[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / baaa / choroy / doomer / eirepol / his / lds / lounge / qanons ]

/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Email
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? the Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?

File: 56265dde01fd73e⋯.jpg (525.76 KB, 1709x1025, 1709:1025, Pius_Lef.jpg)

a939f9  No.781361

I find myself very, very worried about the future of the Catholic Church. The College of Cardinals is mostly people picked by Francis now, and the next Pope may be just as "progressive" as Francis. My heart can't take all of these scandals and the amazingly frustrating quasi-indifferent ecumenicism. What can I, as a layperson, even do? I pray the rosary daily, but I still worry that Amoris laetitia is only the beginning of things to come…

bc26a6  No.781376

Honestly the Roman Catholic Church is dead, Vatican II and all the problems in the church now go back to Vatican I. The only conclusion to this is that the western church was in error going back to the schism, and the root of it all was moving away from a mystical direct connection to God, to scholasticism and rationalism. You'll know them by their fruits, almost all the deformed sects and schism of Christianity stem from the RCC and it's metaphysics. Modern civilization is falling apart, post modernism is eating itself alive, we need to return to a mystical way of life and stop obscuring the obvious.


4f56d0  No.781379

>>781376

THIS 100%


a939f9  No.781395

>>781376

I have considered Eastern Orthodoxy, but I really have a hard time rationalizing the "first among equals" view of the papacy, and the Palamite theology doesn't make sense to me. Also, I'm an American, and there really is a "LARPer" label you get when you're Ameridox. And their views on divorce and contraceptives bother me as a tradcat.


bc26a6  No.781407

>>781395

The first among equals view was the original apostolic view, papal supremacy was a development and perversion of the honor that was originally given to the bishop of Rome. If a Pope is a heretic is he still a valid Pope? Papal infallibility opened the door to the antichrist new order religion of the future as we can see unfolding.


a855e5  No.781424

>>781361

You keep praying the rosary and remember the church will get even weaker until the final battle. The synagogue of Satan will only get stronger each day until the Son of Man comes. And will He find faith on the Earth?

He promised his church will never fall even if we are reduced to the pope and one layperson.


a855e5  No.781428

>>781407

Except Jesus takes Peter apart from the others to trust him with the whole flock and Peter already assumes a position of leadership in Acts. And Paul went to Peter, not to John or James. And let's not forget the Sacred Tradition that confirms the superiority of the Roman Church and whenever they need help with some doctrine the go over to Rome, not to Constantinopole, Alexandria, Antiochia etc.

>Papal infallibility opened the door to the antichrist new order religion of the future as we can see unfolding.

Because? The only recent infallible statement by a post Vatican II pope (excluding canonizations) was by St. JPII when he said women could never be priests. And that's the completely oposite of the Jewish NWO.

It was papal infallibility that saved the Catholic Church from being winnie the poohed over by middle age and renaissance popes, it would be reasonable to assume that with people like that fighting for power there would be at least a page of doctrinal contradictions in this last 2000 years. Thing is there was not.

Also if a pope wants to commit suicide in a fun and shockingly way I'd recommend him to try to impose infallibility on the faithful and heretical doctrine.


3850b9  No.781429

>>781428

Jesus never gave Peter total power over all, there is absolutely zero historical or Biblical tradition to back that up. It was always understood that the Bishopric of Rome was to be "first among equals", a leading role, but not a dominating one.


b4dca6  No.781431

File: 83b27ed0761078f⋯.jpg (104.88 KB, 640x960, 2:3, Στεφανος.jpg)


8f85d8  No.781436

>We bear in mind what was promised about the holy church and him who said that the gates of hell will not prevail against it (by these we understand the death-dealing tongues of heretics); - 2nd Council of Constantinople

>Because by the gates of Hell, that is, by the disputations of heretics which lead the vain to destruction, it would never be overcome; - Pope Leo IX

>You, the rightful heir to this faith and testimony, most holy Father, and your mind is religiously watchful, to let the light of such great wisdom pervade the hearts of the faithful, and refute the madness of heretics, which are rightly called the ‘gates of hell. - St Thomas Aquinas

>The gates of hell are the belief or rather the misbelief of heretics. - St John Cassian

>The Church has always need of an infallible confirmer, to whom she can appeal; of a foundation which the gates of hell, and principally error, cannot overthrow; and has always need that her pastor should be unable to lead her children into error. The successors, then, of S. Peter all have these same privileges, which do not follow the person but the dignity and public charge. - St Francis de Sales

To recognise heretics as legitimate holders of office in the Church is to let the gates of hell prevail.


a855e5  No.781441

>>781429

Everything points otherwise and the primus inter pares bs is a recent novelty.

All you orthos do is look at the evidence of the scriptures and the early Church fathers and close your ears repeatedly saying its not what the Bible says. Just like the prots when they say the Bible doesn't teach the real presence or some other obvious Catholic teaching.


2ba0a2  No.781447

>>781436

>To recognise heretics as legitimate holders of office in the Church is to let the gates of hell prevail.

I take it you're a Sede?

Honest question: Where do you yourself get the authority to "recognize" anyone or not in the first place? And if not you, where does this come from? How up the food chain is it, where the recognition is suddenly valid?


bc26a6  No.781451

File: a9245451267fd35⋯.jpg (26.16 KB, 480x360, 4:3, hqdefault.jpg)


97bf63  No.781453

>>781429

There are several accounts from christian historians from the 4th century about the privileges of the bishop of Rome, so spare us the "primus inter pares" retarded nonsense that has never existed


2ba0a2  No.781456

>>781451

Yes, it's troubling, but honestly, I think JP2's thoughts are simply the result of preexisting notions already in Catholicism - like too much reliance in the old days of using Plato and Aristotle to argue the existence of God. And the notion of an absolutely simple divinity that all can know something about through nature.. if just a little. I'll always say this is a dangerous thought, and shouldn't be emphasized. Because you can indeed get carried away like JP2. The Church - and the Jews before us - is supposed to hold up REVELATION as the means to know God. Not nature.


936c21  No.781477

>>781453

>the church started in the 4th century


a0a255  No.781496

File: cca2abed55f6cbe⋯.jpg (44.78 KB, 466x700, 233:350, seal.jpg)


97bf63  No.781644

>>781477

>the point

>your head


9d48f9  No.781647

File: 1ba195ea6fbd322⋯.jpg (155.94 KB, 794x1007, 794:1007, sasdadad.jpg)

The Church is 2000 years old. It's seen the catacombs and gladiators, swords and flames, the black death, two world wars, the rise or communism, capitalist modernity, and everything in between. There was a time were there were three popes and the battle of Tours was a thing. Pope Francis and the current scandals are but a footnote. Heck, His Holiness isn't even that bad, you guys are just on image boards too much. Take some perspective, pray, and do something positive instead of complain anonymously on the internet.


a855e5  No.781664


fe8898  No.781936

File: 7b771046070110e⋯.png (2.52 KB, 40x40, 1:1, 40px-Orthodox.png)

>>781647

The 2000 year old church. Yes, return to the 2000 year old church. The original, holy, catholic, apostolic church.


61ab90  No.781954

>>781361

Christ said that upon this rock He would build His Church, and that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it. If it comes right down to it, God will bathe the world in fire before He allows the Church to be destroyed, as we were warned at Akita. Don't fall for orthoLARP doomsaying, palamite theology is tantamount to atheism and will land you in the lake of fire.


36f877  No.781960

>>781936

>orthodox cross

>telling people to return to Catholicism


fe8898  No.781967

>>781954

How's that papal supremacy going?

I love how you guys never explain how Orthodoxy is incorrect, just "its pantheism, trust us, trust muh papacy that has changed church teaching on a whim".

>>781960

Orthodoxy is the catholic church, catholic just means universal. I'm not talking about the church in Rome which is not Orthodox and not catholic.


61ab90  No.781968

>>781967

>trust muh papacy that has changed church teaching on a whim

Every "change" you can point to has verifiable origins in the traditions of the Undivided Church. Palamite heresy, on the other hand, was invented in the 13th century. Saint Nicholas would have punched you people no different from the Arians.


9e7cef  No.781970

>>781376

fpbp

>>781936

It's a shame that the Romans insist on using 'Catholic' in their name, since it actually means "whole", which refers to the invisible church. Compared to other denominations, the Roman church is probably home to the fewest members of the true catholic church. LOL


61ab90  No.781974

>>781968

>Saint Nicholas would have punched you people no different from the Arians.

This last part was unnecessary. I take that back and apologize.

>>781970

>the Roman church is probably home to the fewest members of the true catholic church. LOL

>Catholic Church: 1.313 billion

>Eastern Orthodoxy: 200 to 300 million

>Oriental Orthodoxy: 76 million

>Assyrian Church of the East: 323,300

No I'd say that's a pretty clear majority.


fe8898  No.781975

File: 8d84a1a961a5fec⋯.jpg (36.5 KB, 432x320, 27:20, 219971_9bf439d57faad7b5829….jpg)

>>781968

Vatican I? Vatican II? To name the most egregious examples.

How is it a heresy? What about it is heretical?


9e7cef  No.781976

>>781974

>implying even a fifth of those are saved

I pray every day that God will open the eyes of your people before it's too late.


c4af5e  No.781994

File: 421161a175aabc5⋯.gif (43.65 KB, 220x362, 110:181, tenor (2).gif)

>>781976

He already has opened our eyes, thats why we are Catholic ;)


b51349  No.781997

>>781974

So your argument is that numbers prove Roman Catholicism? How many of those are actual devout Christians?

Orthodoxy could have literally one member and it would still be the one true catholic apostolic church.


9e7cef  No.782000

>>781994

We just went over this. You're a Roman. Catholic is a title reserved for the invisible church.


c4af5e  No.782006

File: dc736b44487dc05⋯.jpg (105.61 KB, 252x386, 126:193, Blessed-JPII.jpg)

>>782000

Yes, a Roman Catholic. Just because you don't recognize the See of St. Peter doesn't mean St. Peter doesn't have authority. Come home to Rome, schismatic. We miss you.


b51349  No.782011

File: 397aba2151fe58e⋯.jpg (37.69 KB, 604x404, 151:101, Wat8.jpg)

>>782006

Bishop of Rome: *takes sole credit for fixing the Arian crisis* I am now Pope of everything, because I said so.

Early church fathers:


61ab90  No.782036

File: f02cea96d1ac38f⋯.png (12.82 KB, 308x275, 28:25, russia-2.png)

>>781997

>How many of those are actual devout Christians?

Good question.


fe8898  No.782049

>>782036

>>782036

I'm not a Russian so I can't really comment on that. Orthodoxy is not exclusively Russian. The Russian Orthodox went through a lot of persecution under communism so at least they have an excuse to be suffering in numbers. An optimistic estimate for Roman Catholic mass attendance weekly is 30%, but people lie in surveys so its probably half that.

Also the whole "we have the most numbers therefore we are correct theologically" argument is just wrong. That was my point.


9e7cef  No.782050

>>782006

begone, Great Whore!


6f2fbb  No.782054

File: 4e6d6063db11c10⋯.jpg (63.16 KB, 720x720, 1:1, iakovos paisios porphyrios.jpg)

>>781954

Christ said nothing about Rome. Plus Peter was Bishop of Antioch even before Rome, so the same argument can be used for Antioch. If Palamite theology is so bad, we should see what fruits are born by those who studied it.


c4af5e  No.782059

File: a2d7d194e491430⋯.jpg (100.16 KB, 586x900, 293:450, 2b82976ff690e4817c9235c84e….jpg)

>>782050

>implying im Israeli

Lol okay, buddy

>>782011

>doesn't know his church history or has read the church fathers

Lmao

I'll be keeping both of you in my prayers tonight. I love you both.


fe8898  No.782078

>>782059

>>782059

We are just debating. I have no ill will towards you, I don't doubt that many RCs are devout people, I just can't understand how they can declare a man like Francis to have ultimate authority over their entire church. Hint: He's a heretic and we have the quotes to prove it.


bcae05  No.782090

>>781376

Fpbp, just give it. How much longer are we going to continue in this madness?


a0a255  No.782092

>>782006

>doesn't mean St. Peter doesn't have authority

St. Peter had authority, and he used his authority to start his church in Antioch, which is still Orthodox. That says nothing about your man-made Pharaoh and his city-state however.


f1592e  No.782111

>>781395

The Orthodox position on contraception until recently is that it is forbidden. Like any denomination today there is liberal infiltration in our number, but they will never prevail over Holy Orthodoxy.


63e483  No.782140

>>781361

>>781376

I have been thinking about this for a while.

If we are to deduce that modernity is an entirely anti-traditional and more importantly anti-christian program we must find where its roots are, that is 19th and 20th century thought, based on the enlightenment, based on the renaissance, but what is the renaissance have its origins in? I have almost a resentment against the "catholic" church for this, it's fruit is modernity, it is its creator and nurturer, this was the "catholic" church at a "traditional" time. Modernity has its roots in the catholic church, and its misstep was to trust in itself more than God, that is the sin of Adam in a sense.

Why should I be catholic? A good portion of my ancestors have been trodden by them, Europe has always looked down on Turks(and the middle eastern world), even before they were turks and they were Byzantine Romans, the Catholics have done evil to my ancestors. My grandmother is pure Native American and we need no explanation for what the Protestant(and Catholic) west has done to them. The other part of my family was most likely a somewhat wealthy family engaged in the making of fabric which later emigrated to Flanders, then to Britain, then to America.

Even the first martyr in the continental United States, St Peter(Cungagnaq) the Aleut, was martyred by Catholics(Monks and Priests mind you) in San Francisco, where the "…priest had a toe severed from each of Peter's feet", "cut off each finger of Peter's hands, one joint at a time, finally removing both his hands" and "eventually disemboweled him" for refusing to convert to "Catholicism"

Even the notion of Catholicism is somehow related to Modernity and the Western World. To become catholic in some odd sense one must become western, not to dissimilar to the imperialism of the Western Roman Empire. This was not the way of the early church where the traditions and cultures of the peoples of the world were transformed through Christ to be unified with his Church. Many christanons are attracted to "Catholicism" I think for they see Christ in it, but a significant part of this thought process is most likely a sort of "western nationalism".

I am sorry for ranting like this and please let me words not dissuade any other Christanons from serving Christ, many Catholics, especially here may be most likely part of the one true church invisibly, but this matter has been bothering my mind for some time. The thing that has always discouraged me from Roman Catholicism even when I was a protestant, was this fact, that somehow it seems to be tied up with modernity in some strange way, that if the modern world is anti-christian, then whatever triggered it had a part to play, as a lustful suggestion in the mind leads to something horrible, the Patriarchate of Rome being first in authority is maybe fine according to human reason but I have always felt that human reason, though important and not a small part of our Human Experience, must not be trusted to much, let us not forget that Adam used his reason and through it he was struck unto death by the serpent, not taking into account that St. Peter being the first in earthly authority and holding the Potestas Clavium is also something not true to earthly reason but this is besides the point and not something which should be argued about.

I have most likely repeated myself some times and I am sorry for this as well, I simply had to put my thoughts out here not for anybody else but for myself to concrete this down for my own mind. I am not even properly part of the one true Orthodox and Catholic church founded by Christ himself, but I know it to be the true Church and Christ to be the Way, the Life, and the Truth. And please let many of you not feel put down by me when I say these things, Western Christianity has and has had many good things, a zeal and perseverance, and many other unique things many of which were shared by Peter himself, and it is a shame that the Western Church(Many parts of which remained Orthodox for a very long time on the local level at least) separated from the Eastern Church, not only losing many people, but also certain mental types and ideas. Western Christianity is and was good but should not be the entire scope of Christianity.

May Christ, and she who is his Mother, and all the Heavenly host bless and keep you all.


d34461  No.782180

>>781361

It's amazing how mischievous Lefebvre looks next to Pope Pius, a wolf standing next to a sheep.


a0a255  No.782194

>>782140

>Even the notion of Catholicism is somehow related to Modernity and the Western World. To become catholic in some odd sense one must become western

Bingo, you got it. To elaborate on that point, see:

http://www.oodegr.com/english/filosofia/nihilism_root_modern_age.htm


d3fb2d  No.782234

>>781936

Is that a CK2 icon?


165344  No.782247

>>781376

Daily reminder Orthodox allow divorce and remarriage, in stark contrast with Matthew 5:32.


b89be7  No.782258

>>782234

Idk I just like the purple design.

>>782247

I think what we have there is liberal infiltration like on the contraception issue. (Although don’t pretend this doesn’t happen in RC guys, Vatican II alert) Orthodox cannon law doesn’t permit or recognise divorce but some modern bishops do. Bishops however don’t run the church, they can be deposed.


63e483  No.782353

>>782194

Already read it my man, Seraphim Rose is as a saint and also as an enlightener in our times of confusion.


1e9601  No.782498

What we know about Francis:

He was #2 in terms of election even back in 2005. They've been grooming him for the Papacy.

McCarrick was put out to pasture under Ratzinger. Bergoglio allowed him more freedom, likely because his views aligned with Bergoglio.

He penned Amoris Laetitia, which could allow for attacks on traditional marriage in the future, if we are to get a Francis II.

He involves himself greatly with world politics and buzzwords like "climate change" and "refugees". He also goes full-bore on ecumenicalism, more than any other Pope before him.

He views the Chinese state Church as legitimate.

And yes, he is my Pope, and I submit to him. Remember to pray the rosary. It's always darkest before the dawn.


9e7cef  No.782525

I often dream about what the Roman Church could be like if it were theologically reformed and wonder if such a movement could gain traction from within, but I think it's safe to say that they have strayed so far from the truth that the entirety of the leadership now lies in the claws of Satan.

http://www.jesusisprecious.org/false_religion/roman_catholic/catholic_heresies.htm


1e9601  No.789172

Francis is but a symptom of Vatican II. The council's ecumenical Church is a globalist political entity now, sold out to the powers and principalities that rule this world. When the divisive Paul VI and the communist Romero are canonized, while Archbishop Lefebvre, whose only sin was refusing to give up the Holy Mass of martyrs, saints and crusaders, is excommunicated, well…


61ab90  No.789188

>>781376

>moscow and constantinople in schism literally right now

>constantinople less than 4% Christian

>church attendance in russia down to 7%

>highest abortion rate in the world is in russia

>more abortions in romania than poohing sweden

No thanks dude.


c96f31  No.789445

File: f95881c3f2c2d93⋯.png (54.46 KB, 220x236, 55:59, 220px-Coat_of_Arms_of_the_….png)

Just become Eastern Catholic my dude. We are autonomous, we have our own canon (approved by the Pope, of course) on top of the canon code of law, we have our own Patriarchs, we have our own traditions, and we submit to the Holy See, without having to suffer the afflictions of the West.


b51349  No.789451

>>789188

>>789445

Orthodoxy in America is blossoming. Orthodoxy in Eastern Europe is recovering from a century of Soviet overlordship. Roman Catholicism having more followers in theory right now does not mean Roman Catholicism correct. That's very lazy logic.

Is someone who goes to a Novus Ordo church counted as a true Catholic? How are they a Catholic? Just go to Novus Ordo Watch, its a clown show.

I know a lot of Orthodox who don't even have a church in their area of the U.S. Or their best option is to go to a church speaking a language they don't know. Orthodoxy had almost no presence in the West until recent centuries as opposed to Roman Catholicism. It's not a fair comparison.

The Pope is not a Christian as he prays to heathen idols and according to Canon Law is an apostate.


bd2c35  No.789457

File: 19aec7e4b154a04⋯.jpg (90.99 KB, 1062x962, 531:481, smol.jpg)

>>781361

I will say, as a Copt, do not leave your Church brother. If we cannot stand united even in our own Churches, how will we ever end the Schism?

I weep, for example, for the "British Orthodox," Coptic Orthodox who decided to schism entirely from our Church in the 90s and are not in communion with anyone now. Before that, they were our "Western Rite," so to speak. Or the "Church of the Gauls" for the Eastern Orthodox, or the Old Catholics for the Roman Catholics. No, we must not add more schisms unto the already existing schisms by leaving your Church and joining something like the Union of Scranton. Stay where you are. God will not abandon us. The Holy Spirit works through us all, Catholic, Orthodox, and Coptic. Things look bleak but you are nowhere near the level of the Medici Popes.

If we could recover from over 1400 years of Muslim occupation and persecution, you can recover from one bad Pope.


1eccb5  No.789741

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>789457

Coptanon, your optimism is such a breath of fresh air in this bleak world. Sadly it is more than just one bad Pope. It is a mafia of clerics that have been infected with the smoke of satan (ie liberalism and communism) thanks prots

Just gotta keep praying to God that the next Pope does something about them.


bbe37a  No.789782

>>781395

Used to be tradcath and have been considering orthodoxy. Similar reasoning to this >>781376 post had a lot to do with it for me.

On the first part when it comes to the pope I've seen strong arguments from both sides, but I've always leaned towards the catholics reaching in their justification. I'd generaly agree with this guy >>781429

Palamite theology makes a lot more sense as I've looked into it, Jay Dyer recently did a debate with Classical Theist from twitter that hammered a lot of it home and cleared up some of my doubts about it. Especially when you realize the amount of stock that Catholics put into the writings of Augustine, the divergence starts to make more sense.

There's not really anything larpy about joining something like the OCA and most churches will welcome you, I'm going to attend a ROCOR one for the first time this weekend.


e0d074  No.789799

File: d955df63d9ee25a⋯.jpg (1015.5 KB, 625x952, 625:952, ST GABRE - Copy.jpg)


fe8898  No.789812

File: 99e3c235882e332⋯.jpg (76.94 KB, 338x500, 169:250, st-john-climicus-9.jpg)

>>789782

Same story with me. The essence / energies distinction actually makes sense now thanks to Dyer and some essays I read online.

The traditional Catholic scene is a bit depressing tbh. You've got SSPX and sedes who are on all sorts of mental gymnastics. Everyone is lamenting the Vatican and the modernist pope, and they are hoping for a true pope that will fix everything… chosen from the college of cardinals whom they admit are deeply corrupt. Dostoevsky was right, you could take God out of the Vatican and it would function normally. It's an unholy bureaucracy, very different from how the early church functioned. Sorry for the rant.


567ad5  No.789824

>>781376

Orthodoxpilled and fpbp


10dcd4  No.789929

File: 2ff2328af48e13c⋯.jpg (88.3 KB, 447x550, 447:550, obraz.jpg)

>>781376

I hope everyone here knows this is just a meme, and scholasticism isn't opposed to mysticism, which in turn has very much flourished in the Latin Catholic Church since the Schism, right?


b51349  No.789945

>>789929

We don't mean mysticism as in miracles (or "miracles") such as Fatima or visions, etc. Orthodoxy doesn't accept necessarily as they may be sent from demons. Our mysticism more to do with philosophy being the handmaiden to theology as opposed to Thomism.


2b5ecc  No.789969

File: 67821e0733b28b0⋯.gif (486.42 KB, 392x277, 392:277, BABY FIGHTS.gif)

>>789782

>e-celeb pissing matches


10dcd4  No.790067

File: eac1f9b39f8bb35⋯.jpg (455.9 KB, 2306x700, 1153:350, 15BishopColumn-2306x700.jpg)

>>789945

>This science can in a sense depend upon the philosophical sciences, not as though it stood in need of them, but only in order to make its teaching clearer. For it accepts its principles not from other sciences, but immediately from God, by revelation. Therefore it does not depend upon other sciences as upon the higher, but makes use of them as of the lesser, and as handmaidens: even so the master sciences make use of the sciences that supply their materials, as political of military science. That it thus uses them is not due to its own defect or insufficiency, but to the defect of our intelligence, which is more easily led by what is known through natural reason (from which proceed the other sciences) to that which is above reason, such as are the teachings of this science.

Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Question 1, Article 5


68d223  No.792401

When Christ at a symbolic moment was establishing His great society, He chose for its cornerstone neither the brilliant Paul nor the mystic John, but a shuffler, a snob, a coward - in a word, a man. And upon this rock He has built His Church, and the gates of Hell have not prevailed against it. All the empires and the kingdoms have failed, because of this inherent and continual weakness, that they were founded by strong men and upon strong men. But this one thing, the historic Christian Church, was founded on a weak man, and for that reason it is indestructible. For no chain is stronger than its weakest link.


fe8898  No.792413

>>792401

I think it was also that Peter was the first to accept Christ as the true son of God.

Christ there is just saying that Peter is important and on the rock of his faith the church will be built. That in itself doesn't justify today's Papacy however.


ec9dda  No.792639

Can someone explain the traddy and orthoprot meme about "the renaissance"? As in, can you even prove "the renaissance" was a real thing?


fe8898  No.792654

>>792639

What do you mean? The Renaissance refers to a time period after the middle ages when a lot of stuff (art, technology) from antiquity was resurfacing.

It wasn't a great time for Roman Catholicism considering the Reformation was happening at the same time in Germany. Italy was under the control of the Medici banking clan. There were many sketchy Popes during the Renaissance like the Borgias.


d34461  No.792790

>>792413

>That in itself doesn't justify today's Papacy however.

The Apostles only received the authority to loose and bind in Matthew 18, St. Peter not only received the authority singularly, he received the Keys, and the promise from Christ singularly.

The authority for the other Apostles comes later, so the promise and the keys were given to St. Peter exclusively. Additionally, he really was the "first of the Apostles", by the simple fact that the rest did not receive the authority later.

On "thee" and "thou" did Christ promise that Hell would never prevail.


9bf218  No.792870

>>782258

You've permitted it since Justinian


b51349  No.792935

File: c51b2d7b0eac5ac⋯.png (25.03 KB, 310x493, 310:493, FT_18.08.30_USCatholics_po….png)


d34461  No.792956

>>792948

>No pope in history has had any relation to Peter.

…because it's a position, not a line of kings.

>The catholic church and the papacy came hundreds of years after Peter died.

no, we have extant evidence of letters dated to at least 140 A.D. from St. Justin Martyr speaking of the Early Church, which sounds suspiciously Catholic, if not at least Apostolic.

> If thye Catholic church really was the churdch of peter then peter would have made the rules, selected the scriptures for canonization, written the first catechism, ordained the first clergy, but Peter did none of those things.

He didn't have to, the Apostles were also given the authority in Matthew 18. This is why St. Peter is called "first of the Apostles", not "the only Apostle". That's like saying governors cannot ratify state constitutions because a President exists or something.

>The Catholic church is lying when they claim that their authority comes from Peter. The corrupt Roman cult is attempting to steal the birthright of Christians in the same way that Esau tried to steal the birthright of Jacob.

Well, SOMEBODY has to have the Keys to the Kingdom. It isn't anyone else but the Catholic Church.

>The church of Rome always has been and always will be a polytheistic cult practicing babylonian mysticism under the guise of Christianity

Feel free to join the 2,000 year old peanut gallery, we'll outlive you just as Christ promised.


c96f31  No.792973

>>792965

>no catechism

What is the Didache? Oh wait, what's that? The first catechism? Preposterous. What? It's dated to the first century AD?

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0714.htm


2d2212  No.792974

>>781431

begome matthewite?


d34461  No.793039

>>792965

>The position the church of Rome occupied was granted by the pagan emperor Constantine

no, that's not how bishoprics work.

>And none of the apostles had any hand in the formation of the catholic church either.

if the Church is apostolic, they are from the Apostles, this is the entire reason why they even bother tracking 2,000 years worth of lineage in all the seats

>Yeah, everyone that follows Christ and lives a holy life.

No. Whomever has the keys, also shares in that authority to bind on heaven and on earth. You and I do not have this authority, so this falls to the Apostles and their seats. And further, only one was given the Keys, being Cephas.

> You've chosen to ignore the victims of Catholicism and in doing so you've hardened your heart to God and chosen deception over truth and damnation over redemption.

All I can do is shrug. Christ Himself will tell us who was right.


d34461  No.793083

>>793082

>Oh, so you think the "bishoprick" came before the power to establish a bishoprick was granted by constantine?

no, bishoprics were either established by the Apostles, or later on by the Church. your argument is an old slander nobody takes seriously.

as for the rest, again, Christ will tell us the Truth.


d34461  No.793105

>>793100

The Pope quite clearly delivers a weekly address in front of Christ, in the mouth of the serpent.

The serpent represents the world, attempting, and failing to crush Christ, and thus, His Vicar.


568526  No.793129

>>793110

Dead memes aren't evidence, liar. Go back to your designated heretic board and complain there.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / baaa / choroy / doomer / eirepol / his / lds / lounge / qanons ]