Should the Bible be.....placed aside?

[Truth_Seeker123]

2 Thessalonians 2:3,4 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

Mark 2:7 Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?

“The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh.” Catholic National July 1895.

“We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty” …Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20, 1894

“The Saviour Himself is the door of the sheepfold: ‘I am the door of the sheep.’ Into this fold of Jesus Christ, no man may enter unless he be led by the Sovereign Pontiff; and only if they be united to him can men be saved, for the Roman Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ and His personal representative on earth.” (Pope John XXIII in his homily to the Bishops and faithful assisting at his coronation on November 4, 1958).

Should the Bible be tossed aside to fit these statements?

Anyone is welcome to give feedback.

 

[Rence]

No, the Bible should not be placed aside to fit those statements. The statements need to be read in the context that they were written. The Bible also says, that Tradition is based on verbal as well as written teachings, and that not all teachings are in the Bible.

 

[Truth_Seeker123]

No, the Bible should not be placed aside to fit those statements. The statements need to be read in the context that they were written. The Bible also says, that Tradition is based on verbal as well as written teachings, and that not all teachings are in the Bible.

Can you explain the context?

Also Matthew 15:2,3 says Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

One more question, do you think that the Bible has everything in it that you need to live by?

Mat. 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

 

[Bbigam]

2 Thessalonians 2:3,4 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

Mark 2:7 Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?

“The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh.” Catholic National July 1895.

“We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty” …Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20, 1894

“The Saviour Himself is the door of the sheepfold: ‘I am the door of the sheep.’ Into this fold of Jesus Christ, no man may enter unless he be led by the Sovereign Pontiff; and only if they be united to him can men be saved, for the Roman Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ and His personal representative on earth.” (Pope John XXIII in his homily to the Bishops and faithful assisting at his coronation on November 4, 1958).

Should the Bible be tossed aside to fit these statements?

Anyone is welcome to give feedback.

Of course the Bible shouldn’t be “tossed aside.” This is a common error for those who do not understand Sacred Tradition. Sacred Tradition doesn’t “trump” the Bible. Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition are seamless parts of the Deposit of Faith.

From the Catecism of the Catholic Church - vatican.va/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm

One common source. . .

80 "Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal."40 Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own “always, to the close of the age”.41

. . . two distinct modes of transmission

81 "Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit."42

"And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching."43

82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."44

The quotes you give need to be understood in context. Unfortunately you don’t have links listed so we can easily read the whole context. But, for example, there is an issue in that the Catholic National isn’t part of Sacred Tradition, plus this quote does not mean the the Pope is literally Christ or in any way equal to Christ. But the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, God’s appointed earthly leader of the Church - and totally subordinate to God in every way! The Pope - and priests and bishops - also stands in persona Christi (in the person of Christ) when celebrating the Mass or the Sacrament of Reconciliation. See [lincolndiocese.org/brown/columns/(name removed by moderator)ersona.htm](http://www.lincolndiocese.org/brown/columns/(name removed by moderator)ersona.htm) for more information on this concept.

 

[gerrydevis]

Hi,
I heard about this,
“The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh.” Catholic National July 1895.
This is sentence have very meaningful strength.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Funny, when I google the “Catholic National 1895” all that come up are anti-Catholic web sites trumpeting this quote. I don’t see any sign that an actual Catholic newspaper of that name existed. So where’s the proof? I could claim that the Southern Baptist council meeting of 1895 claimed that Jesus was only man, not God, but does that mean that this ever happened? And if it did happen, that I reported it in context? And even if in context, does this ‘meeting’ of some obscure council presume to determine doctrine for ALL Southern Baptists? I can’t believe that people actually pull up these kinds of things and think that Catholics will swallow them hook, line and sinker because "oh my goodness, there it is in print and if it’s in** print** it **must be true. **No need to do any research, just accept some statements made with no documentation that can be independently verified. . .

People who ‘snip’ quotes out of context and don’t even acknowledge which of the ‘hate’ sites they took it from don’t really seem (to me) to be seeking Truth as much as they are seeking to further their own agenda. . .

 

[Rence]

Can you explain the context?
.

Let’s try this one for now since it’s late and I really hate Bible Verse duels:

You posted this:
“The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh.” Catholic National July 1895.

This statement is not an authentic statement by the Pope. In fact, it’s been circulating among the anti-catholic websites. Just do a google search and you’ll find all sorts of non-catholic sites hosting it.

So, again, no the Bible should not be placed aside to accomodate this statement.

The Pope is not G-d, the Pope is His vicar (or representative) here on earth.

Here’s some more verses for you to chew on, to support it:

*Originally posted on this forum on Aug 5, '08, 9:25 pm by
user “buffalo” - Forum Elder because Rence doesn’t have the time at the moment to comb though scriptures right now. Thank you Buffalo

Primacy of Peter
Mt 16:18 - upon this rock (Peter) I will build my church
Mt 16;19 - give you keys of the kingdom; power to bind & loose
Lk 22:32 - Peter’s faith will strengthen his brethren
Jn 21:17 - given Christ’s flock as chief shepherd
Mk 16:7 - angel sent to announce Resurrection to Peter
Lk 24:34 - risen Jesus first appeared to Peter
Acts 1:13-26 - headed meeting which elected Matthias
Acts 2:14 - led Apostles in preaching on Pentecost
Acts 2:41 - received first converts
Acts 3:6-7 - performed first miracle after Pentecost
Acts 5:1-11 - inflicted first punishment: Ananias & Saphira
Acts 8:21 - excommunicated first heretic, Simon Magnus
Acts 10:44-46 - received revelation to admit Gentiles into Church
Acts 15:7 - led first council in Jerusalem
Acts 15:19 - pronounces first dogmatic decision
Gal 1:18 - after conversion, Paul visits chief Apostle
*Gal 2:11-14 - I opposed Cephas to his face for his hypocrisy
Peter’s name always heads list of Apostles: Mt 10;14; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16; Acts 1:13
“Peter and his companions” Lk 9:32; Mk 16:7
Spoke for Apostles - Mt 18:21; Mk 8:29; Lk 8:45; 12:41; Jn 6:69
Peter’s name occurs 195 times, more than all the rest put together

Apostolic Succession
2 Chr 19:11 - high priest is over you in everything of Lord’s
Mal 2:7 - seek instruction from priest, he is God’s messenger
Eph 2:20 - Church built upon foundation of apostles & prophets
Eph 4:11 - God gave some as apostles, others as prophets…
1 Cor 12:28-29 - God designated in church: apostles, …
Acts 1:20 - let another take his office
Acts 1:25-26 - Matthias takes Judas’ apostolic ministry
1 Tim 3:1, 8; 5:17 - qualifications for: bishops, priests, & deacons
1Tim 4:14 - gift conferred with the laying on of hands
1Tim 5:22 - do not lay hands too readily on anyone
Acts 14:23 - they appointed presbyters in each church
2Tim 2:2 - what you heard from me entrust to faithful teachers
Titus 1:5 - appoint presbyters in every town, as I directed *__________________

 

[adstrinity]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Oh man, too awesome! Thanks for the laugh!!

 

[adelore]

2 Thessalonians 2:3,4 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

Mark 2:7 Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?

“The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh.” Catholic National July 1895.

“We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty” …Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20, 1894

“The Saviour Himself is the door of the sheepfold: ‘I am the door of the sheep.’ Into this fold of Jesus Christ, no man may enter unless he be led by the Sovereign Pontiff; and only if they be united to him can men be saved, for the Roman Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ and His personal representative on earth.” (Pope John XXIII in his homily to the Bishops and faithful assisting at his coronation on November 4, 1958).

Should the Bible be tossed aside to fit these statements?

Anyone is welcome to give feedback.

Truthseeker,

You really amaze me, it’s never a dull moment with you around. I’ve got to take my hat off for you, you do really try hard to “save us poor Catholics” from our beliefs. Never mind the fact that our beliefs are over 2,000 years old and that Jesus himself started The Catholic Church over 2,000 years ago.

Now let’s be honest, do you really think comming onto a Catholic Website, you’re truely going to “change” our minds about the Catholic Faith? Who better than the Catholic Church knows her faith?

There will always be at least one Non-Catholics out there who will try to prove the Error of our ways. Yet, truely if they do their own Homework and do it well, they just might find the Truth in the Catholic Church.

But first, please don’t believe all that you read…second…by all means post the Links so we can check this out for ourseleves. Or don’t you have the links and did you just make this up to ruffle a few Catholic feathers…Or try to.

May God Bless You Truth Seeker as you seek the truth…keep reading the Catholic Website and all the Catholic Lit. you can find…Gods leading you on the right path…After all You are on a Catholic Website…must be Gods hinting to you…take the hint…study the Catholic Religion, (after all just taking the time to stuy the Catholic Religion…) might make you understand us more…

 

[fermat]

The problem is that you have plucked a quote without any context. To understand the ‘veiled in flesh’ concept, you should research In Persona Christi.

If you don’t really want to understand what Christ’s church teaches, then that would not be a good place to start.

 

[Nine_Two]

Truth Seeker still hasn’t answered my question on the literal infallibility of the bible. I must assume he is avoiding what that answer entails and is happy in his ignorence.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Amen bruthah!

Truthseeker,

You really amaze me, it’s never a dull moment with you around. I’ve got to take my hat off for you, you do really try hard to “save us poor Catholics” from our beliefs. Never mind the fact that our beliefs are over 2,000 years old and that Jesus himself started The Catholic Church over 2,000 years ago.

Now let’s be honest, do you really think comming onto a Catholic Website, you’re truely going to “change” our minds about the Catholic Faith? Who better than the Catholic Church knows her faith?

There will always be at least one Non-Catholics out there who will try to prove the Error of our ways. Yet, truely if they do their own Homework and do it well, they just might find the Truth in the Catholic Church.

But first, please don’t believe all that you read…second…by all means post the Links so we can check this out for ourseleves. Or don’t you have the links and did you just make this up to ruffle a few Catholic feathers…Or try to.

May God Bless You Truth Seeker as you seek the truth…keep reading the Catholic Website and all the Catholic Lit. you can find…Gods leading you on the right path…After all You are on a Catholic Website…must be Gods hinting to you…take the hint…study the Catholic Religion, (after all just taking the time to stuy the Catholic Religion…) might make you understand us more…

 

[graceandglory]

Funny, when I google the "Catholic National 1895" all that come up are anti-Catholic web sites trumpeting this quote.m (to me) to be seeking Truth as much as they are seeking to further their own agenda. . .

Isn’t that funny. I did the same thing.

Context, people.

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

Mat. 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Yes, EVERY word that prceeds from the mouth of God. Not just those that were written down and collected together in a book of canon.

 

[patrick457]

Mark 2:7 Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?

You’re forgetting something, aren’t you? If we apply the principle of cherry-picking a quote out of its context as you do here:

And he, having stood up, went to his house; and the crowds, having seen it, became frightened and glorified God, who had given such authority to men.

-Matthew 9:7-8

“The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh.” Catholic National July 1895.

“We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty” …Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20, 1894

“The Saviour Himself is the door of the sheepfold: ‘I am the door of the sheep.’ Into this fold of Jesus Christ, no man may enter unless he be led by the Sovereign Pontiff; and only if they be united to him can men be saved, for the Roman Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ and His personal representative on earth.” (Pope John XXIII in his homily to the Bishops and faithful assisting at his coronation on November 4, 1958).

Should the Bible be tossed aside to fit these statements?

Anyone is welcome to give feedback.

You might like to see my blog here. I started a series - currently it has two parts - addressing two of these very quotes specificially, and I quote:

1.) The ‘Catholic National’ quote:

Frs. Leslie Rumble and Charles M. Carty already answered this question in volume 2 of their Radio Replies (which were actually transcripts of a 1930’s radio program hosted by them), so I would defer to them here:

2-310. Pope Pius X made the blasphemous claim that he was “Jesus Christ hidden under the veil of the flesh. Does the Pope speak? It is Jesus Christ who speaks.”

REPLY: A Protestant paper, the “Church Review,” in England, October 3, 1895, charges Cardinal Sarto, Archbishop of Venice, with having uttered those words at Venice. Cardinal Sarto was elected Pope in 1903. But as soon as the charge was made in 1895 that Cardinal Sarto had said those words, inquiries were sent from England to Venice, and Cardinal Sarto produced the manuscript of his discourse. And this is what he actually did say: “The Pope REPRESENTS Jesus Christ Himself, and therefore is a loving father. The life of the Pope is a holocaust of love for the human family. His word is love; love, his weapon; love, the answer he gives to all who hate him; love, his flag, that is, the Cross, which signed the greatest triumph on Earth and in Heaven.”

1.) The quote is said to have appeared from an English Protestant publication (October 3, 1895), not a Catholic one. As an aside, that quote had also appeared earlier from another Protestant magazine entitled Evangelical Christendom in January 1 of that year.

2.) The actual words of Cardinal Sarto (later Pope Pius X; he only became Pope in 1903) says that the Pope represents Jesus Christ, not that he is Jesus Christ, as this misquote (and those who use them) loves to say.

3.) I haven’t been able to find anything about Catholic National. There is however, a Catholic publication which have the names National Catholic Register which is the oldest Catholic newspaper in the United States; however, this publication was begun in 1927.
Can someone at least show me proof that there was a 19th-century publication entitled Catholic National, and that the quote appeared in there?​

 

[patrick457]

Now for the Leo XIII quote:

The quote in the actual encyclical (called Sapientiae Christianae in Latin), paragraph 22, says the following:

Now, as the Apostle Paul urges, this unanimity ought to be perfect. Christian faith reposes not on human but on divine authority, for what God has revealed “we believe not on account of the intrinsic evidence of the truth perceived by the natural light of our reason, but on account of the authority of God revealing, who cannot be deceived nor Himself deceive.”
It follows as a consequence that whatever things are manifestly revealed by God we must receive with a similar and equal assent. To refuse to believe any one of them is equivalent to rejecting them all, for those at once destroy the very groundwork of faith who deny that God has spoken to men, or who bring into doubt His infinite truth and wisdom.
To determine, however, which are the doctrines divinely revealed belongs to the teaching Church, to whom God has entrusted the safekeeping and interpretation of His utterances. But the supreme teacher in the Church is the Roman Pontiff. Union of minds, therefore, requires, together with a perfect accord in the one faith, complete submission and obedience of will to the Church and to the Roman Pontiff, as to God Himself. This obedience should, however, be perfect, because it is enjoined by faith itself, and has this in common with faith, that it cannot be given in shreds; nay, were it not absolute and perfect in every particular, it might wear the name of obedience, but its essence would disappear. Christian usage attaches such value to this perfection of obedience that it has been, and will ever be, accounted the distinguishing mark by which we are able to recognize Catholics.
Admirably does the following passage from St. Thomas Aquinas set before us the right view: “The formal object of faith is primary truth, as it is shown forth in the holy Scriptures, and in the teaching of the Church, which proceeds from the fountainhead of truth. It follows, therefore, that he who does not adhere, as to an infallible divine rule, to the teaching of the Church, which proceeds from the primary truth manifested in the holy Scriptures, possesses not the habit of faith; but matters of faith he holds otherwise than true faith. Now, it is evident that he who clings to the doctrines of the Church as to an infallible rule yields his assent to everything the Church teaches; but otherwise, if with reference to what the Church teaches he holds what he likes but does not hold what he does not like, he adheres not to the teaching of the Church as to an infallible rule, but to his own will.”

Even a cursory reading of the Encyclical would show that Pope Leo XIII refers to God as if He was a separate entity - quite unlikely if you’re claiming to be God in human flesh!

Now, obedience to the pope “as to God Himself” may make some feel queasy. But once again, from a Catholic lens, this is not too surprising. After all, since Catholics believe that God commissioned the Pope as his visible vicar (representative) in the government of the Church, it would not be repugnant to render submission or obedience to him, just as it would not be repugnant to listen to a king’s representative and obey what he orders in the king’s name. Still, (contrary to what some may think) we need to stress once again that Catholics do not hold the Pope as being equal or even superior to God, as his title Vicar of Christ shows. Think about this for a moment. How can a vicar, or a representative be superior to the one who has sent him? “No servant is greater than his master” indeed.​

By the way, I might include the third quote at part three, so stay tuned.

 

[patrick457]

Can you explain the context?

Also Matthew 15:2,3 says Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

Ah, the classic hand-washing debate passage so beloved of anti-Catholics, only probably because of the fact that it has the word tradition on it used in a negative manner. And we know that no one uses the word tradition as much as Catholics.

If Jesus is condemning paradosis here, so what? I didn’t realize Jesus was talking to Catholics here. Jesus was talking to Pharisees, who is complaining that his disciples do not observe the Pharisaic paradosis (‘something handed down’) in that they do not wash their hands. As has been said, context.
The Bible did not originally have chapter-and-first divisions - it would probably be best to ignore them when talking about such passages.

One more question, do you think that the Bible has everything in it that you need to live by?

Mat. 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

My answer: the Scriptures are important, but it is hardly the only thing we need.

Plus, since Jesus is referencing Deuteronomy 8:3, let’s see the chapter:

Every commandment which I command you today you must be careful to observe, that you may live and multiply, and go in and possess the land of which the LORD swore to your fathers. And you shall remember that the LORD your God led you all the way these forty years in the wilderness, to humble you and test you, to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep His commandments or not.
So He humbled you, allowed you to hunger, and fed you with manna which you did not know nor did your fathers know, that He might make you know that man shall not live by bread alone; but man lives by every word that proceeds from the mouth of the LORD. Your garments did not wear out on you, nor did your foot swell these forty years.
You should know in your heart that as a man chastens his son, so the LORD your God chastens you. Therefore you shall keep the commandments of the LORD your God, to walk in His ways and to fear Him.

Deuteronomy 8:1-6 (NKJV)

Moses and the Israelites still did not have leather-bound, red-lettered KJVs in their possession; in Jesus’ time there were still huge debates raging on many sectors of Judaism concerning certain books now included in our Bibles: which of them are Scripture and which ones are not. So, they’re in different situations than we are now.

 

[Truth_Seeker123]

I provided the quotes, all you have to do is a little research.

If someone came to me with these such claims (a person of higher office speaking blasphemy) I would immediately research it. But instead, many of you have decided to simply say it is out of context.

Why would a person of a higher office make such a statement? Wouldn’t that person know the confusion that he could cause amongst others. I would not take this situation lightly.

If this was out of context, then why is the pope still referred to as the “Lord God”?

Also, Jesus does not need a representative on earth. Jesus is the Word and he is always with us. Jesus is our representative…period, no one else. The pope has to be perfect to be a representative of our Lord and Saviour. To be a representative, must means he can save us as well? To be a representative, must means we can enter to the Father through the pope? To be a representative must means the pope is the Son whom died for our sins.

The pope can’t be a representative of our Saviour when he is in need of the Saviour.

No merit can come from anything or anyone on this earth. Those things aren’t divine.

 

[Truth_Seeker123]

Ah, the classic hand-washing debate passage so beloved of anti-Catholics, only probably because of the fact that it has the word tradition on it used in a negative manner. And we know that no one uses the word tradition as much as Catholics.

If Jesus is condemning paradosis here, so what? I didn’t realize Jesus was talking to Catholics here. Jesus was talking to Pharisees, who is complaining that his disciples do not observe the Pharisaic paradosis (‘something handed down’) in that they do not wash their hands. As has been said, context.
The Bible did not originally have chapter-and-first divisions - it would probably be best to ignore them when talking about such passages.

My answer: the Scriptures are important, but it is hardly the only thing we need.

Plus, since Jesus is referencing Deuteronomy 8:3, let’s see the chapter:

Every commandment which I command you today you must be careful to observe, that you may live and multiply, and go in and possess the land of which the LORD swore to your fathers. And you shall remember that the LORD your God led you all the way these forty years in the wilderness, to humble you and test you, to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep His commandments or not.
So He humbled you, allowed you to hunger, and fed you with manna which you did not know nor did your fathers know, that He might make you know that man shall not live by bread alone; but man lives by every word that proceeds from the mouth of the LORD. Your garments did not wear out on you, nor did your foot swell these forty years.
You should know in your heart that as a man chastens his son, so the LORD your God chastens you. Therefore you shall keep the commandments of the LORD your God, to walk in His ways and to fear Him.

Deuteronomy 8:1-6 (NKJV)

Moses and the Israelites still did not have leather-bound, red-lettered KJVs in their possession; in Jesus’ time there were still huge debates raging on many sectors of Judaism concerning certain books now included in our Bibles: which of them are Scripture and which ones are not. So, they’re in different situations than we are now.

When did this come about? How? Who made it? Where in the Bible was this statement made? We are to be like Christ. When Christ responded to someone he would say “it is written” He went back to his Father’s Law, not some random book, correct?

Why now is it okay to make the Word of God null and void? God’s Law does not change. Christ had a sinful nature, but lived a perfect life. He lived by the Word, He is the Word. Are you saying the Word isn’t enough?

 

[adstrinity]

It was researched, the periodical, the quote, and the belief does not exist.

What was shown what was the man really said, which bears NOTHING to what was stated he said.

It has been proven that this allegation is not only groundless but outright false and we’re still being told to research it and this is what Catholicism teaches EVEN THOUGH the only place this can be found in any way is anti-Catholic sources. There’s nothing else that says to have come from this media. It never existed. Accept it and move on.

If some cannot accept the teachings of the Catholic Church, fine, but, accept the actual teachings, if you want to believe invented propeganda, you’re disfellowshiping yourself from God.