The pope has the power, according to Catholic doctrine, to sanction a doctrine of faith or morals as having come from Jesus.  As Jesus is considered incapable of error this amounts to the doctrine being infallible.

The pope should use his infallibility as much as possible to prevent the Church from being beset by confusion, schism and division over doctrinal and moral problems now and in the future. He won’t tell countries on the brink of war what to do - what the best solution is. He could use his infallibility to determine the moral thing to do. Though the Church doesn’t believe in relativism it does admit that there is some truth in it. For example, whether a war is just or not has to be decided according to the situation. Morality, for the vastly most part is, about these decisions and the Church used to use the casuistry system to deal with them. Jesus according to the gospels focused more on ethics than on rubbish such as God being this or that. Curiously the infallibility of the Church is more concerned about dogma such as Mary being without sin than in morals. Infallible moral statements have been issued by the Church extremely rarely – with the nasty ban on contraception being a notable example. Here we have a God who supposedly wants us to live good lives above all things and who is more concerned about what we believe than what we do. The Church knows fine well that it is not infallible. That is why it avoids making infallible statements on morals for it knows that it will get caught out for making wrong statements.

The pope doesn’t like helping the world out of confusion by his infallibility.  He can’t pretend that there is no point for it won’t make a difference for he doesn’t know if it will or not so it is worth a try. So much for his confidence in the Holy Spirit’s power to guide him in resolving difficulties.

The pope will say that any divisions caused by his silence are not his fault. That is only an excuse with a man of his influence.

He will say that the persons responsible should unite but agree amicably to differ or look into the problem thoroughly. This is no excuse for he has no right to keep his lips shut when he knows it tempts people to tear the Church apart. In his wonderful and sincere way, he says this while he condemns unnecessary actions which give others an excuse for evil works.

It is clear by now that the pope does not really believe that he is infallible for he is afraid to use his alleged gift too much in case he gets found out. He is a con. He devises rules that cause suffering and death like the ban on contraceptives and he doesn’t believe a word of it! He is a murderer!

If the pope really believed in his infallibility he would have given an infallible interpretation of the Bible to the world considering the Church considers the Bible so important and devotes much of the Mass to reading it. It would save scholars a lot of bother. The Church claims to have the power to interpret scripture without error and has made some statements about the meaning of some Bible texts. Today, most Bible scholars give out interpretations and criticise the Bible in a way that must horrify the Church but the pope is silent.
Why is it that the Church says that Catholics do not believe doctrines because they are defined but the Church defines them because they are believed by the people (The Church and Infallibility, page 18). That is an admission that the Church courts popularity. It is an arbitrary standard for it is only in recent years that most Catholics have rejected the ban on birth-control and are slammed as unorthodox and going to Hell. Before then, it was a different story. The whole Christian world disapproved of it.
Sometimes the Church defines to keep a grip on its power over the people. The Church usually defines when a popular doctrine starts to be threatened by large numbers and sometimes even most members challenge the doctrine. The doctrine of the Church that no dogma is an article of faith until the Church infallibly proclaims it (page 20, The Church and Infallibility) is an admission that the Church is not interested in what evidence says at all. You can’t make a dogma just because everybody or most people believe it. That is not evidence that they are right. Given the negativity the New Testament bears towards human reliability when it comes to matters of God, it is downright heretical and reckless.
The Church used to believe from the start that usury was wrong and in recent centuries it has dropped this doctrine without trace (chapter 18, Rome has Spoken). Another tradition that was universal in the early Church in the second century and that has been scrapped by Rome is that Christians are to be pacifist (chapter 17, Rome has Spoken). That means that by its standards, it has abandoned an infallible doctrine for the first universal beliefs of the Church would be the ones that count which is the reason why the Church does not hold that its ban on contraception is fallible doctrine on the basis that the Church does not believe in it now for it accepted it in the past. All this is so absurd that it is seems plain that the Church couldn’t possibly seriously believe that it is infallible.

The pope is not a Roman Catholic for he does not believe in his own infallibility. The Catholic Church cannot be the true Church when a fake pope runs it for then it would be right to break from his Church to continue the true Church and elect a new pope.
To say the pope would excommunicate himself if he tried to deliberately fake an infallible declaration and that God would kill him before he would commit this act conserves the idea of God protecting the Church from error. But it makes no sense to say that the pope can mislead the Church in a far worse way by not defining a dogma that needs to be defined and not excommunicate himself or prove that Jesus’ alleged promise that the Church would never err was false. Not defining is always an indication of disbelief in infallibility though the Church says it is often inopportune to do it which is why it declines to define some teachings as dogmas. For example, the definition of Mary being the co-redeemer with Jesus has been put off in case it does damage to the ecumenical process. The Church and the Bible both teach that the Holy Spirit uses us to convert one another and it is he who is entitled to most of the credit through his interior graces. If the Church really had confidence in him it would go ahead and define that Mary is co-redemptrix. After all it is impossible to be very sure it would harm ecumenical relations or that no solution for this problem could be found if it does happen especially if the Holy Spirit has any power at all. Any corporation can do something at a bad time and the Holy Spirit will do all he can if the Catholic Church does the same. The Spirit can’t expect the Church to be infallible in its diplomatic relations.

If the pope is wrong to say that he is the visible head of the Church then he wants to deceive. He knows he should make sure he is the Vicar of Christ and has the theologians and books to assist in his research. If he is not then he knows he is not or he doesn’t care. He should set up his tribunal and then step down as pope if his office is illegitimate. He should go back to being just the bishop of Rome.

The pope is indeed a man of sin or THE man of sin who planks himself in the temple of God as if he were God (2 Thessalonians 2). He is an impostor and he tells us to obey him for he is the voice of God. He is really claiming to be above God for God wouldn’t want us to. When you worship a man who interprets God for you without authority you are really worshiping that man more than God when you worship God for the revealer is more important than the revealed.

To claim that you know that a person like him is being sincere is evil for you know how much pretending you do yourself.
Roman Catholicism is a religion that is led by a man who is unashamedly called, “Your Holiness.” They say that the pope can be called this even if he is no saint for he is holy to God in his office as pontiff. In other words, his job is holy and not necessarily him. That is seen to be false when you think for a minute. It contradicts the very way they address him. You don’t say, “Your Importance”, to a person who is not important but whose job is. Why can’t the pope be called the Vicar of Christ instead of His Holiness? The pope is boasting of his spiritual and moral superiority. He is a Pharisee. I don’t want to call him a religious snob but many would.

Reverence means treating something as holy to God. Reverend is the title that comes from this. Priests and clergy bear it, they have no shame though they condemn pride as a sin. They are telling people to revere them as if they were something special. Snobs. They are not indispensable if there is a God of power and might.
When you jail a killer it is not because you know he meant to kill – maybe he was possessed? - but because the evidence tells you to jail him to be on the safe side. The pope doesn’t want safe sides. He wants to be regarded as the Vicar of Christ and obeyed . The office of the papacy contradicts the wisdom and the justice endorsed by this principle therefore it is an evil office.

Catholics believe that the bread and wine of communion become the body and blood of Jesus Christ in the literal sense on the altar. Jesus becomes present in every part of them. Yet the pope allows communion in the hand which inevitably means that small particles of the host, each of which are the Lord, are lost. There would be less chance of this happening if communion were only placed on the tongue. And the pope excommunicates people who sacrilegiously defile communion hosts though his policies do the same sacrilege. The pope defiles the communion host himself for unnecessary loss of the body and blood of Christ occurs when communion in the hand is allowed. Therefore he, by justice, has excommunicated himself and is not a Catholic. A non-Catholic pope is not entitled to obedience in matters of faith and dogma.
The popes entered the priesthood knowing it facilitated a culture of secrecy about clerical child sex abuse and such abuse was rife in Catholic schools even at the hands of lay teachers though the priests were their bosses and the patrons of the school. That is what is so disgusting about the alleged compassion of the likes of Benedict XVI about the clerical sex abuse scandals.

It is frightful for a man to give out teachings which he claims are not infallible but nevertheless to be obeyed for they cannot be wrong. He knows that much of Catholic Tradition, which the Church says is the word of God, cannot be traced back to the time of Jesus. So much of the teaching he gives must be man-made because of that. He is just guessing that he is right. Does he not care what harm he is doing if he is wrong?

For the Catholic and Protestant and Pagan world to bless and approve the pope and to accept him as a bona-fide teacher is for them to make themselves as bad as he is.
We need to see the enemies of reason as our own enemies. That is what they are! We need to see the pope and the system he stands for for what they are! Then we won't be taken in by their beatific facades! Their goodness is just superstition masquerading as goodness. It is superstition masquerading as morality.  The pope is an enemy of reason and truth.


No Copyright