re: Pope Leo: ‘God does not bless any conflict’

That argument doesn’t hold up whatsoever. The early Church meeting in homes doesn’t mean it lacked structure, it just reflects persecution. Even in Acts you see clear organization: apostles exercising authority, elders being appointed, councils being held, and binding decisions being made. Acts 15 alone shows a unified Church resolving doctrine, not independent groups figuring things out on their own.

As far as Peter goes… Scripture actually shows a unique role. He’s singled out in Matthew 16, speaks for the apostles repeatedly, and takes leadership in Acts 1–5 and at the council in Acts 15. Paul correcting Peter in Galatians doesn’t disprove authority, it proves Peter wasn’t impeccable, which Catholics already agree with. Authority doesn’t mean sinlessness.

Saying there’s “zero evidence of a well organized Church” ignores what’s plainly in the text. And historically, the early Church very clearly had bishops, succession, and recognized authority long before any Protestant framework existed. The real issue is that Protestantism can’t trace a consistent doctrinal or structural line back to that Church, it shows up 1500 years later with competing interpretations.

Man… You are finding answers to things where they don’t exist. Please take the time to dive in to John six and look at the back-and-forth and the actual words that were used. It is as clear as day. The early church believed it. Catholics believe it. Orthodox believe it. It’s just the Protestants that don’t. Crazy.

Pope wants peace, not at all surprising.

quote:

---

Are you claiming the Eucharist and Real Presence are separate things?

---

Yes, they are two separate concepts in spite of Catholic doctrine packaging them together.

It literally means Thanksgiving.
Thats a concept, thats an event.

Then there are several other concepts that are attached to it.

If the bread doesn't turn to meat and the wine to blood literally, there is still an identical Thanksgiving and remembrance that occurs.

We do believe that Christ's presence is with us whenever we are gathered in his name.

So we know he is there with us even not during the Eucharist.

I read John 6 closely yesterday, and I don’t see it supporting a literal physical interpretation in a consistent way.

Jesus uses symbolic language throughout John (“I am the vine,” “I am the door”), and John 6 fits that same pattern—strong imagery pointing to dependence, not physical consumption.

More importantly, in John 6:63 He explicitly says the flesh counts for nothing and that His words are spirit and life. That doesn’t line up well with a physical transformation reading.

I don’t think the issue is taking Scripture seriously—it’s taking it consistently.

I don’t have an issue with Catholics believing in transubstantiation, but I do take issue with the claim that those who don’t hold that view somehow don’t have access to what Jesus taught. That goes beyond the text.

quote:

---

‘God does not bless any conflict’

---

I wonder if he's read the book of Judges?

quote:

---

Protestants perverted the term to suit their whims.

---

Again, Christ established it, Catholics interpreted it, Protestants have another interpretation.

This really hangs on your circular logic that because your side must be correct anything elae is a perversion.

Thats not logical in anyway.

quote:

---

If is isn't the same, how is it identical?

---

Because everything done happens the same as it would.

There are actually grown people in 2026 arguing about bread and water turning into something and blood?

quote:

---

patient promotion of coexistence and dialogue among peoples

---

The pope needs to explain how we can coexist with a people who believe Jesus will lead a jihad against us, and what the point of dialogue is with those holding demonic beliefs (trannies)

What a clown. Won’t be long before he decrees women can be priests

quote:

---

This Islamic God demands it.

---

Muslims worship the god of Abraham, just like Jews and Christians.