EWTN - POPE Life & Times of John Paul II - Part 1 of 6



  • 2013-03-06T14:58:40

True Christians realize that the papacy is nothing but counterfeit Christianity. It is as phoney as a two dollar bill. Vatican 1 strictly and unambiguously stated that there has always been a papacy with universal jurisdiction from the moment of the Matthew 16:18 episode, at which time Peter's authority was recognized by the entire Christian church, and should we not believe it, one will lose their very salvation! (scroll down to #46 within this document)... http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_29061958_ad-apostolorum-principis_en.html Protestants are adamant that the prominence of Peter, does not equal a papacy. No mention of the office of "pope" is mentioned in Scripture and therefore it must be rejected. Neither is there any mention of the Mass, transubstantiation, infallibility, indulgences, marian piety, ad nauseum. Concerning the papal interpretation of Matt 16, V-1 told us that it was an "absolutely manifest teaching of the sacred scriptures" that "has always been understood by the catholic church"... "known to all ages". History refutes that claim! The earliest interpretations of M-16 are either non-papal or anti-papal. Hence, either the Catholic Church is what it claims to be, or it is the most colossal, pernicious plot ever foisted upon man by the forces of darkness. There are only two choices: Either God's intention was for the doctrine of an infallible pope to "develop" and be declared dogma 1800 centuries after Christianity began, or it is a complete departure (not a development!) from the faith, "once delivered to the saints" per Jude 1:3. Mormons pull the same trick in saying it was God's will for Joseph Smith to appear on the scene 1800 years after Christ left this earth so he could tell the world that all religious systems up to that day were "wrong" and Smith was told to give us the "real deal". NONSENSE! Circa 1850, Cardinal Newman's, "Essay on Development" pointed out that the validity of the papacy depends on the "probability of a monarchial principle in the Divine Scheme." Newman says that accepting the papacy requires the ASSUMPTION that God simply wanted there to be a papal office in the Christian church! Newman says, "All depends on the strength of that presumption. " So there you have it. The reason most Catholics are enamored with the papacy is because they find it philosophically appealing-- contra Col 2:8 I am sorry to say. They like the idea that there should be an institution with all of the authority that the RCC claims to have. But excuse me: what if ***I*** think some OTHER way is more appropriate- --such as letting the Bible breathe on its own and realize that because the Holy Spirit simply did not mention the office of a papacy---HE NEVER MEANT FOR THERE TO BE ONE IN THE FIRST PLACE!

Please add a name and description in order to save your playlist to your user profile.

Name: Description: Public:
No playlists found for this account.