samurai_science said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Haha the tweet got the reader fact check

Well done twitter. For the non Catholics, the Pope was delivering a Homily, which is the part of the Mass AFTER the Gospel is read, where the priest (in this case His Holiness) provides personal commentary on the readings of the day.

---

You get about 10 minutes max of reading from the bible and then double that of human opinion.

Catholics know nothing of the bible compared to Baptists.

I've been both.

---

I assure you, Robert Francis Prevost (Pope Leo XIV) has read more of the Bible than you have read over your journey of jumping between religions.

---

I'd hope so.

But I'm not talking about reading it, with respect to the Pope, or the Cardinals, or the Bishops, or the Priests, or the whole hierarchy that puts themself between the people and Jesus.

I'm talking about teaching it to the people.

Baptists do every single entire sermon AND their classes every single Sunday. Catholics get about 5-10 minutes of it being read to them.

---

Oh ok so this is a "Baptists are better than Catholics" gripe. Cool

The Catholic Pope is the Vicar of Christ. The line passes down 2000 years. Catholicism shaped "Western Civilization". But that's cool that Baptists are around too

---

No, it's not. Read my edit.

---

I read the edit. You like them both.

But what about what I said?

"The Catholic Pope is the Vicar of Christ. The line passes down 2000 years. Catholicism shaped "Western Civilization". But that's cool that Baptists are around too"

---

Pope is just a flawed man, and the current one is scum.

---

Remember that these religious leaders are just men. A human being. With the same flaws that you and I have, more or less.

If you look into history, almost all religious leaders have displayed flaws like greed, envy, lust and wanting to steal, loot and conquer. Muhammad is one towering example.

BigRobSA said:

---

"And Jesus said Woe to those that go against Da Bears!"

---

We actually had a pastor when I was a kid who was a big football fan and would say things like that. Always knew we were getting out of mass faster if the Oilers were playing.

Ahhhh....I miss having straight, non-marxist priests.

Keyno said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Haha the tweet got the reader fact check

Well done twitter. For the non Catholics, the Pope was delivering a Homily, which is the part of the Mass AFTER the Gospel is read, where the priest (in this case His Holiness) provides personal commentary on the readings of the day.

---

You get about 10 minutes max of reading from the bible and then double that of human opinion.

Catholics know nothing of the bible compared to Baptists.

I've been both.

---

I assure you, Robert Francis Prevost (Pope Leo XIV) has read more of the Bible than you have read over your journey of jumping between religions.

---

I'd hope so.

But I'm not talking about reading it, with respect to the Pope, or the Cardinals, or the Bishops, or the Priests, or the whole hierarchy that puts themself between the people and Jesus.

I'm talking about teaching it to the people.

Baptists do every single entire sermon AND their classes every single Sunday. Catholics get about 5-10 minutes of it being read to them.

---

Oh ok so this is a "Baptists are better than Catholics" gripe. Cool

The Catholic Pope is the Vicar of Christ. The line passes down 2000 years. Catholicism shaped "Western Civilization". But that's cool that Baptists are around too

---

No, it's not. Read my edit.

---

I read the edit. You like them both.

But what about what I said?

"The Catholic Pope is the Vicar of Christ. The line passes down 2000 years. Catholicism shaped "Western Civilization". But that's cool that Baptists are around too"

---

I pretty much ignored it after your assumptions and insults.

---

I literally just quoted you (and me). You praised Baptists for being very strong Bible readers and said Catholics only get 5-10 minutes of Bible. I did not insult you. If you don't want to respond, that's fine. But there is no need for false accusations

---

I praised nothing. Just the facts. You're snidey. I was about to say have a nice life...then remembered, I'm a Christian. Lol.

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Haha the tweet got the reader fact check

Well done twitter. For the non Catholics, the Pope was delivering a Homily, which is the part of the Mass AFTER the Gospel is read, where the priest (in this case His Holiness) provides personal commentary on the readings of the day.

---

You get about 10 minutes max of reading from the bible and then double that of human opinion.

Catholics know nothing of the bible compared to Baptists.

I've been both.

---

I assure you, Robert Francis Prevost (Pope Leo XIV) has read more of the Bible than you have read over your journey of jumping between religions.

---

I'd hope so.

But I'm not talking about reading it, with respect to the Pope, or the Cardinals, or the Bishops, or the Priests, or the whole hierarchy that puts themself between the people and Jesus.

I'm talking about teaching it to the people.

Baptists do every single entire sermon AND their classes every single Sunday. Catholics get about 5-10 minutes of it being read to them.

---

Oh ok so this is a "Baptists are better than Catholics" gripe. Cool

The Catholic Pope is the Vicar of Christ. The line passes down 2000 years. Catholicism shaped "Western Civilization". But that's cool that Baptists are around too

---

No, it's not. Read my edit.

---

I read the edit. You like them both.

But what about what I said?

"The Catholic Pope is the Vicar of Christ. The line passes down 2000 years. Catholicism shaped "Western Civilization". But that's cool that Baptists are around too"

---

I pretty much ignored it after your assumptions and insults.

---

I literally just quoted you (and me). You praised Baptists for being very strong Bible readers and said Catholics only get 5-10 minutes of Bible. I did not insult you. If you don't want to respond, that's fine. But there is no need for false accusations

---

I praised nothing. Just the facts. You're snidey. I was about to say have a nice life...then remembered, I'm a Christian. Lol.

---

Probably a good idea to just call it here. I am currently doing a "deep dive" on Protestantism and it is just frankly too much for this thread

Somebody's arrogance is downright liberal.

Hey @grok, list all the Bible verses that support the Pope having any spiritual authority. If there are none, say none.

— Armored (@DavidFischer) April 17, 2026

Grok


None.

The Bible never mentions a "Pope," the office of the papacy, or any singular bishop in Rome holding supreme spiritual authority over the universal church.

Verses about Peter (like Matt 16:18-19 or John 21:15-17) describe his personal role as an apostle among equals, with no mention of successors, keys being passed to Rome, or one man ruling all believers. Church leadership in Scripture is always plural (elders/overseers) under Christ as the sole head (Eph 1:22, Col 1:18).

Breaking news: "Holy man just making it up as he goes"

More at 6

bmks270 said:

---

The Catholic Church believes they speak for God and that their policies, teaching, and traditions are primary and ahead of the Bible.

Took me a bit of studying and listening to a lot of Catholics to fully understand.

---

You still don't.

The current Pope is doing his job. Using the teachings of Jesus, he speaks out as a pro-life - against abortion, murder, war, capital punishment...and support of the poor, weak, sick, young and old, and neighbors - that includes and emphasizes good people [e.g., Samaritins] from different nations.

Better than protecting pedo priests!

Equinox said:

---

Hey @grok, list all the Bible verses that support the Pope having any spiritual authority. If there are none, say none.

— Armored (@DavidFischer) April 17, 2026

Grok


None.

The Bible never mentions a "Pope," the office of the papacy, or any singular bishop in Rome holding supreme spiritual authority over the universal church.

Verses about Peter (like Matt 16:18-19 or John 21:15-17) describe his personal role as an apostle among equals, with no mention of successors, keys being passed to Rome, or one man ruling all believers. Church leadership in Scripture is always plural (elders/overseers) under Christ as the sole head (Eph 1:22, Col 1:18).

---

Peter was appointed as head of the church by Jesus. The Pope as the head of the Catholic Church was never meant to be a family lineage...just a leader. Most Catholics don't believe the Pope has some hotline to heaven.

EXACTLY

The pope is just a guy. Based on his words and actions, he's either a guy who is an idiot, or he is evil. Either way, he is just a guy.

Leo is Francis 2.0. He is intensifying the publicly stated Anti-Americanism that his predecessor initiated.

Keyno said:

---

I am currently doing a "deep dive" on Protestantism ...

---

I bet you're fun at parties!

At some level you have to credit Trump for being the first man to go to war with the pope and the ayatollah at the same time

— Kyle Smith (@rkylesmith) April 18, 2026

Lathspell said:

---

Keyno said:

---

I assure you, Robert Francis Prevost (Pope Leo XIV) has read more of the Bible than you have read over your journey of jumping between religions.

---

Irrelevant. If he is truly a Believer, then we have the same Spirit of God within us to help us discern and lead us. Just because a bunch of dudes in red voted him your spiritual leader does not somehow make him the authority on Christianity.

If you live in the middle of Africa, and all you have is a few pages of the Gospel, Christ can still reveal himself to you and lead you. This Christian Elitism you seem to profess is one of the reasons protestants even exist, and thank God we do.

---

The Catholic Church is the original and primary Christian Church. All Protestant off shoots are like 500 years old at the most, while the Catholic Church is 2000 years old. The Pope is the leader of the Catholic Church and the successor to St Peter with an unbroken line to St Peter. I am not sure what you mean by "Christian elitism" but Protestants are also Christians technically.

Technically? We follow Christ, hence being "Christians."

We don't follow the pope, who is just a dude.

BigRobSA said:

---

Keyno said:

---

I am currently doing a "deep dive" on Protestantism ...

---

I bet you're fun at parties!

---

Especially after a day of rest!

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Technically? We follow Christ, hence being "Christians."

We don't follow the pope, who is just a dude.

---

The Catholic Church acknowledges the concept and legitimacy of "authority". As the successor to St. Peter, whom Jesus charged with building his Church, the Pope is given the due respect and honor as the authority of Christ's Church.

I think it would be specifically interesting to you that the Israel is mentioned many times in the Bible after the death of Peter, including what Israel, as separate from the Church, would do in the future. But there is no specific mention of a continuance of any "office" held by Peter.

That's Hegseth's beer!

Phatbob said:

---

I think it would be specifically interesting to you that the Israel is mentioned many times in the Bible after the death of Peter, including what Israel, as separate from the Church, would do in the future. But there is no specific mention of a continuance of any "office" held by Peter.

---

In the Bible? The last book in the Bible is generally considered to have been written in or around 96 AD. So it does not surprise me that it does not discuss the papacy. However St. Peter is considered by Catholics to be the first Bishop of Rome- which established the line of succession which is unbroken for 2000 years.

Red Fishing Ag93 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

Haha the tweet got the reader fact check

Well done twitter. For the non Catholics, the Pope was delivering a Homily, which is the part of the Mass AFTER the Gospel is read, where the priest (in this case His Holiness) provides personal commentary on the readings of the day.

---

You get about 10 minutes max of reading from the bible and then double that of human opinion.

Catholics know nothing of the bible compared to Baptists.

I've been both.

---

Interesting take. I was raised Baptist and converted to Catholic precisely because they follow the Bible much more closely than my experiences as a Baptist. I was in my 20's before I realized that the "Book of Finance" was not in the New Testament.

But agree that this pope is no better than the last. I had such high hopes from the report of a casual acquaintance that went to high school with him, but he is nothing like he was described to be.

The problem with the Pope's sermon is that he intentionally mischaracterizes the words of Jesus. I don't care what his "transcript" says. The way he spoke the words CLEARLY demonstrate his intent to make those words sound like Jesus' words.

Deception was intended, and that's rather disgusting. Especially for the "direct lineage of Peter".

That's the whole problem with a fallable human leading a fallable church: he is not even nearly perfect. One man was. He is my Savior.

I hate to be so reductive, but Catholicism, their "Church" and the Pope are all inherently flawed for these reasons. They are creations of man nothing more.

Scripture is not.

Ultimately, that's the one disagreement that will exist until Jesus returns. Some of us will choose Christ through sola scriptura and some will choose the man-made traditions of the RCC and papal supremacy.

I know the "good Catholics" will be right along to goal tend for the Pope but he was intentionally (and disgustingly) deceptive in this sermon. It was wrong.

AgPrognosticator said:

---

The problem with the Pope's sermon is that he intentionally mischaracterizes the words of Jesus. I don't care what his "transcript" says. The way he spoke the words CLEARLY demonstrate his intent to make those words sound like Jesus' words.

Deception was intended, and that's rather disgusting. Especially for the "direct lineage of Peter".

That's the whole problem with a fallable human leading a fallable church: he is not even nearly perfect. One man was. He is my Savior.

I hate to be so reductive, but Catholicism, their "Church" and the Pope are all inherently flawed for these reasons. They are creations of man nothing more.

Scripture is not.

Ultimately, that's the one disagreement that will exist until Jesus returns. Some of us will choose Christ through sola scriptura and some will choose the man-made traditions of the RCC and papal supremacy.

I know the "good Catholics" will be right along to goal tend for the Pope but he was intentionally (and disgustingly) deceptive in this sermon. It was wrong.

---

This random guy definitely and clearly knows the Pope's intentions.

Keyno said:

---

AgPrognosticator said:

---

The problem with the Pope's sermon is that he intentionally mischaracterizes the words of Jesus. I don't care what his "transcript" says. The way he spoke the words CLEARLY demonstrate his intent to make those words sound like Jesus' words.

Deception was intended, and that's rather disgusting. Especially for the "direct lineage of Peter".

That's the whole problem with a fallable human leading a fallable church: he is not even nearly perfect. One man was. He is my Savior.

I hate to be so reductive, but Catholicism, their "Church" and the Pope are all inherently flawed for these reasons. They are creations of man nothing more.

Scripture is not.

Ultimately, that's the one disagreement that will exist until Jesus returns. Some of us will choose Christ through sola scriptura and some will choose the man-made traditions of the RCC and papal supremacy.

I know the "good Catholics" will be right along to goal tend for the Pope but he was intentionally (and disgustingly) deceptive in this sermon. It was wrong.

---

This random guy definitely and clearly knows the Pope's intentions.

---

You're being disingenuous. The video is plainly obvious to anyone who is intellectually honest.

AgPrognosticator said:

---

Keyno said:

---

AgPrognosticator said:

---

The problem with the Pope's sermon is that he intentionally mischaracterizes the words of Jesus. I don't care what his "transcript" says. The way he spoke the words CLEARLY demonstrate his intent to make those words sound like Jesus' words.

Deception was intended, and that's rather disgusting. Especially for the "direct lineage of Peter".

That's the whole problem with a fallable human leading a fallable church: he is not even nearly perfect. One man was. He is my Savior.

I hate to be so reductive, but Catholicism, their "Church" and the Pope are all inherently flawed for these reasons. They are creations of man nothing more.

Scripture is not.

Ultimately, that's the one disagreement that will exist until Jesus returns. Some of us will choose Christ through sola scriptura and some will choose the man-made traditions of the RCC and papal supremacy.

I know the "good Catholics" will be right along to goal tend for the Pope but he was intentionally (and disgustingly) deceptive in this sermon. It was wrong.

---

This random guy definitely and clearly knows the Pope's intentions.

---

You're being disingenuous. The video is plainly obvious to anyone who is intellectually honest.

---

Disingenuous? You just made a post assuming the Pope's "intentions" multiple times and then argued against that. You are obviously not Catholic, so you may not be aware of the concept of a homily. I explained it earlier in this thread but I can do it again if you'd like

Quote:

---

I hate to be so reductive, but Catholicism, their "Church" and the Pope are all inherently flawed for these reasons. They are creations of man nothing more.

---

Name me a church (or "Church") that isn't.

irony level 1000

Quote:

---

The problem with the Pope's sermon is that he intentionally mischaracterizes the words of Jesus. I don't care what his "transcript" says. The way he spoke the words CLEARLY demonstrate his intent to make those words sound like Jesus' words.

---

Quote:

---

Deception was intended, and that's rather disgusting

---

agent-maroon said:

---

Quote:

---

I hate to be so reductive, but Catholicism, their "Church" and the Pope are all inherently flawed for these reasons. They are creations of man nothing more.

---

Name me a church (or "Church") that isn't.

---

I don't worship my church or brag about its ancient authority. The Church (capital C) is the body of believers around the world governed by the Holy Trinity according to the scripture, not the Pope or any other man.

You can rationalize your derision any way you want. But if you think you're attending a church without a man/woman leading the congregation with authority over worship practices, then you're mistaken. You're in a bible study.

Phatbob said:

---

I think it would be specifically interesting to you that the Israel is mentioned many times in the Bible after the death of Peter, including what Israel, as separate from the Church, would do in the future. But there is no specific mention of a continuance of any "office" held by Peter.

---

You'd be surprised. Read Acts about what the apostles did after Judas. All the apostles (we call the episkopoi but they are apostles) have done that ever since, in an unbroken line. That election to replace someone to his office didn't just stop happening. And the same thing happens for Peter's office (the papacy).

Keyno said:

---

AgPrognosticator said:

---

Keyno said:

---

AgPrognosticator said:

---

The problem with the Pope's sermon is that he intentionally mischaracterizes the words of Jesus. I don't care what his "transcript" says. The way he spoke the words CLEARLY demonstrate his intent to make those words sound like Jesus' words.

Deception was intended, and that's rather disgusting. Especially for the "direct lineage of Peter".

That's the whole problem with a fallable human leading a fallable church: he is not even nearly perfect. One man was. He is my Savior.

I hate to be so reductive, but Catholicism, their "Church" and the Pope are all inherently flawed for these reasons. They are creations of man nothing more.

Scripture is not.

Ultimately, that's the one disagreement that will exist until Jesus returns. Some of us will choose Christ through sola scriptura and some will choose the man-made traditions of the RCC and papal supremacy.

I know the "good Catholics" will be right along to goal tend for the Pope but he was intentionally (and disgustingly) deceptive in this sermon. It was wrong.

---

This random guy definitely and clearly knows the Pope's intentions.

---

You're being disingenuous. The video is plainly obvious to anyone who is intellectually honest.

---

Disingenuous? You just made a post assuming the Pope's "intentions" multiple times and then argued against that. You are obviously not Catholic, so you may not be aware of the concept of a homily. I explained it earlier in this thread but I can do it again if you'd like

---

Let me put it this way: I've been in churches and listened to sermons where the pastor mischaracterizes the scripture. I make it a point to never return or listen again.

Here, your Pope mischaracterized the words of Jesus. The problem for Catholics is that you cannot be intellectually honest with the Pope's deception, or you'd have to disown your entire Catholic Church. Therein lies your conundrum: you are forced to listen and adhere to a mere mortal, no matter how incorrect or improver his homily's may be.

AgPrognosticator said:

---

Keyno said:

---

AgPrognosticator said:

---

Keyno said:

---

AgPrognosticator said:

---

The problem with the Pope's sermon is that he intentionally mischaracterizes the words of Jesus. I don't care what his "transcript" says. The way he spoke the words CLEARLY demonstrate his intent to make those words sound like Jesus' words.

Deception was intended, and that's rather disgusting. Especially for the "direct lineage of Peter".

That's the whole problem with a fallable human leading a fallable church: he is not even nearly perfect. One man was. He is my Savior.

I hate to be so reductive, but Catholicism, their "Church" and the Pope are all inherently flawed for these reasons. They are creations of man nothing more.

Scripture is not.

Ultimately, that's the one disagreement that will exist until Jesus returns. Some of us will choose Christ through sola scriptura and some will choose the man-made traditions of the RCC and papal supremacy.

I know the "good Catholics" will be right along to goal tend for the Pope but he was intentionally (and disgustingly) deceptive in this sermon. It was wrong.

---

This random guy definitely and clearly knows the Pope's intentions.

---

You're being disingenuous. The video is plainly obvious to anyone who is intellectually honest.

---

Disingenuous? You just made a post assuming the Pope's "intentions" multiple times and then argued against that. You are obviously not Catholic, so you may not be aware of the concept of a homily. I explained it earlier in this thread but I can do it again if you'd like

---

Let me put it this way: I've been in churches and listened to sermons where the pastor mischaracterizes the scripture. I make it a point to never return or listen again.

Here, your Pope mischaracterized the words of Jesus. The problem for Catholics is that you cannot be intellectually honest with the Pope's deception, or you'd have to disown your entire Catholic Church. Therein lies your conundrum: you are forced to listen and adhere to a mere mortal, no matter how incorrect or improver his homily's may be.

---

Ha uh no, the Pope did not "mischaracterize the words of Jesus". Again, you are just making stuff up and arguing with it because you are mad that the Pope is calling for peace (which is in line with the teachings and Jesus and the Catholic Church)

Keyno said:

---

AgPrognosticator said:

---

Keyno said:

---

AgPrognosticator said:

---

Keyno said:

---

AgPrognosticator said:

---

The problem with the Pope's sermon is that he intentionally mischaracterizes the words of Jesus. I don't care what his "transcript" says. The way he spoke the words CLEARLY demonstrate his intent to make those words sound like Jesus' words.

Deception was intended, and that's rather disgusting. Especially for the "direct lineage of Peter".

That's the whole problem with a fallable human leading a fallable church: he is not even nearly perfect. One man was. He is my Savior.

I hate to be so reductive, but Catholicism, their "Church" and the Pope are all inherently flawed for these reasons. They are creations of man nothing more.

Scripture is not.

Ultimately, that's the one disagreement that will exist until Jesus returns. Some of us will choose Christ through sola scriptura and some will choose the man-made traditions of the RCC and papal supremacy.

I know the "good Catholics" will be right along to goal tend for the Pope but he was intentionally (and disgustingly) deceptive in this sermon. It was wrong.

---

This random guy definitely and clearly knows the Pope's intentions.

---

You're being disingenuous. The video is plainly obvious to anyone who is intellectually honest.

---

Disingenuous? You just made a post assuming the Pope's "intentions" multiple times and then argued against that. You are obviously not Catholic, so you may not be aware of the concept of a homily. I explained it earlier in this thread but I can do it again if you'd like

---

Let me put it this way: I've been in churches and listened to sermons where the pastor mischaracterizes the scripture. I make it a point to never return or listen again.

Here, your Pope mischaracterized the words of Jesus. The problem for Catholics is that you cannot be intellectually honest with the Pope's deception, or you'd have to disown your entire Catholic Church. Therein lies your conundrum: you are forced to listen and adhere to a mere mortal, no matter how incorrect or improver his homily's may be.

---

Ha uh no, the Pope did not "mischaracterize the words of Jesus". Again, you are just making stuff up and arguing with it because you are mad that the Pope is calling for peace (which is in line with the teachings and Jesus and the Catholic Church)

---

Making stuff up? You mean like when the Pope put fake words in Jesus mouth during a sermon??

AgPrognosticator said:

---

Keyno said:

---

AgPrognosticator said:

---

Keyno said:

---

AgPrognosticator said:

---

Keyno said:

---

AgPrognosticator said:

---

The problem with the Pope's sermon is that he intentionally mischaracterizes the words of Jesus. I don't care what his "transcript" says. The way he spoke the words CLEARLY demonstrate his intent to make those words sound like Jesus' words.

Deception was intended, and that's rather disgusting. Especially for the "direct lineage of Peter".

That's the whole problem with a fallable human leading a fallable church: he is not even nearly perfect. One man was. He is my Savior.

I hate to be so reductive, but Catholicism, their "Church" and the Pope are all inherently flawed for these reasons. They are creations of man nothing more.

Scripture is not.

Ultimately, that's the one disagreement that will exist until Jesus returns. Some of us will choose Christ through sola scriptura and some will choose the man-made traditions of the RCC and papal supremacy.

I know the "good Catholics" will be right along to goal tend for the Pope but he was intentionally (and disgustingly) deceptive in this sermon. It was wrong.

---

This random guy definitely and clearly knows the Pope's intentions.

---

You're being disingenuous. The video is plainly obvious to anyone who is intellectually honest.

---

Disingenuous? You just made a post assuming the Pope's "intentions" multiple times and then argued against that. You are obviously not Catholic, so you may not be aware of the concept of a homily. I explained it earlier in this thread but I can do it again if you'd like

---

Let me put it this way: I've been in churches and listened to sermons where the pastor mischaracterizes the scripture. I make it a point to never return or listen again.

Here, your Pope mischaracterized the words of Jesus. The problem for Catholics is that you cannot be intellectually honest with the Pope's deception, or you'd have to disown your entire Catholic Church. Therein lies your conundrum: you are forced to listen and adhere to a mere mortal, no matter how incorrect or improver his homily's may be.

---

Ha uh no, the Pope did not "mischaracterize the words of Jesus". Again, you are just making stuff up and arguing with it because you are mad that the Pope is calling for peace (which is in line with the teachings and Jesus and the Catholic Church)

---

Making stuff up? You mean like when the Pope put fake words in Jesus mouth during a sermon??

---

Again, if you need me to explain to you the concept of a Homily, I will. Maybe you just don't know and I will give you the benefit of the doubt.