top of page
Writer's pictureMichelle Hayman

Unpacking Claims

Updated: Sep 21



The Catechism of the Catholic Church claims authority over the interpretation of Scripture, asserting that the Magisterium is the sole interpreter of God’s Word. This reliance on human authority raises significant concerns.

While the Catholic Church cites Matthew 16:18-19 to justify Peter’s primacy and the Pope’s authority as his successor, the passage is ambiguous and does not suggest the establishment of an ongoing office of supreme leadership. In fact, nowhere in Scripture does Jesus directly appoint Peter or any of the apostles as the head of a permanent hierarchical structure that would control and interpret the faith for all future generations.


The Roman Catholic Church claims that the Popes, as successors of St. Peter, possess divine authority to interpret Scripture and lead the Church. However, there is no solid evidence—scriptural, historical, or empirical—that validates this claim. In fact, there are strong reasons to believe that none of the 266 Popes throughout history were divinely appointed.


First, the scriptural foundation for papal authority is tenuous. While the Catholic Church often refers to Matthew 16:18–19 (“You are Peter, and on this rock, I will build my church”) as evidence of Christ establishing the Pope’s authority, this passage is open to interpretation. Many theologians and scholars argue that the “rock” referred to by Jesus was Peter’s faith in Christ, not Peter himself. The Bible does not clearly outline the creation of a singular, continuous office of the Pope as we understand it today, and nowhere does it explicitly support the idea that Peter’s supposed leadership was to be passed down in an unbroken line of succession. In fact, the New Testament offers no evidence that Peter—or any apostle—established a centralized hierarchy resembling the modern papacy.


Furthermore, there is no tangible or empirical evidence of divine intervention in the election of any of the 266 Popes. In biblical accounts where divine appointments were made, such as the calling of prophets and leaders in the Old Testament, these events were often accompanied by unmistakable, miraculous signs—whether through the appearance of angels, the blowing of trumpets, or other supernatural phenomena. By contrast, no such events have been recorded during the appointment of any Pope in history. No trumpets have sounded, no divine manifestations have taken place, and no visible act of God has marked the election of a Pope. The process of choosing a Pope is entirely human, managed by the College of Cardinals, who elect the new Pope through a vote. This human-centered process stands in stark contrast to the divine appointments we see in Scripture, where God’s hand was unmistakably present in the selection of spiritual leaders.


The history of the papacy also reveals how deeply intertwined it has been with political power, wealth, and influence—especially during the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Many Popes came from noble families and were selected not because of their spiritual qualifications but due to their political connections. The papal office, particularly in Italy, was heavily influenced by powerful families like the Medicis and Borgias, who often used the papacy to consolidate their own wealth and power. This historical reality raises serious doubts about the idea of divine authority being passed down through these men. If Popes were truly chosen by God, how can we explain the deep corruption, political maneuvering, and even scandalous behavior that marked the reigns of certain Popes, such as Alexander VI, who was notorious for nepotism and immorality? It is difficult to reconcile the idea of a divinely chosen leader with the fact that many Popes were primarily political actors.


Additionally, the Western Schism (1378-1417), during which multiple individuals simultaneously claimed to be the true Pope, further undermines the idea of divine authority. If the papacy were truly instituted and protected by God, how could such confusion exist over who held the divine office? This schism resulted in multiple Popes excommunicating each other and divided the Christian world. Such events strongly suggest that the papacy has often been subject to the same political and human failings as any other institution, rather than being a divinely guided office.


The question remains: which God granted them divine authority?


The Catholic doctrine of apostolic succession claims that an unbroken line of authority from St. Peter continues through the Popes. However, the idea that this line conveys divine authority lacks verifiable proof. Apostolic succession is based on tradition, not on any direct, observable act of divine intervention. When biblical prophets or leaders were chosen by God, such as when Elijah passed his mantle to Elisha, it was done through clear supernatural events. In the case of the papacy, there is no evidence of such supernatural continuity.


Moreover, faith and the guidance of the Holy Spirit do not require a singular human intermediary to claim divine authority. Scripture emphasizes that the Holy Spirit leads all believers into truth (John 16:13), and the early Christian Church was diverse and decentralized, without a single leader claiming exclusive authority over interpretation. The insistence that 266 men, many from noble or wealthy families, hold divine authority is neither supported by Scripture nor by the example of the early Christian community.


Furthermore the New Testament refers to Christ as the true foundation of the Church (1 Corinthians 3:11) and does not focus on any one individual or office as the final authority. Additionally, Ephesians 2:20 states that the Church is “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone,” underscoring the collective leadership of the apostles rather than a single, supreme figure.

In Matthew 16:23, just after Jesus calls Peter the "rock," He also refers to Peter as "Satan" for misunderstanding His mission. This rebuke suggests that Peter, like all other apostles, was prone to error. There is no scriptural evidence suggesting Peter possessed any unique infallibility or special office that would be inherited by future bishops of Rome.

Moreover, Peter’s role in the early Church was important but not exclusive. Paul, James, and John were also significant leaders in the early Church (see Galatians 2:9, where they are called "pillars"), and the New Testament never suggests that Peter had singular or supreme authority over them. In fact, Acts 15 shows a Council in Jerusalem, where various apostles, including Peter, participate in decision-making, but no one exercises unilateral authority

There is also no clear biblical evidence that Peter was ever in Rome. While some early Church traditions place Peter in Rome, this is not supported by the New Testament. The Bible is silent on Peter’s presence in Rome, which is a foundational claim for the Catholic doctrine that the Pope, as the Bishop of Rome, is Peter’s successor.


Without solid biblical or historical evidence linking Peter to Rome in a direct and authoritative way, the entire concept of the papacy rests on a tenuous foundation.


In 2 Timothy 3:16-17, we read that "All Scripture is breathed out by God," which strongly implies that personal interpretation, guided by the Holy Spirit—as promised in John 16:13—should suffice for believers. This reliance on human interpretation mirrors Gnostic tendencies, which prioritize secret knowledge over the accessible truths of Scripture.

Moreover, the veneration of Mary and the saints as intermediaries in the Catechism complicates the relationship believers have with God. While the New Testament emphasizes direct access to the Father through Christ, as articulated in Hebrews 4:16, the practice of seeking intercession from saints suggests a return to the Gnostic practice of relying on intermediaries rather than fostering a direct, personal connection with the divine. The idea of salvation as a mystery is prevalent throughout the Catechism, which aligns closely with Gnostic thought. Gnosticism often posits that salvation is achieved through secret knowledge.

In stark contrast, Romans 1:16 asserts that the Gospel is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, emphasizing that this truth should be accessible and clear, not shrouded in layers of esoteric interpretation. The sacramental system within Catholicism further blurs the lines, resembling Gnostic rituals designed for spiritual enlightenment. While sacraments are intended to convey grace, their emphasis on physical rituals can detract from the simplicity of faith expressed in Ephesians 2:8-9, which underscores that grace comes through faith alone, independent of ritualistic works.


Historical issues within the Church also contribute to skepticism about its teachings. The involvement of Church leadership with political power and wealth has led many to question the integrity of their interpretations. Allegations of corruption and financial scandals create an environment of distrust, undermining the Church’s position as a moral authority. This departure from the humility and servitude that Christ exemplified, particularly in Mark 10:42-45, where He teaches that leaders should serve rather than dominate, raises significant doubts about the legitimacy of its teachings.


While the Catholic Church argues that veneration of images is distinct from worship and serves as a visual aid to devotion, this distinction can blur in practice, making it difficult to prevent the very idolatry that the Second Commandment seeks to avoid.


The Second Commandment states, "You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth" (Exodus 20:4), that was before St. Augustine adapted them for the Catholics. This clear directive raises important questions regarding certain practices within the Roman Catholic Church.

The commandment explicitly forbids the making of any images or likenesses of anything in heaven, which would include depictions of Christ, angels, and saints. This commandment challenges the validity of creating statues and icons intended for veneration. The intent behind the commandment is to prevent idolatry. Even if the images are intended to honor rather than worship, the creation of such likenesses can lead to confusion and misdirected devotion. This concern is echoed in other biblical passages that warn against the worship of created things instead of the Creator.

The commandment emphasizes that God is spirit and should not be confined to physical representations. By creating images, the Church may undermine the understanding of God’s transcendence and the spiritual nature of worship (John 4:24). The New Testament does not provide any directives from Jesus or the apostles endorsing the creation of images for worship or veneration. This absence raises questions about the legitimacy of such practices in light of the early Church’s focus on spiritual rather than physical representations.

The creation of images may detract from the essential Christian belief that God is ultimately beyond human comprehension and representation. By making likenesses, there is a risk of limiting God to human interpretations.


Look around the world—statues, figurines, and people profiting from the Holy Word. How is this not idolatry? Do they even understand who these so-called saints are? The reason we refrain from praying to or venerating idols is to shield ourselves from the false gods, including the Nephilim in spirit form, who seek to lead us astray. Interestingly, the Nephilim, believed to be the offspring of fallen angels and humans, were thought to be linked to the Aryan race, which Hitler claimed to belong to. I’ll delve into this further in another post.


Continued......


To explore the validity of the Catholic Catechism's teachings on knowing God, it is essential to critically examine its claims regarding natural and divine revelation, especially in light of Scripture and the parallels that can be drawn to Gnostic beliefs and Freemasonry.


The Catechism states that divine revelation is essential for understanding God (CCC 50). - Hebrews 1:1-2 affirms that God has spoken definitively through His Son, suggesting that while revelation is necessary, it is Christ alone who provides the fullness of knowledge about God. This counters the idea that a dual reliance on Scripture and Tradition is needed. Freemasonry emphasizes the pursuit of truth through initiation and secret teachings. This idea of needing specific knowledge to reach a greater understanding of God mirrors the Catholic reliance on both Scripture and Tradition.

The Church claims that human reason, while valuable, must be guided by divine revelation (CCC 31). However, Jeremiah 17:9 states, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?” This suggests that human understanding can lead to error, emphasizing the need for direct revelation rather than interpretation through human reasoning.

Why should we, as fallible humans, place our trust in other fallible humans, especially when corruption and scandals—such as the instances of abuse within the Roman Catholic Church—highlight the serious shortcomings in their moral integrity? The very nature of human imperfection raises significant questions about the reliability of any interpretation of Scripture that comes from such individuals.


When we witness systemic issues like corruption and misconduct among church leaders, it undermines the credibility of their interpretations and teachings. If those entrusted with spiritual authority are capable of such grave failings, how can we confidently rely on their understanding of divine truth? Furthermore, this raises a critical issue about accountability within religious institutions. Shouldn't the interpretation of Scripture be guided by a standard that transcends human frailty, rather than resting in the hands of those who have proven themselves fallible?


Pope Alexander VI (1492-1503)

- Known for his nepotism and fathering several children, including Cesare and Lucrezia Borgia.

Accused of various corrupt practices, including simony (buying and selling church offices).


Pope Julius II (1503-1513)

- Known as the "Warrior Pope" for his involvement in military campaigns.

- Criticized for his lavish spending on art and architecture, including commissioning Michelangelo for the Sistine Chapel.


Pope Leo X (1513-1521)

- His papacy is marked by extravagant spending and indulgences, which contributed to the Protestant Reformation.

- Criticized for his luxurious lifestyle and failure to address the growing discontent with Church corruption.


Pope Urban VI (1378-1389)

- His election led to the Western Schism, with rival claimants to the papacy, resulting in a division within the Church.


Pope Benedict IX (multiple terms, 1032-1044, 1045, 1047-1055)

- Known for his notorious lifestyle, including allegations of debauchery and selling the papacy.


Pope Paul IV (1555-1559)

- Instituted the Roman Inquisition and was involved in anti-Semitic policies, including the creation of the ghetto in Rome.


Pope Pius IX (1846-1878)

- Criticized for his opposition to modernism and liberalism, as well as his role in the Italian unification.


Pope Leo XIII (1878-1903)

- Although respected, faced criticism for his handling of labor issues and his failure to address the needs of the working class.


Pope Pius XII (1939-1958)

- Controversial for his silence during the Holocaust and perceived inaction against Nazi atrocities.


Pope John Paul II (1978-2005)

- Criticized for his handling of sexual abuse scandals within the Church, particularly for not taking stronger action against offending clergy.


Pope Benedict XVI (2005-2013)

- Faced scrutiny for his previous role as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith during the height of the abuse scandals.


Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, a former archbishop of Washington, D.C., who was accused of sexual abuse and misconduct involving seminarians and minors. His case shocked many and ultimately led to his laicization in 2019.

Cardinal George Pell from Australia. Pell was convicted in 2018 of child sexual abuse, though his conviction was later overturned by the High Court of Australia, igniting widespread debate and controversy.


Bishop Robert Finn, who served in the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph in the United States, faced criticism for his handling of sexual abuse cases and resigned in 2015 after being convicted of failing to report suspected child abuse. Cardinal Roger Mahony, the former archbishop of Los Angeles, has also been scrutinized for his role in covering up numerous abuse cases within his archdiocese, leading to significant public outcry and legal battles.


Additionally, Father Marcial Maciel, the founder of the Legion of Christ, was revealed to have a history of sexual abuse and fathering children.


These cases represent just a fraction of the broader issue, as many dioceses around the world have begun to release lists of accused clergy in response to increased scrutiny and demand for accountability. Reports from various countries, including the United States, Canada, Australia, and several European nations, have highlighted systemic failures within the Church to protect victims and address allegations adequately.


You might consider me old-fashioned, but when did God say that any of this wouldn't lead to hell?


This situation compels us to seek a more trustworthy foundation for understanding faith and morality—one that is less susceptible to the weaknesses and failings inherent in human nature. It invites us to consider alternative ways of engaging with Scripture that prioritize personal discernment and the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit over human authority.

The Catechism emphasizes both faith and reason in coming to know God (CCC 159). Ephesians 2:8-9 states, “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.” This underscores that faith, rather than reason or works, is the primary means of knowing God and obtaining salvation.

Meanwhile Freemasonry emphasizes a system of belief that requires adherence to certain moral and ethical teachings, suggesting that enlightenment requires a commitment to specific principles, similar to the reliance on faith within Catholicism.


The Church teaches that divine revelation is transmitted through both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition (CCC 80-83). The Magisterium (teaching authority of the Church) is tasked with interpreting these. Scripture itself declares its sufficiency for teaching, correction, and instruction. Again, why should we, as fallible humans, place our trust in other fallible humans, especially when corruption and scandals—such as the instances of abuse within the Roman Catholic Church—highlight the serious shortcomings in their moral integrity? The very nature of human imperfection raises significant questions about the reliability of any interpretation of Scripture that comes from such individuals.


The Catholic teaching on Tradition and the role of the Magisterium suggests that there is knowledge necessary for salvation that is not found in Scripture alone but is preserved and interpreted by the Church’s hierarchy. This hierarchical structure and secretive approach to truth align with Freemasonry, which also promotes esoteric knowledge accessible only to those initiated into its ranks.

The Catechism teaches that the Magisterium has the final authority to interpret Scripture and Tradition (CCC 85-87). It places the Church’s teaching authority above individual interpretation of the Bible.

The Bible affirms the priesthood of all believers and the guidance of the Holy Spirit in understanding Scripture. 1 John 2:27 says, “But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie—just as it has taught you, abide in him.” This suggests that believers do not need a human intermediary (such as the Magisterium) to understand Scripture, as the Holy Spirit leads all believers into truth.

As it did me.

Both Gnosticism and Freemasonry emphasize a system of hierarchical knowledge and enlightenment, where only certain individuals (those initiated or spiritually superior) have access to truth. The Catholic Church’s claim that only its appointed leaders (the Magisterium) can properly interpret Scripture mirrors this idea. The notion of special intermediaries between God and the faithful, particularly in how knowledge is controlled and disseminated, echoes Gnostic beliefs in hidden truths known only to a select few, much like the secretive nature of Freemasonry.

The Catholic Church maintains that divine revelation is not confined to Scripture alone, but also encompasses Sacred Tradition, passed down orally and through the practices of the Church (CCC 78). This includes teachings that may not be directly found in the Bible but are considered essential to the faith. The Bible warns against adding to the Word of God.


Deuteronomy 4:2 commands, “You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you.” Similarly, Revelation 22:18-19 cautions against anyone who “adds to” or “takes away” from the words of Scripture. These passages indicate that Scripture is complete and sufficient, and the addition of extra-biblical traditions is contrary to God’s commands.

Gnosticism is centered on the idea of esoteric knowledge, hidden from the majority but revealed to a spiritual elite. This secret knowledge is essential for salvation, much like the way the Catholic Church claims that not all truth is contained in Scripture alone. Freemasonry, similarly, is structured around advancing through levels of hidden knowledge, with each higher degree offering access to more “light” or truth. The Catholic system of Tradition and the necessity of the Magisterium's interpretations could be viewed as parallel to the idea that secret knowledge is required for true understanding and salvation.


While the Church officially condemns idolatry and pagan practices, there are certain elements in Catholic worship, such as the use of obelisks (often associated with sun worship) and other practices linked to paganism, as I've spoken about on multiple occasions. Scripture clearly condemns the worship of celestial bodies and warns against the integration of pagan practices.

Deuteronomy 4:19 says, “And when you look up to the sky and see the sun, the moon, and the stars... do not be enticed into bowing down to them and worshiping things the LORD your God has apportioned to all the nations.”

Jeremiah 10:2 similarly warns, “Do not learn the ways of the nations or be terrified by signs in the heavens, though the nations are terrified by them.”


Freemasonry and certain Gnostic sects have been associated with sun worship and other celestial symbolism, often linking the sun to higher knowledge or spiritual awakening. The Vatican's observatory, obelisk, and timing of rituals with celestial events can be seen as remnants of pagan sun worship, blending Christian practice with esoteric, Gnostic, or Masonic traditions that focus on cosmic elements for spiritual enlightenment.



All I can do is share the truth and allow you to form your own conclusions.

Remember, tomorrow is the true Sabbath, not Sunday altered by the pagan Roman Emperor Constantine. Let’s remain faithful to our divine Creator and rest tomorrow, if possible.


Have a good one.

Comentarios


Los comentarios se han desactivado.