THAT HE WILLS. “ONCE SAVED, ALWAYS SAVED” CONTRADICTS THE BIBLE MINI-ARGUMENT - THE FILIOQUE ARGUMENT - THE HOLY MARY MOTHER OF GOD. SINLESS (IMMACULATE CONCEPTION), ETERNAL VIRGIN, AND ASSUMED INTO HEAVEN NOTE - THERE IS NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ... 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 ARGUMENT 1 - THE CHURCH IS FOUNDED UPON PETER. PETER IS THE STEWARD (THE SECOND-IN-COMMAND) - PETER IS THE NEW (AMPLIFIED AND PROTECTED) ELIAKIM In Matthew 16:18-19, Jesus gave to Peter 3 characteristics, Peter: 1. is the Foundation; 2. has the Keys of King Jesus; 3. has the power to bind/loose, and no one can contradict him. ... The Catholic Church is founded upon Peter. Having the Keys of the Kingdom (Jesus is the King; Jesus gave His Keys to the Pope) means that he has the authority to act in Jesus's name and manage the Church and Kingdom of Jesus, so Peter (and his Successor, the Pope) is at the top of the ecclesiastical pyramid of authority, that God put in place. ... To conjugate with this: in Isaiah 22:22-23, God gave 3 characteristics to Eliakim that made him the SECOND-IN-COMMAND (the STEWARD) of the kingdom. So these 3 characteristics made him the STEWARD. Also, it's the steward that carries the keys of the king; the steward has full authority over the kingdom, no one is above him, except the king; the steward represents the king. ... God gave 3 characteristics that made Eliakim the steward (Isaiah 22:22-23); Eliakim: 1. is the (peg) foundation; 2. has the key of the king; 3. has the power to open/close, and no one can contradict him. REMEMBER, Peter: 1. is the (Rock) Foundation; 2. has the Keys of the King, Jesus; 3. has the power to bind/loose, and no one can contradict him. ... Jesus purposely mirrored this and gave all of these 3 characteristics to Peter, and even amplified them, consequently making Peter the Steward of His Kingdom, with much more promises than Eliakim had. The characteristics Jesus gave to Peter are extremely more meaningful and amplified than those given to Eliakim; not only did Jesus amplify each of the three characteristics, but He also gave more essential characteristics to Peter (and did not give any negative characteristics to Peter that Eliakim was given). Ofcourse, Peter is the Rock on which the Catholic Church is built. With this fact alone, all heresy is eliminated. Protestantism appeared in 1500+; false orthodoxy in 1054+; ofcourse, these heresies are not founded upon Peter. ...The Catholic Church (following the Pope) was exclusive and alone for the entire first Millennium! And it is the only Church founded upon Peter, in which Peter left his Chair, specifically the Roman Catholic Church! 🗝🗝 ARGUMENT 1.1 - PETER=ROCK Papias of Hierapolis, Clement of Alexandria, and Irenaeus of Lyons all record that the Gospel according to Saint Matthew was originally written in aramaic. The New Testament we have was written in (Koine) Greek, but Jesus spoke in Aramaic when he changed Simon's name to Cephas. [Cephas is a Hellenised version of Kepha (aramaic); Saint John himself taught that Cephas means Rock (=Petros=Peter): John 1:42]. The word "Rock" in aramaic is Kepha; therefore, Cephas is clearly a Hellenised version of Kepha, which means Rock. Even in greek, Simon's name is PETROS (in english: ROCK). The word PETER (PETROS) literally means ROCK: - "You are PETROS"="You are ROCK"! - "You are Cephas=Kepha=Petros=Rock!” Comparison of languages: ***Peter's name - the default word for “rock”*** - Aramaic: Kepha [כֵּיפָא] - kepha [כֵּיפָא] (both are exactly the same, masculine words, as a name or as a standard rock; this is what Jesus said) *Note: aramaic has no capital or lowercase letters; it's the exact same. *Note: in aramaic, this is a masculine word, whether as a name for someone, or as the common object. ... - Greek: Petros - petra (same word and meaning, male-female, same root/object; this is the language that the Apostles used to write the Gospels, so they translated what Jesus said in aramaic to greek) *Note: even though both male/female variations have the same meaning, the reasons why in greek the male word Petros is used to refer to Simon are these: the use of “Petros” in Greek for Simon Peter's name is influenced by the fact that כֵּיפָא (Kepha) is a masculine noun in Aramaic, in order to preserve the gender of the word that Jesus used; not just this, but also, greek uses gendered nouns that match the gender of the person being referred to. Since Simon Peter is a man, "Petros" (masculine) was chosen over "Petra" (feminine), adhering to the linguistic convention that male individuals are referred to with masculine nouns. The gender of the word changes, but the word is still the same. For example: a man must not be called “Patricia”, but instead the male variant of the same word: “Patrick”. ... - English: Peter - rock ("Peter" is an anglicization of the greek "Petros"; therefore "Peter" is still "Rock") ... - Portuguese: Pedro - pedra (same word and meaning, male-female, same root/object) ... - French: Pierre - pierre (the exact same word and meaning, male-female; the french do not play around) As we can see, between these languages, all languages directly agree that Simon's new name is Rock. English also agrees, but makes it harder for a common englishman to understand, since english decided to keep this word similar-looking to the greek word, thus the common englishman may not understand what it truly means. ... Sadly, this simple reason may be the cause that started protestantism. It would make sense, since it is the english that originated protestantism, and many people who speak english tend to be protestant... Meanwhile, the other languages do not take protestants seriously, because the other languages easily understand that Peter is Rock. So, for an englishman to correctly understand and interpret the meaning of "Peter", he must study the greek (because "Peter is an anglicization of "Petros", and the New Testament is written in greek); and then, to understand the greek further, he must study the aramaic (since Jesus changed Simon's name to an aramaic word: Kepha, since the Bible itself [John 1:42] clarifies that "Cephas" is the Hellenization of "Kepha", which means "Rock". EXTRA: «THIS ROCK» MEANS PETER "this" (ταύτῃ) in Greek is a demonstrative pronoun!... It specifically points to "rock" (πέτρα), and Peter is Rock! Jesus only identified Peter as the Rock, so there is not even competition! ... «You are ROCK, and upon *this* ROCK I shall build My Church» ... «THIS ROCK» does NOT mean «ANOTHER ROCK», it would be a contradiction! It can only refer to the rock being talked about, which is clearly «You (Simon) are Rock»! Those who claim “Jesus is the rock” or “Peter's confession is the rock” are wrong, because Jesus did not identify those as the rock; the identity of the rock given by Jesus is literally only Peter. (And even if hypothetically Jesus were to identify multiple rocks, «this rock» would still be Peter, because it was the only subject being mentioned at the moment of the declaration!). So if there is only one identified rock (Peter), «this rock» can only refer to this only identity. ... In Greek, the demonstrative pronoun «*THIS* ROCK» (*ταύτῃ*) refers to the immediately preceding **noun** (or the noun that is being discussed), which in this case is «You (Simon) are **ROCK**» 🗝🗝 ARGUMENT 1.2 - PETER, THE ROCK AND STEWARD, UNTIL THE CONSUMMATION OF THE WORLD Some may claim that God declared that Eliakim's authority and foundation (as the peg) would fade, as if this would mean that Peter's Authority and Foundation would also fade. Isaiah 22:25 - “In that day, saith the Lord of hosts, shall the peg be removed, that was fastened in the sure place: and it shall be broken and shall fall: and that which hung thereon, shall perish, because the Lord hath spoken it.” Although, refuting this is not hard, since this is not even a respectable argument (it reveals that the heretic has not fully read the Bible, and profoundly lacks knowledge). The problem with the one who gives this argument is that he presupposes that everything about Eliakim is transferred to Peter. Firstly, it is a fact that Jesus gave the three characteristics to Peter that result in giving authority and instituting a steward. Secondly, it is an impossibility that the declaration regarding "the foundation being removed, and that which hung thereon, shall perish" is given to Peter. Peter (the Rock) is the Foundation of the Church, and if the Foundation is removed, what is constructed upon it shall perish. Jesus declared that the Church and Foundation shall not perish. God only gave to Peter the characteristics that result in giving authority to make him the Steward; yet God did not give to Peter any characteristic or declaration that would result in a ceasing of authority and foundation. The simple fact is that God declared that Eliakim's authority would cease, but God Jesus never declared that Peter's authority would cease; on the contrary, He specifically declared and promised to protect and be with Peter (and his Successors, and the Catholic Church...) basically until the consummation of the World, which means: until the very end of Creation. Matthew 16:18-19 - «And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.»... ... Repeat: «the gates of hell shall not prevail against it»... This declaration by Jesus affirms that Peter, as the Rock upon which the Church is built, holds a foundational and enduring role. The assurance that "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" includes the Rock (since it is the Foundation of the Church; without the Foundation, the Church would fall/be prevailed by the gates of hell), signifying the Church's resilience and affirming Peter's ongoing authority under Christ's divine protection. Therefore, since it is a necessity for the Church to be firmly founded upon the Rock, protecting the Church implies and requires that the Rock is protected, since the Rock is the Foundation of the Church. Matthew 28:19-20 - «Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.» This is why I say that Peter is the New (Amplified and Protected) Eliakim. Peter is the New Eliakim when it comes to being the Steward (2nd-In-Command), but in an amplified and protected way, because the negative declarations were not given, but opposite declarations were given: hell shall never prevail against the Church, the Holy Spirit guides them forever, and Jesus is with them until the consummation of the World! 🗝🗝 ARGUMENT 1.3 - JESUS IS THE CORNERSTONE AND ULTIMATE FOUNDATION, BUT THE CHURCH IS FOUNDED UPON THE ROCK WHICH IS PETER Some may claim that the Church is not founded upon Peter, but that it is founded upon Jesus. These people claim that Peter is not the rock, and that the rock is Jesus. The word for "cornerstone" in Greek, as used in Ephesians 2:20, is «ἀκρογωνιαῖος» (akrogōniaios). This word is different than "rock" (petra), and has a different meaning. ... *ἀκρο- (akro-): Prefix meaning "extreme" or "highest." *γωνία (gōnia): Root meaning "corner."αῖος *(-aios): Suffix indicating quality or belonging. - This greek word, «ἀκρογωνιαῖος», literally translates to: “pertaining to the extreme corner”. ... In Matthew 16:18-19, Jesus did not say that the He shall build His Church upon «ἀκρογωνιαῖος» (akrogōniaios=cornerstone); Jesus said that He would build His Church upon the «πέτρα» (petra=rock), and at the same moment, while directing to Peter, said that Peter is this same word: Kepha=Petros/Petra... Jesus literally renamed Simon to Rock. ... Premises: 1 - Jesus said that He shall build His Church upon the Rock. 2 - Jesus said that Peter is the Rock. 3 - Therefore, Peter is the Rock upon which the Church of Christ is built!!!!! ... No one should ever puke blasphemy and claim that Peter is not the Rock, because it is extremely clear that Peter is the Rock. So, Jesus is the ἀκρογωνιαῖος (akrogōniaios), and Peter is the Petros (petra). Jesus said that He would build the Church upon Petra=Rock. Therefore, the Church is built upon Petros=Rock, Kepha. Jesus said: 1- That He would found His Church upon KEPHA/PETRA! 2- That KEPHA/PETRA is literally “you (Simon)”, not the act of Simon confessing or Jesus Himself. Jesus did not say “your confession is KEPHA/PETRA”; Jesus did not say “I am KEPHA/PETROS”. ... Jesus said: “YOU (Simon) are KEPHA/PETROS=PETRA”. 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 ARGUMENT 2 - PETER FEEDS THE SHEEP In John 10:11, Christ, the Good Shepherd, said that He would lay down His life for us, the sheep; in John 21:15-17, Jesus told Peter to feed His sheep. Peter teaches and leads us: we follow Peter, we are fed by Peter. We must submit to the Pope. Since Peter feeds us, this implies and requires that we are One Flock, United (in the Catholic Church, the Body of Christ, submitting to this Hierarchy of Authority), being fed by (Peter; in other words:) the Pope (because the Bible teaches that there is succession [read ARGUMENT 4, 6, and 11]). 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 ARGUMENT 3 - THE CHURCH MUST BE UNITED; PETER (THE POPE) KEEPS THE CHURCH UNITED; HE IS THE POINT OF UNITY; THE POPE IS INFALLIBLE The Bible insists that we must be One Flock; the Church must have no divisions (John 17:20-23, 1 Corinthians 1:10-13, Phillipians 2:2, Romans 15:5-6, Romans 16:17-20, 2 Thessalonians 2:13-15, +++). Saint Paul rejects divisions such as “I follow Christ (exclusively/alone)” (1 Corinthians 1:10-13), emphasizing Unity and Church leadership. 1 Corinthians 1:10-13 - «I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.”... Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?» ... At the Church of Corinth, there were 4 divisions that Paul lists: 1 - Broke the Unity to exclusively follow Paul; 2 - Broke the Unity to exclusively follow Apollos; 3 - Broke the Unity to exclusively follow Cephas; 4 - Broke the Unity to exclusively follow Christ. ... Paul reprehends all four divisions, including the fourth division [“I follow (exclusively) Christ”], demanding that they all unite, and they obeyed and resolved their divisions. This shows that Saint Paul has authority over them... So the Church of Corinth, obeying Saint Paul's authority and commands, further proves that the fourth division [“I follow (exclusively) Christ”] is refuted, along with the rest of the divisions. Saint Paul, exercising his authority over them, shows that within the Body of Christ, there is an ecclesiastical pyramid of authority (in other words: we must follow Paul and Christ (we must follow the entire Body and Hierarchy of Authority); we must not “exclusively” follow one; we must not reject the others). ... It is an impossibility to follow “ONLY” Christ while rejecting the authorities within the Body of Christ, such as Saint Paul, and the other Apostolic Successors. ... Ofcourse, the Church of Corinth submitted to the Pope; they followed Pope Clement's commands in his Letter to the Corinthian Church (year 90). ... NOTE: protestants believe in an absolute “I only follow Christ” (in which a person can just “believe” in Christ and do NOTHING ELSE - which is contradictory)! - The “I follow (exclusively) Christ” in the fourth faction/division is much less heretical, because bishops were apart of the factions, and these bishops still had and exercised authority, were (TEMPORARILY divided and bad) Catholics, and they merely made up their ecclesiastical doctrines claiming that they learn from “exclusively Christ”, rejecting other opinions - in other words, they still practiced the Sacraments and saw it as essential, and believed in the fundamental pillars of Catholic doctrine... They were not rejecting the Church's general structure but were improperly emphasizing their own interpretation of following Christ. ... So, if Saint Paul rejected this light “I exclusively follow Jesus, but still believe in the Authority and general structure of the Church, Sacraments, and bishops”, then the absolute “I only follow Jesus, and reject everything else such as the Sacraments, the bishops, Tradition...+++” is much worse. The Catholic Church is the Church of Christ that He founded upon Peter, so the Holy Spirit guides this Church; whoever causes division or contradiction against this Unity is a heretic. So since the Church of Christ teaches Extra Ecclesiam, Nulla Salus... You better submit. Luke 22:31-32 - «And the Lord said: Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you [plural: all of the Apostles], that he may sift you [plural: all of the Apostles] as wheat: But I have prayed for thee [singular: only Peter], that thy [singular: only Peter] faith fail not: and thou [singular: only Peter], being once converted, confirm thy brethren.» ... In Luke 22:31-32, Jesus made Peter the point of Unity and correctness, and Jesus protects only Peter from error; this means infallibility. Whoever is not in communion with the Pope, is outside of the Unity of the Flock, outside of the Church. The necessity of a Chief is that only he can unite us. That is why protestantism has one trillion+++ divisions, and the "orthodox" are not united, as they have 17 autocephalous churches of equal authority (so they can freely contradict eachother). ... The Pope is the Steward of the Kingdom and Church; someone who does not submit to him is outside. Only Catholics are United and in the Church, since all Catholics submit to the Pope's authority. Conjugating with Peter feeding us all, this is perfectly synchronized. EXTRA: In John 11, we see that the High Priest is infallible. The Pope is, ofcourse, also infallible. 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 ARGUMENT 3.1 - THE CHURCH IS AN INSTITUTION Since there is a group of men with authority united, it is synonymous of saying that this One Group of Authority is the Institution (THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH)! Ephesians 4+1 Corinthians 12 also state that there are offices and members with different roles in the Church/Body of Christ. So if there are offices and members, and they are united all in one Body, this consequently means that it is an institution, since it is being led by the ones in the offices. EXTRA: Going to Church/mass is necessary: Hebrews 10:25 - «Not forsaking our assembly, as some are accustomed; but comforting one another, and so much the more as you see the day approaching.» 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 ARGUMENT 4 - THE BIBLE IS NOT THE ONLY AUTHORITY; THE BIBLE AFFIRMS THE AUTHORITY OF THE SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES AND ECUMENICAL COUNCILS As already seen, the Bible affirms that the Pope has Universal Authority, he is the Steward, he is the Second-In-Command. ... The Bible also gives authority to: 1. bishops which The Holy Spirit puts in place (Acts 20:28); 2. Tradition passed through the Apostolic Successors (this implies that the Apostolic Successors carry and teach the TRADITION, the WRITTEN and SPOKEN WORD [2 Thessalonians 2:13-15]), so we must learn from them; 3. Ecumenical Councils (Matthew 18:15-18, Acts, +++). Matthew 18:17 - If he [heretic] refuses to listen to them [correct Catholic men], tell it to the [Catholic] Church. And if he refuses to listen even to the Church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. ... This verse shows that the Church has a physical, visible, authority; there are members of the Church that exercise this authority (the bishops, and such). Also, we can look at the book of Acts, in which the Church has a Council. ... SOME PROTESTANTS (LIKE A NON-DENOMINATIONAL) CLAIM THAT THE CHURCH IS "INVISIBLE" AND NOT PHYSICAL; CLEARLY, THEY HAVE NEVER LOOKED AT THE BIBLE, AND MERELY FOLLOW THEIR OWN WISHES!!!!!!!!! Hebrews 13:17 - «Obey your prelates, and be subject to them. For they watch as being to render an account of your souls; that they may do this with joy, and not with grief. For this is not expedient for you.» ... St. Paul tells us the Church is “the pillar and foundation of truth” (1 Tim. 3:15) and it was built on “the foundation of the apostles” (Eph. 2:20) and that we are to respect and obey this authority (1 Thess. 5:12, Hebrews 13:17). When a decision is made by the Church regarding the faith and practice of it’s members, this decision is binding on all Christians, as Christ Himself said:“If he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile or a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” - Matt. 18:17-18. The phrase “binding and loosening” was a legal term referring to the Sanhedrin’s capacity to establish halakah (rules of conduct) for the Hebrew people (Sifra, Emor, 9; Talmud: Makkot 23b). Christ acknowledged this authority as long as the Pharisees sat on the “Chair of Moses” (Matt. 23:1-4) However, Christ uses this formula of binding and loosening to show that this authority to teach, govern, and discipline has been transferred over to the Chair of St. Peter and the apostles (Matt. 16:19; 18:19; Luke 22:29-32). It was only by the authority given by Christ that the Church could even author Scripture in the first place, so naturally it would also be by this authority that the Church could later determine which books belonged in the Bible. This is why the Bible could be infallibly written by the Church and the Church could infallibly determine which books belong in the Bible. In other words, by accepting the current Biblical canon, one necessarily must accept the teaching authority of the Church. ... So, the Bible redirects towards the Church. The Church has authority, and the Pope is the Big Boss (Metal Gear reference). Also, it is a necessity for the Church to have visible authority; because Jesus gave Sacraments for us to participate in; these alone require the bishops and authority of the Catholic Church, the way it is. Protestants accept the first Church Council (of Jerusalem) merely because it is mentioned in the Bible, but reject the other Councils merely because they are not mentioned in the Bible. Church Councils, like the first Council of Jerusalem, were guided by the Holy Spirit to resolve doctrinal disputes and maintain unity in the early Church. Just as we trust in the authority of the first Council (Acts 15), we recognize the authority of subsequent Councils; because Christ promised to send the Holy Spirit to guide the Church (John 16:13), not just for a single moment in time, but always. The same Spirit that guided the Apostles in Acts 15 continues to guide the Church in subsequent centuries, including the convening of later Councils. To dismiss their authority is to reject the continuous presence of the Holy Spirit in the Church and Her decision-making processes. Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would be with His disciples and Apostles to guide them and to make them have the truth (John 14:16-20, 14:26, and 16:13). So when the Church has a Council, we have to obey. Luke 10:16 - Jesus said to his disciples: «Whoever listens to you, listens to me; whoever rejects you, rejects me.» Matthew 28:19-20: «Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.» ... With this phrase alone, Jesus said that He shall be with the Apostolic Church founded upon Peter till the end, and that the Church has the authority to teach to observe whatever Jesus commands to teach. John 14:26 - «But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.» ... Again, Jesus insists that the Church shall be divinely guided, not only to remind of what He taught but also to teach all things. 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 ARGUMENT 5 - CHURCH FATHERS AND ECUMENICAL COUNCILS - THE ENTIRE CHURCH FOLLOWED THE POPE IN THE FIRST MILLENNIUM So, the Bible tells us to follow the Pope, Church, bishops, and Councils. The power to bind and loose was given to all of the Apostles but only Peter is the Rock and was given the Keys; so only Peter is the Universal Steward - Peter is over them. So the others must be in communion with Peter to make use of the power to bind/loose. ... Also, even if someone says that the Apostles have ""equal"" authority, then you would still have to be Catholic, because they were all apart of the Holy Apostolic Catholic Church! And you would still have to submit to the Pope, because they (in the entire first Millennium) disagreed with you, because at the Councils (and also outside of the Councils) all agreed that the Pope and the Roman Church is above and over them in authority. All Successors of the Apostles were Catholic (all obeyed the Pope). Let's see what they taught: Saint Cyprian of Carthage (year 251 - The Unity of the Catholic Church, 4): «If someone deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?» Saint Jerome (year 376 - Letter 15 to Pope Damasus): «As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the Chair of Peter. For this, I know, is the rock on which the church is built!» Saint Augustine (year 397-426): - Letter 54 (to Januarius), chapter 1: «As to those other things which we hold on the authority, not of Scripture, but of tradition, and which are observed throughout the whole world, it may be understood that they are held as approved and instituted either by the apostles themselves, or by plenary Councils, whose authority in the Church is most useful, e.g. the annual commemoration, by special solemnities, of the Lord's passion, resurrection, and ascension, and of the descent of the Holy Spirit from heaven, and whatever else is in like manner observed by the whole Church wherever it has been established.» ... - On Christian Doctrine (De Doctrina Christiana): «Let the reader consult the rule of faith, which he has gathered from the plainer passages of Scripture, and from the authority of the Church, and from the soundness of reason.» Augustine advises readers to use the "rule of faith" derived from Scripture, Church authority, and reason to interpret Christian doctrine. ... *He was the bishop of the Catholic Church of Hippo, submitting to the Pope. Ecumenical Council of Nicaea II: - Letter to Patriarch Tarasios of Constantinople (GREEK ACTS) (180): «The Roman Church is the head of all the churches of God. All must observe the tradition of this our sacred and most holy Roman church.» FULL VERSION: «“You are Peter, and on this rock I shall build my church...”... His see shines forth as primatial throughout the world and is the head of all the churches of God... Therefore the same blessed Peter the Apostle, shepherding the church at the command of the Lord, has left nothing to neglect, but upholds, and has always upheld, her authority... Our Apostolic See is the head of all the churches of God... Every place must observe the tradition of this our sacred and most holy Roman church, and abominating and expelling the error of the wicked heretics.» ... Nicaea II: (Patriarch of Constantinople's Letter to the Pope) Terasios Second Letter to Pope Hadrian: «Your fraternal high-priestly holiness, presiding lawfully and by God's will over the holy hierarchs, enjoys universal repute.» ... Council of Ephesus (Acts, session 2): «The Pope is the Holy Head - the Head of the whole faith, the Head of the Apostles, is blessed Peter.» *FULL: Council of Ephesus (Acts of the Council, session 2): «Philip, presbyter and legate of [Pope Celestine I] said: We offer our thanks to the holy and venerable synod, that when the writings of our holy and blessed Pope had been read to you... You joined yourselves to the Holy Head also by your holy acclamations. For your blessedness is not ignorant that the Head of the whole faith, the Head of the Apostles, is blessed Peter the Apostle.» Council of Ephesus (Acts, session 3): «Peter is the Prince and Head of the Apostles, foundation of the Catholic Church; he received the Keys of the Kingdom; who down even to today and forever both lives and judges in his successors.» *FULL: Council of Ephesus (Acts of the Council, session 3): «There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, Prince and Head of the Apostles, pillar of the faith, and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the Keys of the Kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: who down even to today and forever both lives and judges in his successors.» Synod of Chalcedon, session III: «Pope Leo, through this synod, together with the thrice blessed and all-glorious Peter the Apostle, who is the rock and foundation of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith...» *FULL: Synod of Chalcedon, session III: «Wherefore the most holy and blessed Leo, archbishop of the great and elder Rome, through us, and through this present most holy synod together with the thrice blessed and all-glorious Peter the Apostle, who is the rock and foundation of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith, hath stripped him of the episcopate, and hath alienated from him all hieratic worthiness. Therefore let this most holy and great synod sentence the before mentioned Dioscorus to the canonical penalties.» Chalcedon, session I: «He dared to hold a synod without the authority of the Apostolic See. A thing which had never taken place nor can take place.» Acts of the Council of Chalcedon (451), session II: «Peter has spoken through (Pope) Leo» Council of Chalcedon (451): ... The patriarchs of the East made the proposal in canon 28 to give Constantinople the same privileges as Rome. ... Pope Leo I rejected canon 28 as it violated the primacy of the Church of Rome. The patriarchs obeyed and removed canon 28, obeying the Pope. Pure proof of Supreme Papal and Roman Church Authority. ... Pope Leo I was concerned not only with the immediate implications of granting Constantinople a position of authority, but also with the potential long-term consequences. By opposing Constantinople's aspirations for greater authority, Leo sought to prevent any usurpation of the primacy of the Roman See and to safeguard the unity and stability of the Church. ... Pope Leo I understood that allowing Constantinople to gain more influence could lead to future challenges to Rome's authority. He therefore took a firm stance to maintain the traditional hierarchy and to ensure that Rome's pre-eminence in the Church remained unchallenged. This approach aimed to preserve the integrity of the Church and avoid any potential conflicts or divisions over ecclesiastical authority. Council of Nicaea, canon 6: «Let the ancient custom which is followed in Egypt and Libya and the Pentapolis remain in force, by which the Bishop of Alexandria has the supervision of all those places, since this is also the custom of the Bishop of Rome.» ... The Alexandrian church gained this faculty merely because Rome had this faculty; this proves that Rome is the primary model and basis for the determination of the other churches. This actually shows that Rome is superior. Council of Nicaea, arabic c.39: «He who occupies the chair of Rome is the Head and Prince of all patriarchs, with power over the whole Church.» ... *FULL: Arabic canon 39 attributed to the Council of Nicaea, that decrees: «He who occupies the chair of Rome is the Head and Prince of all patriarchs; since he is the first, as was Peter, to whom power is given over all Christian princes, and over all their peoples and over the whole Christian Church, and whosoever shall gainsay this is excommunicated by the Synod.» The entire Church (so every Apostolic Successor) agreed: the Pope (the Successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome) carries Peter's full authority, he is the Universal Steward, with Supreme Authority, over all. 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 ARGUMENT 6 - SUCCESSION The Bible affirms that there is succession of the Apostolic Positions/Authority: Acts 1:20-26 - The selection of Matthias to replace Judas Iscariot among the Twelve Apostles after Judas's betrayal and death. 1 Timothy 4:14 - Paul instructs Timothy not to neglect the gift he has received through the laying on of hands by Paul and the elders. Titus 1:5 - Paul instructs Titus to appoint elders in every town, implying a succession of leadership. Paul tells Timothy to transmit the teaching he has given to him to future generations, but to be sure it is committed to faithful men: 2 Timothy 2:2 - Paul instructs Timothy to entrust what he has learned to faithful people who will be able to teach others also. Timothy is given the authoritative task to “command and teach” (1 Tim. 4:11), along with rebuking those who come along and teach things contrary to sound teaching (2 Tim. 4:1-5). Paul makes it clear how Christians should receive this teaching and that they should consider “elders” as “worthy of double honor” (1 Tim. 5:17). Timothy and Titus were also given the authority to ordain other men as presbyters (priests) and bishops (Titus 1:5). Timothy is told to discern which men are worthy to be “bishops” (1 Tim. 3:1-7) and “deacons” (1 Tim. 8-13) and he should not be too hasty in handing this authority on to others (1 Tim 5:22). ... So this means that we must follow the Apostolic Successors. Ofcourse, this includes Peter's Papal Position; Peter is the Chief, so Peter's special authority is carried through his successors; to add to this argument, the Position of Steward that Jesus mirrored had succession, so when Jesus mirrored it to Peter, it naturally includes the succession; because succession is an inherent characteristic of the Position of Steward; it is a necessity for there to always be a steward, otherwise the kingdom shall have no caretaker, and shall inevitably collapse. Succession is inherent to this authority, and is fundamental for the continuous existence of the Carrier of the Keys, and the Steward of the Kingdom. Also, Peter himself chose successors. Peter himself verified that there should be succession for his Papal Position; Peter himself chose his student Clement to succeed him. Pope Francis is the current Pope, the Successor of Saint Peter. 1️⃣ TERTULLIAN OF CARTHAGE (155-240) Document: The Prescription Against Heretics Chapter XXII: ➡️ "Peter, who is called 'the rock on which the Church is to be built'." Chapter XXXII: ➡️ "Like the Church of Smyrna, which records that Polycarp was placed there by John; likewise the Church of Rome, which makes Clement to have been ordained in the same way by Peter." 2️⃣ IRENAEUS OF LION (successor of St. John) Document: Against Heresies (year 160) Book III, chapter I, verse I: ➡️ "Peter and Paul were preaching in Rome and laying the foundations of the Church." Book III, chapter III, verse II: ➡️ "The very great, very ancient and universally known Church, founded and organized in Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul. It is a matter of necessity that all churches should agree with this Church, because of its pre-eminent authority." Book III, chapter III, verse III: ➡️ "The blessed Apostles, having founded and built up the Church, entrusted the episcopate to the hands of Linus.... And then Anacletus, and then Clement, were entrusted with the bishopric." To further solidify this argument: Ignatius of Antioch (disciple of Apostle John) wrote to the Smyrnaeans [8:2] - “Where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.”; Ignatius also wrote to the Roman Church [4:3]: “I do not give you orders like Peter and Paul gave you orders.” (this shows that Peter founded the Roman Catholic Church). 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 ARGUMENT 7 - THE CANONIZATION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT The canonization of the NT is a product of Catholic Authority; the logical consistency of Sola Scriptura is null. The Bible does not authenticate itself - Sola Scriptura is absolutely paradoxical. The Bible relies on an external authority for validation, because it does not validate itself - the Bible does not give the list of documents that are Sacred, and it does not authenticate the complete contents of the texts. This alone refutes Sola Scriptura. The Catholic Church appeared first (year 33), and was alone for the entire first Millennium; all Apostles were Catholic; the Sacred Texts were written by the Catholic Church between year 50-90. ... So, the external authority is the Catholic Church and the Pope, because (the Sacred Texts were firstly written, then protected and shared by the Catholic Church/Apostolic Fathers, and then) the New Testament was canonized at the Council of Rome (year 382), by the Catholic Church, led by Pope Damasus I. The Catholic Church, led by Pope Damasus I, at the Council of Rome (382), infallibly chose the correct and perfect list (and it's contents) of infallible documents to make the New Testament; so this requires that the Catholic Church has authority, is guided by the Holy Spirit, and also has capacity to be infallible. Ultimately, if the New Testament that we have is an infallible authoritative list (+contents) of documents inspired by God, you are forced to agree that the canonization at the Ecumenical Council of Rome (382) was authoritative and guided by God. Thus, you must aswell agree that Ecumenical Councils are authoritative and guided by God. Thus, once more, you must agree that the entity that leads and manages the Ecumenical Councils is authoritative and guided by God. Thus, finally, you are forced to submit to the authority of the man at the top of the ecclesiastical pyramid of authority (the Pope), and to the other successors aswell, because they have authority and are guided by the Holy Spirit. If we look at the Apostolic Canon 85 we shall see the Epistles and Constitutions of Pope Clement there; many early Catholic churches considered Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthian Church as apart of Sacred Scripture (because it was written by the Successor of Peter, the Pope). In Pope Clement's Letter to the Corinthian Church (year 90), he gives commands to the Corinthian Church... He exercises Supreme Authority, showing that he has Universal Jurisdiction (because Jesus made Peter the Universal Steward, the Chief of the Church). Pope Clement wrote (chapters 59 and 60): «God speaks through us (Pope+Roman Church), so obey what we say or else be in transgression» ... Note: when Pope Clement wrote this, Saint John was still alive; instead of Saint John enforcing his authority towards Corinth, the Pope did. This shows that the Pope is supreme in authority. Saint John did not go against this. ... The Church of Corinth received the Letter, obeyed, considered it as SACRED SCRIPTURE, and put it in the New Testament (proof: Codex Alexandrinus has this Letter). Dionysius of Corinth wrote (year 170) to Pope Soter showing that Clement's Letter was indeed authoritative and Sacred Scripture. Ofcourse, even though this Letter is genuine and recommended for reading by the Catholic Church, it was not canonized in 382 by the Catholic Church. This actually helps to show that protestants obey the Catholic Church's canonization as divinely guided and infallible (since protestants follow the EXACT thing that the canonization affirmed, and not Clement's Letters), thus needing that the Church has authority, infallibility, and divine guidance; because it is the only way to validade the New Testament. So it is an impossibility to consider the New Testament as valid and authoritative without considering the Catholic Church as valid and authoritative. 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 BONUS ROUND: ARGUMENT 8 - FURTHER DESTRUCTION OF SOLA SCRIPTURA. JESUS AND THE APOSTLES ARE AGAINST SOLA SCRIPTURA Jesus and the Apostles followed the Seat of Moses, but the Seat of Moses is not explicitly seen being established in the Old Testament Scriptures. So the source authority of this other authority is Tradition. Some may claim that the Seat of Moses is established in the Old Testament Scriptures: Exodus 18:13 - «Moses sat, to judge the people...» *The Old Testament alone does not explicitly state that the Seat of Moses was established, this verse merely states Moses's own actions and authority. The Seat is legitimately recognized through Tradition instead. ... If you believe that this verse is sufficient to prove that the Seat of Moses was established, then you would also be forced to agree that the following verse is sufficient to prove that the Chair of Peter was established: Acts 15:7 - «(At the Council,) Peter stood up (from his seat) and said to them...» Now, if you change your position in order to avoid accepting this, that would mean that Jesus and the Apostles recognized the Seat of Moses (Matthew 23:2) through Tradition, extra-biblical source of authority, and thus proving furthermore that Sola Scriptura is false. So, the same way that Tradition followed the Seat of Moses, Tradition follows the Chair of Peter (Irenaeus's Against Heretics, Book III, Chapter III) - all must become Catholic! EXTRA: The decisions that the Church made at the Council of Jerusalem were not based on Scriptures, but on their own decisions. For example the Council abolished circumcision; when they abolished it, the New Testament Scriptures were not written yet, and there were only the Old Testament Scriptures; the Old Testament Scriptures does not say anything about abolishing circumcision. So this means that the Council decided something with their own decisions, and it was authoritative. So Sola Scriptura is false. The Apostles and their Successors have living authority. 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 BONUS ROUND: ARGUMENT 9 - THE WORD «CATHOLIC» IN THE BIBLE. EKKLESIA KATH HOLĒS Acts 9:31 - «So the CHURCH THROUGHOUT ALL Judea and Galilee and Samaria had peace and was being built up. And walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, it multiplied.» «CHURCH THROUGHOUT ALL» in greek: «ἐκκλησία καθ' ὅλης» (EKKLESIA KATH HOLĒS) ... In english the roots of «KATH HOLĒS» changes wildly, so we have to look at the language that the Apostles wrote the New Testament in: greek. ... «καθ' ὅλης» (kath' holēs) has two roots: 1 - "κατά" (kata), meaning "according to" or "throughout" 2 - "ὅλος" (holos), meaning "whole" or "entire" ... Now, let's look at «THE CATHOLIC CHURCH» in greek: - «ἡ Καθολικὴ Ἐκκλησία» (hē Katholikē Ekklēsia). ... «Καθολικὴ» (Katholikē) is just a variation of «καθ' ὅλης» (kath' holēs), as we can clearly see, they share the same two roots: - "κατά" (kata) and "ὅλος" (holos) The two roots together, "κατά" (kata) "ὅλος" (holos) form the basis for the term "Catholic" in Greek... So «καθ' ὅλης» (kath' holēs) shares the exact same roots and is a variation of the greek word «Catholic». 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 BONUS ROUND: ARGUMENT 10 - REGARDING IMPECCABILITY "Oh, but ummm, Church did bad thing 🤓☝️", or "Pope bad 🤓☝️", some may claim. ... The Church teaches that it is infallible but not impeccable. ... Infallibility: This means that the Church, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, is preserved from error when it definitively teaches doctrines of faith and morals. This infallibility is exercised in specific circumstances, such as when the Pope speaks ex cathedra (from the chair of Peter) or when the bishops, in union with the Pope, define doctrines in an Ecumenical Council. ... Impeccability: This refers to the inability to sin. The Church does not claim that its members, including the Pope and bishops, are impeccable. Church leaders and members can and do commit sins. The Church's infallibility pertains to its teachings on faith and morals, not the personal sinlessness of its members. ... Individual bishops, priests, and even Popes, as human beings, can and do sin. They can also err in their personal opinions or teachings that are not promulgated as official Church doctrine. However, this personal fallibility does not undermine the Church's infallibility when it comes to official teachings on faith and morals. The doctrine of infallibility applies only under specific conditions. The Bible gives authority to peccable men; they have authority nonetheless. ... “Bu-- bu-- but, pedophile priests!!!!!” ... The argument stands. If I were to use your same argument against you, [that sinning invalidates the institution that he belongs to and the entire religion,] then if one secular teacher practices pedophilia, the whole school that he belongs to and the entire education system would have to close and cease. It is a bad argument. The Catholic Church hunts these priests that commit abominations, to purify the position and bring justice. ... Throughout history, God has always chosen leaders to act as an authority for his people. Sometimes those leaders were morally questionable; Moses was a murderer, King David was an adulterer and murderer, Peter denied knowing Jesus, Thomas lacked faith, Paul martyred Christians, and Judas betrayed Jesus to His death –but this did not prevent God from working through them. Despite their personal faults, some went on to write divinely inspired Scripture, protected from error by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 2:13). God made sure that, despite their faults, what these men taught about the faith would be safeguarded from error (e.g., 1 Cor. 2:13; 2 Pet. 1:20-21). It is God’s grace and the guidance of the Holy Spirit that makes their teachings authoritative, not some perceived human perfection. 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 BONUS ROUND ARGUMENT 11 - LIVING AUTHORITY; SOURCES OF AUTHORITY, NOT LIMITED BY THE SCRIPTURES There are three authorities of equal value, that perfectly synchronize with eachother: the Magisterium, the Tradition, and the Scriptures. Some may claim that the extra-biblical authorities cannot go beyond or add to what is written. This is silly. ... First of all, the New Testament Scriptures appeared many years AFTER the Magisterium and the Tradition. The New Testament Scriptures are fruits of the Catholic Church's MAGISTERIUM and TRADITION - they wrote and canonized the New Testament Scriptures. Also, the Scriptures does not limit these other authorities, but even follows them, and points towards them for a further and deeper living guidance. - Peter, having the Keys, is the Steward, that makes living authoritative decisions (Matthew 16:18-19). - Peter has the authority to bind and loose; his decisions are living and authoritative (Matthew 16:18-19); Jesus said that heaven agrees with Peter's decisions. - Peter feeds us (John 21:15-17). ... - Throughout the Gospels and Acts, Peter is shown exercising leadership among the apostles and in the early Church, including presiding over the selection of Matthias to replace Judas (Acts 1:15-26). ... The New Testament Scriptures were not even written at the time; Peter made authoritative decisions, and only later was it written (Peter made authoritative decisions that were later documented in Scripture). Peter is not bound and limited by Scriptures; it is the opposite: the Scriptures follow and accepted Peter's decisions. ... In other words, this means that Peter's authority is independent of the Scriptures, and the Scriptures subsequently followed and accepted his decisions (just as Jesus said! Whatever Peter binds/looses on earth, shall be bound/loosed in heaven)! Thus, Peter's leadership is not bound or limited by the Scriptures; rather, the Scriptures affirm the authority he exercised from the outset. ... Given this, Peter's authority is a living authority, one that was acknowledged and recorded in the Scriptures but not derived from them. This living authority implies that the principle of Sola Scriptura, which asserts that Scripture alone is the ultimate authority in matters of faith and practice, is fundamentally flawed and false. If Peter’s authority was valid and recognized before the New Testament existed, then there are indeed extrabiblical authorities, and we should follow Peter and his successors. This directly refutes the heresy of Sola Scriptura, and it shows that Peter (and the other apostles) is an independent authority that synchronizes with the Scriptures. 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 BONUS ARGUMENT: ARGUMENT 12 - THE SEVEN SACRAMENTS Some protestants may claim that the Sacraments are not biblical. The Catholic Church teaches that there are seven sacraments: Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance (Reconciliation), Anointing of the Sick, Holy Orders, and Matrimony. But as we have already seen, the Catholic Church has living authority, which the Bible makes clear. Even if the Sacraments were not mentioned in the New Testament Scriptures, they would still be validated by the Catholic Church (and so the Successors of the Apostles). Nonetheless, the Sacraments are mentioned in the Scriptures: 1 - Baptism: - Matthew 28:19: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." - Acts 2:38: "Peter replied, 'Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.'" 2 - Confirmation: - Acts 8:14-17: "Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, for it had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit." - Hebrews 6:2: "...the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment." 3 - Eucharist (Holy Communion): - Luke 22:19-20: "And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, 'This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.' In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, 'This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.'" - 1 Corinthians 11:23-26: Paul recounts the institution of the Lord's Supper. ... CHECK: Malachi 1:11, 1 Corinthians 10:16-21, Matthew 26:26-28, John 6 4 - Penance (Reconciliation): - John 20:22-23: "And with that he breathed on them and said, 'Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone's sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.'" - James 5:16: "Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective." ... CHECK: Matthew 9:6-8, James 5:14-16, Acts 19:18, 1 John 1:9 5 - Anointing of the Sick: - James 5:14-15: "Is anyone among you sick? Let them call the elders of the church to pray over them and anoint them with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise them up. If they have sinned, they will be forgiven." 6 - Holy Orders: - Acts 6:5-6: "They chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit; also Philip, Procorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas from Antioch, a convert to Judaism. They presented these men to the apostles, who prayed and laid their hands on them." - 1 Timothy 4:14: "Do not neglect your gift, which was given you through prophecy when the body of elders laid their hands on you." 7 - Matrimony (Marriage): - Ephesians 5:31-32: "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church." - Matthew 19:5-6: "'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.". ... To solidify this even further, one quick example/historical proof: Ignatius (year 107), disciple of Saint John, wrote extensively about the Eucharist in his letters: ...1 - Letter to the Smyrnaeans 7:1 - "They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His goodness, raised up again." ... 2 - Letter to the Ephesians 20:2 - "Take heed, then, to have but one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup to show forth the unity of His blood; one altar; as there is one bishop, along with the presbytery and deacons, my fellow-servants." ... 3 - Letter to the Philadelphians 4 - "Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the unity of His blood; one altar, as there is one bishop along with the presbytery and deacons." ... More of what Ignatius wrote: 1 - Letter to the Smyrnaeans, chapter 8 - «See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.» ... 2 - Letter to the Magnesians, chapter 7 - "Therefore, as the Lord did nothing without the Father, being united with Him, neither by Himself nor by the apostles, so neither do ye anything without the bishop and presbyters." 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 MISCELLANEOUS NOTES - Rites, intercessor, Unity, The Holy Spirit and Divine Guidance. Catholic rites are not divisions. The Pope allows the rites, and all of the rites submit to the Pope's teachings; so they are valid and united. All submit to the Pope, and all follow the same fundamental Catholic dogmas. If the Pope and Church makes a dogma, all submit to it, no matter the rite; the rites are just decorative. Jesus is the one intercessor, which means that we can only reach the Father through the Son... So we have to reach the Son to reach the Father!... But the Son Jesus gave authority to and told us to submit to the Church and Sacraments, which mean that to reach the Son, it is through the Catholic Church and the one that holds the Son's Keys: the Pope. So, since Jesus said so, we must submit to the Pope to reach the Son, so that we can reach the Father! The Holy Spirit does not guide protestants; that would mean that the Holy Spirit motivates contradictory things. ... For example: one protestant believes that he can pray to Saints, and another protestant believes that it is necromancy, an abomination. Instantly, just with this single topic, the Holy Spirit did not inspire both, because the Holy Spirit does not teach or motivate lies, contradictions, evil, and divisions. ... Christians, from the very first and for the ENTIRE first Millennium, submitted to the Pope (all were Catholic: the first Apostles and their successors - these were definitely guided by the Holy Spirit, just as Jesus promised); this instantly means that Catholicism is what the Holy Spirit motivated and protected. Any idea that appears and contradicts this is a heresy, it is against the Holy Spirit. 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 MINI-ARGUMENT: HAVING FAITH IN GOD MEANS TO DO THE WORKS THAT HE WILLS. “ONCE SAVED, ALWAYS SAVED” CONTRADICTS THE BIBLE Matthew 7:21-23 - «Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. Many will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have not we prophesied in thy name, and cast out devils in thy name, and done many miracles in thy name? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity.» Jesus said that it’s not merely verbal profession of faith that matters, but doing the will of the Father. «Doing the will of the Father» = means that you must do the works/actions that God wills. ... So since God wills that you follow the Church founded upon Peter, the Pope, and the bishops, if you have faith, you will do the works and obey. In other words, you cannot be a true follower with faith if you reject the works of following the Pope and Catholic Church. ... The Catholic Church is the Church of Christ founded upon Peter, being led by the Pope that Christ put in place as the Chief Shepherd to guide us (Matthew 16:18-19); rejecting the Catholic Church and the Pope is rejecting Christ; ... The Catholic Church is the Body of Christ (Colossians 1:18); no man cometh to the Father, but by the Son (John 14:6), so you must not reject the Son's Body (the Catholic Church); ... Only those that do the will of the Father who is in Heaven shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 7:21-23)... The will of the Father includes accepting the fullness of truth revealed by Christ, which is preserved and taught by the Catholic Church that Christ founded; the Catholic Church is the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Timothy 3:15). 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 MINI-ARGUMENT - THE FILIOQUE: The Great Schism was in 1054, but before this, the entire Church (submitted to the Pope, as already shown, and) believed in the Filioque: - Tertullian (A.D. 216), Origen (A.D. 229), Maximus the Confessor (A.D. 254), Gregory the Wonderworker (A.D. 265), Ephrem the Syrian (306), Hilary of Poitiers (A.D. 357), Didymus the Blind (A.D. 362), Epiphanius of Salamis (A.D. 374), Basil the Great (A.D. 375), Ambrose of Milan (A.D. 381), Gregory of Nyssa (A.D. 382), Pope Leo I (400), The Athanasian Creed (A.D. 400), Augustine of Hippo (A.D. 408, 416), Cyril of Alexandria (A.D. 424), Council of Toledo (A.D. 400), Fulgence of Ruspe (A.D. 524), John Damascene (A.D. 712, 728), Council of Nicaea II (A.D. 787). *So the "Eastern orthodox" are the ones that contradict orthodoxy. The Pope and Rome, as expected, are correct. 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 ARGUMENT - THE HOLY MARY MOTHER OF GOD. SINLESS (IMMACULATE CONCEPTION), ETERNAL VIRGIN, AND ASSUMED INTO HEAVEN Mary is full of grace (Luke 1:28). Being full of grace means that she has no sin; this proves the Immaculate Conception. The Bible says that the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23), so if she has no sin, then it means that she was assumed into heaven. Archangel Gabriel visited Holy Mary, and she said: Luke 1:34 - «I know not a man» (οὐκ ἔγνων ἄνδρα)... «ἔγνων» (egnōn) is in the perfect tense, indicating a state that began in the past and continues into the present, and that she does not wish to know a man. This implies that Mary had taken a vow of perpetual virginity. ... Also, she said that even though she was married to Saint Joseph; this further shows that she gave a vow of eternal celibacy. Because the archangel said that she would be the Mother of the Messiah, and naturally, since she was married, she would have presupposed that the Messiah would be born through her and Joseph, but no! Mary instead says «I know not a man», even though she is married, indicating that she had taken a vow of perpetual virginity. ... Also, Jesus made Saint John take care of Mary (John 19:26-27); this shows that Mary had no other sons since she is a virgin (because the rule at the time was that the children had to take care of the mother, and not someone else if she had children; it was the jewish custom; going against this rule was punishable by death). ... Church Fathers: Hilary of Poitiers: “If they [the brethren of the Lord] had been Mary’s sons and not those taken from Joseph’s former marriage, she would never have been given over in the moment of the passion [crucifixion] to the apostle John as his mother, the Lord saying to each, ‘Woman, behold your son,’ and to John, ‘Behold your mother’ [John 19:26–27), as he bequeathed filial love to a disciple as a consolation to the one desolate” (Commentary on Matthew 1:4 [A.D. 354]). Origen: “The Book [the Protoevangelium] of James [records] that the brethren of Jesus were sons of Joseph by a former wife, whom he married before Mary. Now those who say so wish to preserve the honor of Mary in virginity to the end, so that body of hers which was appointed to minister to the Word . . . might not know intercourse with a man after the Holy Spirit came into her and the power from on high overshadowed her. And I think it in harmony with reason that Jesus was the firstfruit among men of the purity which consists in [perpetual] chastity, and Mary was among women. For it were not pious to ascribe to any other than to her the firstfruit of virginity” (Commentary on Matthew 2:17 [A.D. 248]). 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 NOTE - THERE IS NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH Vatican II, Lumen Gentium - 14: «The Church is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.» ... «They are fully incorporated in the society of the Church who, possessing the Spirit of Christ accept her entire system and all the means of salvation given to her, and are united with her as part of her visible bodily structure and through her with Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. The bonds which bind men to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion.» ... Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) 845+846: ... «According to another image dear to the Church Fathers, She (the Son's Catholic Church) is prefigured by Noah's ark, which alone saves from the flood.» ... «All salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body: Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church.» ... «Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.» ... The Bible: The Catholic Church is the Church of Christ founded upon Peter, being led by the Pope that Christ put in place as the Chief Shepherd to guide us (Matthew 16:18-19); rejecting the Catholic Church and the Pope is rejecting Christ; ... The Catholic Church is the Body of Christ (Colossians 1:18); no man cometh to the Father, but by the Son (John 14:6), so you must not reject the Son's Body (the Catholic Church); ... Only those that do the will of the Father who is in Heaven shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 7:21-23)... The will of the Father includes accepting the fullness of truth revealed by Christ, which is preserved and taught by the Catholic Church that Christ founded; the Catholic Church is the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Timothy 3:15). ... The disciple and Successor of Saint John, Ignatius of Antioch, taught: “Be not deceived, my brethren: If anyone follows a maker of schism [i.e., is a schismatic], he does not inherit the kingdom of God; if anyone walks in strange doctrine [i.e., is a heretic], he has no part in the passion [of Christ]. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of his blood; one altar, as there is one bishop, with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons” (Letter to the Philadelphians 3:3–4:1 [A.D. 110]). 🇻🇦🇻🇦🇻🇦 Recommended links: http://4marksofthechurch.com https://www.churchfathers.org https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/ All must and shall bend their knees to Rome. TikTok: @INQUISIDORLUSITANO Instagram: @MOZ_CATH Sponsored by Kojima Productions.