APG

@Catholicizm1 Your sect follows Nostra Aetate, it’s a Jewish religion.

You mean the spurious “quote” that is actually a fabrication? (If I’m wrong, by all means, prove it.) Speaking of numbers, the Church’s mark of catholicity includes what Msgr. Van Noort calls “moral catholicity,” meaning that “the Church should always include in its membership a vast number of men from many different nations. … To satisfy the requirements of moral catholicity in fact — a quality belonging to Christ’s Church perpetually and necessarily — we stated there was required: ‘a great number of men from many different nations.’” Christ’s Church, p. 146 aroucapress.com/christs-church As for Pope Leo XIV, I recognize him as the legitimate successor of St. Peter with real authority to teach, govern, and sanctify. Like all Catholics, however, he is bound to the remote rule of faith (Scripture and Tradition) and “the ecclesiastical monuments” (Cardinal Franzelin, On Divine Tradition, Thesis XIII), such as formal creeds of the Church and infallible definitions of past popes and councils. (He is not a divine oracle whose every word is infallible.) From the moment his election was peacefully and universally accepted by the Church, Leo XIV’s pontificate was established as a dogmatic fact. To quote Fr. Berry, “since the Church is infallible in believing as well as in teaching, it follows that the practically unanimous consent of the bishops and faithful in accepting a council as ecumenical, or a Roman Pontiff as legitimately elected, gives absolute and infallible certainty of the fact.” The Church of Christ, p. 507 archive.org/details/church… In the words of Van Noort, “It is certainly not a backbreaking job to find the legitimate successor of Peter. First, it is a fact beyond question that Christ’s Church can never fail to have a successor to Peter [cf. Vatican I, Pastor Aeternus, Ch. 2; DH 3058: “perpetual successors”]; secondly, no one ever seriously claims to hold Peter’s office except the Roman pontiffs.” Christ’s Church, p. 153