Replies

Please, whatever. Ss. Peter and Paul went to Rome. They didn’t go to Constantinople. And they didn’t go to Wittenberg.

Which is simply more sophistry, for it presumes that visiting a city makes the particular church in it the head of all the churches and supremely determinitive of doctrine, but which is simply nowhere taught in the record of the NT church, which at best makes Jerusalem the residence of the central leadership.

Rather than teaching Roman Catholicism, with its people looking to Peter as the first of a line of infallible popes in Rome, Paul does not even mention Peter (the initial street-level leader among brethren) in his epistle to the Romans (don't even try the absurd excuse that he sought to protect Peter while naming over 30 people).

Nor does this letter nor any other letter to the churches or Acts (which are interpretive of the gospels) exhort or remind the churches to submit to Peter as their supreme head, nor is such imagined particular universal submission mentioned or commended, including in the Lord's critique of the 7 churches in Asia.

And rather than a distinct class of believers distinctively called "saints," the word is used interchangeably for believers.

And rather than a distinct, normatively celibate class of believers distinctively titled "priests" offering up the "real" body and blood of Christ as a sacrifice for sins, and to be consumed in order to obtain spiritual life;

instead no leadership is ever distinctively titled "priests" (and presbuteros or episkopos does not mean priest), and are not even described as officiating at the Lord's supper and dispensing the elements, much less offering them as a sacrifice for sins.

Nor is this Catholic function taught as being a primary or unique function of the clergy, who instead are exhorted to preach the word, (2Tim. 4:2) feeding the flock (Acts 20:28; 1Pt. 5:2) with the word of God, which is what is called "milk" and "meat" (1Co. 3:2; Heb. 5:13; 1Pt. 2:2) by believing which souls obtain spiritual life within themselves, (Acts 10:43-47; 15;7-9; Eph. 1:13) and then they are "nourished" (1Tim. 4:6) and built up. (Acts 20:32)

Moreover, both apostles (1Co. 9:5) and NT clergy were normatively married with children, which evidenced his qualifications for the pastorate,(1Tim. 3;1-7) and with celibacy being a gift that not all have, (1Co. 7:7) and it is only wrongly presumed that all or almost all clergy do.

Nor is the Lord's supper manifest as being the central supreme practice of the NT church, as instead it is only manifestly described in one epistle (besides "feast of charity" in Jude 1:12) and in which the Catholic Eucharist is not evident, but the church is the focus as the "one bread" and the body of Christ, purchased with the sinless shed blood of Christ, whose death, and the love behind it, the church is supposed to declare by sharing food in that communal meal. (1Co. 11:17-34) . More , by God's grace.

Nor (among approx. 200 prayers in Scripture) is any believer ever described as praying to created beings in Heaven, which only pagans did, and is contrary to the instructions given on prayer to Heaven, God's throne,

Nor is salvation taught as being attained by the act of sprinkling making one good actually enough to be with God, thus (since one acts out his remaining sinful nature afterward) usually having to endure postmortem "purifying torments" in RC "Purgatory " in order to (atone for sins and) actually become good enough to be with God.

Nor were novenas made to obtain indulgences to escape RC purgatory, as instead by effectual faith true believers are already accepted in the Beloved, and positionally seated together with Him in Heaven, and have boldness to enter into the holy of holies, (Eph. 1:6; 2:6; Heb. 10:19; cf. Phil. 3:21) and will go to be with the Lord at death or at His return. (Lk. 23:43 [cf. 2Cor. 12:4; Rv. 2:7]; Phil 1:23; 2Cor. 5:8 ["we"]; 1Cor. 15:51ff'; 1Thess. 4:17)

And with the only suffering manifestly taught after this life is that of the judgment seat of Christ, (1Co. 3:8) which does not begin at death, but awaits the Lord's return, (1Cor. 4:5; 2Tim. 4:1,8; Rev.11:18; Mt. 25:31-46; 1Pt. 1:7; 5:4) and is the suffering of the loss of rewards due to the manner of material one built the church with, which one is saved despite the loss of such, not because of it.

Nor did the NT church profess belief in ensured magisterial infallibility, which is unseen and unnecessary in Scripture, but which presumptuous self-proclaimed premise is the real basis for RC assurance that her claims are true.