TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

He created one Church, if it failed Christ failed. He didn't create pockets of true churches scattered around from here to there. That is almost sounding like the Mormons trying to explain their theory on how the entire church went apostate.

---

Then how did countless churches in revelation, that were in good standing, get threated to loose their candlesticks?

God wouldn't allow it to be all or nothing.

The biblical pattern is local congregations that don't answer to each other, but to God alone.

You're take on this is far different from the first century church. Which had nothing to do with Rome.

---

They were not individual Churches but members of the same Church in different cities. Further evidence of a one Holy Catholic And Apostolic Faith. If they weren't members of the same body why would Paul spend so much time writing to all of them and why would they listen to an outsider with so much reverence if they didn't respect his position within the Church. Also, what would yall do if you didn't have St. Paul to waive in our face.

Rumors persist of a Conclave in December to elect a successor to the resigned Francis. It is clear that he has alienated both Catholics and other believers like no pope in modern history. We'll see what happens.

https://novusordowatch.org/2021/08/francis-resignation-conclave-rumors/

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

He created one Church, if it failed Christ failed. He didn't create pockets of true churches scattered around from here to there. That is almost sounding like the Mormons trying to explain their theory on how the entire church went apostate.

---

Then how did countless churches in revelation, that were in good standing, get threated to loose their candlesticks?

God wouldn't allow it to be all or nothing.

The biblical pattern is local congregations that don't answer to each other, but to God alone.

You're take on this is far different from the first century church. Which had nothing to do with Rome.

---

They were not individual Churches but members of the same Church in different cities.

---

They were Churches of Christ if you want to be real about it. "Universal" aka "Catholic" was just a broad term to describe the early church in the aggregate. I think Constantine referred to them in this way.

RebelE Infantry said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

As for me and my house, we will defend the Vicar of Christ.

---

---

The Rock/rock upon which it was built.

Actually St. Ignatius of Antioch used the term Catholic first to describe The Christian Church in the year 110AD in his letter to the Smyrnaeans. But please don't let that get in your way of fantasy that the Catholic Church was created by the Emperor Constantine. That honestly is one of my favs that you guys invented.

**** this Pope

SB 43rd STREET OG said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

He created one Church, if it failed Christ failed. He didn't create pockets of true churches scattered around from here to there. That is almost sounding like the Mormons trying to explain their theory on how the entire church went apostate.

---

Then how did countless churches in revelation, that were in good standing, get threated to loose their candlesticks?

God wouldn't allow it to be all or nothing.

The biblical pattern is local congregations that don't answer to each other, but to God alone.

You're take on this is far different from the first century church. Which had nothing to do with Rome.

---

They were not individual Churches but members of the same Church in different cities.

---

They were Churches of Christ if you want to be real about it. "Universal" aka "Catholic" was just a broad term to describe the early church in the aggregate. I think Constantine referred to them in this way.

---

They were all united because they professed and believed the same thing, the thing the church taught that was made canon at the ecunemenical councils that formed the structure for Christian belief.

This councils were not made up of random Joe's from the congregation, but the Bishops of the Catholic church who could draw a line back to the Apostles.

This thread reminds me of the old days in R&P.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

He created one Church, if it failed Christ failed. He didn't create pockets of true churches scattered around from here to there. That is almost sounding like the Mormons trying to explain their theory on how the entire church went apostate.

---

Then how did countless churches in revelation, that were in good standing, get threated to loose their candlesticks?

God wouldn't allow it to be all or nothing.

The biblical pattern is local congregations that don't answer to each other, but to God alone.

You're take on this is far different from the first century church. Which had nothing to do with Rome.

---

That pattern shows you know nothing of Church history. What did the early councils do? What was their purpose?

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

AggieRain said:

---

Quote:

---

If the catholic tradition came first then it would have been put in the bible while they were still writing it...

---

They did.

Did the Last Supper occur before the writing of the New Testament? Because the 2nd half of the Mass, the Liturgy of the Eucharist, replicates what Christ himself celebrated with the Desciples.

Look...here is a simplistic breakdown of the Mass (i.e. the fundamentals of Catholic services):

-Introductory Rites
-Liturgy of the Word (Bible readings)
-Liturgy of the Eucharist
-Concluding Rites

Which part(s) of the above do you find extra Biblical or objectionable, because this is the Mass in a nutshell?

---

How about the entire structure of the Catholic church's leadership?

You may be misunderstanding, so I wont assume you're being dishonest.

The argument is that Catholics have adopted a lot of extra biblical practices that are found nowhere in the scriptures.

If you're pretending to not realize that many catholic doctrines are not in the bible then idk what to tell you.

---

Where does the Bible say that it has to?

You keep asking us to cooperate with you heresy of Scripture alone, which is it self un-biblical. Furthermore your definition of the faith would clearly clash with other proponents of Sola scripture, so how do we know you all are right if can't even agree.

When Christ proclaimed that the gates of hell wouldn't prevail against his Church was he wrong? When he gave the apostles, especially Peter the power to loose and bind on heaven and earth, did they forget the part that it has to be clearly defin d in scripture first?

It seems that you have added to scripture yourself, and we all know what a condemnable offense that is.

---

The gates of hell have prevailed over the corrupt Catholic church.

Not His true church. There will always be a remnant of local faithful churches. Made of imperfect people, but that are not susceptible to big organizational corruption. That's why he didn't set up the church the way the catholic church is organized, and that that structure is not found in the bible.

You're right that there are heretical protestant churches out there. Your belief that Catholics are special and cant be corrupt is illogical, and frankly insane.

There are countless passages that show the bible is the perfect word of God, and that it's all we need to be complete in Gods eyes.

I never professed solo scriptura. I was only pointing out that catholics favor tradition over scripture. Even to the point of become pharisees.

There are many NT and OT storys where God gets very angry at people valuing traditon over his actual words.

Revelation 22:18-19 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

Peter was an apostle they all had the authority to speak for God. That's how we got the scriptures. When they passed that authority deminished.

There is no clear passage spelling out apostolic succession, and it's cute that you think that is a clear passage on popehood.

It's a stretch and you know it.

---

Apostolic succession was happening far before the bible was written; who do you think the Bishops were that met in council to determine which books were inspired?

Tradition predates scripture, that's why there were bishops around to canonize scripture.

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

He created one Church, if it failed Christ failed. He didn't create pockets of true churches scattered around from here to there. That is almost sounding like the Mormons trying to explain their theory on how the entire church went apostate.

---

Then how did countless churches in revelation, that were in good standing, get threated to loose their candlesticks?

God wouldn't allow it to be all or nothing.

The biblical pattern is local congregations that don't answer to each other, but to God alone.

You're take on this is far different from the first century church. Which had nothing to do with Rome.

---

They were not individual Churches but members of the same Church in different cities. Further evidence of a one Holy Catholic And Apostolic Faith. If they weren't members of the same body why would Paul spend so much time writing to all of them and why would they listen to an outsider with so much reverence if they didn't respect his position within the Church. Also, what would yall do if you didn't have St. Paul to waive in our face.

---

So you admit individual churches can be wrong. Now do the church at rome.

The church at rome is not in charge of the others.

All churches answer to God directly. That's the biblical pattern.

We don't need a man made bureaucracy to tell is what we can plainly read in scripture.

Needless to say there are many scriptures teaching us how to confront church leadership. You refuse to criticize even when you know the pope is wrong, and you disagree with him. Sad.

Have your vasectomy reversed and obey God rather than someone who is just a man.

jrico2727 said:

---

Actually St. Ignatius of Antioch used the term Catholic first to describe The Christian Church in the year 110AD in his letter to the Smyrnaeans. But please don't let that get in your way of fantasy that the Catholic Church was created by the Emperor Constantine. That honestly is one of my favs that you guys invented.

---

I didn't mean to imply that Constantine invented the term. But that is irrelevant. My point is that "Catholic" wasn't initially used as anything more than a descriptor of the early Christian Church. Modern Catholic Church has no more of a claim to the roots of the original Church than anyone else. The modern Catholic Church has strayed MUCH further away from it than your local community Bible Church, Baptist Church, or Church of Christ. It's not even close.

The organizational structure, hierarchy and most of the traditions of the Catholic church were built by men over centuries and centuries...many of which were corrupt as all get out. Some downright evil. If you study Jesus and his teachings and his followers closely...it would be obvious that they never intended for the church to be anything like what the Catholic church has morphed into.

Jesus would be scolding the priests and clergy with rage today, I can almost guarantee that. He would be ANGRY at how the church has been perverted.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

He created one Church, if it failed Christ failed. He didn't create pockets of true churches scattered around from here to there. That is almost sounding like the Mormons trying to explain their theory on how the entire church went apostate.

---

Then how did countless churches in revelation, that were in good standing, get threated to loose their candlesticks?

God wouldn't allow it to be all or nothing.

The biblical pattern is local congregations that don't answer to each other, but to God alone.

You're take on this is far different from the first century church. Which had nothing to do with Rome.

---

They were not individual Churches but members of the same Church in different cities. Further evidence of a one Holy Catholic And Apostolic Faith. If they weren't members of the same body why would Paul spend so much time writing to all of them and why would they listen to an outsider with so much reverence if they didn't respect his position within the Church. Also, what would yall do if you didn't have St. Paul to waive in our face.

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

He created one Church, if it failed Christ failed. He didn't create pockets of true churches scattered around from here to there. That is almost sounding like the Mormons trying to explain their theory on how the entire church went apostate.

---

Then how did countless churches in revelation, that were in good standing, get threated to loose their candlesticks?

God wouldn't allow it to be all or nothing.

The biblical pattern is local congregations that don't answer to each other, but to God alone.

You're take on this is far different from the first century church. Which had nothing to do with Rome.

---

They were not individual Churches but members of the same Church in different cities. Further evidence of a one Holy Catholic And Apostolic Faith. If they weren't members of the same body why would Paul spend so much time writing to all of them and why would they listen to an outsider with so much reverence if they didn't respect his position within the Church. Also, what would yall do if you didn't have St. Paul to waive in our face.

---

So you admit individual churches can be wrong. Now do the church at rome.

The church at rome is not in charge of the others.

All churches answer to God directly. That's the biblical pattern.

We don't need a man made bureaucracy to tell is what we can plainly read in scripture.

Needless to say there are many scriptures teaching us how to confront church leadership. You refuse to criticize even when you know the pope is wrong, and you disagree with him. Sad.

Have your vasectomy reversed and obey God rather than someone who is just a man.

---

Individual Churches can be wrong, the Church cannot. When individual churches teach heresy or had questions about heresy, a council was called attended by the bishops who would rule on the issues at hand.

That "man-made bureaucracy" formed the entire basis of belief of Christianity.

Joe Boudain said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

He created one Church, if it failed Christ failed. He didn't create pockets of true churches scattered around from here to there. That is almost sounding like the Mormons trying to explain their theory on how the entire church went apostate.

---

Then how did countless churches in revelation, that were in good standing, get threated to loose their candlesticks?

God wouldn't allow it to be all or nothing.

The biblical pattern is local congregations that don't answer to each other, but to God alone.

You're take on this is far different from the first century church. Which had nothing to do with Rome.

---

They were not individual Churches but members of the same Church in different cities. Further evidence of a one Holy Catholic And Apostolic Faith. If they weren't members of the same body why would Paul spend so much time writing to all of them and why would they listen to an outsider with so much reverence if they didn't respect his position within the Church. Also, what would yall do if you didn't have St. Paul to waive in our face.

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

He created one Church, if it failed Christ failed. He didn't create pockets of true churches scattered around from here to there. That is almost sounding like the Mormons trying to explain their theory on how the entire church went apostate.

---

Then how did countless churches in revelation, that were in good standing, get threated to loose their candlesticks?

God wouldn't allow it to be all or nothing.

The biblical pattern is local congregations that don't answer to each other, but to God alone.

You're take on this is far different from the first century church. Which had nothing to do with Rome.

---

They were not individual Churches but members of the same Church in different cities. Further evidence of a one Holy Catholic And Apostolic Faith. If they weren't members of the same body why would Paul spend so much time writing to all of them and why would they listen to an outsider with so much reverence if they didn't respect his position within the Church. Also, what would yall do if you didn't have St. Paul to waive in our face.

---

So you admit individual churches can be wrong. Now do the church at rome.

The church at rome is not in charge of the others.

All churches answer to God directly. That's the biblical pattern.

We don't need a man made bureaucracy to tell is what we can plainly read in scripture.

Needless to say there are many scriptures teaching us how to confront church leadership. You refuse to criticize even when you know the pope is wrong, and you disagree with him. Sad.

Have your vasectomy reversed and obey God rather than someone who is just a man.

---

Individual Churches can be wrong, the Church cannot. When individual churches teach heresy or had questions about heresy, a council was called attended by the bishops who would rule on the issues at hand.

That "man-made bureaucracy" formed the entire basis of belief of Christianity.

---

Y'all have created a system that is not able to be criticized, and you wonder how it becomes corrupt.

Lol.

SB 43rd STREET OG said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

Actually St. Ignatius of Antioch used the term Catholic first to describe The Christian Church in the year 110AD in his letter to the Smyrnaeans. But please don't let that get in your way of fantasy that the Catholic Church was created by the Emperor Constantine. That honestly is one of my favs that you guys invented.

---

I didn't mean to imply that Constantine invented the term. But that is irrelevant. My point is that "Catholic" wasn't initially used as anything more than a descriptor of the early Christian Church. Modern Catholic Church has no more of a claim to the roots of the original Church than anyone else. The modern Catholic Church has strayed MUCH further away from it than your local community Bible Church, Baptist Church, or Church of Christ. It's not even close.

The organizational structure, hierarchy and most of the traditions of the Catholic church were built by men over centuries and centuries...many of which were corrupt as all get out. Some downright evil. If you study Jesus and his teachings and his followers closely...it would be obvious that they never intended for the church to be anything like what the Catholic church has morphed into.

Jesus would be scolding the priests and clergy with rage, I can almost guarantee that.

---

I don't believe that's right at all, again my Church follows the description of St.Justin the Martyr as espoused in 155 AD, we believe the same things that the patristics believed and can point to our systems of belief.

From the beginning there was a hierarchy, the Bishops were the leaders of the Church as they descended from the Apostles; we knew their teachings were authentic because they had been passed down in an unbroken line from those that had received them from Christ himself.

Jesus was a fan of authority; even though he called out the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, he said that they should be listened to, if not emulated as their authority came from their seat in the throne of Moses.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

He created one Church, if it failed Christ failed. He didn't create pockets of true churches scattered around from here to there. That is almost sounding like the Mormons trying to explain their theory on how the entire church went apostate.

---

Then how did countless churches in revelation, that were in good standing, get threated to loose their candlesticks?

God wouldn't allow it to be all or nothing.

The biblical pattern is local congregations that don't answer to each other, but to God alone.

You're take on this is far different from the first century church. Which had nothing to do with Rome.

---

They were not individual Churches but members of the same Church in different cities. Further evidence of a one Holy Catholic And Apostolic Faith. If they weren't members of the same body why would Paul spend so much time writing to all of them and why would they listen to an outsider with so much reverence if they didn't respect his position within the Church. Also, what would yall do if you didn't have St. Paul to waive in our face.

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

He created one Church, if it failed Christ failed. He didn't create pockets of true churches scattered around from here to there. That is almost sounding like the Mormons trying to explain their theory on how the entire church went apostate.

---

Then how did countless churches in revelation, that were in good standing, get threated to loose their candlesticks?

God wouldn't allow it to be all or nothing.

The biblical pattern is local congregations that don't answer to each other, but to God alone.

You're take on this is far different from the first century church. Which had nothing to do with Rome.

---

They were not individual Churches but members of the same Church in different cities. Further evidence of a one Holy Catholic And Apostolic Faith. If they weren't members of the same body why would Paul spend so much time writing to all of them and why would they listen to an outsider with so much reverence if they didn't respect his position within the Church. Also, what would yall do if you didn't have St. Paul to waive in our face.

---

So you admit individual churches can be wrong. Now do the church at rome.

The church at rome is not in charge of the others.

All churches answer to God directly. That's the biblical pattern.

We don't need a man made bureaucracy to tell is what we can plainly read in scripture.

Needless to say there are many scriptures teaching us how to confront church leadership. You refuse to criticize even when you know the pope is wrong, and you disagree with him. Sad.

Have your vasectomy reversed and obey God rather than someone who is just a man.

---

Individual Churches can be wrong, the Church cannot. When individual churches teach heresy or had questions about heresy, a council was called attended by the bishops who would rule on the issues at hand.

That "man-made bureaucracy" formed the entire basis of belief of Christianity.

---

Y'all have created a system that is not able to be criticized, and you wonder how it becomes corrupt.

Lol.

---

Not able to be criticized in public for the sake of complaining. What good does dragging our clergy through the mud on a message board, or facebook or what have you, do?

You also never answer the question; how can you deride the College of Bishops, and man made bureaucracy where your entire belief structure and scripture is the fruit of them?

I'll ask again, what were the councils for? What were the bishops for? Why did they exist?

Joe Boudain said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Joe Boudain said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

He created one Church, if it failed Christ failed. He didn't create pockets of true churches scattered around from here to there. That is almost sounding like the Mormons trying to explain their theory on how the entire church went apostate.

---

Then how did countless churches in revelation, that were in good standing, get threated to loose their candlesticks?

God wouldn't allow it to be all or nothing.

The biblical pattern is local congregations that don't answer to each other, but to God alone.

You're take on this is far different from the first century church. Which had nothing to do with Rome.

---

They were not individual Churches but members of the same Church in different cities. Further evidence of a one Holy Catholic And Apostolic Faith. If they weren't members of the same body why would Paul spend so much time writing to all of them and why would they listen to an outsider with so much reverence if they didn't respect his position within the Church. Also, what would yall do if you didn't have St. Paul to waive in our face.

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

He created one Church, if it failed Christ failed. He didn't create pockets of true churches scattered around from here to there. That is almost sounding like the Mormons trying to explain their theory on how the entire church went apostate.

---

Then how did countless churches in revelation, that were in good standing, get threated to loose their candlesticks?

God wouldn't allow it to be all or nothing.

The biblical pattern is local congregations that don't answer to each other, but to God alone.

You're take on this is far different from the first century church. Which had nothing to do with Rome.

---

They were not individual Churches but members of the same Church in different cities. Further evidence of a one Holy Catholic And Apostolic Faith. If they weren't members of the same body why would Paul spend so much time writing to all of them and why would they listen to an outsider with so much reverence if they didn't respect his position within the Church. Also, what would yall do if you didn't have St. Paul to waive in our face.

---

So you admit individual churches can be wrong. Now do the church at rome.

The church at rome is not in charge of the others.

All churches answer to God directly. That's the biblical pattern.

We don't need a man made bureaucracy to tell is what we can plainly read in scripture.

Needless to say there are many scriptures teaching us how to confront church leadership. You refuse to criticize even when you know the pope is wrong, and you disagree with him. Sad.

Have your vasectomy reversed and obey God rather than someone who is just a man.

---

Individual Churches can be wrong, the Church cannot. When individual churches teach heresy or had questions about heresy, a council was called attended by the bishops who would rule on the issues at hand.

That "man-made bureaucracy" formed the entire basis of belief of Christianity.

---

Y'all have created a system that is not able to be criticized, and you wonder how it becomes corrupt.

Lol.

---

Not able to be criticized in public for the sake of complaining. What good does dragging our clergy through the mud on a message board, or facebook or what have you, do?

You also never answer the question; how can you deride the College of Bishops, and man made bureaucracy where your entire belief structure and scripture is the fruit of them?

I'll ask again, what were the councils for? What were the bishops for? Why did they exist?

---

Bishops are the shepherds of the local flock. They are the elders and pastors. Same office. It's the only structure you'll find in the bible.

Elders(bishops), deacons, preachers, and teachers.

All with clearly defined roles. No central bureaucracy, and no answering to other churches.

The council in Jerusalem was an exceptional case because the churches were all Jewish first, but many going against the will of God to accept Gentiles. Paul gathered those early churches to set them straight, but did NOT ordain a head church or start a burocracy.

Only an apostle had the authority to do what they did.

I know you believe in succession, but that is not clearly spelled out here or anywhere.

Sorry I never saw your question about councils.

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

jrico2727 said:

---

He created one Church, if it failed Christ failed. He didn't create pockets of true churches scattered around from here to there. That is almost sounding like the Mormons trying to explain their theory on how the entire church went apostate.

---

Then how did countless churches in revelation, that were in good standing, get threated to loose their candlesticks?

God wouldn't allow it to be all or nothing.

The biblical pattern is local congregations that don't answer to each other, but to God alone.

You're take on this is far different from the first century church. Which had nothing to do with Rome.

---

They were not individual Churches but members of the same Church in different cities. Further evidence of a one Holy Catholic And Apostolic Faith. If they weren't members of the same body why would Paul spend so much time writing to all of them and why would they listen to an outsider with so much reverence if they didn't respect his position within the Church. Also, what would yall do if you didn't have St. Paul to waive in our face.

---

So you admit individual churches can be wrong. Now do the church at rome.

The church at rome is not in charge of the others.

All churches answer to God directly. That's the biblical pattern.

We don't need a man made bureaucracy to tell is what we can plainly read in scripture.

Needless to say there are many scriptures teaching us how to confront church leadership. You refuse to criticize even when you know the pope is wrong, and you disagree with him. Sad.

Have your vasectomy reversed and obey God rather than someone who is just a man.

---

The Church of Rome has made mistakes, feel better. It is still the seat of Peter and the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. All Churches are subject to God, but there is a structure and a hierarchy, if your not a fan of that you may not like Heaven because there certainly is a hierarchy there. The bible pattern is a Kingdom patterned out of the David Kingdom, which Jesus is a heir. There you have the King (Christ) with his Queen to his right, who was his mother (Mary) he had a chief Stuart (Peter), who held the keys(authority) in his stead when he was away.

I haven't felt a need to address the OP, yes Francis was being snide. So what so have all the good and righteous poster on F16 pointing out how bad he is and Catholics in general. Was it sinful, probably and he should examine his conscious and take it to confession- yes the Pope is a sinner and goes to confession like the rest of us.

I do confront the church leadership, I do not brag about it on a forum especially with non-Catholics, you don't disagree with the family in public. St. Paul give a great example in scripture when he rightly approached Peter.

My Vasectomy really???

Ok I think it is an effete quality for people to avoid suffering and do what is easy. Examples would be such as , I don't like the Pope I am leaving, I can read I am starting my own Church, blah blah blah.

A real man holds the line and doesn't blink, doesn't fail. At my confirmation I became part of the Church Militant, I am a solider for Christ and I will not leave my post.

Non servium is the cry of Satan and I am not his ally.

747Ag said:

---

This thread reminds me of the old days in R&P.

---

You should stop by over there...things are getting interesting again...

Quote:

---

The Church of Rome has made mistakes, feel better. It is still the seat of Peter and the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. All Churches are subject to God, but there is a structure and a hierarchy, if your not a fan of that you may not like Heaven because there certainly is a hierarchy there. The bible pattern is a Kingdom patterned out of the David Kingdom, which Jesus is a heir. There you have the King (Christ) with his Queen to his right, who was his mother (Mary) he had a chief Stuart (Peter), who held the keys(authority) in his stead when he was away.

I haven't felt a need to address the OP, yes Francis was being snide. So what so have all the good and righteous poster on F16 pointing out how bad he is and Catholics in general. Was it sinful, probably and he should examine his conscious and take it to confession- yes the Pope is a sinner and goes to confession like the rest of us.

I do confront the church leadership, I do not brag about it on a forum especially with non-Catholics, you don't disagree with the family in public. St. Paul give a great example in scripture when he rightly approached Peter.

My Vasectomy really???

Ok I think it is an effete quality for people to avoid suffering and do what is easy. Examples would be such as , I don't like the Pope I am leaving, I can read I am starting my own Church, blah blah blah.

A real man holds the line and doesn't blink, doesn't fail. At my confirmation I became part of the Church Militant, I am a solider for Christ and I will not leave my post.

Non servium is the cry of Satan and I am not his ally.

---

That was fun. Let's do it again sometime.



Gotta make burgers.