I was raised in the Catholic Church by parents who loved the Catholic faith. We went to church every Sunday, I received all of my sacraments...but I never really considered myself a true Christian, and in fact, I didn’t even know if I believed in God at all. I didn’t like going to Mass because I didn’t get anything out of it…I was there to worship a God that I didn’t even know was real…and a lot of things in the account of the story of Creation and the earth itself contradicted what I was taught in public school science. Religion seemed silly and a waste of time.
Through the years I dabbled in different ideas, mainly new age, law-of-attraction type things...but was never convinced of God The Father or Jesus.
In 2016 my conversion to Christ started, happening in a most unconventional way. It is a very long story, but I will suffice it to say that I realized that pure evil exists in this world, and it exists throughout the highest levels of government, Hollywood, the pharmaceutical industry, and many other powerful organizations.
The information and revelations of the world were coming at me like a flood, and I had an encounter with Who I believe was The Holy Spirit. I immediately experienced a radical internal transformation of heart and deep sorrow for my sins...and I had a sense of "knowing" (this is the only way I can describe it)..that God The Father is real. Jesus is real. The Bible is real and true.
I knew everything that I’d ever been so confused about with the Bible contradicting “science” about evolution and the age of the earth etc…actually made so much sense and was crystal clear if we just took the Bible at it’s Word.
I had also heard recently that the Scriptures say Satan is the "prince of this world" - and in my “knowing” I instantly saw this. I realized that he had his hand on everything in this world, and EVERYTHING in this world (education, hollywood, modernism, feminism, politics) is evil disguised as good and in place to not only deter people from the truth about God The Father and Jesus - but to be an abomination to Them.
I ordered my first Bible and started to read the New Testament fervently, and started to surround myself with people who I felt were more spiritually advanced than I was. I was hungry for truth.
I joined a group on Facebook for Christian women, and there was a lady who would do teachings in this group that were very convincing. One thing that was really emphasized in teachings, and from other ladies in this group, was adherence to the Torah and Mosaic law. Being hungry for truth and being a babe in my journey, I had no reason to doubt what they were saying was true. At the time I honestly didn't even realize there were so many different sects of Christianity.
I started to research the Mosaic law and my family started celebrating the biblical feasts. I started covering my head (which I still do when I pray) and I started calling Jesus “Yeshua” and God “Yawheh” or “Yehovah” or “Yah”…even today, I don’t think there is anything wrong with calling Them those names, but back then, I believed to call them anything other than those names would be a great sin and a disgrace.
I started speaking out against the Catholic Church, very unmercifully.
Praying to “Saints” (we are all saints)!!!
“Worship” of Mary.
Statues.
The wafer-bread Jesus.
The hierarchy in the Church.
The Pope.
Calling Priests, “Father”.
Confession to a Priest when I could go directly to God.
“Pagan” holidays.
My perception of the Church and what I thought I knew about it disgusted me. I was convinced that it was the Great Whore of Babylon, and I prayed fervently every day for God to open the door for my family to leave Catholicism. I knew that there was nothing I could do in and of myself to change their minds - it had to be Him moving in their lives.
I continued living adherent to Torah “as much as I could” from 2016 to the beginning of 2019, when there were a couple of things that happened all around the same time.
First - I began to doubt that adhering to Torah was correct. I began to see adhering to the Mosaic law as a very slippery slope to self-righteousness, and in reading Paul’s letters, I just could not reconcile it (putting myself under the law).
I could see how some verses could be taken and interpreted as “you have to follow the law as best you can’”, but overall that was not the message I was getting. It seemed to me that this movement emphasizes Jesus is pointing to God’s perfect law, instead of God’s law pointing to how we need His perfect Son, a savior. When I saw it that way, it clicked in me that this interpretation of scripture really seemed terribly wrong.
Second - I started to notice the error of SOLA SCRIPTURA. I was constantly - CONSTANTLY seeing debates from Christians who interpreted the Bible on their own, ALL claiming to be led by The Holy Spirit - but yet, they ALL had different interpretations of what it said.
And the issues they were speaking on with seeming authority, were very serious. Such as, in what form and Name do you get baptized? Do you need to speak in tongues to know you’ve been baptized by the Holy Spirit, and therefore, saved? Is Yoga demonic? Should we be celebrating holidays such as Christmas and Easter? Are we justified by our works, or by faith alone? Should we tithe?
If you didn’t agree with someone’s interpretation, then it was because you just weren’t studying it correctly…(but I thought The Holy Spirit was leading)???
There was SO MUCH CONDEMNATION amongst all of these different sects, and I had friends who are unbelievers - who wanted to believe…messaging me on a regular basis and telling me that they couldn’t become Christian looking at this hypocrisy and mess. It just wasn’t right.
If The Holy Spirit was truly leading people in the scripture interpretation, then there would be no divisions in the Church, because The Holy Spirit cannot lie.
This division and confusion also took a toll on my spirit. All that I wanted to do was what was right in the eyes of God, but I didn’t know 100% what that was, and I didn't see how anyone could. And it TERRIFIED me to claim that The Holy Spirit was leading ME in truth as compared to someone else who was claiming the same thing, but interpreted it differently.
Third - God finally opened the door for me to have a conversation with my family about Catholicism. My aunt - who was raised Catholic, became Protestant for 20 years, and then went back to Catholicism, added me to one of her Catholic Facebook groups, knowing how much I despised that religion. I was initially frustrated with her trying to convert me...But again, I saw it as the door being opened for discussion.
I didn’t understand how she could, knowing her Bible (and she really knew her Bible), go into the Catholic Church. I honestly believed that Catholics were only Catholic because they hadn’t read a Bible to learn the errors in their way.
We went back and forth a little bit debating scripture... and I eventually told her I would research with an open mind and asked for recommendations on where I could begin studying (I was fully intending to disprove that The Catholic Church is THE Church Jesus started).
She recommended starting with a book called Rome Sweet Home. It’s the story of a Presbyterian pastor (who was also very anti-Catholic at one time) - who ended up becoming Catholic. It was very interesting and actually gave pretty good defense of the things that I believed were blasphemous about the Catholic teachings. But still - to me, this was one man’s journey and this was not a primary source. And I really needed to see primary sources about what exactly was going on during those early years when the church was forming.
So, I quickly found out that there were historical writings from disciples of the original twelve Apostles, and other early church fathers and martyrs...#GoldMine
The main ones I read were from:
Ignatius - who was a disciple of the Apostle John, and the third bishop of Antioch. He was a martyr for the Church.
Polycarp, who was also a disciple of the Apostle John and bishop of the church at Smyrna. He was a martyr for the Church.
Irenaeus, who was a disciple of Polycarp and priest at the Church of Lyons. He was a martyr for the Church.
Justin Martyr, who was a Christian convert in 130 AD, a Christian apologist and Martyr in the year 165 AD.
And Clement of Rome, who was ordained by Peter himself. He was a martyr for the Church.
SO… you might have noticed that I said the words “bishops” and priests” right then.
Right away - one of the first things I learned (that I always believed was made up by the Catholic Church after it came into being in 300AD or so, after “Constantine made Christianity legal and combined it with Paganism”) - was that there has always been hierarchy in the church, that it was established and in place by the will of God, and that this is even in the Bible (somehow never saw it with my anti-Catholic lenses).
This is initially established when Jesus changes Peter’s name from Simon to Peter, and Jesus gives him the Keys to the Kingdom and the power to bind and to loose.
There is an excellent video on this called “PETER, THE ROCK, THE KEYS, and THE CHAIR” - that I HIGHLY, HIGHLY recommend! (Linked Below). Steve Ray, a former Baptist and convert to the Catholic Church will literally blow your mind and make you see the Bible and the Apostolic Office in a whole new way.
And this video by Brandt Pitre goes over the Jewish roots of the Papacy. Also highly recommend!
In my reading of the writings of the early church fathers, it didn't take me long to learn that when the Apostles went out to preach and spread the gospel, they appointed elders at each of the churches, and these elders had authority given by Christ to shepherd His flock, meaning, when people were baptized, they came into an actual church institution under the authority of these bishops. AND...that this office of bishop or presbyter was always entrusted to someone else to preserve the deposit of faith when a former elder could no longer carry out his duty.
The first time we see this Apostolic succession in the Bible is in ACTS, after Judas has killed himself. The other eleven Apostles come together to appoint someone else to take his place... and we see it had to be someone who had been with Jesus during His whole ministry, so as to know very well the teachings which He SPOKE.
We also see this office and its authority in the following verses:
John 21:15-17 says: So when they had finished breakfast, Jesus *said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me more than these?” He *said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He *said to him, “Tend My lambs.” 16 He *said to him again a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me?” He *said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He *said to him, “Shepherd My sheep.” 17 He *said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love Me?” Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, “Do you love Me?” And he said to Him, “Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You.” Jesus *said to him, “Tend My sheep”
1 Timothy 3:1-15
1 It is a trustworthy statement: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, it is a fine work he desires to do.
2 An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,
4 He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity
5 (but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?),
6 and not a new convert, so * that he will not become conceited and fall into the condemnation incurred by the devil.
7 And he must have a good reputation with those outside the church, so that he will not fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.
8 Deacons likewise must be men of dignity, not double-tongued, or addicted to much wine or fond of sordid gain,
9 but holding to the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience.
12 Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households.
13 For those who have served well as deacons obtain for themselves a high standing and great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.
15 but in case I am delayed, I write so that you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth...
I had NEVER seen that verse before about the CHURCH being the foundation of TRUTH.
Acts 20:28 (this is to elders of the church)
Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood.
1 Titus 7:-9 an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, 8 but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. 9 He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.
Titus 1:5 This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you
1 Peter 5:2 Shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly;
Hebrews 13:17 Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account.
Also see - 1 Timothy 4:14, James 5:14, 1 Thesallonians 5:12, Ephesians 4:11-14, Acts 15.
...Moving on to the APOSTOLIC FATHERS, who put to rest ANY DOUBT WHATSOEVER of this God-given authority that we are supposed to submit to, and an actual Church Institution …
The First Epistle of Clement To The Corinthians (176-183) The apostles have preached the Gospel to us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ [has done sol from God. Christ therefore was sent forth by God, and the apostles by Christ. Both these appointments, then, were made in an orderly way, according to the will of God. Having therefore received their orders, and being fully assured by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and established in the word of God, with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth proclaiming that the kingdom of God was at hand. And thus preaching through countries and cities, they appointed the first-fruits [of their labours], having first proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons of those who should afterwards believe. Nor was this any new thing, since indeed many ages before it was written concerning bishops and deacons. For thus saith the Scripture in a certain place, "I will appoint their bishops in righteousness, and their deacons in faith.”
187 -189 Our apostles also knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, and there would be strife on account of the office of the episcopate. For this reason, therefore, inasmuch as they had obtained a perfect fore-knowledge of this, they appointed those [ministers] already mentioned, and afterwards gave instructions, that when these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed them in their ministry
Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 4:33:8 (A.D. 180)... Imagine I've BOLD TEXTED this whole quote
True knowledge is [that which consists in] the doctrine of the apostles, and the ancient constitution of the Church throughout all the world, and the distinctive manifestation of the body of Christ according to the successions of the bishops, by which they have handed down that Church which exists in every place, and has come even unto us, being guarded and preserved without any forging of Scriptures, by a very complete system of doctrine, and neither receiving addition nor [suffering] curtailment [in the truths which she believes]; and [it consists in] reading [the word of God] without falsification, and a lawful and diligent exposition in harmony with the Scriptures, both without danger and without blasphemy; and [above all, it consists in] the pre-eminent gift of love, which is more precious than knowledge, more glorious than prophecy, and which excels all the other gifts [of God].”
But, again, when we refer them to that tradition which originates from the apostles, [and] which is preserved by means of the succession of presbyters in the Churches, they object to tradition, saying that they themselves are wiser not merely than the presbyters, but even than the apostles, because they have discovered the unadulterated truth.
Epistle of Ignatius to Ephesians : For even Jesus Christ, our inseparable life, is sent by the will of the Father; as the bishops, appointed unto the utmost bounds of the earth, are by the will of Jesus Christ. Wherefore it will become you to run together according to the will of your bishop, as also ye do.For your famous presbytery, worthy of God, is fitted as exactly to the bishop, as the strings are to the harp. For if the prayers of one or two be of such force, as we are told; how much more powerful shall that of the bishop and the whole church be?
He therefore that does not come together in the same place with it, is proud, and has already condemned himself. For it is written, God resisteth the proud. Let us take heed therefore, that we do not set ourselves against the bishop, that we may be subject to God.
The more any one sees his bishop silent, the more let him revere him. For whomsoever the master of the house sends to be over his own household, we ought in like manner to receive him, as we would do him that sent him. It is therefore evident that we ought to look upon the bishop, even as we would do upon the Lord himself.
Ignatius also repeats subjection to bishops as the will of God in his Epistle to Trallians, his Epistle to the Smyrneans, to the Philadephians, to the Phillippians.
So here, we have a clearly established hierarchy in the church that did not come into being after Constantine converted...but it was always there, and there by the will of God, at that.
We also have clear writings on APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION…meaning, church elders appointed new church elders whenever one elder could no longer carry out his obligation to shepherd the flock of Christ- they would lay hands on the new successor and pray for them to ordain him in his ministry, and this tradition has been carried on down from the time of Peter, to the current POPE today.
Ok...so there are elders. So what? WHERE IS THE POPE IN THE BIBLE?
Jesus took His disciples to Cesaerea Phillippi where he renamed Simon, Peter (Peter means “ROCK”) and gave him the “KEYS TO THE KINGDOM”.
I used to believe this meant we ALL had the keys to the kingdom, the keys being the gospel. However, that is not what was believed by the early church, and that is not how a first-century Jew would have understood it.
The following excerpt is not my own words - and I saved it from a site that I would LOVE to credit - but I didn’t save the site…if you’re reading it and know, please tell me so I can properly credit, thank you!
“In ancient times, a king might choose a second in command (known as the royal steward or prime minister) who LITERALLY wore a large key as a symbol of his office and who SPOKE WITH THE AUTHORITY OF THE KING
The prophet Isaiah confirms this:
Isaiah 22:20-22
"In that day I will summon my servant, Eliakim son of Hilkiah. I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a FATHER to those who live in Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.”
In the passage above, God is speaking, and He confirms the existence of the office, the key, and the continuation of the office despite the change of office holder. In other words, the office of the royal steward continued even when the man who held the office died or was replaced by someone else. God Himself passes the key from one steward to the next.
In the New Testament, we learn that Jesus inherits the throne of his father, David.
Luke 1:31–33
And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there will be no end.
We also read the following:
Matthew 16:13-19
When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?” Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
The passage quoted above from Matthew tells us that Jesus named Peter as His royal steward and gave him the “keys to the kingdom of heaven" as the symbol of his authority to speak in His name. Since Jesus is an eternal king, the office of royal steward in His kingdom will never end. Peter died as a martyr as Jesus foretold, but the successors of Peter have taken his place in the perpetual office that Jesus established in His royal court.
In addition to the reference to a key or keys, note the following parallels:
"What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.” (Is. 22:22)
"Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” (Mt. 16:19)
Jesus specifically referenced the passage from Isaiah when He appointed Peter, and Peter received authority from Jesus to speak universally in His name.”
Early church fathers confirm they knew of the primacy of Peter ...(https://www.churchfathers.org/peters-primacy)…
CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA “The blessed Peter, the chosen, the preeminent, the first among the disciples, for whom alone with himself the Savior paid the tribute [Matt. 17:27], quickly gasped and understood their meaning. And what does he say? ‘Behold, we have left all and have followed you’ [Matt. 19:27; Mark 10:28]” (Who Is the Rich Man That Is Saved? 21:3–5 [A.D. 200]).
TERTULLIAN “For though you think that heaven is still shut up, remember that the Lord left the keys of it to Peter here, and through him to the Church, which keys everyone will carry with him if he has been questioned and made a confession [of faith]” (Antidote Against the Scorpion 10 [A.D. 211]).
“The Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. . . . Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; and I will give to you the keys, not to the Church” (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).
THE LETTER OF CLEMENT TO JAMES “Be it known to you, my lord, that Simon [Peter], who, for the sake of the true faith, and the most sure foundation of his doctrine, was set apart to be the foundation of the Church, and for this end was by Jesus himself, with his truthful mouth, named Peter, the first fruits of our Lord, the first of the apostles; to whom first the Father revealed the Son; whom the Christ, with good reason, blessed; the called, and elect” (Letter of Clement to James 2 [A.D. 221]).
ORIGEN “If we were to attend carefully to the Gospels, we should also find, in relation to those things which seem to be common to Peter . . . a great difference and a preeminence in the things [Jesus] said to Peter, compared with the second class [of apostles]. For it is no small difference that Peter received the keys not of one heaven but of more, and in order that whatsoever things he binds on earth may be bound not in one heaven but in them all, as compared with the many who bind on earth and loose on earth, so that these things are bound and loosed not in [all] the heavens, as in the case of Peter, but in one only; for they do not reach so high a stage with power as Peter to bind and loose in all the heavens” (Commentary on Matthew 13:31 [A.D. 248]).
CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE “The Lord says to Peter: ‘I say to you,’ he says, ‘that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church.’ . . . On him [Peter] he builds the Church, and to him he gives the command to feed the sheep [John 21:17], and although he assigns a like power to all the apostles, yet he founded a single chair [cathedra], and he established by his own authority a source and an intrinsic reason for that unity. Indeed, the others were that also which Peter was [i.e., apostles], but a primacy is given to Peter, whereby it is made clear that there is but one Church and one chair. So too, all [the apostles] are shepherds, and the flock is shown to be one, fed by all the apostles in single-minded accord. If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; 1st edition [A.D. 251]).
CYRIL OF JERUSALEM “The Lord is loving toward men, swift to pardon but slow to punish. Let no man despair of his own salvation. Peter, the first and foremost of the apostles, denied the Lord three times before a little servant girl, but he repented and wept bitterly” (Catechetical Lectures 2:19 [A.D. 350]).
“[Simon Magus] so deceived the city of Rome that Claudius erected a statue of him. . . . While the error was extending itself, Peter and Paul arrived, a noble pair and the rulers of the Church, and they set the error aright. . . . [T]hey launched the weapon of their like-mindedness in prayer against the Magus, and struck him down to earth. It was marvelous enough, and yet no marvel at all, for Peter was there—he that carries about the keys of heaven [Matt. 16:19]” (ibid., 6:14).
“In the power of the same Holy Spirit, Peter, both the chief of the apostles and the keeper of the keys of the kingdom of heaven, in the name of Christ healed Aeneas the paralytic at Lydda, which is now called Diospolis [Acts 9:32–34]” (ibid., 17:27).
EPHRAIM THE SYRIAN “[Jesus said:] Simon, my follower, I have made you the foundation of the holy Church. I betimes called you Peter, because you will support all its buildings. You are the inspector of those who will build on Earth a Church for me. If they should wish to build what is false, you, the foundation, will condemn them. You are the head of the fountain from which my teaching flows; you are the chief of my disciples. Through you I will give drink to all peoples. Yours is that life-giving sweetness which I dispense. I have chosen you to be, as it were, the firstborn in my institution so that, as the heir, you may be executor of my treasures. I have given you the keys of my kingdom. Behold, I have given you authority over all my treasures” (Homilies 4:1 [A.D. 351]).
JOHN CHRYSOSTOM “Jesus said to Peter, ‘Feed my sheep’. Why does He pass over the others and speak of the sheep to Peter? He was the chosen one of the Apostles, the mouth of the disciples, the head of the choir. For this reason Paul went up to see him rather than the others. And also to show him that he must have confidence now that his denial had been purged away. He entrusts him with the rule [prostasia] over the brethren. . . . If anyone should say ‘Why then was it James who received the See of Jerusalem?’, I should reply that He made Peter the teacher not of that see but of the whole world.” (Homilies on John, 88.1).
AMBROSE OF MILAN “[Christ] made answer: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church. . . .’ Could he not, then, strengthen the faith of the man to whom, acting on his own authority, he gave the kingdom, whom he called the rock, thereby declaring him to be the foundation of the Church [Matt. 16:18]?” (The Faith 4:5 [A.D. 379]).
POPE DAMASUS I “Likewise it is decreed . . . that it ought to be announced that . . . the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . . ’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither stain nor blemish nor anything like it” (Decree of Damasus 3 [A.D. 382]).
JEROME ‘But,’ you [Jovinian] will say, ‘it was on Peter that the Church was founded’ [Matt. 16:18]. Well . . . one among the twelve is chosen to be their head in order to remove any occasion for division” (Against Jovinian 1:26 [A.D. 393]).
“Simon Peter, the son of John, from the village of Bethsaida in the province of Galilee, brother of Andrew the apostle, and himself chief of the apostles, after having been bishop of the church of Antioch and having preached to the Dispersion . . . pushed on to Rome in the second year of Claudius to overthrow Simon Magus, and held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years until the last, that is the fourteenth, year of Nero. At his hands he received the crown of martyrdom being nailed to the cross with his head towards the ground and his feet raised on high, asserting that he was unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Lord” (Lives of Illustrious Men 1 [A.D. 396]).
POPE INNOCENT I “In seeking the things of God . . . you have acknowledged that judgment is to be referred to us [the pope], and have shown that you know that is owed to the Apostolic See [Rome], if all of us placed in this position are to desire to follow the apostle himself [Peter] from whom the episcopate itself and the total authority of this name have emerged” (Letters 29:1 [A.D. 408]).
AUGUSTINE “Among these [apostles] Peter alone almost everywhere deserved to represent the whole Church. Because of that representation of the Church, which only he bore, he deserved to hear ‘I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven’” (Sermons 295:2 [A.D. 411]).
“Some things are said which seem to relate especially to the apostle Peter, and yet are not clear in their meaning unless referred to the Church, which he is acknowledged to have represented in a figure on account of the primacy which he bore among the disciples. Such is ‘I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven,’ and other similar passages. In the same way, Judas represents those Jews who were Christ’s enemies” (Commentary on Psalm 108 1 [A.D. 415]).
“Who is ignorant that the first of the apostles is the most blessed Peter?” (Commentary on John 56:1 [A.D. 416]).
COUNCIL OF EPHESUS “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 blessednesses is not ignorant that the head of the whole faith, the head of the apostles, is blessed Peter the apostle’” (Acts of the Council, session 2 [A.D. 431]).
“Philip, the presbyter and legate of the Apostolic See [Rome] said: ‘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’” (ibid., session 3).
POPE LEO I “Our Lord Jesus Christ . . . has placed the principal charge on the blessed Peter, chief of all the apostles, and from him as from the head wishes his gifts to flow to all the body, so that anyone who dares to secede from Peter’s solid rock may understand that he has no part or lot in the divine mystery. He wished him who had been received into partnership in his undivided unity to be named what he himself was, when he said: ‘You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church’ [Matt. 16:18], that the building of the eternal temple might rest on Peter’s solid rock, strengthening his Church so surely that neither could human rashness assail it nor the gates of hell prevail against it” (Letters 10:1 [A.D. 445).
“Our Lord Jesus Christ . . . established the worship belonging to the divine [Christian] religion. . . . But the Lord desired that the sacrament of this gift should pertain to all the apostles in such a way that it might be found principally in the most blessed Peter, the highest of all the apostles. And he wanted his gifts to flow into the entire body from Peter himself, as if from the head, in such a way that anyone who had dared to separate himself from the solidarity of Peter would realize that he was himself no longer a sharer in the divine mystery” (ibid., 10:2–3).
“Although bishops have a common dignity, they are not all of the same rank. Even among the most blessed apostles, though they were alike in honor, there was a certain distinction of power. All were equal in being chosen, but it was given to one to be preeminent over the others. . . . [So today through the bishops] the care of the universal Church would converge in the one See of Peter, and nothing should ever be at odds with this head” (ibid., 14:11).
So. I'd clearly been wrong about the hierarchy in the church. I'd been wrong about their authority. I'd been wrong about there being an actual church institution. I'd been wrong about the Pope.
I moved hesitantly onto the next subject - where I tackled the claims of the perpetual virginity of Mary, and her Queenship in Heaven.
I found very quickly that her perpetual virginity was never really questioned, ever, AT ALL during the first 1500 years of the Church’s existence. Even Martin Luther believed that Mary was a perpetual virgin, so this was pretty easy Protestant claim to debunk.
I also found out that her Queenship in Heaven was never questioned..and it’s 100% Biblical as well. Again, we look to the Old Testament and the Davidic Kingdom to see this in proper context.
“In ancient Israel, it was the king’s mother who reigned as queen, not the king’s wife. Most kings in this period had large harems. King Solomon, for example, had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:3). It would have been impossible to bestow the queenship on 1,000 women! Yet, since each king had only one mother, the queenship was typically given to her.
The queen mother was given the title “Great Lady,” and we can see her importance in a number of passages from the Old Testament. For example, when 1 & 2 Kings introduces a new king in the Kingdom of Judah, it almost always mentions the name of the king’s mother alongside her royal son. The queen mother also is portrayed as a preeminent member of the royal court, wearing a crown on her head (Jeremiah 13:18) and heading the list of palace officials in the kingdom (2 Kings 24:12-15). Furthermore, the queen mother had a real share in her son’s reign, helping in his mission to shepherd the people (Jer. 13:18-20) and serving as a trusted counselor (see Proverbs 31). But most of all, the queen mother served as an advocate for the people, hearing their petitions and presenting them to the king.
One Biblical woman who illustrates the queen mother’s royal prerogatives most clearly is Bathsheba. Consider what happens when Bathsheba transitions from her role as the wife of king David to her role as queen mother after her son Solomon assumes the throne.
When her husband David still reigns as king, Bathsheba enters the royal chamber, and she approaches him like most subjects in the kingdom would: she bows with her face to the ground, pays him homage and says “May my lord King David live forever!” (1 Kings 1:16, 31).
However, after David dies and her son Solomon becomes king, she is treated very differently, for now she is queen mother. Right away a man from the kingdom recognizes Bathsheba’s role as advocate and asks her to take a petition to the king. Expressing great confidence in her powerful intercession, he says: “Ask, he will not refuse you” (1 Kings 2:17).
Bathsheba agrees to go to the king. But this time, when she enters the royal chamber, she finds herself receiving royal treatment. The king stands up to greet her and bows before her. He then orders a throne to be brought in for her, and she is seated at his right hand, the position of authority (1 Kings 2:19-20; cf. Ps. 110:1). Nowhere else in Scripture does the king honor someone as much as Solomon honors the queen mother in this scene.
Even more remarkable is how King Solomon affirms his commitment to the queen mother’s intercessory role in the kingdom. After Bathsheba mentions she has a request to present, Solomon responds, “Make your request, my mother, for I will not refuse you” (1 Kings 2:20).
All this serves as important background for understanding how the New Testament portrays Mary, the mother of the King Jesus, as queen mother in Christ’s Kingdom.
For example, in Luke’s account of the annunciation, the angel Gabriel told Mary she would become the mother of a royal Son who would fulfill Old Testament hopes about the Messiah’s everlasting kingdom (e.g., 2 Sam. 7; Ps. 2, 72, 89). The angel said: “And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there will be no end” (Lk. 1:31-33).
If ancient Jews heard of a woman giving birth to a new Davidic king, they would easily conclude she was a queen mother. And that’s exactly the vocation Mary receives at the Annunciation. She is the royal mother of the king who will sit on “the throne of his father David” and of whose “kingdom there will be no end.”
Mary’s royal office is made even more explicit in the next scene of Luke’s Gospel, the Visitation. Here, Elizabeth greets Mary saying, “Why is this granted me, that the mother ofmy Lord should come to me?” (Lk. 1:43).
This title “mother of my Lord” is packed with great queenly significance. In the royal court language of the ancient Near East, the title “my Lord” was used to address the king (see 2 Sam. 24:21). Therefore, “mother of my lord” would mean, “mother of the king,” or in other words, queen mother. In using this particular title to address Mary, Elizabeth recognizes the great dignity of Mary’s royal office.
Another passage that sheds light on Mary’s queenship is in the Book of Revelation, chapter twelve: “And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; she was with child…” (Rev. 12:1-2).
Who is this mysterious woman of the Apocalypse? While some interpreters suggest the woman symbolizes Israel or the Church, she also can easily be seen as Mary, the mother of Jesus. Indeed, Revelation 12 portrays this woman as the mother of the messiah. In Revelation 12:5 the woman’s son is attacked by the devil, taken up to heaven, seated on a throne, and destined to “rule all the nations with a rod of iron,” alluding to a prophecy about the messiah-king (Ps. 2:9). If the child is Christ—the messiah—then who is this mother of Christ? Clearly, the woman would be seen as Mary.
Therefore, Mary appears in Revelation 12 with royal splendor, reigning in heaven as the mother of the king. Like the queen mothers of old, she wears a crown on her head, expressing her royal office. The twelve stars on her crown symbolize her reign in the Church, which was born from the 12 tribes of Israel and is founded on the 12 apostles. She is clothed with the sun, radiating God’s glory, and even the moon being under her feet points to her royal authority—since “under the feet” imagery symbolized royal power and defeat of one’s enemies (e.g., Psalm 8:6; 110:1).
Just like the “Great Lady” of the Davidic kingdom, Mary continues to serve as an advocate for the people in God’s kingdom today. As queen mother, she is the most powerful intercessor in Christ’s kingdom, presenting our needs before His throne. Therefore, let us approach our queen mother with confidence, knowing that she faithfully carries our petitions to her royal Son, who responds to her as Solomon did to Bathsheba, saying: “I will not refuse you” (1 Kings 2:20).”
- From the website
Again...I had to eat my words....I was terribly ignorant and wrong.
The last subject I researched was the claim of “true presence” of Jesus in the Eucharist.
Again, I found that this belief was never debated among the early church - they TRULY believed that the bread they broke during mass was TRUE flesh of Jesus and the wine they drank became the TRUE blood. I found that this is both biblical, and in early church writings as well.
Jesus says in John 6: 48-65 I am the bread of life. 49“Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50“This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51“I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.”
52Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” 53So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. 54“He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55“For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56“He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. 57“As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me. 58“This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever.”
59These things He said in the synagogue as He taught in Capernaum.
60Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, “This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?” 61But Jesus, conscious that His disciples grumbled at this, said to them, “Does this cause you to stumble? 62“What then if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before? 63“It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. 64“But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. 65And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”
66As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. 67So Jesus said to the twelve, “You do not want to go away also, do you?” 68Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. 69“We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.”
So here - Jesus actually has disciples leave Him because they don’t want to believe this teaching. He doesn’t tell them it is a parable. He repeats himself..."Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves." When you go to the original text - the word “eat” literally means “to knaw, or chew”.
Further, Paul warns in his letters to the Corinthians that people we getting sick and dying for not properly discerning the Eucharist as the Body and Blood of Christ, or profaning it.
1 Corinthians 10:16-17
Is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing in the blood of Christ? Is not the bread which we break a sharing in the body of Christ? Since there is one bread, we who are many are one body; for we all partake of the one bread.
1 Corinthians 10:21-22
You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? We are not stronger than He, are we?
1 Corinthians 11:20-34
Therefore when you meet together, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper, for in your eating each one takes his own supper first; and one is hungry and another is drunk. What! Do you not have houses in which to eat and drink? Or do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you? In this I will not praise you.read more.
For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep.
In the Epistile of Ignatius to Smyrnaeans (speaking on gnostic heretics) he says : Let no man deceive himself. Both the things which are in heaven, and the glorious angels, and rulers, both visible and invisible, if they believe not in the blood of Christ, shall, in consequence, incur condemnation. “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” Matthew 19:12 Let not [high] place puff any one up: for that which is worth all is faith and love, to which nothing is to be preferred. But consider those who are of a different opinion with respect to the grace of Christ which has come unto us, how opposed they are to the will of God. They have no regard for love; no care for the widow, or the orphan, or the oppressed; of the bond, or of the free; of the hungry, or of the thirsty.
They (heretics) abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes.
Ignatius of Antioch
“I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ . . . and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible” (Letter to the Romans 7:3 [A.D. 110]).
“Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . 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 that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1 [A.D. 110]).
Justin Martyr
“For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus” (First Apology 66 [A.D. 151]).
Irenaeus
“If the Lord were from other than the Father, how could he rightly take bread, which is of the same creation as our own, and confess it to be his body and affirm that the mixture in the cup is his blood?” (Against Heresies 4:33–32 [A.D. 189]).
“He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies. When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life—flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord, and is in fact a member of him?” (ibid., 5:2).
Tertullian
“[T]here is not a soul that can at all procure salvation, except it believe whilst it is in the flesh, so true is it that the flesh is the very condition on which salvation hinges. And since the soul is, in consequence of its salvation, chosen to the service of God, it is the flesh which actually renders it capable of such service. The flesh, indeed, is washed [in baptism], in order that the soul may be cleansed . . . the flesh is shadowed with the imposition of hands [in confirmation], that the soul also may be illuminated by the Spirit; the flesh feeds [in the Eucharist] on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may be filled with God” (The Resurrection of the Dead 8 [A.D. 210]).
Hippolytus
“‘And she [Wisdom] has furnished her table’ [Prov. 9:2] . . . refers to his [Christ’s] honored and undefiled body and blood, which day by day are administered and offered sacrificially at the spiritual divine table, as a memorial of that first and ever-memorable table of the spiritual divine supper [i.e., the Last Supper]” (Fragment from Commentary on Proverbs [A.D. 217]).
Origen
“Formerly, in an obscure way, there was manna for food; now, however, in full view, there is the true food, the flesh of the Word of God, as he himself says: ‘My flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink’ [John 6:55]” (Homilies on Numbers 7:2 [A.D. 248]).
Cyprian of Carthage
“He [Paul] threatens, moreover, the stubborn and forward, and denounces them, saying, ‘Whosoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily, is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord’ [1 Cor. 11:27]. All these warnings being scorned and contemned—[lapsed Christians will often take Communion] before their sin is expiated, before confession has been made of their crime, before their conscience has been purged by sacrifice and by the hand of the priest, before the offense of an angry and threatening Lord has been appeased, [and so] violence is done to his body and blood; and they sin now against their Lord more with their hand and mouth than when they denied their Lord” (The Lapsed 15–16 [A.D. 251]).
Aphraahat the Persian Sage
“After having spoken thus [at the Last Supper], the Lord rose up from the place where he had made the Passover and had given his body as food and his blood as drink, and he went with his disciples to the place where he was to be arrested. But he ate of his own body and drank of his own blood, while he was pondering on the dead. With his own hands the Lord presented his own body to be eaten, and before he was crucified he gave his blood as drink” (Treatises 12:6 [A.D. 340]).
Cyril of Jerusalem
“The bread and the wine of the Eucharist before the holy invocation of the adorable Trinity were simple bread and wine, but the invocation having been made, the bread becomes the body of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ” (Catechetical Lectures 19:7 [A.D. 350]).
“Do not, therefore, regard the bread and wine as simply that; for they are, according to the Master’s declaration, the body and blood of Christ. Even though the senses suggest to you the other, let faith make you firm. Do not judge in this matter by taste, but be fully assured by the faith, not doubting that you have been deemed worthy of the body and blood of Christ. . . . [Since you are] fully convinced that the apparent bread is not bread, even though it is sensible to the taste, but the body of Christ, and that the apparent wine is not wine, even though the taste would have it so, . . . partake of that bread as something spiritual, and put a cheerful face on your soul” (ibid., 22:6, 9).
Ambrose of Milan
“Perhaps you may be saying, ‘I see something else; how can you assure me that I am receiving the body of Christ?’ It but remains for us to prove it. And how many are the examples we might use! . . . Christ is in that sacrament, because it is the body of Christ” (The Mysteries 9:50, 58 [A.D. 390]).
Theodore of Mopsuestia
“When [Christ] gave the bread he did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my body,’ but, ‘This is my body.’ In the same way, when he gave the cup of his blood he did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my blood,’ but, ‘This is my blood’; for he wanted us to look upon the [Eucharistic elements] after their reception of grace and the coming of the Holy Spirit not according to their nature, but receive them as they are, the body and blood of our Lord. We ought . . . not regard [the elements] merely as bread and cup, but as the body and blood of the Lord, into which they were transformed by the descent of the Holy Spirit” (Catechetical Homilies 5:1 [A.D. 405]).
Augustine
“Christ was carried in his own hands when, referring to his own body, he said, ‘This is my body’ [Matt. 26:26]. For he carried that body in his hands” (Explanations of the Psalms 33:1:10 [A.D. 405]).
“I promised you [new Christians], who have now been baptized, a sermon in which I would explain the sacrament of the Lord’s Table. . . . That bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the body of Christ. That chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the blood of Christ” (Sermons 227 [A.D. 411]).
“What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread is the body of Christ and the chalice is the blood of Christ” (ibid., 272).
Council of Ephesus
“We will necessarily add this also. Proclaiming the death, according to the flesh, of the only-begotten Son of God, that is Jesus Christ, confessing his resurrection from the dead, and his ascension into heaven, we offer the unbloody sacrifice in the churches, and so go on to the mystical thanksgivings, and are sanctified, having received his holy flesh and the precious blood of Christ the Savior of us all. And not as common flesh do we receive it . . . but as truly the life-giving and very flesh of the Word himself.” (Session 1, Letter of Cyril to Nestorius [A.D. 431]).
Francis Chan - one of my favorite evangelical pastors - recently did an incredible and beautiful sermon on the true presence in the Eucharist , and the communion of Saints. See it linked below.
And this video about the Jewish roots of the Eucharist is SO GOOD. Brandt Pitre knocks it out of the park!!! (Think "Bread of the Presence" in the OT...and the original Passover dinner)...Highly recommend!
So now, everything I had tried to debunk about the Catholic Church - I actually found out was true.
There was always a hierarchy, and it was there in place by the will of God.
Mary was always believed to be a perpetual virgin and the Queen of Heaven.
And finally, the early church believed in the literal, true presence of Jesus in the Eucharist and those that didn’t, were considered heretics.
Just as Israel had been a visible, physical body who shared one faith...so was the Church that Christ started supposed to be.
Once I got to this point, my mind was blown…but when I shared my findings with my husband (a firm bible-alone Protestant, as I was)…he wasn’t open to hearing the information, and not only that, he didn't want me to look into it anymore, at all. I’d been there myself before, so I tread lightly and delicately…I decided that ultimately it was more important for me to submit to my husband and so I let the research go... this was April of 2019.
As the year progressed though, the division I saw among my Protestant friends was ugly and it truly grieved my heart and soul.
Around Christmas of 2019 things had gotten really bad. Unbearable actually. I was messaged a couple of times every week week from people in different Christian sects asking me why I was celebrating “pagan” Christmas?
Why I wasn’t following Mosaic law anymore?
Why was I wearing makeup?
Why would I wear pants?
Had I spoken in tongues to know I'd received the Holy Spirit and thus been saved?
I received MANY messages from friends looking for direction in the faith and I honestly didn't know how to answer them with 100% certainty, other than lightly encouraging them to research the early church.
The straw that broke the camel's back was when I had made a post about baking cookies and listening to Christmas music - and it was as if World War III broke out on my Facebook wall over this. People who were struggling in faith saw this and became discouraged, because all they wanted to do was what was right in God’s eyes, but they had no idea what that "right" was.
There was also a little girl who had passed away…she was the daughter of people in the Bethel Church. They had a post go viral where they were praying for her resurrection, and of course other Christians were jumping all over this, saying it was wrong. The timing of the condemnation was toxic and cruel and I was over the confusion.
I had come to breaking point.
I was grieved from seeing people confused, trying to do what was right but feeling downcast because they didn't know what "right" was.
Each person claimed to be led by the Holy Spirit in their interpretation. If you didn’t agree with their interpretation, it was because you just didn’t study it enough. Again - if the Holy Spirit was leading - why do we need to be well-studied???
This theory was self-refuting. If the Holy Spirit was TRULY leading people to truth, then we would not have so many different denominations. We would have ONE.
And even people who are biblical "scholars" who dedicate their lives to studying the scriptures, cannot agree on what the scriptures actually mean.
I knew I would receive backlash, but whatever that church was that Jesus started, I wanted to be a part of THAT Church… I couldn’t reconcile in my mind that Jesus would start a church that would be “wrong”...and it had become exceedingly clear on why the church and bishops being shepherds made sense.
So I dove into the church fathers again. This time it just whopped me on the head.
These writings talk over and over again about the bishops in place by will of God, and that we should not create schisms or divisions in the church. There were extremely dire warnings agains doing so...as in, people who created or people who followed people who created schism in the Church would not inherit the Kingdom of God. And in fact, not only are these things in the early church father writings, but they are in the Bible too, I just never saw them through my Protestant lenses!!! Unity is the LAST thing Jesus prayed for in the Bible in the Garden of Gesthemane.
In 1 Corinthians 1:10 Paul says: 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.
Romans 16:17-18 says I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.
Titus 3:9-11 says But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned
Igantius to Philadephians says If any man follow him that makes a schism in the church, he will not inherit the kingdom of God. He also says, The Spirit proclaimed these words: do nothing without the bishop, keep your bodies as the temples of God, love unity, avoid divisions.
In his letter to symrneasns he says See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the psybytery as ye 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 one to whom he has entrusted it. (So the Eucharist HAS to be administered by someone in Apostolic succession). Wherever the bishop shall appear, let the multitude of the people be; even as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.
There are many more writings that talk about the importance of UNITY in the church and being in submission to bishops!!!
I realized it all makes sense. Perfection. God’s people have NEVER been without authority on earth. There has always been someone to shepherd His flock, and the sola scripture deception makes it so clear as to WHY... When everyone leans on their own understanding, it becomes a MESS.
Jesus is the Word of God. Jesus in His entire ministry, never wrote anything that we know of (other than a word in the sand)...He spoke. SO EVERY WORD that He spoke, would also be considered the WORD OF GOD. I had never thought about it like that before!!! When I heard the "Word of God" - I thought "Bible alone". But Jesus didn't leave us a Bible. He left us 12 men. Jesus entrusted His apostles to protect the teachings and the mysteries that were SPOKEN, and to preserve them even two thousand years later. They were even given the power to forgive sins …
Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you." 22And with that he breathed on them and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit. 23If you forgive anyone's sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.” - John 20:21-23
In fact, there was no canon of scripture universally accepted until the fifth century. And it was the Catholic bishops who put it together under the guidance of The Holy Spirit...something I also had never considered.
Since going back to the Catholic Church, and especially after having been in the Torah movement and gaining more understanding of Judaism, and now being in the traditional Latin and Melkite Rite (I was raised Novus Ordo), I have a whole new appreciation for the Mass and all of the richness, the fullness, and the beauty of it!!
Whereas before I was always looking for the perfect preacher, and looking for conviction for myself…
now, I was going to worship GOD Himself…where it was not about me, at all. It is ALL about worshiping HIM!
Because the Mass and Divine Liturgy are so ancient and not about us, but about worshipping God and communing with Heaven, I believe this is why the Catholic Church loses SO MANY of its people today. There is a failure in teaching the beautiful history of the Church, and we live in a selfish society where if it’s not about us, then it’s a waste of time. Also - parents should be discipling their children at home!!! Not handing children over to be brainwashed by a Freemason public school agenda. That's for another post.
When the priest walks in for the entry procession, my heart is overwhelmed with happiness and joy to the point of tears. There are Psalms, hymns and so much scripture read, there are prayers for people in need, and the most special part is the new covenant which Jesus instituted himself, the Eucharist. I have never felt the presence of The Holy Spirit in such a way as I do now!
The backlash that I experienced after coming out Catholic was intense to say the least. And after reading and listening to SO many testimonies and EVERY ONE experiencing the same thing, I truly believe the reaction is demonic in nature, because Satan KNOWS this is the true church and doesn’t want people in it.
I have lost close friends, but it is ok! I answer to God, not to man, and there’s nothing I’m not willing to sacrifice to live my life exactly how Jesus would have wanted or intended. I have never felt so at peace in my life or in my spiritual journey. And it’s so cool to know that we DON’T Have to guess at what we should or shouldn’t be doing as Christians...because we have teachers today who were given authority by Christ Himself to tell us!
The first thing Satan did in the garden was to get Eve to question did God REALLY say that? This is the exact deception of Sola Scriptura. It causes us to lean on our own understandings and to waste our time debating instead of actually being the Church. Serving the poor. Helping the needy. Going to Mass and receiving the Eucharist, which is living bread which came down from Heaven that is the bread of life, which Jesus commanded us to eat. And this bread HAS to be consecrated by someone in the Apostolic office. This is in the ECF writings. Taking that point of the Eucharist alone into consideration, that immediately disqualifies all churches other than the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. No other churches have pastors with Apostolic authority, and most believe it's a "symbol".
God has preserved the historical evidence for us to look back at...it is there to guide us out of this deception if we aren’t already aware that Jesus left us a CHURCH to guide us to truth and in correct interpretation of the beautiful and Holy scriptures. The bible says that the bible is the pillar and foundation of truth….just kidding…the bible says that the CHURCH is the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Timothy 3:15) That cannot mean the mystical body of Christ as evangelicals would claim...because they cannot agree amongst themselves what the TRUTH is!
Taking all of the above into consideration, what does make sense Is that Jesus left us teachers and shepherds to preserve the pure teaching under the guidance of The Holy Spirit, and to protect us from heresies that would jeopardize our souls. WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ONE, UNIFIED BODY. ONE FAITH. ONE MIND. WITH A ROYAL STEWARD WITH THE KEYS TO THE KINGDOM TO BE A VOICE HERE ON EARTH TO KEEP THE FLOCK UNITED.
I think Protestants believe that by submitting to church authority or believing oral traditions, it somehow detracts or takes away from the Bible. That couldn't be further from the truth. Learning the ancient roots of the faith will bring Christianity to life in a way you've never experienced. Your only regret in studying Catholicism, and falling in love with it and converting to the Holy Mother Church...will be that you didn't do it sooner.
So that is my testimony!!!
You probably are saying “what bout worshiping Mary and the Saints?” What about Purgatory?” …don't the contradict the Bible? NO. They don't!!!
I understand all of those concerns because I had them too - but what I found was that I hated what I THOUGHT was true about Catholicism - not what Catholicism ACTUALLY is. There is a reason for everything they teach...but those are for another post!
I set out to disprove the Catholic Church and bring my family out of it, and ended up finding the truth.
"To be deep in history, is to cease to be Protestant" - John Henry Newman
God bless, and thank you for reading!
Meghan