"The gates of hell will never prevail over muh Catholic Church"
(media.scored.co)
that's gonna be a no from me dawg
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You must log in or sign up to comment
22 comments:
Lol christians really suck.
If they have pro-gay sex ed, then it is not a catholic school, and you need to choose a different one.
u/CrusaderPepe
Sincere question - How are Catholics expected to believe the Pope or the Vatican deserves respect?
Sincere question - How are Catholics expected to believe the Pope or the Vatican deserves respect?
That is a sincere and fair question.
Catholics are not required to believe that every pope is personally holy, prudent, courageous, or correct in every judgment. What deserves reverence first of all is the **office Christ established**, not every action of the man who occupies it.
And St. Peter himself proves the distinction.
Peter was unquestionably given a unique leadership role among the Apostles: Christ gave him the keys of the kingdom (Matthew 16:18–19), commanded him to strengthen his brethren (Luke 22:32), and after the Resurrection entrusted His sheep to him: “Feed my lambs… feed my sheep” (John 21:15–17). After the Ascension, Peter plainly acts as the leading Apostle in Acts.
Yet look at Peter personally:
* He began sinking into the water because his faith faltered, and Christ rebuked him: “O thou of little faith, why didst thou doubt?” (Matthew 14:31).
* Immediately after confessing Christ and receiving the promise of the keys, Peter tried to dissuade Christ from the Cross and received the devastating rebuke: **“Go behind me, Satan”** (Matthew 16:23).
* On the night of the Passion he denied Christ three times (Matthew 26:69–75).
* Later St. Paul “withstood him to the face” because Peter’s conduct at Antioch was blameworthy (Galatians 2:11).
Yet nobody seriously argues that Peter therefore ceased to be the leader of the Apostles or lost the office Christ had entrusted to him.
That is extremely relevant to the papacy.
A pope can sin. He can be cowardly. He can exercise terrible judgment. He can create scandal. He can even require correction in matters that do not engage the Church’s infallibility. None of that means Catholics must pretend the behavior is good.
But neither does the personal failure of the officeholder automatically abolish the office.
So my position is neither blind papolatry nor “the pope offended me, therefore there is no pope.” It is to **recognize the authority Christ established, distinguish the office from the man, hold firmly to the perennial Catholic Faith, and resist error when necessary without abandoning the visible Church.**
The papacy deserves respect ultimately because of **Who established it**, not because every successor of Peter has lived up to Peter’s commission.
Christ chose Peter knowing perfectly well how badly Peter would sometimes fail.
Catholics are not required to believe that every pope is personally holy, prudent, courageous, or correct in every judgment. What deserves reverence first of all is the **office Christ established**, not every action of the man who occupies it.
And St. Peter himself proves the distinction.
Peter was unquestionably given a unique leadership role among the Apostles: Christ gave him the keys of the kingdom (Matthew 16:18–19), commanded him to strengthen his brethren (Luke 22:32), and after the Resurrection entrusted His sheep to him: “Feed my lambs… feed my sheep” (John 21:15–17). After the Ascension, Peter plainly acts as the leading Apostle in Acts.
Yet look at Peter personally:
* He began sinking into the water because his faith faltered, and Christ rebuked him: “O thou of little faith, why didst thou doubt?” (Matthew 14:31).
* Immediately after confessing Christ and receiving the promise of the keys, Peter tried to dissuade Christ from the Cross and received the devastating rebuke: **“Go behind me, Satan”** (Matthew 16:23).
* On the night of the Passion he denied Christ three times (Matthew 26:69–75).
* Later St. Paul “withstood him to the face” because Peter’s conduct at Antioch was blameworthy (Galatians 2:11).
Yet nobody seriously argues that Peter therefore ceased to be the leader of the Apostles or lost the office Christ had entrusted to him.
That is extremely relevant to the papacy.
A pope can sin. He can be cowardly. He can exercise terrible judgment. He can create scandal. He can even require correction in matters that do not engage the Church’s infallibility. None of that means Catholics must pretend the behavior is good.
But neither does the personal failure of the officeholder automatically abolish the office.
So my position is neither blind papolatry nor “the pope offended me, therefore there is no pope.” It is to **recognize the authority Christ established, distinguish the office from the man, hold firmly to the perennial Catholic Faith, and resist error when necessary without abandoning the visible Church.**
The papacy deserves respect ultimately because of **Who established it**, not because every successor of Peter has lived up to Peter’s commission.
Christ chose Peter knowing perfectly well how badly Peter would sometimes fail.
Christ didn't choose some jewed faggot named Leo to say it's okay to teach gay sex to kids, and you're a retarded antichrist jew for subverting otherwise
>"*But if you cause one of these little ones who trusts in me to fall into sin, it would be better for you to have a large millstone tied around your neck and be drowned in the depths of the sea.*" - Matthew 18:6
Why aren't you tying a millstone around his neck and drowning this faggot pedophile instead of pretending he has any relation to Saint Peter?
>"*But if you cause one of these little ones who trusts in me to fall into sin, it would be better for you to have a large millstone tied around your neck and be drowned in the depths of the sea.*" - Matthew 18:6
Why aren't you tying a millstone around his neck and drowning this faggot pedophile instead of pretending he has any relation to Saint Peter?
Subversive marrano interlopers
Reminder there was a living pope when this one was installed, meaning he is an antipope.
Reminder there was a living pope when this one was installed, meaning he is an antipope.
Toast message
Sedevacantism is the path forward to preserving the Faith as it stood under Pope Pius XII.
Simple.
They don't need any fucking donations.
The USCCB is NOT paying the bills for your local parish. They absolutely need our money, and THAT's how we can influence them.