top of page

The Catholic Church is the Authority of the Reestablished Kingdom of David Luke Haskell

I want to talk about the authority God established in the Catholic Church today but I want to start by setting the stage with some simple reasoning so people have a clear understanding of why there has to be authority. We will then begin to show the authority God established.

So, people come from all different environmental influences including different churches which include the origins of those churches, all accept the Catholic Church being a creation of man. Every church which calls itself Christian that is not Catholic, finds itself as originally in schism from the Catholic Church, in schism from an original schismatic church or something completely separated from the original schismatic’s.

So every one of them in their process of being created, to some level or another, developed an image through new interpretations of scripture or a process of elimination of certain texts by calling them metaphorical, in the goal of separation from the Catholic Church.

I am reminded of a certain meme that illustrates this where there is a line of different preachers as a cartoon. It starts with a Lutheran in the front of the line and the Presbyterian behind him says , “Wow, you Lutherans still celebrate lent, that’s papist. The baptist behind the Presbyterian says, “ wow, you Presbyterians still baptize babies, that’s papist. The Jehovah’s Witness behind the baptist says , wow you baptists still believe in the Trinity, that’s papist. This is the danger of incrementalism. 

There is another funny meme and it is three different churches next to each other. The first one has a sign that says, first community church. The second one says , second community church. The third one says, third community church. The three pastors are standing together outside in front of the row of churches and the first one says to the other two, “maybe we need to define community?”

Of course in human nature they would then define community according to how they think would be the easiest for their ministry. That is part of the human condition.

These are good examples of why man in fallen nature cannot sustain God's truth without authority guided by God. Satan uses man’s lower nature against him and we can see how this starts.

 The original schismatics might of had 98 percent of the truth, the next level maybe 50, then next level even less, all that Satan needs is a fork in the road then man’s lower nature takes over and can move man thousands of miles away from that true path. We also showed this in our presentation of the diabolical deception of the born again movement and the creation of the 20th century fundamentalist movement which even separated people from the original schismatics into the stand alone born again movement. Once you separate from baptism you separate from any ties whatsoever to the New Covenant.

In a devolution from authority established by God till today, you had man separating from the authority of the church which led to the entropy of Protestantism, man in fallen nature establishing multiple images of religions of opinions and once you separate from historical facts that back up authority there is no way to rise above opinion. 

But what does this do to the state of mind when you begin to separate from the practice of humility in obedience to the faith? You begin to create an environment where in your image of faith in choosing your opinion you begin choosing your reality and in pushing what you think is true reality you no longer have a practice of humility through obedience. In turn not even realizing how far we have gone you become a god by proxy by creating your own image of god and faith from an interpretation that is simply pleasing to believe. You have then began to fulfill Satan’s plan for us. He tells Adam and Eve, “you will not die, you will be as gods.” Or, you have value separate from god. We can see that this is part of Satan’s plan because we know his famous words “ non servium “ “ I will not serve” , while God through Paul, calls us to obedience to the faith.

Then here is where cognitive dissonance takes over. Anything that challenges your set belief system which you are emotionally grounded in, begins to create turmoil in the mind. This is the point where a change of dying to self is the only solution to changing these preconceptions and moving towards truth. Yet it is also the point where the Holy Spirit exposes truth to the soul and a dilemma with infinite consequences develops. Do I drop everything and follow truth or do I end up in sin against the Holy Spirit not following the truth revealed? Once the truth is revealed it may haunt your conscience for the rest of your life or, you may simply end up in a slide downward where you begin to continuously ignore God on many levels throughout the rest of your life. 

James tells us:

He who knows what is right and refuses to do so for him this is sin.

Paul tells us, the wages of sin is death.

John tells us there is sin unto death.

This all begins with denying truth revealed to the soul.

So in separation from the authority on another path, developed into the false Age of Enlightenment which completely separated from the spiritual reality and developed a system of thought where all truth is revealed only through what we can see. This separation from faith led to groups like the libertines which is a religion of hedonism and a purposeful process of action of doing whatever is amoral or whatever is the opposite that would tie one to Christianity. This led to Nietzsche saying God is dead.

Even though our Constitution is founded on inalienable rights secured by God this libertine undercurrent was still present. Our present state is due to separation from the moral and natural law so it is a separation from what is the foundation of a free organized society with inalienable rights secured by God. In this separation from the moral and natural law is a slide into blind insanity and there is no stop sign for insanity.

So this is how detrimental separating from God's authority through His church is. There are a couple paths here but Protestantism is responsible for the foundation of the entropy. I am not discounting the worldliness and corruption in the church but that story would be for a different day.

The farther back in time you go to the origins of Christianity, the more the schismatics look Catholic.

The greatest separations begin through faith alone and scripture alone.

Both of these are easily disputed and we have addressed both in the past but to set the stage for looking at the authority let’s just look at one of the proof texts Protestantism uses to separate from the Catholic Church.

Every Protestant knows the verse’s. Every Protestant has a false understanding of them as a tradition of false exegesis specifically created to separate people from the authority of the Catholic Church. I am referring to Paul’s letter to Timothy in his second letter, chapter three.

We will start a few verses above the proof text.

evil men and seducers shall grow worse and worse: erring, and driving into error, 14But continue thou in those things which thou hast learned and which have been committed to thee. Knowing of whom thou hast learned them: 15And because from thy infancy thou hast known the holy scriptures which can instruct thee to salvation by the faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice: 17That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.

So all scripture is inspired by God. Of course it is, all Catholics agree. The Catholic Church established the Bible.  The question is, how many interpretations are inspired by God? Does the Holy Spirit have multiple personalities? So first, there can only be one interpretation inspired by God. This would be an authoritative interpretation.

So Paul is writing to Timothy who received redemption from original sin through the grace given of entrance into the chosen people, the holy nation, the royal priesthood through baptism. Timothy who was placed as the bishop of Ephesus by Paul through the laying on of hands, this is why Paul addressed him in passing as a man of God. Timothy who would through apostolic succession ordain priests as Paul told Titus to do in Titus 1:5. Timothy who was living obedience to the faith in the sacramental life keeping this precept of God.

“ For as often as you shall eat this bread and drink this cup, you will show the death of the Lord until He comes again.”

“The cup of benediction that we bless, is this not participation in the blood of Christ”?

Timothy who was instructed in the faith by Paul who Paul described as his son in faith. The  same faith as the universal church, would use the God breathed Old Testament he knew of since his youth, as a man of God, a bishop in Gods one universal church, for study and reproof of the priests and laity under his care as Catholic bishops have done for 2000 years.

So those evil men Paul is referring to who would seduce, taking people further and further into error, are those who separated from obedience to the faith by separation from the men of God the bishops in the universal church.

You will find with just about every verse Protestantism tries to use against the Catholic Church, a more truthful and encompassing exegesis will prove that the context actually accuses Protestantism. God designed it that way.

This is why Paul said in his letter to the Hebrews:

Obey your prelates, and be subject to them. For they watch as being to render an account of your souls; that they may do this with joy, and not with grief. For this is not expedient for you. 

Hb 13:17

And of course this takes us back to the choice. A religion of opinion or a religion of obedience.

The fathers of the church were defending against this religion of opinion from the beginning. Irenaeus writes:

“Those, therefore, who desert the preaching of the Church, call in question the knowledge of the holy presbyters, not taking into consideration of how much greater consequence is a religious man, even in a private station, than a blasphemous and impudent sophist. Now, such are all the heretics, and those who imagine that they have hit upon something more beyond the truth, so that by following those things already mentioned, proceeding on their way variously, in harmoniously, and foolishly, not keeping always to the same opinions with regard to the same things, as blind men are led by the blind, they shall deservedly fall into the ditch of ignorance lying in their path, ever seeking and never finding out the truth. It behooves us, therefore, to avoid their doctrines, and to take careful heed lest we suffer any injury from them; but to flee to the Church, and be brought up in her bosom, and be nourished with the Lord's Scriptures." Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 5,20:2 (A.D. 180).

So often in the debate rooms in order to show the illogical nature of scripture alone I would ask our Protestant brothers to do a specific task. I would say, “ show me your verses that you think proves scripture alone and then show me how your interpretation of those verses do not contradict the hundreds of verses showing the establishment of an authoritative church?

Of course they become stuck or fall into Sophistry giving an ambiguous answer that is far from addressing the request. This is part of the cognitive dissonance. So where we are now, at the extreme ends of Christianity, is people who create their own image of faith even evolving into new age spiritualism where demons easily influence their understanding. Where they think God talks directly to them and they are God's messenger. I have said this over and over again because we must see why Jesus said it. Jesus said, 

Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. 22Many will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have not we prophesied in thy name, and cast out devils in thy name, and done many miracles in thy name? 23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity.

Why? Why does Jesus raise obedience above casting out demons, prophecy, and miracles? Because Satan as the father of lies has the power to mimic all three in his goal of separating people from the Catholic Church. He will do all three in order to destroy souls making them think what they are experiencing is from God while he keeps them in a heretical faith. Jesus  says, depart from me, I never knew you, because he is referring to those who never entered into obedience to the faith in the sacramental life in the kingdom of heaven of the church or someone who left the Faith thinking they have found something better.

And what is this kingdom of heaven if Jesus said, Satan planted weeds in the Kingdom? There are no weeds in the eternal state so the kingdom is Gods church.

So if you are being deceived through false miracles and casting out demons etc and you are outside of obedience to the faith in God's church, then this is God telling you, I never knew you! This is so so so important and Satan destroys so many souls through this false path. Don’t let cognitive dissonance keep you from dying to self. Jesus is the same God that punished those who attacked the Jewish nation in the Old Testament.

So, there are Doctors of theology who are Fundamentalists. There are Doctors of theology who are Presbyterian, Calvinist, Pentecostal, Lutheran etc etc…

What do they have in common?

What they have in common is a belief in scripture alone which is asserted because it cannot be proven, they have in common differences in understanding and faith that looks worlds apart from the faith of the disciples of the apostles and early martyrs.

For our Protestant brothers and sisters.

Can you name some people who believed as you do from 100 AD until the 14th century?

If you are Protestant you can’t. Satan’s deceptions are that diabolical. In man’s objective of separation from the Catholic Church he created a religion of anti Catholicism as a tradition of man and separated man from the New Covenant and full union in the mystical body of Christ.

In this upside down world, Protestantism began to call Catholicism a tradition of man.

You cannot even enter the promise of Abraham fulfilled without baptism into the chosen people, the holy nation, the Royal Priesthood.

So, I wanted to start with a little fire and brimstone to condition minds to not look at what is to follow too lightly.

Of course the church has the doctrine of invincible ignorance, yet, in the age of the internet I am thinking that group who would qualify is getting smaller and smaller.

So whose interpretation of scripture is not an interpretation of man? Either one religion is true or no religions are true. We do not have a God with multiple personalities. 

So Jesus told us, “17Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18For amen I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one tittle shall not pass of the law, till all be fulfilled.

Mt 5:17

So it is not reasonable to think that God would establish a physical authority in the Old Covenant as the final arbiter on interpretation of the law and not do so for the law in the new. We have a Supreme Court as the final arbiter on the interpretation of the Constitution, God established the papacy and the magisterium as the final arbiter on interpretation of the body of faith and morals God established. While Protestants become their own final arbiter as individuals, the church defines what is truth through the three legged stool of scripture, authority of the magisterium, influenced by apostolic traditions all under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Which is more of a logical process? I think it’s obvious. Protestants not even knowing it have a Bible due to this process. They attack the authority while they read from a book created by the process.

After living the faith for longer than America has been a country, after hiding books from pagans due to edicts of pagan kings to destroy all Christian records the church was still coming together every Sunday and reading in the liturgy of the Eucharist of the Holy Mass from Old Testament scriptures and New Testament scriptures. They were doing so since the earliest days of Christianity.

Justin Martyr describes the Holy Mass including the reading of the scriptures in 150 AD yet he is describing a traditional act that existed before him.

He writes:

And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings.

So through this apostolic tradition Justin is the first one to tell us there were gospels, Irenaeus tells us there were four gospels and gives us the first list of epistles and different church fathers gave further details to the lists. And yet due to the church being underground off and on for over 300 years at the same time people were reading the books we see as accepted (many of which do not have the authors name on them,) they were also in the Mass in diverse places reading from the Shepherd of Hermes, 1 Clement, Diatessaron, the gospel   of Thomas, The Book of Enoch, The Protoevangelium of James, the Apocalypse of Peter, the Epistle of Barnabas, also believing these were inspired and many more.

So due to the church needing an authentic official canon read at every Holy Mass wherever the Mass was celebrated, the authority of the church through the three legged stool of scripture, magisterium and tradition guided by the Holy Spirit determined what would compose the official canon of scripture.

The scriptures were protected and  re produced in many different  languages  by  those who believed the same as Justin  and Irenaeus  through  persecution  and book burnings until  those who  believed  the same through  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit  ( I will not leave you orphans) decided  exactly  which scriptures  would compose the New Testament .

From the manuscript of the Council of Carthage of 419 AD before the list of scriptures are given we read:

That nothing be read in church besides the Canonical Scripture

Item, that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture.

This Document then goes on to read the same list of scriptures that was reaffirmed at the Council of Trent.

So it was by divine Providence that the authority established by God, after living the Catholic faith for longer than America has been a country, established through the tradition and magisterium of the Catholic Church, what would be the complete canon of scripture.

Dr Hahn describes this word canon:

There was a widespread consensus regarding these Scriptures, yet there was no official canon imposed by an official act of any centralized authority. Indeed, even the word “canon” held a different meaning for those first generations than it does for us today. Though the early Christians frequently used the Greek word kanon- which can mean “measuring stick” or “list”- it was not until the fourth century that they applied the term specifically to the list of biblical books.

                For the early Christians, “canon” was a term that encompassed all of Christian tradition. The Greek Fathers referred to kanon tes altheias (the canon of truth) while their Latin contemporaries spoke of regula fidei (the rule of faith). The term encompassed the Church’s faith in its entirety- the scriptures, yes, but also the rituals, customs, order, and disciplines handed on by the Apostles.

Scott Hahn Consuming the Word

So I would ask my Protestant friends, can you name anyone involved in establishing what the Bible would be ( your source of where you go to define your faith) who did not live the Catholic faith?

I don’t know the last time I have received an honest answer. The honest answer is that there was no one involved that we can see in the historical record, who did not live the Catholic faith.

So through the establishment of the scriptures, if you see them as the complete word of God, then you by proxy are acknowledging the authority God established to bring them to the world.  You have a Bible because God established the Holy Mass and the authority of the Catholic Church.

I want to take a quick detour here to add context. Justin and Irenaeus were pivotal in the establishment of the New Testament so wouldn’t it be illogical to simply accept their contributions to the New Testament but ignore the faith they lived?

The first in historical records to tell us there were gospels was Justin. The same Justin that in his First Apology described the Holy Mass said that our bodies when we partake of the Eucharist go through transmutation becoming flesh of Christ s glorified flesh. The same Justin who said that the fact the Eucharist is now spread throughout the world shows that it is pleasing to God ( Malachi 1:11) The same Justin  described the necessity of water baptism saying it destroyed original sin calling it regeneration and being born again. He explained that you cannot receive the Eucharist until you are regenerated in baptism and have been instructed in the faith. He taught that Satan created paganism to keep humanity from Catholic truth. 

The First one to tell us there were 4 gospels was Irenaeus (Disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of John the apostle) who believed in the authority of the church as God's authority on earth. He taught that all of Christianity is to be united to the church at Rome in order to keep the true faith. He believed that Mary was the true Eve mother of all the living and the true Ark of the Covenant. He taught that the Mass was a sacrifice and of course as we have read in his against heresy, he taught that those who come up with interpretations of their own and disregard the authority of the Church are proud Sophists. The early fathers did not pull punches.

There was no Bible for longer than America has been a country and there was no faith alone scripture alone believers. The Church lived in apostolic tradition which is simply defined as the faith lived. The epistles are an after thought.

A great source for images of this early church is Butlers Lives of the Saints. So let’s go here to look at this early church that was protecting the scriptures through pagan book burnings.


The Romans and the Greeks kept pretty good records on the trials of Christians and Christians also wrote about the trials. We have record from the trial of the martyrs Pionius, Sabina, and Asclepiades from what was called the Decian persecution that occurred around 250 A.D. An edict was issued by the Emperor Decius which ordered everyone in the Roman Empire to perform a sacrifice to one of the Roman gods. The edict stated that this must be done in the presence of the Roman magistrate and a document confirming the sacrifice must be signed by both the Christian and the magistrate. Pionius who was a priest of the Catholic faith, Sabina, and Asclepiades were being questioned by one of the Roman magistrates named Polemon.

So this is from a manuscript of the trial.

Polemon says. What God do you adore?

Pionius responds:  The Almighty God, who made heaven and earth; who made us all; who gives us all things in abundance; whom we know through Jesus Christ, His Word.

Polemon. Sacrifice at least to the emperor.

Pionus. I do not sacrifice to man. ( In other words, Pionius understood the sacrifice of the Holy Mass)

The report says:

Polemon then interrogated him juridically, having all his answers taken down by a clerk, who wrote on wax. How are you called? He said.

Pionius. I am called a Christian.

Polemon. Of what Church?

This question must be seen through its second century understanding Polemon is simply asking of what group of people here.

Pionius responded . Of the Catholic Church.

Polemon, leaving Pionus  turned to Sabina. We read on: The holy woman had changed her name by  the advice of Pionius, lest she should be found out, and should fall again into the hands of her mistress, who was a pagan, and who, under the Emperor Gordian, wishing to make her renounce her faith, had chained her, and banished her to the mountains, where she had been secretly relieved by the brethren.

Polemon. How are you called?

Sabina. I am called a Christian Theodota.

Polemon. Of what Church?

Sabina. Of the Catholic Church.

Polemon. What God do you adore?

Sabina. The Almighty God who made heaven and earth, and whom we know through Jesus Christ, his Word.

Polemon (addressing Asclepiades). And you, how are you called?

Asclepiades. I am called a Christian.

Polemon. Of what Church?

Asclepiades. Of the Catholic Church.

Polemon. What God do you adore?

Asclepiades. Jesus Christ.

Polemon. What! Is He another God?

Asclepiades. No: He is the same that they have just confessed.

After this examination, the martyrs were led to prison: the crowd around them was immense. Sabina held Pionus by his coat, to support her in the crush. Arrived in prison, they all took the generous resolution of not receiving what the faithful were accustomed to bring to the confessors; for Pionius, the holy priest, said, I have never been a burden to anyone- I will not begin now.

We can go back farther to the time of Irenaeus who I have described as a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of John the apostle.

Ireneaus writes about Blandida during his time.

Ireneus disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of John the apostle.

For when the Greeks, having arrested the slaves of Christian catechumens, then used force against them, in order to learn from them some secret thing [practised] among Christians, these slaves, having nothing to say that would meet the wishes of their tormentors, except that they had heard from their masters that the divine communion was the body and blood of Christ, and imagining that it was actually flesh and blood, gave their inquisitors answer to that effect. Then these latter, assuming such to be the case with regard to the practices of Christians, gave information regarding it to other Greeks, and sought to compel the martyrs Sanctus and Blandina to confess, under the influence of torture, [that the allegation was correct]. To these men Blandina replied very admirably in these words: How should those persons endure such [accusations], who, for the sake of the practice [of piety], did not avail themselves even of the flesh that was permitted [them to eat]?

And back further. As another example we can show that it was written in the Apostolic Constitutions that the Bereans first Bishop was Catholic. The authority is present from the beginning.  Protestantism trying to use the Bereans to prove scripture alone is foolishness.

Onesimus, formerly Philemon's slave, was its first bishop according to the Apostolic Constitutions (VII, 46). A list of the Known bishops who attended ecclesiastical councils included Gerontius who took part in the Council of Sardica (c. 344), Lucas in the Second Council of Ephesus (449), Sebastian in the Council of Chalcedon (451), Timothy in the synod convoked by the patriarch Menas of Constantinople in 536, 

So as we move back in time showing examples of authority we come to Ignatius and Clement. Ignatius who was a disciple of John the apostle, as bishop of Antioch Syria wore:

“Ignatius . . . to the church also which holds the presidency, in the location of the country of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of blessing, worthy of praise, worthy of success, worthy of sanctification, and, because you hold the presidency in love, named after Christ and named after the Father” (Letter to the Romans 1:1 [A.D. 110]).

“You [the church at Rome] have envied no one, but others you have taught. I desire only that what you have enjoined in your instructions may remain in force” (ibid., 3:1

So it is reasonable to assume that the bishops of Berea would have the same sentiments being that Paul calls the church to be united in one mind and one faith and that there be no dissensions   between members.

Ignatius submitted to the church at Rome where Clement was bishop, so does Clement show us the authority of Rome?

From Clement we read:

THE FIRST CENTURY (96 AD, Epistle of Clement to Corinth, chapter 59):

"If, however, any shall disobey the words spoken by Him through us, let them knowthat they will involve themselves in transgression and serious danger.

So it was Pope Damasus who was understood to be the final authority to put the seal of authenticity on the Bible and His succession goes back to Clement and of course even farther back to Peter. Peter and Paul worked together to establish the Church at Rome. 

Going back to Clement again we read:

Through envy and jealousy, the greatest and most righteous pillars [of the Church] have been persecuted and put to death. Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles. Peter, through unrighteous envy, endured not one or two, but numerous labours and when he had at length suffered martyrdom, departed to the place of glory due to him. “Clement of Rome, The First Epistle of Clement, 5 (c. A.D. 96).

And through tradition we know where their bodies were placed.

In Eusebius history of the church we read:

"It is, therefore, recorded that Paul was beheaded in Rome itself, and that Peter likewise was crucified under Nero. This account of Peter and Paul is substantiated by the fact that their names are preserved in the cemeteries of that place even to the present day. It is confirmed likewise by Caius, a member of the Church, who arose under Zephyrinus, bishop of Rome. He, in a published disputation with Proclus, the leader of the Phrygian heresy, speaks as follows concerning the places where the sacred corpses of the aforesaid apostles are laid: 'But I can show the trophies of the apostles. For if you will go to the Vatican or to the Ostian way, you will find the trophies of those who laid the foundations of this church.'" Gaius, fragment in Eusebius' Church History, 2:25 (A.D. 198).

And Ignatius writes:

"I do not, as Peter and Paul, issue commandments unto you." Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Romans, 4 (c. A.D. 110).

Irenaeus wrote:

The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. – St. Irenaeus, A.D. 189

Irenaeus knows that there are multiple bishops, overseers, and yet here he is describing the Episcopate in a singular fashion because he is referring to an overseer above all other overseers.

And we see that the names of the earliest popes are in scripture.

Linus, generally thought to have been pope from 64 or 67 to 76 or 79 is mentioned in 2 Timothy, iv. 21 “Make haste to come before winter. Eubulus, and Pudens, and Linus, and Claudia, and all the brethren, salute thee.”

Clement is mentioned in Paul’s letter to the Phillippians iv.3, “And I entreat thee also, my sincere companion, help those women, who have labored with me in the gospel with Clement, and the rest of my fellow-labourers, whose names are in the book of life.”

And this takes us from the establishment of the Bible through the authority of the Catholic Church back to Peter and there were three popes and maybe 4 before the death of John the apostle. And, there were around 30 popes before Constantine. It is also obvious that Gods church was living the Catholic faith for 300 years before Constantine. So we are beginning to use the reasoning process of cause and effect, but I wanted to go backwards into the Biblical age by first showing the effect. Of course the cause is in scripture and the effect is the authority of the Catholic Church.

So, history shows the authoritative church God established. You have a final arbiter or you are tossed in the wind. It is obedience to the faith that nurtures our souls clouded by our fallen nature.

Matt. to Rev. - Peter is mentioned 155 times and the rest of apostles combined are only mentioned 130 times. Peter is also always listed first except in 1 Cor. 3:22 and Gal. 2:9 (which are written to show how Christ is head of the body. And how Paul saw himself in humility as separated from the pillars of the church who he described as James, Peter, and John.

So what was Jesus telling Peter and the church in this discourse?

He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: Feed my sheep. Jn 21:27

He was telling Peter to lead His church. He was giving him a kingly supremacy. John knew Peters role. A power of honor and jurisdiction. To feed Gods sheep is to be the shepherd of Gods flock. He says feed Gods sheep not his own sheep but the family of God.

From Jesus, Peter and The Keys in a quote from a Mr. Sungenis we read: There is a change from ‘feed’ (Greek: boske) to ‘shepherd’ (Greek :poimaine), Peter is told to ‘feed’ the lambs, but both ‘shepherd’ and ‘feed’ the sheep. Of the two, poimaine is the more technical and comprehensive of the two. It is used of ‘ruling’ in other texts, ( e.g Matthew 2:6; Revelation 2:27; 12:5; 19:5), whereas boske refers to only feeding. In each one of these three word exchanges there is a movement from weaker to stronger. The weaker words arnia, phileo, and boske are replaced by the stronger words, probatia, agape, and poimaine. The progression from weaker to stronger helps to show, in a preliminary way, the parameters and requirements for the ministry that Peter will soon undertake. Under divine assistance that he will eventually receive from the Holy Spirit, Peter will inaugurate his rule over the clergy and the laity that in turn, will be followed by his successors. At Pentecost, Peter received the complete installment of this divine assistance.”

The text shows going from friendly love, (Greek: phileo) to profound love in Christ (Greek: Agape) a change from Lambs (Greek: arnia) to sheep (Greek:probatia)

Of course we don’t want to forget Jesus telling us how Satan will attack this authority.

And the Lord said: Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat. 32But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren. Luke 22

The first use of the word “you” is plural showing us that Satan has desire to destroy the church. The second reference in the use of the word thee, is Jesus praying that Peter as head of the church His chief shepherd who will be given judicial authority, his faith will be strengthened and he will strengthen his brethren. This has to be the rest of the apostles but in the spiritual sense it is referring to the 2000 year old rock of unity. It is what keeps the church as one.

I want to now turn to this famous council of Jerusalem which was the mustard seed, the first council of the magisterium of the Catholic Church led by the first pope who was given judicial authority by God. You can’t truly look for the Catholic Church as you see it today in scripture because in scripture was the foundation that would later develop into the city on a hill that could not be hidden that would spread out throughout the entire world. You are not going to see the exact same thing you are going to see the mustard seed of the same thing because the church as a living entity grew and even grew in knowledge of itself and this knowledge was codified by the magisterium in councils, and yet almost all of the doctrine of the church was in the heart of the church from its earliest days.


This council of Jerusalem in 51 AD, was the image of the mustard seed that grew into the biggest tree and spread throughout the world. The same structure that was present in this council has grown and has survived for two thousand years while Kingdoms rose and fell. Even this fact over 2000 years should prove that the church has been protected by God for 2000 years.

What we see here at this council is that 

Peter, after establishing the church at Rome, came back to Jerusalem to lead this council. Remember, this is during the time of persecution and the Romans were always looking for the king on the chess board so these things were happening and things are being written in a guarded way. They did not want to expose the king on the chess board but people inside the church still knew what was going on.

From  Butler’s lives…we read:

 that “Eusebius, St. Jerome, and the old Roman Calendar, published by Bucherius, say that St. Peter held the see of Rome twenty-five years; though he was often absent upon his apostolic functions in other countries. According to this chronology, many place his first arrival at Rome in the second year of the reign of Claudius, of Christ, 42; but all circumstances prove it to have been in the year 40, the twelfth after the death of Christ, in 39…St. Peter went again into the East, and in 51 was present in the general council held by the apostles at Jerusalem.”

Protestants try to say that Peter was not in charge of this council James was. But this makes no sense when you take in all of the information. James was the host bishop in the same way even today there are host bishops for the pope. But notice what happened at this council after Peter spoke. After Peter everyone held their peace. Peter has spoken.

12And all the multitude held their peace: and they heard Barnabas and Paul telling what great signs and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them.

13And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying: Men, brethren, hear me. 14Simon hath related how God first visited to take to the Gentiles, a people to his name. 15And to this agree the words of the prophets, as it is written:

16After these things I will return and will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down: and the ruins thereof I will rebuild. And I will set it up:

So the multitude was silent after Peter did something that would shock the ancient world if they did not think Peter had authority to do it. Peter, by explaining that both Jews and Gentiles are saved by the grace of God and not Mosaic Law, just separated the church from 1300 years of Mosaic Law. I don’t understand why many people dont see this.

Those who followed Peter only gave an indication of acceptance. They did not tell Peter this is blasphemous. They did not tell Peter, you have no authority. In fact Paul and Barnabas confirms this by talking about how they experienced this grace among the Gentiles and James as the bishop of Jerusalem said something profound. James saw in this Council the prophecy of Amos fulfilled.

In that day I will raise up the tabernacle of David, that is fallen: and I will close up the breaches of the walls thereof, and repair what was fallen: and I will rebuild it as in the days of old.

13{12}That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and all nations, because my name is invoked upon them: saith the Lord that doth these things.

Amos 9:11

All nations, those from all nations will enter the body of Christ the sacramental kingdom of David.

In addition. It was not James who had a vision that would influence the decision of this council but it was the first pope of the universal Catholic Church.

Remember Peter’s vision in Acts 10?

Let’s read it.

And on the next day, whilst they were going on their journey and drawing nigh to the city, Peter went up to the higher parts of the house to pray, about the sixth hour. 10And being hungry, he was desirous to taste somewhat. And as they were preparing, there came upon him an ecstasy of mind. 11And he saw the heaven opened and a certain vessel descending, as it were a great linen sheet let down by the four corners from heaven to the earth: 12Wherein were all manner of four-footed beasts and creeping things of the earth and fowls of the air. 13And there came a voice to him: Arise, Peter. Kill and eat. 14But Peter said: Far be it from me. For I never did eat any thing that is common and unclean. 15And the voice spoke to him again the second time: That which God hath cleansed, do not thou call common. 16And this was done thrice. And presently the vessel was taken up into heaven.

Soon after this vision Peter baptized the Gentile family of Cornelius and to make a long story short, what did Peter say to Cornelius.

We read it in Acts 10:28

8And he said to them: you know how abominable it is for a man that is a Jew to keep company or to come unto one of another nation: but God hath shewed to me, to call no man common or unclean.

He is showing us a common belief of Jews and yet at the council he declared that both Jews and Gentiles are saved by grace not by the Mosaic Law!

So an Orthodox scholar by the name of Nicholas Koulomzine wrote in his book  Peter’s  Place in the Early Church:

For Peter’s actions after the Ascension give us a means to discover the real meaning of the words that Christ had spoken to him. Jerusalem is the place where Peter stands forth, in the Pentecostal Church and surrounded by the twelve (he is never dissociated from them in the Gospels); here he first showed that he could be a Rock, Rock of the church, as Christ called him when He said, “Thou art Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church ‘(Matt. 16:18). At Jerusalem, again, Peter was to show a faith that did not fail, and acted out Christ’s promise, “Thou then, when thou hast turned again, stablish thy brethren (Luke 22:32) and, still at Jerusalem, Peter became the Shepherd of the church and carried out Christs injunction, ;Feed my lambs, feed my sheep.” 



So, it was Peter the first pope of the Catholic Church who separated the church from 1300 years of Mosaic Law and it was by divine Providence, God wanted the first pope to baptize the first Gentiles into the church even though it was Paul who focused on going out to the Gentiles and Peter to the Jews. And St Chrysostom tells us why when he wrote:

“And if anyone would say 'How did James receive the chair of Jerusalem?", I would reply that he appointed Peter a teacher not of the chair, but of the world..."  St. Chrysostom

So the church would never have put together the Bible if it did not believe itself to be the reestablished kingdom of David so from here besides the council, let’s look at how we know the church is the reestablished Kingdom of David.

The Jews looked to Jesus on Palm Sunday as the coming of their king because their own prophets showed them that the Kingdom of David would be reestablished. John 12:13 says:

Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him, and cried: Hosanna, blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord, the king of Israel.


Jesus named Simon rock. Where there is a name change in scripture there is a higher calling, there is the establishment of a very important piece in the salvation mysteries. Through Isaiah God called Abraham rock.

1Give ear to me, you that follow that which is just, and you that seek the Lord: look unto the rock whence you are hewn, and to the hole of the pit from which you are dug out.

2Look unto Abraham your father

Isaiah 51:1

So both Abraham and Peter are referred to as “ rock”.

Let’s quickly dispel this foolishness that Peter is not the rock and we will add emphasis to this in a little while. One of the problems with Sola Scriptura that it constantly placed Protestants at odds with other Protestants. So let’s let Protestants defend Peter as being the rock.

William Hendriksen

Member of the Reformed Christian Church, Professor of New Testament Literature at Calvin Seminary

The meaning is, “You are Peter, that is Rock, and upon this rock, is, on you, Peter I will build my church.” Our Lord, speaking Aramaic, probably said, “And I say to you, you are Kepha, and on this kepha I will build my church.” Jesus, then, is promising Peter that he is going to build his church on him! I accept this view. (New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1973), 647.)


Gerhard Maier

Leading conservative evangelical Lutheran theologian

Nowadays a broad consensus has emerged which – in accordance with the words of the text – applies the promise to Peter as a person. On this point liberal (H. J. Holtzmann, E. Schweiger) and conservative (Cullmann, Flew) theologians agree, as well as representatives of Roman Catholic exegesis. (“The Church in the Gospel of Matthew: Hermeneutical Analysis of the Current Debate,” Biblical Interpretation and Church Text and Context, (Flemington Markets, NSW: Paternoster Press, 1984), 58.) 

Donald A. Carson III

Baptist and Professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Seminary

Although it is true that petros and petra can mean “stone” and “rock” respectively in earlier Greek, the distinction is largely confined to poetry. Moreover the underlying Aramaic is in this case unquestionable; and most probably kepha was used in both clauses (“you are kepha” and “on this kepha”), since the word was used both for a name and for a “rock.” The Peshitta (written in Syriac, a language cognate with Aramaic) makes no distinction between the words in the two clauses. The Greek makes the distinction between petros and petra simply because it is trying to preserve the pun, and in Greek the feminine petra could not very well serve as a masculine name.  (The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Volume 8 (Matthew, Mark, Luke), (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984), 368.)

So Abraham was the physical rock in the Old Testament, the Old Testament patriarch. Peter the physical in the new. The New Testament Patriarch. Both supported by the spiritual rock of Christ. Just as Abraham was a physical founder of a nation the promise of Abraham fulfilled includes Peter as the physical foundation of   the new nation. There is nothing new here when it comes to structure. What happened with Abraham is what happened with Peter in the fulfillment of the promise of Abraham in the chosen people, the holy nation, the Royal Priesthood.

I guess I need to make clear here that Jesus is the ultimate founder who established both Abraham and Peter in order to establish unity of the nation.

When Jesus walked the earth, the Jews were spread out all over the known world and they prayed for a new king and for the kingdom of David to be reestablished.

So in looking at the origins of the Catholic Church, 

the Jews understood through the prophet Jeremiah that the throne of David would always have a leader. Jer. 33:17

For thus saith the Lord: There shall not be cut off from David a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel

Daniel told us that the kingdom would never be destroyed.

But in the days of those kingdoms the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed, and his kingdom shall not be delivered up to another people, and it shall break in pieces, and shall consume all these kingdoms, and itself shall stand for ever. 

Dan 2:44

In the Old Kingdom there is a chief steward of the house of God and in Isaiah 22 Shebna is described as having an office in the kingdom. So an office shows dynastic succession because when Isaiah is writing he is showing this office four hundred years after David established the kingdom.

In Isaiah 22:21 Eliakim is called a father from which we get the word papa or pope. The pope is the chief steward of the reestablished Kingdom of David and we just proved his authority by showing how he separated the Church from 1300 years of Mosaic Law.

In Isaiah 22:22 we see the keys being past from Shebna to Aliakim showing the key’s being not only a symbol of authority but also to show a dynastic succession.

So the apostles understood this and that is why you saw the authority at Rome being past down from Peter to Linus down to the papal leaders of every council of the church to our present pope fulfilling the prophecy of Jeremiah that there will always be a leader on the throne.

I would ask our Protestant friends, does Aliakim as the new palace administrator in Isaiah 22:23 in the kingdom of David, have a throne of honor granted to him?

Does this throne include placing on him the dignity of the king by the giving to him as the ambassador of the king, the king’s robes?

21And I will clothe him with thy robe, and will strengthen him with thy girdle, and will give thy power into his hand: and he shall be as a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Juda

Isaiah 22:21

Is this why Catholics kiss the ring of the pope ? Because He holds an office established by God therefore it is a holy office as Gods representative on earth? Humility, humility, humility. Satan has none.

Oscar Cullman a Lutheran and biblical scholar addressed this. We read:

In Matthew 16:19, it is presupposed that Christ is the master of the house, who has the keys to the kingdom of heaven, with which to open to those who come in. Just as in Isaiah 22:22 the Lord lays the keys of the house of David on the shoulders of His servant Eliakim, so Jesus commits to Peter the keys of His house, the kingdom of heaven, and therefore installs him as administrator of the house.

( Oscar Cullman, Peter: Discipline, Apostles, Martyr p 203)

In the book Jesus, Peter and the Keys, by Scott Butler is a reference to a Jewish rabbi who lived in 70 AD. This is quoted from a book called The Pope: Vicar of Christ by Francis J. Ripley

Whatever thou shalt bind.’ In these words Jesus was conferring on Peter in a special and unique way power which was conferred on the Apostle as a body on another occasion. He was simply using the language of the day [emphasis added]. Everyone knew what it meant. The Rabbis were said to bind when they forbade something and to loose when they permitted it. We know of a Rabbi called Nechonya [ or, Nehunya] who lived about the year 70. He always put the following prayer before his lessons: May it please thee, O Yahweh, my God and God of my Fathers, that we may not declare impure what is pure and pure what is impure; that we may not bind what is loosed nor loosed what is bound “

For our Protestant friends. With this in mind, What did Peter do at the Council of Jerusalem in the reestablished kingdom of David?

He declared what is pure through the power of the Keys through the influence of the Holy Spirit by way of his vision, separating the church from 1300 years of Mosaic Law. You just saw the beginning of the doctrine of infallibility established by God. 

Again in Jesus, Peter and the keys Butler quotes a Protestant scholar named  R.T France:

“ These terms [ Binding and loosing] thus refer to a teaching function, and more specifically one of making halakhic pronouncements [ i.e, relative to laws not written down in the Jewish scriptures but based on an oral interpretation of them] which are to be “ binding “ on the people of God. In that case Peter’s ‘Power of the keys’ declared in [ Matthew] 16:9 is not so much that the doorkeeper, who decides who may or may not be admitted to the Kingdom of heaven, but that of the stewards { as in Isaiah 22:22, generally regarded as the Old Testament background to the metaphor of the keys here}, whose keys of office enable him to regulate the affairs of the household.

This is decree from which we get the Latin dogmata. In halakhic you also see the beginning of canon law and papal bulls.

And where did we see this first decree? 

When Peter separated the church from 1300 years of Mosaic Law through the power of the keys. What would be a Biblical example of halakhic?

We saw it as a temporary law at the council of Jerusalem so that Jews in the church were not scandalized by Gentiles eating food which was on pagan alters.

But that we write unto them, that they refrain themselves from the pollutions of idols and from fornication and from things strangled and from blood. 21For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him in the synagogues, where he is read every sabbath. Acts 15:20

Saint Bede who lived from 673-735 A.D wrote:

“ Blessed  Peter so received the keys of the kingdom and the supremacy of judicial power, that all who believe throughout the world may understand that whosoever shall cut themselves off in any way… cannot enter the kingdom of heaven… Peter received the keys to Heaven as a sign to all the children of the church, so that if they separate from the one faith which teaches, they give up all hope of being acquitted of their guilt and of entering the eternal portals…And I say unto you that Peter is the doorkeeper whom I will not contradict, but I will obey his decrees in everything, lest when I come to the gates of the kingdom of Heaven there should be no one to open them, since he will be my adversary who is proven to have possession of the keys.”

And of course this great saint does not separate Peter from the office of the papacy. This is one of the reasons why every time I have a conversation with Protestants and they begin to evade by not answering because their answer would in turn support the Catholic faith, I pray that they are in a state of invincible ignorance and that they are not destroying their souls.

Let’s solidify this understanding of Peter’s authority with kind of a shot gun approach across the early history of the church.

Tertullian ( 200-220 ) said:

“ Was anything hidden from Peter, who was called the rock wherein the church was built.”

St Hippolytus around 225 AD wrote:

Peter the rock of the church.

Origen 230-250


See what is said by the Lord to [ Peter] that great foundation of the Church.

St Cyprian around 246 AD wrote:

On him he builds the church, and unto him He gives the commandment to feed the sheep.

Bishop Firmilian around 254 AD writes addressing pope Stephen on a dispute over the baptism of heretics:

But how great his ( Pope) Stephens) error, how exceeding his blindness, who says remission of sins can be given in the synagogues of the heretics, not abiding on the foundation of the one church, which was once first established by Christ on a Rock, may hence be understood that to Peter alone Christ said, “ Whatever thou shalt bind.

Bishop Eusebius 325 AD

Writes concerning Peter:

That powerful and great one of the Apostles, who, on account of his excellence, was the leader of the rest.

Of course we can go on and on but one thing is clear. Contrary to the teachings of Protestantism which can never rise above opinion. The scriptures were actualized for the Catholic Church. The church flowed from scripture before a word of scripture was written down. It flowed past scripture developing into its physical reality and for the first 1400 years of Christianity, Christianity as a whole lived within this physically reality of the reestablished kingdom of David. Protestantism is not in scripture. Protestantism is created by taking a cookie cutter to a Judeo Catholic Book.

Matthew 23:2 shows that the Jews understood the authority of the chair of Moses through which Jesus fulfilled in the chair of Peter.

1Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to his disciples, 2Saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses. 3

All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do.

Jesus before Pentecost is telling the Jews under the law to do as the authority of the Old Kingdom tells you to do. Jesus said I did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill the law and this chair never went away, it now has a power much much greater. It has been given the keys to the kingdom of heaven.

Whatever is bound on earth is bound in heaven. This chair has the power to wipe out 1300 years of Mosaic Law. A  Cardinal named Cajetan referred to Caiaphas speaking prophetically from Moses seat:

Jesus Christ has given testimony on these matters. Why should the faithful be astonished at such a great help given by divine grace to Christs vicar on earth? Grace aided Caiaphas when he held pontifical office over the synagogue, as it was losing its rightful character and was persecuting Christ himself. By reason of his pontifical office he was given prophetic speech, as John the Evangelist bore witness. ‘He did not say this on his own, but being high priest for that year, he prophesied that Jesus would die for the people’ [John 11:51]. Why else did John reveal this, if not to reveal this, if not to reveal the special divine assistance given one in pontifical office”

Notice that nowhere in the Old Testament do you find reference to this authoritative seat of Moses. In Jesus referring to it he is referring to unwritten tradition. So Jesus here is beginning to bind the church to an unwritten tradition in an authoritative office.

Scripture proves that even if a bad pope has excathedra authority, the Holy Spirit in defending the truths of the church will work through a bad pope. The Holy Spirit worked through Caiaphas who fornicated with pagan Rome in the killing of the Christ. Jesus meant it when He said, Satan will plant weeds in the wheat in the kingdom of heaven because the kingdom is Gods church. Paul says, whoever hateth his own flesh, no, one loves and nourishes his own flesh as Christ does the church.

Augustine said, “Peter was made the pastor of the church, as Moses was made the ruler of the Jewish people.”

With these things in mind; and even bringing to mind our last discussion of the mystical body of Christ. We should have a much clearer vision when it comes to what Paul meant when he said,

You have come to Mount Sion, to the New Jerusalem…Mount Sion is through which the wisdom of God goes out into the world.

Isaiah tells us:

And many people shall go, and say: Come and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, and to the house of the God of Jacob, and he will teach us his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for the law shall come forth from Sion, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. 

Isaiah 2:3

We should have a clearer understanding when He said:

But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. 

1 Tim 3:15

When he said:

That the manifold wisdom of God may be made known to the principalities and powers in heavenly places through the church, 

Ephesians 3:10

From here I want to go to a series of scriptures and interpretations that really places this in perspective. I don’t remember where I got it so I will simply say, I did not create it.


The Bible teaches that the true Church began with Christ over 1900 years ago, not with men or women 15 to 19 centuries later. It was founded when Our Lord spoke the following and other similar words:

Matt. 28, 18-20: And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye, therefore. and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

COMMENT: History proves that the First Protestant Church was the Lutheran, founded in 1517 by the ex-priest Martin Luther; all other of the some 33,800 sects have been created since then.


The Bible teaches that the rulers of Christ's Church have authority which must be obeyed in matters of religion.

Heb. 13, 17: Obey them that have the rule over you and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

Matt 18-17: And if he shall neglect to hear them tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

Luke 10-16: He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.

Matt. 16-19: And I will give unto thee (Peter) the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou (Peter) shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou (Peter) shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

COMMENT: The apostles repeatedly claimed this authority: Gal. 1-8; John 1-10; Acts 15, 23 and 28. Hence the laws or precepts of the true Church are founded upon the same authority as the commandments of God. For the Church of Christ has authority to act in his Name.




The Bible teaches that not the Bible itself, but the Holy Ghost was the teacher of the Apostles.

John 14-26: But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things. and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

John 16-13: How be it when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth . . .

Acts 1-8: But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost parts of the earth.

COMMENT: In consequence, the true Church was necessarily infallible, being as St. Paul said (l Timothy 5-15) "the pillar and ground of the truth."


The Bible teaches that the Church has Christ always WITH IT and the Holy Ghost always to guide it-not only during the first century but during all future ages.

Matt. 28-20: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you ALWAYS, EVEN UNTO THE END of the world. Amen.

John 14-16: And I will pray the Father and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you FOREVER.

COMMENT: Hence it is an insult to Christ and the Holy Spirit to say that God's Church fell into error and had to be reformed by Luther, Calvin and other men or women.


The Bible teaches that the visible Church of Christ has had and will ever have uninterrupted existence.

Matt. 28, 19-20: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost . . . lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.

Matt. 16-18: . . . and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

COMMENT: Hence the theory that Christ's Church, which began with Christ, failed - became non-existent for 1000 or more years - and then was revived by either Luther, Calvin, Knox or some other man or woman, is ridiculous and untrue.

So, in closing:

Jesus came from the line of David as king, therefore scripture shows us the begots.

Jesus said I will build my church. We know prophecy tells us that the Kingdom of David would last forever.

The apostles believed they were in the last days where prophecy is fulfilled.

At the council of Jerusalem, James quoted the prophet Amos showing the prophecy fulfilled that the kingdom of David has been reestablished in the church for both Jews and Gentiles.

Paul said ( Writing to those who were baptized into the church living the sacramental life in obedience to the faith) you have come to Mount Sion, the New Jerusalem.

Mount Sion in prophecy is the mountain of the Lord which we shall go to in order to learn the wisdom of God.

Jesus told the church:

If they hear you they hear me, if they reject you then they reject me and the one who sent me.

He said, Behold, I will be with you always, even until the consummation of the word. 

He said, If they do not listen to even the church treat them as heathens and publicans.

Paul tells us the one church will exist from the beginning of Christianity through all generations telling us, to Him be glory in the church, through all generations which confirms the prophecy that the throne will always be occupied.

So let’s look at simple logical deduction.

Jesus would never have given Peter the keys of binding and loosing and succession of the Kingdom of David , if he was not reestablishing the Kingdom of David in the universal church of both Jews and Gentiles as James announced at the council of Jerusalem.

The church became Catholic when circumcision showing the promise of Abraham for Jews only was fulfilled through baptism for both Jews and Gentiles into the promise fulfilled in the kingdom as the chosen people, the holy nation, the royal priesthood.

Paul would never have called the church the pillar and foundation of truth, he would never have said “that the manifold wisdom of God may be made known to the principalities and powers in heavenly places through the church “, if he did not believe that the church is Mount Sion, if the church was not the bride, the flesh of Christ, the reestablished kingdom of David. 

Therefore, when Paul said

How can one preach unless he be sent, he is saying the only authority that can send is the reestablished kingdom of David.

When he said, obey your prelates who have the rule over you for they watch over your souls. When he says, “let the priest who rules well be worthy of double honor especially those who labor in the word and doctrine”; he would think it an abomination to say obey the prelates of a denomination that is not the reestablished kingdom of David; it is Heresy to say obey the Anglican Church, the Lutheran Church, The Pentecostal, the born again…

There is one supernatural sacramental church established by God. The sacraments perpetuate the mystical body of Christ through time. The Eucharist is true because through the Eucharist is the true Passover for the general redemption of the world. There is no salvation without the Eucharist before the Father. All other churches are created by man. 

There is nowhere in scripture where man is given the right to form a different church or a different doctrine.

Satan’s deceptions are that complete. He even created paganism to keep people from Catholic truth. People think they can easily uncover the deceptions of a preternatural intelligence that has had from the beginning of time to perfect his brainwashing on a world scale. There is no Protestant church in scripture. You cannot go through the scriptures showing the formation of a Protestant style church. You  cannot separate apostolic tradition from the faith God established or you injure the very vitals of the gospel.

The church became Catholic/ universal, before a word of New Testament scripture was written. It became Catholic when the sign of the promise of Abraham in circumcision for Jews only, was fulfilled in entering the promise of Abraham fulfilled was established through baptism into the chosen people, the holy nation, the royal priesthood for both Jews and Gentiles/ universal.


bottom of page