Thanks to Pope Francis I'm No Longer a 'Neo-Catholic'

The Remnant ^ | March 22, 2017 | Petra Perkov

[BlessedBeGod]

Three months is not such a long period of time, but it was more than enough for me to turn my life around. All I knew and all I was came tumbling down like a house of cards one late evening in the fall of 2016. And it started with Pope Francis.

I was born in the 80s, raised a Catholic in a 'modern, ecumenical' Catholic faith. However, it would be unfair for me to blame the post-Vatican II period for my sinful ways. I hold myself accountable, more than anyone or anything else, for not taking the Faith seriously.

I was a Catholic on the fence, Catholic in name only. In other words, I was a disgrace. Sure, I prayed to God (when I needed something), went to Confession (once a year), refrained from sin (when it wasn't too inconvenient) and believed (in a false version of God).

Clearly, I was living a lie.

Picking and choosing those bits of the Church's teaching that suited me, while completely ignoring the others, I was quickly becoming a disciple of Satan without even realizing it.

And so, as an ardent follower of Satan, I found myself watching some Protestant videos on YouTube. Then it happened. By the Grace of God, I stumbled upon a pretty interesting Protestant video on Pope Francis.

As a modern, semi-liberal Catholic (thank God, I have always been very much pro-life), I had thought that Pope Francis was pretty amazing. I never knew much about him, but I quickly bought into the whole 'mercy mission' of our Pope. Watching this Protestant video bashing Pope Francis, I felt my heart sink. For although I liked some Protestants, there was something deep inside me, buried beneath the layers of modernism, that was truly Catholic. I had always known that the Catholic Church was the only true church.

Still, these Protestants were right about everything regarding Pope Francis. The video in question analyzed the obviously outrageous prayer exchange between our Pope and the prosperity gospel fraud Kenneth Copeland.

My heart was racing like crazy. What is Pope Francis doing? What's going on?

And then, a question crossed my mind: Is the Catholic Church really the One True Church?

I needed to find out what was happening. Is it possible that Catholics support the actions of our Pope?

This was the beginning of the end. The end of the old me and the first step on my journey home. For, while I was searching for facts regarding Pope Francis and Catholicism, a whole new world opened up to me: the world of traditional Catholics (aka faithful Catholics).

I learned abouth the Church history, the errors of modernism, the rotten fruits of the Vatican II, the few remaining faithful bishops and cardinals, Amoris Laetitia, the Latin Mass and the false mercy. But, most importantly, I learned about hell.

I had never known about hell. Sure, there was a vague concept somewhere at the back of my mind of what hell might look like. You know, a place where some really nasty paedophiles and serial killers go. Mortal sin – what's that?

Metaphorically speaking, it was Pope Francis who led me to hell. His actions and words became so outrageously liberal and erroneous, that I could no longer ignore the whole 'let's-tolerate-everyone-and-everything-in-the-name-of-mercy“ attitude, let alone mistake it for the real Church teaching. I needed to know what the Church really is all about. I needed to know what hell is. Thanks to Pope Francis, I learned all this and so much more.

Had Pope Francis never been elected, would I have changed my ways? Only God knows.

The whole point of this story is, that even in the midst of the unprecedented crisis in Church history, the Holy Spirit still governs the Catholic Church. Sinners are being converted every day, some in spite of the crisis in the Church, others because of it.

Thank you, Holy Spirit, for always guiding us.

Forgive us, Our Lord Jesus, for we have sinned.

Have mercy on our poor souls, God the Father.

Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us.

[Elsie]

Um, sorry, but the Apostles were celebrating the Mass long before the Book of Revelation was written!

Then PLEASE!

Tell us how it is POSSIBLE that these churches were so screwed up in such a short period of time?

[Elsie]

I think you’re having to work awfully hard to rewrite and refute what is very clearly there.

Oh??

 

The way it's written:

 

Galatians 4:4-5

But when the set time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, ⁵ to redeem those under the law, that we might receive adoption to sonship.

 

The way Rome teaches it:

 

Galatians 4:4-5

But when the set time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a....

 

Co-Redemptrix, 
Ark of the Covenant,
Cause of Our Joy,

Cause of our Salvation ,
Comfort of the Afflicted,
Destroyer of Heresy,
Ever-virgin ,
Favoured Daughter of the Father,
Gate of Heaven,
God-bearer,
Health of the Sick,
Help of Christians,
Holy Mary,
Holy Mother of God,
Holy Virgin of Virgins,
House of Gold,
Joy of the Just,
Majesty,
Mirror of Justice,
Morning Star,
Most Holy,
Mother Admirable,
Mother Inviolate,
Mother Most Amiable,
Mother Most Chaste,
Mother Most Pure,
Mother of Christ,
Mother of Divine Grace,
Mother of God,
Mother of Good Counsel,
Mother of Mercy,
Mother of Orphans,
Mother of Our Creator,
Mother of Our Redeemer,
Mother of Sorrows,
Mother of the Church,
Mother of the Poor,
Mother of the Word,
Mother Thrice Admirable,
Mother Undefiled,
Mystical Rose,
Nova Eva (the New Eve),
Our Lady of Compassion,
Our Lady of Confidence,
Our Lady of Victory,
Our Lady, Star of the Sea,
Our Mother of Perpetual Help,
Queen Assumed Into Heaven,
Queen Conceived Without Original Sin,
Queen of All Saints,
Queen of Angels,
Queen of Apostles,
Queen of Confessors,
Queen of Families,
Queen of Heaven,
Queen of Martyrs,
Queen of Patriarchs,
Queen of Peace,
Queen of Prophets,
Queen of the Most Holy Rosary,
Queen of Virgins,
Ravisher of Hearts,
Refuge of Sinners,
Seat of Wisdom,
She Who Shows the Way,
Singular Vessel of Devotion,
Spiritual Vessel,
Spouse of the Holy Spirit,
Tabernacle of the Lord,
Temple of the Most Holy Trinity,
Throne of Wisdom,
Tower of David,
Tower of Ivory,
Treasure House of God's Graces,
Untier of Knots,
Vessel of Honor,
Virgin God-bearer,
Virgin Most Faithful,
Virgin Most Merciful,
Virgin Most Powerful,
Virgin Most Prudent,
Virgin Most Renowned,
Virgin Most Venerable          born under the law, ⁵ to HELP redeem those under the law, that we might receive adoption to sonship; sooner or later; and not spend TOO much time in Purgatory.

 

[Elsie]

 

And don’t forget Paul’s words in 1 Cor 10:

Don't forget the LETTER that the Catholic CHURCH sent to the Gentiles in Acts 15 (St. Luke recorded the incident there):

Acts 15

The Council at Jerusalem

 ¹ Certain people came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the believers: "Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved." ² This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question. ³ The church sent them on their way, and as they traveled through Phoenicia and Samaria, they told how the Gentiles had been converted. This news made all the believers very glad. ⁴ When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done through them.

 ⁵ Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, "The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses."

 ⁶ The apostles and elders met to consider this question. ⁷ After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: "Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. ⁸ God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. ⁹ He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. ¹⁰ Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? ¹¹ No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are."

 ¹² The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. ¹³ When they finished, James spoke up. "Brothers," he said, "listen to me. ¹⁴ Simon has described to us how God first intervened to choose a people for his name from the Gentiles. ¹⁵ The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written:

 ¹⁶ "'After this I will return
   and rebuild David's fallen tent.
Its ruins I will rebuild,
   and I will restore it,
¹⁷ that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord,
   even all the Gentiles who bear my name,
says the Lord, who does these things'
 ¹⁸ things known from long ago.

 ¹⁹ "It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. ²⁰ Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. ²¹ For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath."

The Council's Letter to Gentile Believers

 ²² Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, men who were leaders among the believers. ²³ With them they sent the following letter:

   The apostles and elders, your brothers,

   To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia:

   Greetings.

 ²⁴ We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. ²⁵ So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— ²⁶ men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. ²⁷ Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. ²⁸ It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: ²⁹ You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.

   Farewell.

 ³⁰ So the men were sent off and went down to Antioch, where they gathered the church together and delivered the letter. ³¹ The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message. ³² Judas and Silas, who themselves were prophets, said much to encourage and strengthen the believers. ³³ After spending some time there, they were sent off by the believers with the blessing of peace to return to those who had sent them. ^{[34] 35} But Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, where they and many others taught and preached the word of the Lord.

Disagreement Between Paul and Barnabas

 ³⁶ Some time later Paul said to Barnabas, "Let us go back and visit the believers in all the towns where we preached the word of the Lord and see how they are doing." ³⁷ Barnabas wanted to take John, also called Mark, with them, ³⁸ but Paul did not think it wise to take him, because he had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not continued with them in the work. ³⁹ They had such a sharp disagreement that they parted company. Barnabas took Mark and sailed for Cyprus, ⁴⁰ but Paul chose Silas and left, commended by the believers to the grace of the Lord. ⁴¹ He went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches.

 

 

...the Apostles were celebrating the Mass long before the Book of Revelation was written!   Somehow the MASS got left out! 

[Elsie]

Just a clear carrying out of the Lord’s Supper a Passover meal.

Luke 22:8 King James Version (KJV)

... saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

No Mass in Revelation Placemarker

[ealgeone]

Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsəˈdʒiːsəs/; from the Greek preposition εἰς "into" and the ending from the English word exegesis, Greek ἐξήγησις, which in turn is derived from ἐξηγεῖσθαι "to lead out")[1] is the process of interpreting a text or portion of text in such a way that the process introduces one's own presuppositions, agendas, or biases into and onto the text. This is commonly referred to as reading into the text.[2] The act is often used to "prove" a pre-held point of concern to the reader and to provide him or her with confirmation bias in accordance with his or her pre-held agenda. Eisegesis is best understood when contrasted with exegesis. While exegesis is the process of drawing out the meaning from a text in accordance with the context and discoverable meaning of its author, eisegesis occurs when a reader imposes his or her interpretation into and onto the text. As a result, exegesis tends to be objective when employed effectively while eisegesis is regarded as highly subjective..

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisegesis

[daniel1212]

I love the deeply rich tapestry of Catholicism and find all other Christian religions to be Christian-lite. Easier to follow and preach, but not the real fullness of the message Christ delivered. Others can say, “This is a hard teaching” and walk away... but I never will.

With your love for rich tapestry and man-made traditions being what Christ preached you must consider the NT church in Scripture to be Christian-lite, seeing as, the church began upon Scriptural substantiation in word and in power, (Mt. 4:4; 19:4-5; 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27,44; Jn. 5:36,39; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 12:12, etc.) in dissent from the historical magisterial stewards of Divine revelation of the body “unto whom were committed the oracles of God," (Rm. 3:2) to whom pertained "the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises" (Rm. 9:4) of Divine guidance, presence and perpetuation as they believed, (Gn. 12:2,3; 17:4,7,8; Ex. 19:5; Lv. 10:11; Dt. 4:31; 17:8-13; Ps, 11:4,9; Is. 41:10, Ps. 89:33,34; Jer. 7:23) but who wrongly supposed lineage made them correct, (Mt. 3:9; Jn. 8:33) and thus the authenticity of Truth claims and oral preaching of the word must be subject to the only wholly God-inspired substantive body of Truth, the Scriptures. (Matthew 4:4; Luke 24:44,45; Acts 17:2,11; 18:28)

In the light of which, what the NT church in Scripture (as seen in Acts onward, which shows how the NT church understood the gospels) did NOT profess/teach practice were such things as:

• Praying to created beings in Heaven, which is utterly unseen in Scripture despite prayer being so basic a practice that the Holy Spirit inspired the recording of approx. 200 prayers by believers, with none being addressed to anyone else but God, who alone is shown able to hear all such from Heaven. Only pagans prayed to invisible heavenly beings than God, as the Spirit is faithful to record.

• Kneeling before a statue and praising the entity it represented in the unseen world, beseeching such for Heavenly help, and making offerings to them, and giving glory and titles and ascribing attributes to such which are never given in Scripture to created beings (except to false gods. Only pagans burned incense unto the queen of heaven: Jeremiah 44:16-17), including having the uniquely Divine power glory to hear and respond to virtually infinite numbers of prayers individually addressed to them

Which manner of adulation would constitute worship in Scripture, yet Catholics imagine that by playing word games then they can avoid crossing the invisible line between mere "veneration" and worship.

• That the act of baptism itself renders souls formally justified by their own holiness so that they would directly enter Heaven if they died at the time of the baptism, but which thus means that the same (due to the outworking of their remaining sinful nature) usually have to later endure postmortem purifying torments in order to become good enough (and atone for venial sins) to enter Heaven.

• 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) Note in the latter case all believers were assured that if the Lord returned, which they expected in their lifetime, so would they “ever be with the Lord.” (1Thes. 4:17) though they were still undergoing growth in grace, as was Paul, who expressed he would go to be with the Lord at death, yet was not already perfect. (Phil. 3:10f)

And with the only suffering for believers that is manifestly taught as after this life being that of the judgment seat of Christ, which does not begin at death, but awaits the Lord's return, (1 Corinthians 4:5; 2 Timothy. 4:1,8; Revelation 11:18; Matthew 25:31-46; 1 Peter 1:7; 5:4) and is the suffering of the loss of rewards (and the Lord's displeasure) due to the manner of material one built the church with, which one is saved despite the loss of such, not because of. (1 Corinthians 3:8ff)

• That believers were separated into two classes, one formally called "saints," the latter being the only believers who directly go to Heaven at death, contrary to Scripture.

• That the Catholic Eucharist was the paramount, supreme central practice in the life of the church, the "source and summit of the Christian life," in which "our redemption is accomplished," around which all else basically revolved. For 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. (1 Corinthians 11:17-34) More , by God's grace.

• Ordaining a separate class of believers distinctively titled "priests" whose primary active function was conducting the Lord's supper and offering up "real" flesh and blood as a sacrifice for sin. Neither presbuteros or episkopos are even called “hiereus," the distinctive word translated "priest," which conflation is the result of ecclesiastical evolution, and NT pastors are nowhere 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, (2 Timothy 4:2) feeding the flock (Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:2) with the word of God, which is what is called spiritual "milk" and "meat" (1 Corinthians 3:2; Hebrews 5:13; 1 Peter 2:2) by which souls obtain spiritual life within themselves, (Acts 10:43-47; 15:7-9; Ephesians 1:13) and then by which they are "nourished" (1Timothy 4:6) and built up. (Acts 20:32)

• That presbuteros (senior/elder) and episkopos (superintendent/overseer) denoted two separate classes.

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

• Directing the church to look to Peter as the first of a line of supreme infallible popes reigning over the churches from Rome (which even Catholic scholarship provides testimony against), whom they were especially enjoined to honor and obey.

• Choosing more apostolic successors (or preparations for it) as was done for Judas (in order to maintain the original number of 12: Rv. 21:14) by casting lots, thus no politics. (Acts 1:15ff; cf. Prov. 16:33; Leviticus 16:5,8,9-10,15-16,29-30) despite the vacancy left by the martyrdom of the apostle James. (Acts 12:1,2)

• That the magisterial office possessed ensured magisterial infallibility (thereby infallibly declaring that she is infallible), enabling them to even claim to essentially "remember" an extraScriptural event which lacks even early historical testimony. , and was opposed by RC scholars themselves the world over as being apostolic tradition.

More to see by God's grace.

[Melian]

You are forgetting that Christ stated emphatically that the Holy Spirit would lead the Church into deeper knowledge as time went on. New concepts would be revealed and the nuances and foreshadowings became clearer.

I do love being Catholic and think it’s the first, best, most Christ-centered religion one can have. But thanks for all the effort you put into your post.

I invite you to read the Catholic Bible, which is the original, and compare it to yours. See all the words that were changed or deleted from yours. You will be amazed.

[Melian]

With all the Catholic Church’s history, tradition, and memories, it is the religion best equipped to practice exegesis (the process of drawing out the meaning from a text in accordance with the context and discoverable meaning of its author).

But, of course, Cousin Billy Bob, who got religion yesterday, thinks he knows more than two thousand years of saints and theologians.

[Melian]

Paul’s own words in 1 Cor 10 speak volumes about the Mass and the fact that it was celebrated by the most faithful. Even then.

Those who weren’t sufficiently spiritual enough got the watered down version until their hearts and minds were ready for more. Even now.

[Melian]

Yep.

[Melian]

That’s exactly what the Mass is, a gathering of the community for fellowship and faith and a re-presentation of the sacrifice of Calvary.

No mention of sacrifice! Surely you jest!

(see Mark 14:22-24; Matt 26:26-28; cf. Luke 22:17-20; 1 Cor 11:23-25)
“Take this, all of you, and eat of it, for this is my Body, which will be given up for you” (a combination of Mark 14:22; Matt 26:26; Luke 22:19; 1 Cor 11:24)
“Take this, all of you, and drink from it, for this is the chalice of my Blood, the Blood of the new and eternal covenant, which will be poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.” (a combination of Mark 14:24; Matt 26:27b-28; cf. Luke 22:17, 20; 1 Cor 11:25)
“Do this in remembrance of me” (only Luke 22:19; 1 Cor 11:24a, 25b)

And our prayer at Mass:
Bless and approve our offering; make it acceptable to you, an offering in spirit and in truth (Jn. 4:24).

Let it become for us the body and blood of Jesus Christ, your only Son, our Lord.

The day before he suffered he took bread in his sacred hands and looking up to heaven, to you, his almighty Father, he gave you thanks and praise. He broke the bread, gave it to his disciples, and said: Take this, all of you, and eat it: this is my body which will be given up for you (cf. Mt. 26:26-28).

[Melian]

That’s exactly what the Mass is, a gathering of the community for fellowship and faith and a re-presentation of the sacrifice of Calvary.

No mention of sacrifice! Surely you jest!

(see Mark 14:22-24; Matt 26:26-28; cf. Luke 22:17-20; 1 Cor 11:23-25)
“Take this, all of you, and eat of it, for this is my Body, which will be given up for you” (a combination of Mark 14:22; Matt 26:26; Luke 22:19; 1 Cor 11:24)
“Take this, all of you, and drink from it, for this is the chalice of my Blood, the Blood of the new and eternal covenant, which will be poured out for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.” (a combination of Mark 14:24; Matt 26:27b-28; cf. Luke 22:17, 20; 1 Cor 11:25)
“Do this in remembrance of me” (only Luke 22:19; 1 Cor 11:24a, 25b)

And our prayer at Mass:
Bless and approve our offering; make it acceptable to you, an offering in spirit and in truth (Jn. 4:24).

Let it become for us the body and blood of Jesus Christ, your only Son, our Lord.

The day before he suffered he took bread in his sacred hands and looking up to heaven, to you, his almighty Father, he gave you thanks and praise. He broke the bread, gave it to his disciples, and said: Take this, all of you, and eat it: this is my body which will be given up for you (cf. Mt. 26:26-28).

[Melian]

So nice, I posted it twice! LOL

[Melian]

Take comfort in this: John 6

52
The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us [his] flesh to eat?”
53
Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
54
Whoever eats* my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
55
For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.
56
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.
57
Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.
58
This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.”
59
These things he said while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.
60
Then many of his disciples who were listening said, “This saying is hard; who can accept it?”

Who can accept it? It was the question in Jesus’ day, and it’s the question now. And it’s just as hard for the majority of people today to accept His clear words to us as it was then. Rejoice that you have such a great gift of faith! Those who walked away were Christians, disciples, they believed in Jesus, but they couldn’t accept the entirety of His message and He watched them go, let them go, with sadness. They chose the lesser faith. It was true then and it is still true today.

[Elsie]

Those who weren’t sufficiently spiritual enough got the watered down version until their hearts and minds were ready for more.

Then where is THAT letter?

I see nothing else unitl the 7 churches get called out for error.

[Elsie]

Whoever eats* my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.

I've always wondered...

...when Thomas; with his doubt; was confronted by Jesus; just why he did NOT lick his fingers after they were plunged into the wounds that our transgressions caused.

[Elsie]

And it’s just as hard for the majority of people today to accept His clear words to us as it was then.

Yup...

Call n o man father...

[daniel1212]

Chrysostom (John) [who affirmed Peter was a rock, but here not the rock in Mt. 16:18]: Therefore He added this, 'And I say unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church; that is, on the faith of his confession. — Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of Saint Matthew, Homily LIIl; Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf110.iii.LII.html)

Sounds like,

“We refuse to be bound by the interpretations which others place upon our beliefs, or by what they allege must be the practical consequences of our doctrines. Men have no right to impute to us what they think may be the logical deduction from our beliefs, but which we ourselves do not accept. We are to be judged by our own interpretations and by our own actions, not by the logic of others, as to what is, or may be, the result of our faith”, page 154. ( Messages of the First Presidency, Volume IV, compiled by James R. Clark, 1970)

. President J. Reuben Clark: Here we must have in mind—must know—that only the President of the Church, the Presiding High Priest, is sustained as Prophet, Seer, and Revelator for the Church, and he alone has the right to receive revelations for the Church, either new or amendatory, or to give authoritative interpretations of scriptures that shall be binding on the Church....(J. Reuben Clark, Jr., "Church Leaders and the Scriptures,"Vol, 2)

[Elsie]

But, of course, Cousin Billy Bob, who got religion yesterday, thinks he knows more than two thousand years of saints and theologians.

---

Like THIS guy??

---

As regards the oft-quoted Mt. 16:18

• Augustine, sermon:

"Christ, you see, built his Church not on a man but on Peter's confession. What is Peter's confession? 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' There's the rock for you, there's the foundation, there's where the Church has been built, which the gates of the underworld cannot conquer. — John Rotelle, O.S.A., Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine , © 1993 New City Press, Sermons, Vol III/6, Sermon 229P.1, p. 327

Upon this rock, said the Lord, I will build my Church. Upon this confession, upon this that you said, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God,' I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not conquer her (Mt. 16:18). — John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City, 1993) Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 236A.3, p. 48.

• Augustine, sermon:

For petra (rock) is not derived from Peter, but Peter from petra; just as Christ is not called so from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ. For on this very account the Lord said, 'On this rock will I build my Church,' because Peter had said, 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.' On this rock, therefore, He said, which thou hast confessed, I will build my Church. For the Rock (Petra) was Christ; and on this foundation was Peter himself built. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Christ Jesus. The Church, therefore, which is founded in Christ received from Him the keys of the kingdom of heaven in the person of Peter, that is to say, the power of binding and loosing sins. For what the Church is essentially in Christ, such representatively is Peter in the rock (petra); and in this representation Christ is to be understood as the Rock, Peter as the Church. — Augustine Tractate CXXIV; Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: First Series, Volume VII Tractate CXXIV (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf107.iii.cxxv.html)

• Augustine, sermon:

And Peter, one speaking for the rest of them, one for all, said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God (Mt 16:15-16)...And I tell you: you are Peter; because I am the rock, you are Rocky, Peter-I mean, rock doesn't come from Rocky, but Rocky from rock, just as Christ doesn't come from Christian, but Christian from Christ; and upon this rock I will build my Church (Mt 16:17-18); not upon Peter, or Rocky, which is what you are, but upon the rock which you have confessed. I will build my Church though; I will build you, because in this answer of yours you represent the Church. — John Rotelle, O.S.A. Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1993), Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 270.2, p. 289

• Augustine, sermon:

Peter had already said to him, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' He had already heard, 'Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood did not reveal it to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of the underworld shall not conquer her' (Mt 16:16-18)...Christ himself was the rock, while Peter, Rocky, was only named from the rock. That's why the rock rose again, to make Peter solid and strong; because Peter would have perished, if the rock hadn't lived. — John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City, 1993) Sermons, Volume III/7, Sermon 244.1, p. 95

• Augustine, sermon:

...because on this rock, he said, I will build my Church, and the gates of the underworld shall not overcome it (Mt. 16:18). Now the rock was Christ (1 Cor. 10:4). Was it Paul that was crucified for you? Hold on to these texts, love these texts, repeat them in a fraternal and peaceful manner. — John Rotelle, Ed., The Works of Saint Augustine (New Rochelle: New City Press, 1995), Sermons, Volume III/10, Sermon 358.5, p. 193

• Augustine, Psalm LXI:

Let us call to mind the Gospel: 'Upon this Rock I will build My Church.' Therefore She crieth from the ends of the earth, whom He hath willed to build upon a Rock. But in order that the Church might be builded upon the Rock, who was made the Rock? Hear Paul saying: 'But the Rock was Christ.' On Him therefore builded we have been. — Philip Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), Volume VIII, Saint Augustin, Exposition on the Book of Psalms, Psalm LXI.3, p. 249. (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf108.ii.LXI.html)

• Augustine, in “Retractions,”

In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: 'On him as on a rock the Church was built.'...But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said: 'Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church,' that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying: 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,' and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven.' For, 'Thou art Peter' and not 'Thou art the rock' was said to him. But 'the rock was Christ,' in confessing whom, as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter. But let the reader decide which of these two opinions is the more probable. — The Fathers of the Church (Washington D.C., Catholic University, 1968), Saint Augustine, The Retractations Chapter 20.1:.