Daily reminder our president is catholic

>He doesnt pray to Satan

Probably isnt even invited to Elite pizza parties along with all the other world leaders. Pathetic incel

Attached: 1539009780258.jpg (500x322, 16K)

Patriarch Joseph of Constantinople accepted Florence, the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, and Florence’s teaching against all who would deny it.

Fall in line.

mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/refuting-eastern-orthodox/

You people are even schismatic within your schism. Not really surprising it is appealing to so many: it’s provides the comfort of Protestantism, yet the appearance of ancient tradition, at the same time the feel of liturgical piety, with the illusion of hierarchical authority.

Attached: 1458751943545.jpg (500x679, 122K)

Based gooks

Oh I know. Orthodoxy is like a Satanic cult in comparison to Catholicism which is merely Paganic cult.

Now I'm not denying that there are holy men of faith in each of these two, but the general idea is that those system are highly dangerous to men's psychology and make them a most likely target for demonic attacks and oppression.

Everyone has known this since before he was elected.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=7sWzJZMTNd4

I thought you just got rid of a Sex cult from power?

They wear headscarves in Catholic Churches in Korea? Nice only ever seen that in ortho churches

Based

Attached: 4626896D-386C-430F-A484-33B48930F1FE.jpg (700x502, 259K)

And before you throw me some Protestant bullshit churches, I'm not denying that most of those are corrupt either. But at least they're corrupt in worldy sense, not so much spiritually as for example Orthodoxy, which one might as well make a blood tie with demons

That just confirms your country is ruled by the orders of the quest, the mystery babylon luciferian philosophy followers.

Yes

Attached: 5B6B513F-24DC-4A45-B44A-E743C5C76120.jpg (500x752, 77K)

Oh, but he is invited to pizza parties. The head of all Catholicism, the vatican, throws the biggest pizza parties of all

yeah, your president is a cuck

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Epistle_of_Clement

Clement writes to the troubled congregation in Corinth, where certain "presbyters" or "bishops" have been deposed (the class of clergy above that of deacons is designated indifferently by the two terms).

This passage in Irenaeus [from Against Heresies 3:4:1] illuminates the meaning of his remarks about the Church of Rome: if there are disputes in a local church, that church should have recourse to the Roman Church, for there is contained the Tradition which is preserved by all the churches. Rome's vocation

Also around this time The Didache, dating from AD 70 to 140, states "Appoint for yourselves therefore bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord".

St. Ignatius of Antioch spoke in "praise of unity" in a Letter to the Ephesians, saying "He, therefore, that does not assemble with the Church, has even by this manifested his pride, and condemned himself. For it is written, 'God resisteth the proud.' Let us be careful, then, not to set ourselves in opposition to the bishop, in order that we may be subject to God.

So the role of the Bishop of Rome (the Pope) was defined while the Apostle John was still alive.

:)
Come back scruffy Magicians lol

Attached: 1536954332060.jpg (400x300, 28K)

Jesus you're a fucking idiot and have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Stick to your trap boards on /b/

I’d like to cum in her vagina, if you know what I mean.

Koreans just bounce around to whatever religion they feel will give them the biggest leg up in society.

thejc.com/lifestyle/features/why-south-koreans-are-in-love-with-judaism-1.22961

You're all heathens who don't truly believe your faith. You do it it to gain favour. Not because you believe in the teachings.

I'm really disapointed actually.

While I'm here I'll post what else I've written about Orthodoxy's issues on this board.

Lets begin with essence/energies v. divine simplicity.
There is evidence for divine simplicity in the church fathers:

>"For God is simple and non-composite and without shape" - St. John Crysostom

Again from St. John,

>"[Paul] knows [God] in part. But he says, ‘in part,’ not because he knows God’s essence while something else of his essence he does not know; for God is simple. Rather, he says ‘in part’ because he knows that God exists, but what God is in his essence he does not know" -St. John Crysostom

>"Far removed is the Father of all from those things which operate among men, the affections and passions. He is simple, not composed of parts, without structure, altogether like and equal to himself alone. He is all mind, all spirit, all thought, all intelligence, all reason . . . all light, all fountain of every good, and this is the manner in which the religious and the pious are accustomed to speak of God" -St. Iraneaus, Against Heresies 2:13:3

part 1/2

You have to be Christian and you have to marry her first.

part 2/2

>"But there is neither nor ever shall be such a dogma in the Church of God that would prove the simple and incomposite [God] to be not only manifold and variegated, but even constructed from opposites. The simplicity of the dogmas of the truth proposes God as he is" -St. Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius 1:1:222

>“We perceive the operation of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to be one and the same, in no respect showing differences or variation; from this identity of operation we necessarily infer the unity of nature.” -St. Basil, Letters

The strength of the latter quote being the comment of essence. If we were to weigh Palamas' interpretation of God against this view the argument of St. Basil would fall to plurality of essence and lead to the same "polytheism" criticism it is known to get.

Despite all of this, though, the essence/energies distinction is also present in the church fathers. The issue that causes the conflict is grasping the distinctions between the two, to which there is almost nothing and the situation largely arises from the difference in terms that developed over time between the west and east. The Orthodox would state that God's essence is distinct from reality and that what is present sustaining reality are "energies" of God but the distinction is not an ontological one and God is still one. The Catholic view is that God is simplistic and so is synonymous with His essence but his essence cannot be apprehended by those in nature and so still remains transcendent.

Attached: 1536319473025.jpg (760x961, 133K)

Look man, I know how Catholic traditionalists speak, with throwing thousand historical sources, which hold no value for me whatsoever. When you send me these sources, you are implying I'm giving them any value whatsoever, which I am not.

You can however discuss this issues like a man in a debate, down to ground, with each having our own unique ideas

Pathetic. They co-opted an Arabic religion. OMEGALUL.

For the filioque, it is entirely accurate to note that the filioque was not introduced with the original Nicene Creed in the First Council of Constantinople. Further, it is also accurate to state that in the Council of Ephesus that it was ruled to not create new creeds. This was not a doctrinal ruling but one about church practices, which are often overturned for newer rulings on church practices in later councils. This overruling occurred in the Council of Florence. And, hell, additions that Orthodoxy accepts came about at the Council of Nicea as well.

However, while it is not against church teaching to change the creed itself, the key charge is that the filioque is theological innovation.

The Western Church commonly uses a version of the Nicene creed which has the Latin word filioque ("and the Son") added after the declaration that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. Scripture reveals that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. The external relationships of the persons of the Trinity mirror their internal relationships. Just as the Father externally sent the Son into the world in time, the Son internally proceeds from the Father in the Trinity. Just as the Spirit is externally sent into the world by the Son as well as the Father (John 15:26, Acts 2:33), he internally proceeds from both Father and Son in the Trinity. This is why the Spirit is referred to as the Spirit of the Son (Gal. 4:6) and not just the Spirit of the Father (Matt. 10:20).

The quotations below show that the early Church Fathers, both Latin and Greek, recognized the same thing, saying that the Spirit proceeds "from the Father and the Son" or "from the Father through the Son."

"Through" the son is the more accurate claim of Catholics theologically and one that is ultimately aligned with the Orthodox ruling as well.

Attached: 1499116808443.png (1154x3699, 685K)

Also, your previous ruler was taken out for corruption and her affiliation with secret societies. Now you got a catholic ruler lmao. Herez a hint, the only christian generals are either evangelical or catholic. Elites from both denominations are responsible for zionism, putting jews in power, and new age degeneracy.

You are a fuckin west puppet i will be ashamed of being south korean, and least your north brothers have some balls.

Attached: 1492234259176.jpg (512x341, 36K)

And the reason I'm giving them no value whatsoever is that I don't know "Saint" John of whatever or "Saint" Chrystopher of whatever something else, I do not know their faith, I do not hold their opinion over anyone elses who wants to discuss Christianity.

Jay Dyer would be happy to debate you.

Catholics arent true Christians

Who makes up the rules ?
You understand basically ZERO about what the pope can and cannot do. We don't follow the Pope, we follow the dogma of the church.

The truths of faith (including the scripture) which have been proclaimed by the popes speaking infallibly from the Chair of Peter are called dogmas. The dogmas make up what is called the deposit of Faith. And the deposit of Faith ended with the death of the last apostle.

This means that when a pope defines a dogma from the Chair of Peter he does not make the dogma true, but rather he proclaims what is already true, what has already been revealed by Christ and delivered to the Apostles. The dogmas are therefore unchangeable, of course. One of these dogmas in the deposit of Faith is that Outside the Catholic Church There is No Salvation. Since this is the teaching of Jesus Christ, one is not allowed to dispute this dogma or to question it; one must simply accept it. It does not matter if one doesn’t like the dogma, doesn’t understand the dogma, or doesn’t see justice in the dogma. If one doesn’t accept it as infallibly true then one simply does not accept Jesus Christ, because the dogma comes to us from Jesus Christ.

Pope St. Pius X, Lamentabile, The Errors of the Modernists #21: “Revelation, constituting the object of Catholic faith, was not completed with the apostles.”[xv] - This Belief is Condemned

Even the simplest member of the faithful, clinging to an infallible definition, will know more than the most ‘learned’ theologian who denies or undermines the definition. That is the whole purpose of the Church’s infallibly defined teaching – to make us independent of the mere opinions of men, however learned, however high their rank.

Attached: 1440826722763.jpg (479x305, 36K)

protestant snake-charmer spotted

Protestantism is a lie that spits on the early Christians. A religion that says you cannot know God

All you done is shown how God lied to Peter. After the last book of Scripture was written, all Christians apostasized until you came along with your nonsense!

This is Protestantism

>if a dead saint said Catholicism is the true faith it must be true regardless of how many commandments they break

true christianity transcends petty label like "protestant" and "catholic"

>I shit on the early christians
Protestant 101

Korean Christianity is one of the most wacky branches of Christianity.

Like look at the Moonies as an example.

So when are we getting 30 years war: part 2?

Councils like the Council of Trent decided what was canon and not canon.

How is that fair? If you want True Christianity, you need to get an unedited version and demand the Vatican to hurry up and upload all the old ass scrolls they stored away.

Probably a lot of unknown Christain texts buried under sand somewhere in the Middle East as well.

And they contradict the five solaes

I'm not a prot, and Athanasius was not infallible