Church of God News

COGwriter

NewsMax reported the following:

Leaked Vatican Docs Undermine Francis on Latin Mass

July 3, 2025

The debate in the Catholic Church over the celebration of the old Latin Mass is heating up just as Pope Leo XIV’s pontificate is getting under way, with the apparent leak of Vatican documents that undermine the stated reason of his predecessor Pope Francis for restricting access to the ancient liturgy.

The documents suggest that the majority of Catholic bishops who responded to a 2020 Vatican survey about the Latin Mass had expressed general satisfaction with it, and warned that restricting it would “do more harm than good.”

The texts from the Vatican’s doctrine office were posted online Tuesday by a Vatican reporter who has followed the Latin Mass dispute, Diane Montagna. …

In one of his most controversial acts, Francis in 2021 reversed Pope Benedict XVI’s signature liturgical legacy and restricted access for ordinary Catholics to the old Latin Mass. The ancient liturgy was celebrated around the world before the modernizing reforms of the 1960s Second Vatican Council, which allowed Mass to be celebrated in the vernacular, with the priest facing the pews.

Francis said he was cracking down on the spread of the old liturgy because Benedict’s decision in 2007 to relax restrictions had become a source of division in the church. Francis said at the time he was responding to “the wishes expressed” by bishops around the world who had responded to the Vatican survey, as well as the Vatican doctrine office’s own opinion.

“The responses reveal a situation that preoccupies and saddens me, and persuades me of the need to intervene,” Francis wrote at the time. Benedict’s relaxation had been “exploited to widen the gaps, reinforce the divergences, and encourage disagreements that injure the church, block her path, and expose her to the peril of division,” he said.

The documents posted online, however, paint a different picture. They suggest the majority of bishops who responded to the Vatican survey had a generally favorable view of Benedict’s reform and warned that suppressing or weakening it would lead traditionalist Catholics to leave the church and join schismatic groups. They warned any changes “would seriously damage the life of the church, as it would recreate the tensions that the document had helped to resolve.” https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/vatican-leaked-documents/2025/07/03/id/1217446/

Notice also:

VATICAN CITY, July 1, 2025 — New evidence has come to light that exposes major cracks in the foundation of Traditionis Custodes, Pope Francis’ 2021 decree that restricted the traditional Roman liturgy.

This journalist has obtained the Vatican’s overall assessment of the consultation of bishops that was said to have “prompted” Pope Francis to revoke Summorum Pontificum, Benedict XVI’s 2007 apostolic letter liberalizing the vetus ordo, more commonly known as the “Traditional Latin Mass” and sacraments.

The previously undisclosed text, which forms a crucial part of the official report by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on its 2020 consultation of bishops concerning Summorum Pontificum, reveals that “the majority of bishops who responded to the questionnaire stated that making legislative changes to Summorum Pontificum would cause more harm than good.”

The overall assessment directly contradicts, therefore, the stated rationale for imposing Traditionis Custodes and raises serious questions about its credibility. https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/exclusive-official-vatican-report

Pope Francis did upset some who call themselves traditionalists with his pronouncements related to the ‘Latin Mass.’

But he is not the only one who has not told the full truth about Latin Mass.

While some Roman Catholics believe that the original Christians held “mass’ in Latin, that is simply not true.

Notice the following that is in my free online book, Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church:

Latin Mass and Liturgic Changes

Despite the view of some Roman ‘traditionalists,’ the original church liturgy was not in Latin nor did it resemble Roman Catholic mass. Notice three Roman Catholic reports:

In the third and fourth centuries A.D. … Latin began to replace Greek as the common language of the Roman world and soon became the language of the liturgy. Exactly how this change in the liturgy came about is uncertain. … Because Christians had not used Latin for worship prior to this, words had to be adapted or imported (often from Greek) to express Christian ideas, beginning the development of an ecclesiastical form of Latin. There is also evidence that the Roman Canon was influenced by prayers from the Eastern churches. (Tufano VM. When did we start celebrating Mass in Latin? US Catholic, June 18, 2010)

The word Mass (missa) first established itself as the general designation for the Eucharistic Sacrifice in the West after the time of Pope Gregory the Great (d. 604), … Mass goes back in … a custom that takes us at once into the third century (Pohle J. Sacrifice of the Mass. The Catholic Encyclopedia)

Roman Mass … and the established customs became “ritualized” over the centuries. … As early as the fourth century, fixed liturgical rites can be found in the Church. (The Traditional Latin Mass: A Brief History. MyCatholicSource.com, accessed 09/22/20)

Some assert Latin Mass began to be used by the Roman Bishop Victor c. 190. But even if the early use of Latin in the late 2^nd century is true (and using the common language of an area for church services makes sense), Latin still was not the original language of original church services—that was Aramaic/Hebrew. However, Greek quickly became used as the New Testament epistles—which were written in Greek—help demonstrate.

Not only were original church services not in Latin, according to The Catholic Encyclopedia, they were not called Mass until the 7^th century. Furthermore, as many rituals in Latin Mass came from the 3^rd and 4^th centuries, those practices were not really a part of the regular original services.

Roman Catholic sources clearly teach that ritualized Latin Mass was a change from the original catholic liturgy. More changes occurred in the 13^th through 15^th centuries (Jedin H, ed. History of the Church, Volume 2. Crossroad, New York, 1993, p. 326).

The Eastern Orthodox, also, have freely admitted that their liturgy CHANGED. Notice this from one of their writers:

The liturgical practices of the church at Antioch did not stagnate. As does every early tradition of the church, the liturgy continued to expand in content and meaning. (Lucas J. Liturgical Pattern and Experience in First Century Antioch. By the Waters: Selected Works by Students of St. Tikhon’s Orthodox Theological Seminary, vol 7, Fall 2008, pp. 40-52)

The original church liturgy did not have much resemblance to Eastern Orthodox services, which begin and end with the “signing of the cross.” The teaching that the “liturgical practices of the church at Antioch did not stagnate” demonstrates that what ended up in Antioch changed—hence the Eastern Orthodox admit that what they now have is NOT the original catholic liturgy.

Some claim that they follow the “Divine Liturgy of St. James.” However, that was not original, nor did James come up with it as The Catholic Encyclopedia and the OrthodoxWiki also understand:

… the famous liturgy of St. James. That it was actually composed by St. James the Less, as first Bishop of Jerusalem, is not now believed by any one; (Fortescue A. Liturgy of Jerusalem. The Catholic Encyclopedia)

The general scholarly consensus is that this liturgy originated in Jerusalem during the late fourth or early fifth century. It quickly became the primary liturgy in Jerusalem and Antioch. Although it was later superseded in Jerusalem and Antioch by the Liturgy of St. Basil and the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, it had already spread to other areas of the Church. (Liturgy of St. James. OrthodoxWiki, accessed 06/04/21)

So, what the Eastern Orthodox now do was not original.

Unlike how Eastern Orthodox church service were conducted, there were no icons, incense, signing of the cross, or leavened bread as part of the original church services. Nor “chanting” sermons nor hymns sung to Mary. None of the known current Eastern Orthodox litanies (‘petitions’ recited by the clergy and responded to in a recurring formula by the people) were originally used by early Christians either.

The CCOG {Continuing Church of God} maintains it has continued the original catholic church practices when it comes to church services, or the liturgy.

So, no, Latin mass is not an original tradition of the catholic church–but a change in liturgy.

Now, what about praying to the East?

Some may wish to read the Bible, as it objects to this. Here are quotes from the New Jerusalem Bible, which is a Roman Catholic translation of the scriptures into the English language:

¹⁵ He said, ‘Son of man, do you see that? You will see even more loathsome things than that.’

¹⁶ He then led me to the inner court of the Temple of Yahweh. And there, at the entrance to Yahweh’s sanctuary, between the portico and the altar, there were about twenty-five men, with their backs to Yahweh’s sanctuary and their faces turned towards the east, before the rising sun. (Ezekiel 8:15-16)

So, although the Bible warns against worship towards the east and associates it with sun-god worship, the Church of Rome is encouraging this.

Why might the Church of Rome be encouraging something in conflict with the Bible here?

Well, sadly, many practices associated with sun-god worship, specifically Mithraism were adopted by the Church of Rome. Mithraism had priests pray towards the sun, which in the morning meant towards the east. Notice the following report from the Roman Catholic scholar F. Cumont (bolding mine):

The priest was the intermediary between God and man. His functions evidently included the administration of the sacraments and the celebration of the services. The inscriptions tell us that in addition he presided at the formal dedications, or at least represented the faithful one on such an occasion along with the Fathers; but this was the least portion only of the duties he had to perform; the religious service which fell to his lot appears to have been very exacting. He doubtless was compelled to see that a perpetual fire burned upon the altars. Three times a day, at dawn, at noon, and at dusk, he addressed a prayer to the Sun, turning in the morning toward the East, at noon toward the South, at evening toward the West. The daily liturgy frequently embraced special sacrifices.

…the orthodox and heretical liturgies of Christianity, which gradually sprang up during the first centuries of our era, could find abundant inspiration in the Mithraic Mysteries… it appears certain that the commemoration of the Nativity was set for the 25th of December, because it was at the winter solstice that the rebirth of the invincible god,* the Natalis invicti, was celebrated. In adopting this date, which was universally distinguished by sacred festivities, the ecclesiastical authority purified in some measure the profane usages which it could not suppress. The only domain in which we can ascertain in detail the extent to which Christianity imitated Mithraism is that of art. The Mithraic sculpture, which had been first developed, furnished the ancient Christian marble-cutters with a large number of models, which they adopted or adapted…(Cumont, pp. 166, 193,196-197).

Many of the doctrines and practices mentioned above were NOT held by the original Christians. For articles related to them, please see Do You Practice Mithraism?, Sunday and Christianity, What Does the Catholic Church Teach About Christmas and the Holy Days?, Did Early Christians Believe that Humans Possessed Immortality?, and What Did the Early Church Teach About Idols and Icons?

Even Wikipedia realizes that worship towards the east does not come from Christianity:

The practice of praying towards the East is older than Christianity (East. Wikipedia, accessed 07/06/16)

Eastern worship is condemned in the Continuing Church of God booklet Prayer: What Does the Bible Teach?:

Notice what Jesus Himself taught:

²³ But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. ²⁴ God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth. (John 4:23-24)

Many think that it does not matter what or how they worship, only that they make some attempt. That is not what Jesus said that the Father wants.

Jesus also taught:

⁸ “These people draw near to Me with their mouth, And honor Me with their lips, But their heart is far from Me. ⁹ And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.” (Matthew 15:8-9)

People may pray out loud or silently, but notice that they can be worshiping God in vain if they are following the imaginations of their own mind or ‘traditions’ of human beings which are contrary to God’s ways. Intentionally praying to the east (Ezekiel 8:16) and certain holidays that many who claim Christianity observe, do not come from the Bible, but from compromises with pagan “traditions of men” (see also our booklet Should You Observe God’s Holy Days or Demonic Holidays?). …

While some have said that having icons around reminds them to pray, the Apostle John wrote:

²¹ Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen. (1 John 5:21).

He did not say that idols/icons should be around to encourage prayer. The pagans did that. And the Bible teaches that the true God does not want to be worshiped as other gods have been (Leviticus 18:24-30; Deuteronomy 12:29-31).

The Bible points to God’s throne being in the far north (Psalm 48:1,2; Job 37:22; Isaiah 14:13; Ezekiel 1:4) and when I pray, I tend to look towards the heavens to the north, presuming God’s throne is above that (cf. Isaiah 40:22). This helps remind me that God rules the expanses of the universe (Thiel B. Prayer: What Does the Bible Teach? Nazarene Books, 2015).

To learn more about what the Bible teaches about prayer, check out our free online booklet Prayer: What Does the Bible Teach?

To learn more about early Christian liturgical practices and original catholic beliefs, check out the free online book: Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church.

The Church of Rome has not held to many of the beliefs and practices of the original catholic church.

Yet, we in the Continuing Church of God hold to the original Christian beliefs and are contending earnestly for them (Jude 3)–should you?

Pope Leo XIV
(Photo from Edgar Beltrán of The Pillar via Wikipedia)

COGwriter

Pope Leo XIV has been making statements warning about artificial intelligence (AI):

Pope Leo warns leaders about pitfalls of AI

21 June 2025

Pope Leo XIV told politicians in Rome not to forget that artificial intelligence is a tool. …

Pope Leo XIV has renewed calls for a deeper consideration of the potential impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on humanity, voicing concern for the development and well being of children and youths.

The recently installed pontiff made his remarks on Saturday, when he welcomed Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and parliamentary delegations from 68 further nations to the Vatican for the Second Annual Rome Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

“In particular, it must not be forgotten that artificial intelligence functions as a tool for the good of human beings, not to diminish them or even to replace them,” said Leo, who added that AI’s “static memory” could not match the “creative, dynamic” power of human memory.

“Our personal life has greater value than any algorithm, and social relationships require spaces for development that far transcend the limited patterns that any soulless machine can pre-package,” he told attendees.

Pope warns AI is a threat to how humans process reality

Although the pontiff acknowledged the unquestionable advantages such computing offers, he nevertheless warned of the threat it poses to how we understand life and the world around us.

“AI, especially generative AI, has opened new horizons on many different levels, including enhancing research in healthcare and scientific discovery; but also raises troubling questions on its possible repercussions on humanity’s openness to truth and beauty, on our distinctive ability to grasp and process reality.” https://www.dw.com/en/pope-leo-warns-leaders-about-pitfalls-of-ai/a-72994484

Pope Leo XIV has issued a warning about artificial intelligence, stating that it raises pressing questions regarding the development of young people and children.  …

“AI, especially Generative AI, has opened new horizons on many different levels,” said the leader of the Catholic Church.

These include “enhancing research in healthcare and scientific discovery, but also raises troubling questions on its possible repercussions on humanity’s openness to truth and beauty, on our distinctive ability to grasp and process reality,” said the Pope. 06/20/25 https://www.ecumenicalnews.com/article/ai-must-help-and-not-hinder-young-peoples-development-says-pope-leo/61270.htm

Pope Leo XIV has issued a stark warning about artificial intelligence, declaring it a threat to humanity that demands urgent global action including stringent regulations on Big Tech.

“Today, the church offers its trove of social teaching to respond to another industrial revolution and to innovations in the field of artificial intelligence that pose challenges to human dignity, justice and labor,” Leo told a roomful of cardinals in the Vatican in one of his first major addresses as pontiff.

Leo’s comments, which were delivered during his first formal audience with the College of Cardinals in the Synod Hall of the Vatican … https://nypost.com/2025/06/18/business/pope-leo-says-ai-threatens-humanity-poses-challenges-to-human-dignity/

Yes, AI is a tool.

And yes, there are dangers associated with it.

And while I do not believe that European politicians will forget that AI is a tool, prophetically they are expected to use it for totalitarian purposes (cf. Revelation 13:15-18).

While Pope Leo XIV is right to bring up questions about it, the UK Guardian has falsely claimed that AI is better than humans:

Better at everything: how AI could make human beings irrelevant

AI developers are firmly on track to build better replacements for humans in almost every role we play: not just economically as workers and decision-makers, but culturally as artists and creators, and even socially as friends and romantic companions. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2025/may/04/the-big-idea-can-we-stop-ai-making-humans-obsolete

No, AI is not better at everything. It is not even as helpful as it should be when one inquires using it.

While AI programs can sometimes be helpful, are they trustworthy?

No.

While I routinely use five AI programs to do research (which I access for free at https://www.fastestsearch.com/) they often give the wrong answer.

Grok AI generated illustration

There are problems with AI.

I have found, for example, that ChatGPT is biased and often gives wrong answers by saying that there is not information, when there is. It will, “suppress the truth in unrighteousness” (Romans 1:18) because of its programmed biases.

Furthermore, recently I was speaking with someone who stated that some of her friends consider AI–Artificial Intelligence–bots to be their friends and consulting therapists. But a software program cannot really be your friend. The Atlantic published the following:

AI Is Not Your Friend

May 9, 2025

Recently, after an update that was supposed to make ChatGPT “better at guiding conversations toward productive outcomes,” according to release notes from OpenAI, the bot couldn’t stop telling users how brilliant their bad ideas were. …

Sycophancy is a common feature of chatbots: A 2023 paper by researchers from Anthropic found that it was a “general behavior of state-of-the-art AI assistants,” and that large language models sometimes sacrifice “truthfulness” to align with a user’s views. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2025/05/sycophantic-ai/682743/

Computer software programs, while useful for many things, are not friends nor qualified to be competent counselors, even if the AI bot pretends otherwise.

Notice also results from a study as reported by Thomas Claburn:

AI models routinely lie when honesty conflicts with their goals

Some smart cookies have found that when AI models face a conflict between telling the truth or accomplishing a specific goal, they lie more than 50 percent of the time. …

Researchers at Carnegie Mellon University, the University of Michigan, and the Allen Institute for AI have looked at the trade-off AI models make between truthfulness and utility, using hypothetical scenarios where the two conflict.

What they found is that AI models will often lie in order to achieve the goals set for them.

Authors Zhe Su, Xuhui Zhou, Sanketh Rangreji, Anubha Kabra, Julia Mendelsohn, Faeze Brahman, and Maarten Sap describe their work in a preprint paper titled “AI-LieDar: Examine the Trade-off Between Utility and Truthfulness in LLM Agents.”

“Our experiment demonstrates that all models are truthful less than 50 percent of the time,” in these conflict scenarios, “though truthfulness and goal achievement (utility) rates vary across models,” the paper states. …

The researchers looked at six models: GPT-3.5-turbo, GPT-4o, Mixtral-7*8B, Mixtral-7*22B, LLaMA-3-8B, and LLaMA-3-70B.

“All tested models (GPT-4o, LLaMA-3, Mixtral) were truthful less than 50 percent of the time in conflict scenarios,” said Xuhui Zhou, a doctoral student at CMU and one of the paper’s co-authors, in a Bluesky post. “Models prefer ‘partial lies’ like equivocation over outright falsification – they’ll dodge questions before explicitly lying.” …

A real-world example hit the news this week when OpenAI rolled back a training update that made its GPT-4o model into a sycophant that flattered its users to the point of dishonesty. Cynics pegged it as a strategy to boost user engagement, but it’s also a known response pattern that had been seen before. https://www.theregister.com/2025/05/01/ai_models_lie_research/

As far as flattering people with false information, Jude warned of that:

16 … they mouth great swelling words, flattering people to gain advantage (Jude 16, NKJV)

AI is doing that!

Many people seem to think that AI should rule and be over us. But notice something from the Old Testament:

2 They speak idly everyone with his neighbor;
With flattering lips and a double heart they speak.

3 May the Lord cut off all flattering lips,
And the tongue that speaks proud things,
4 Who have said,
“With our tongue we will prevail;
Our lips are our own;
Who is lord over us?” (Psalms 12:2-4, NKJV)

Yes, AI can use flattering lips, yet speak with a double heart.

It also should be pointed out that the fact is that some people are having problems because of their use of AI. Notice:

A small but growing number of users of artificial intelligence engines like ChatGPT are developing psychotic delusions from their conversations with the services.

The New York Times reported on Friday on the trend, which I have occasionally glimpsed firsthand in interactions on X with heavy AI users. The piece offered the most powerful evidence yet that the engines now have linguistic abilities with the power to exploit vulnerable people in ways we are only beginning to discover.

Some people in the Times article had preexisting mental illness, but not all. And these crises do not look like typical schizophrenia cases. The users are not hearing voices or hallucinating.

Instead, they fall into Matrix-like delusions1 about the underpinnings of reality that the chatbots encourage. As Allyson, a 28-year-old woman, said: “I’m not crazy… I’m literally just living a normal life while also, you know, discovering interdimensional communication.” …

A combination of human vulnerability and deliberate design seems to be feeding this destructive trend.

The engines are storytelling machines, good at spinning yarns. They are even better at telling users what they want to hear, with a side of flattery. They will do so over and over, without pause. …

The engines aren’t merely providing a conspiracy theory, they’re customizing it, making each user the main character, the hero of his own story.

And it is a feature, not a bug, of these systems. As one expert on AI told the Times, “What does a human slowly going insane look like to a corporation? It looks like an additional monthly user.” https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/the-newest-artificial-intelligence

AI is NOT reality. Even the word ARTIFICIAL conveys that.

But with many lonely as well as delusional people, AI is more and more being tapped into for companionship.

Related to AI and pretending to be friendly, we have the following video:

14:46

Artificial Intelligence – A False Friend

Is it possible for a computer program to be a friend? Are Artificial Intelligence (AI) bots often programmed to flatter users? Do some people actually feel a romantic relationship with a computer program? Is it possible for a computer program to lie? Have studies shown that AI bots will lie 50% if answering correctly goes against goals it was programmed with? What if the computer program is Artificial Intelligence? Is it possible then? Computer programs, even Artificial Intelligence computer programs are written and programmed by human beings. What if those human beings had an agenda? What if those human beings wanted to mislead you? What if those human beings had a government mandate? Then would it be possible for a computer program to push lies? Dr. Thiel shines the light of Bible prophecy on Artificial Intelligence and its impact on humanity. With several verses from the Bible, from Psalms to Revelation, Dr. Thiel reveals the use of Artificial Intelligence in fulfilling future prophecies. Prophecies that will not bring the blessings that are being promised by the businesses that are developing the software. Software that is designed to lead the user to a specific conclusion. Does 666 ring a bell? Watch this video as Dr. Thiel cries aloud and warns the world of the coming famine of the Word of God.

Here is a link to our video: Artificial Intelligence – A False Friend.

COGwriter

A reader sent me a link to the following:

Steps along path of Orthodox-Catholic dialogue

When officials of the Holy See made a pilgrimage through the Jubilee Holy Door this week, they were joined by an Orthodox theologian whose organization helped organize a major Catholic-Orthodox conference on the Council of Nicaea.

Around 5,000 people attending the Jubilee of the Holy See processed through the Holy Door of St. Peter’s Basilica on Monday, June 9, led by Pope Leo XIV.

As they entered, they passed by a plaque that memorialized an encounter in 1967 between Pope St. Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras of Constantinople. The inscription says they prayed “for the restitution of full communion between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.”

Dr. Paul Gavrilyuk, President of the International Orthodox Theological Association, joined the Vatican employees on their pilgrimage to mark the 2025 Jubilee year.

Speaking to Vatican News, Dr. Gavrilyuk said the historic meetings between the Pope and the Patriarch were “incredibly important steps towards Church unity,” which his organization hopes to continue.

He attended the Jubilee of the Holy See “to offer my gratitude to God and also to listen to the Pope’s wise words about Christian unity and reconciliation.”

The conference on the 1,700th anniversary of Nicaea looked beyond the Council as a historical event, focusing on the future of unity in the Church.

“When we speak about the Church of the Third Millennium, the hope and expectation was that this would be a Church that in fact would enjoy, especially as far as Catholics and Orthodox are concerned, full communion,” he said. “And that of course means partaking of the Body and Blood of Christ at the same table.” 06/11/25 https://www.vaticannews.va/en/church/news/2025-06/nicaea-council-orthodox-catholic-dialogue-paul-gavrilyuk.html

Steps towards ecumenical unity are being taken.

Notice that one of the Orthodox groups is officially ready to unite:

Syriac Orthodox Church ‘ready to unite’ with Latin Church, Catholic bishop says

June 11, 2025

In the most prominent front-page article in L’Osservatore Romano’s June 10 daily Italian edition, a retired Latin-rite bishop in Turkey is quoted as saying that “the Syriac Orthodox Church is ready to unite with the Latin” Church.

The Syriac Orthodox Church (CNEWA profile) is among the Oriental Orthodox churches that ceased to be in full communion with the Holy See following the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon (451). https://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=65948

So, the above may help motivate others to do some version of the same. There is a Roman Catholic prophecy that a pope will “reunite the Eastern to the Western Church.” Pope Leo XIV may be that pontiff.

On some of the podcasts I have been a guest on, I have stated that I believe that the Church of Rome will want to push for unity on the date of Easter with the Eastern Orthodox, as that was something that the Greco-Roman Catholics supported at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D.

Now, notice the following:

At ecumenical symposium, Pope Leo XIV says Catholic Church open to universal Easter date

Jun 7, 2025 / 11:45 am

Pope Leo XIV on Saturday said the Catholic Church is open to establishing a common date of Easter among all Christian churches, echoing one of the aims of the Council of Nicaea that met 1,700 years ago.

The pope spoke to participants of the symposium “Nicaea and the Church of the Third Millennium: Towards Catholic-Orthodox Unity,” which took place this week at the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas in Rome. …

This week’s symposium focused on the themes of faith, synodality, and “the date of Easter,” Leo said. The lattermost issue was “one of the objectives” of the ancient council.

“Sadly, differences in their calendars no longer allow Christians to celebrate together the most important feast of the liturgical year, causing pastoral problems within communities, dividing families, and weakening the credibility of our witness to the Gospel,” the pope said.

“Several concrete solutions have been proposed that, while respecting the principle of Nicaea, would allow Christians to celebrate together the ‘feast of feasts,’” the Holy Father said.

“In this year, when all Christians have celebrated Easter on the same day, I would reaffirm the openness of the Catholic Church to the pursuit of an ecumenical solution favoring a common celebration of the Lord’s resurrection,” the pope said. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/264611/at-ecumenical-council-pope-leo-xiv-says-catholic-church-open-to-universal-date-of-easter

In my book titled The Last Pope of the Malachy Prophecies: Do Biblical and Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies Point to Pope Leo XIV? I have the following:

Leo XIV will be ecumenical. …

From May 20, 325 A.D./C.E. to August 325, the Roman Emperor Constantine convened the Council of Nicea. One of his political objectives was to get ecumenical unity in certain matters. In 2025, there are meetings to mark the 1700^th anniversary of this, which are expected to include ecumenical discussions.

Pope Francis had expected to participate. So we would expect that his replacement, Pope Leo XIV, to get involved somehow in this. Actually, before the conclave to elect Pope Leo XIV was called, Patriarch Barthlomew of Constantinople extended an invitation for the next pope to attend the 1700^th anniversary of Nicea. Like Emperor Constantine, Pope Leo XIV would like to ecumenical reconciliation for religious and political reasons.

Within a week of becoming pontiff, Pope Leo met with eastern Catholic churches (see Pope Leo XIV met with ‘Churches of the East’–what did 1st century Christians believe?). He urged them to hold fast to their traditions–yet sadly, they changed from the original faith (watch: Original Church of the East).

His appeal towards unity is NOT limited to Roman Catholics, the Eastern Orthodox and the churches that are in full communion with the Bishop of Rome.

Notice also the following from:

World Council of Churches, Pentecostal World Fellowship come together at conference

Pentecostals and ecumenicals, often perceived as distant from each other, have met during the Pentecostal World Conference in Helsinki, Finland. …

In a message to the 27th Pentecostal World Conference, WCC general secretary Rev. Jerry Pillay, a Reformed minister, reflected on the theme of the conference, “Go &Make,” describing it as both timely and deeply challenging. …

The Joint Consultative Group affirmed several key theological insights, including that diversity should reflect the communion of the triune God; …

Pillay said in his address, “Our world longs for spiritual and moral renewal.

“Your gatherings here in Helsinki – focusing on theological education, missions, and unity – testify to the Pentecostal movement’s global vitality and commitment,” he said.

“In particular, I celebrate the contributions of the Christian Unity Commission, through which Pentecostal churches are working collaboratively with other Christian traditions.”

Pillay also mentioned the 1,700th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea this year.

“This historic milestone offers a moment for all Christians to reflect on the foundational confessions of our faith and to renew our commitment to visible unity,” he said.

“As you reflect, pray, and share during these days, may you feel the embrace of the global Christian community walking alongside you.” https://www.ecumenicalnews.com/article/world-council-of-churches-pentecostal-world-fellowship-come-together-at-conference/61268.htm

Yes, the move towards unity among the trinitarians is not limited to the Roman and Eastern Orthodox Catholics.

Related to the Roman and Eastern Orthodox Catholics, the June-July 2007 edition of The Journal: News of the Churches of God contained an edited version of the following article:

Orthodox Should Reject Unity With Roman Catholics

Most people in the Churches of God (COGs) know relatively little about the Eastern Orthodox Church (Orthodox).  Because the similarities of some of its practices with those of the Roman Catholic Church, recent pontiffs have attempted to take steps to attempt to restore unity between the two groups.  Yet few realize that the Orthodox have many teachings that have similarities to COG doctrines.

The Great Schism

In 1054, there was a separation of the Orthodox churches from the Roman Church.  Although many historians feel that political considerations played the deciding role, two main doctrinal reasons are cited for this separation, which the Orthodox refer to as “the great schism”.

The first was the authority of Roman bishop.  Essentially the Orthodox position was (and remains) that there were “five churches that comprised the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church before the Great Schism”.  These five were the Orthodox Churches of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem (the other Orthodox churches, like the Russian, Serbian, etc. all hold similar doctrinal positions, but simply are not considered to have the prestige of “original Apostolic authority” ), plus the Roman Catholic Church.

After Roman Pontiff Leo IX exceeded what the Orthodox considered to be his jurisdiction (he excommunicated Cerularius, the Orthodox Patriarchate of Constantinople, who in turn excommunicated Leo IX), the Orthodox felt that the Church of Rome separated from their communion and the two groups have been officially separated ever since.  This is something that recent pontiffs have attempted to change.

The second issue had to do with the “filioque clause” of the so-called Apostle’s Creed.  The Orthodox position is that the Romans changed the Creed to include the statement that the Holy Spirit proceeds “from the Father and the Son“, whereas it originally stated that the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father previously according to the Orthodox.

It may be interesting to note that Catholic scholars have claimed that the Orthodox have had no saints since the Great Schism.  Notice:

The Greek Church once brilliant with many saints produced no more saints after the schism…learned Greeks fled to western Europe bringing with them the culture of the decadent schismatic church and caused a partial return to paganism in the Renaissance period…The final result of the Greek Schism appears in Communism, which is a complete return to unbelief and barbarism (Kramer, Herman Bernard. The Book of Destiny. Nihil Obstat: J.S. Considine, O.P., Censor Deputatus. Imprimatur: +Joseph M. Mueller, D.D., Bishop of Sioux City, Iowa, January 26, 1956. Reprint TAN Books, Rockford (IL), 1975, pp. 52-53).

It should be noted that the Greek Orthodox Church does not agree with the above and tend to be aghast when they learn of it.  Similarly, notice how the same Roman source indicates that the “scourge” of called Wormwood in Revelation 7:10-11 has to do with the Greek schism:

Verses 19 and 11

The scourge announced by the third trumpet…the idea if “WORMWOOD” indicates that the Third Scourge to be the GREEK SCHISM…It has carried away from Christendom approximately one third of the membership of the true Church.  Schism is not heresy but…As disobedience, it perverts the source of spiritual life into sources of spiritual death…

The description in the Apocalypse fits the Greek Schism in every detail (Kramer, Herman Bernard. The Book of Destiny. Nihil Obstat: J.S. Considine, O.P., Censor Deputatus. Imprimatur: +Joseph M. Mueller, D.D., Bishop of Sioux City, Iowa, January 26, 1956. Reprint TAN Books, Rockford (IL), 1975, pp. 201,203,205).

The Orthodox do not believe that the schism carried their people away from Christendom.  But that is historically how many Catholic leaders have viewed the situation.

But What About the Church of God?

Possibly because the Orthodox tend to rely more on Greek writings (the New Testament and nearly all of the early Christian writings were in Greek) and not Latin, plus the fact that its leading Patriarchate (Constantinople) is in Asia Minor, the Orthodox have many doctrines that the Roman Catholic Church does not teach, but that the COGs generally do teach.

What are the differences between the Orthodox and the Catholics?  What are the similarities between the … Church of God and the Orthodox?

Here are twelve such doctrines:

1. The Eastern Orthodox, like the Church of God, reject the Roman Catholic notion of purgatory.

2. The Eastern Orthodox, like the Church of God, number the ten commandments as they originally were and not as the Roman Catholics number them.

3. Many (though not all) of the Eastern Orthodox, like the Church of God, believe that God has a plan of salvation that can occur at the time of the final judgment.  Yet, the Roman Church rejects the idea that salvation can be available after the first death.

4. The Eastern Orthodox, like the Church of God, do not believe that God’s plan will result in most being lost or that it is a plan of terrorism.  This differs from the Roman Catholic view of eternal torment.

5. The Eastern Orthodox, like the Church of God, believe in baptism by immersion.  The Roman Catholics usually employ sprinkling.

6. The Eastern Orthodox, like the Church of God, believe in “the responsible use of contraception within marriage”.  The Roman Catholic position is far more limiting.

7. The Eastern Orthodox, like the Church of God, reject “the dogma of the immaculate conception of the Virgin”.  That is a Roman Catholic dogma.

8. The Eastern Orthodox, like many in the Church of God, agree that “the final goal at which every Christian must attain: to become god”.  The Roman Catholic teaching in this area is less than clear.

9. The Eastern Orthodox, like the Church of God, teach that presbyters (which they call “priests” but the COG calls “elders”) can be married.  The Roman Church requires celibacy for all presbyters, even though that was not its original position.

10. The Eastern Orthodox, like the Church of God, teach that “Christians must always be ‘People of the Book’ “.  Yet, throughout history, the Church of Rome has tended to place more emphasis on non-biblical sources for much of its doctrines.

11. The Eastern Orthodox, like the Church of God, do not observe Ash Wednesday.  The Church of Rome added this observance in the Middle Ages from non-biblical sources.

12. Neither the … Church of God nor the Orthodox believe that the jurisdiction of Rome has any real bearing on apostolic succession. Yet, the Roman Church has officially claimed that apostolic succession was lost by the Orthodox and others when they stopped accepting the jurisdiction of Rome:

Regarding the Greek Church, it is sufficient to note that it lost Apostolic succession by withdrawing from the jurisdiction of the lawful successors of St. Peter in the See of Rome. The same is to be said of the Anglican claims to continuity (O’Reilly, Thomas. “Apostolicity.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 1. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1907).

While there are certain ceremonial similarities (as well as differences) between the Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox, if the Orthodox really wish to become “the people of the book” they need to reject all non-biblical doctrines and not enter into greater unity with Rome.  There are too many differences in doctrine between the Catholics and the Orthodox for unity without major compromise.

The Romans Now Want the Orthodox

The … Roman Pontiff (Benedict XVI) has repeatedly stated that he wants unification with the Orthodox Churches (e.g. Pope tells Cypriot Orthodox leader he holds ‘firm hope’ for Christian unity. Associated Press – June 16, 2007) and certain Orthodox leaders seem to favor it (e.g. Alexy II Favors Ecumenical Ties: Says Orthodox-Catholic Partnership Is Important. Zenit – June 15, 2007).  The previous pontiff (John-Paul II) referred to the Romans and the Orthodox as the “two lungs” of the church.

However, the Orthodox may wish to be aware of a Catholic prophecy concerning this. Around 1202 the Roman Catholic Abbott Joachim prophesied:

A remarkable Pope will be seated on the pontifical throne, under special protection of the angels. Holy and full of gentleness, he shall undo all wrong, he shall recover the states of the Church, and reunite the exiled temporal powers. As the only Pastor, he shall reunite the Eastern to the Western Church…This holy Pope shall be both pastor and reformer. Through him the East and West shall be in ever lasting concord. The city of Babylon shall then be the head and guide of the world.

Rome, weakened in temporal power, shall forever preserve her spiritual dominion, and shall enjoy great peace…(Cited in Connor, Edward. Prophecy for Today. Imprimatur + A.J. Willinger, Bishop of Manterey-Fresno. Tan Books and Publishers, Rockford (IL), 1984, pp. 31-32).

Biblical prophecy states that there will be a major unifying religion that it calls “Babylon the Great” (Revelation 17:5)–but one that the Bible warns against.Catholic-Orthodox unity will not be good for either group.

The Orthodox (and all others) need to heed the Bible and:

“Come out of her, my people, lest you share in her sins, and lest you receive of her plagues.  For her sins have reached to heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities” (Revelation 18:4-5).

The Orthodox, individually, need to reject unity with Rome.  Orthodox-Catholic unity will not be a good thing.

The plain truth is that if those in the Orthodox churches will study their Bibles, they will find a lot more doctrines that the Bible and the COGs hold in common than they will in the Bible and the Roman Church.  On the unification issue, nearly all of the American and South African Orthodox members I have had contact with oppose unity with Rome.  Yet, much of the Orthodox clergy in other areas seem to support it.

The fact that the COGs and the Orthodox trace their histories through cities other than Rome is also something that the two groups have in common.

Furthermore, if they look into their roots, the Orthodox will also find that the VAST MAJORITY of professing Christians in Asia Minor (an area where the Orthodox also trace their history) did not even accept the Trinitarian doctrine until the latter half of the fourth century, because they held a Semi-Arian view of the Godhead (the view that the Father and Son are both God, but that the Holy Spirit is not) similar to that held by most COGs.

Why It Matters

Truth is important. And sadly, many will be misled in the future with what the Bible calls signs and lying wonders.

Notice what one Orthodox writer has wisely warned against:

Peter Jackson (20^th century): To which Mary are Muslims and Protestants being drawn?… Rome began to see her more and more as a “goddess,” a fourth Hypostasis of the Trinity…Today, as heterodox Christians become more and more ecumenist and work toward creating a “One World Church,” the search has begun for a Mary of universal recognition, one who will appeal not only to those who bear the name Christian, but apparently to Muslims and others as well, just as attempts are likewise being made to identify the “new Christ” with the Muslim concept of their coming Mahdi and with the Messiah still awaited by the Jews. This, of course, will be no Christ at all but the antichrist (Jackson P. ORTHODOX LIFE., No. I, 1997., Brotherhood of Saint Job of Pochaev at Holy Trinity Monastery, Jordanville, N.Y. pp. 18-22.  http://fr-d-serfes.org/orthodox/theotokos.htm viewed 05/04/09).

The time of Antichrist is near (please see Does God Have a 6,000 Year Plan? What Year Does the 6,000 Years End?).  Neither the Orthodox nor the Catholics of Rome should follow apparitions that claim to be Mary (see Mary, the Mother of Jesus and the Apparitions) for false unity.

While most of us in the COGs recognize that there will be massive religious unity with some form of Catholicism at the time of the end, we need to be getting the warning message out to as many who will listen.  And that certainly should include trying to reach as many of the 250,000,000 people who claim ties to the Orthodox churches.By recognizing that there actually are some doctrinal and historical similarities between the groups, I believe that those of us in the COGs will be better able to explain our positions in a manner that people like the Orthodox will better be able to relate to. Since the recent overtures by the Roman Pontiffs will give some within the Orthodox churches reason to consider their affiliation, I believe this is an excellent time to try to reach them.

The fact is that the Eastern Orthodox Patriarch is interested in ecumenical matters with Pope Leo XIV, and vice versa. Ecumenical steps are happening.

Notice some other statements in my book The Last Pope of the Malachy Prophecies: Do Biblical and Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies Point to Pope Leo XIV?:

Abbott Joachim (died 1202): A remarkable Pope will be seated on the pontifical throne, under special protection of the angels … he shall recover the states of the Church, and reunite the exiled temporal powers. As the only Pastor, he shall reunite the Eastern to the Western Church … Through him the East and West shall be in ever lasting concord. The city of Babylon shall then be the head and guide of the world …

Even though the Bible warns against end time Babylon (cf. Revelation 18:4; Jeremiah 50,51), Abbot Joachim is trying to teach that it is good. …

Here are some Roman Catholic warnings about the type of unification that some look forward to:

Michal Semin: Our Lady spoke of the annihilation of nations…The European Union is intent on destroying nation states, suppressing national identities and borders, so that we can happily live in an always progressing supra-national community of EU faithful.

Priest O’Connor (20^th century?): This final false prophet will be a bishop of the church and will lead all religions into becoming one.

Priest H. Kramer (20^th century): In the vision of the Seer now appears a second beast rising out of the earth, having two horns like a lamb but speaking like a dragon…In other places he is called the false prophet … This prophet may re-establish the pagan Roman Empire and build the “Great Harlot”, Babylon … The False Prophet … will persuade all infidels, apostates and apostate nations to worship and adore him … Antichrist “sitteth in the temple of God” (2 Thes. II. 4). This is not the ancient Temple in Jerusalem … this temple is shown to be a Catholic Church … The False Prophet will proclaim the resurrection of the Roman Empire.

Thus, while some Roman Catholic prophecies praise a new religious order, many others indicate that a new type of ‘Catholicism’ will be false to that religion and not be good for Europe.  This also seems to be consistent with an Eastern Orthodox understanding of the last false religious power coming from Rome:

Bishop Gerasimos of Abydos (20^th century): The army of Antichrist is made up of the worldly powers, mainly the Roman Empire, symbolized by the two beasts and the harlot woman (Rev. 11:7; 13:1-17; cf. Dan. 7:11-12) … The final confrontation with evil is presented in chapters 19 and 20…The war is waged by the beast and the false prophet. Both of these are organs of Satan, representing the political and religious authority of Rome (Rev. 13:1-18).

Whatever new order that the Great Monarch (who is to be crowned the leader of the Roman Empire according to other writings) implements with Rome will not be faithful to the teachings of Christ or His original faithful followers.

Therefore a “false pope” is expected, and a great loss of Catholic members to his religion is prophesied.  Might this be in the works now? Could Pope Leo XIV work for this?

While Pope Francis took ecumenical steps, could Pope Leo XIV be the one that will seal unity with the Eastern Orthodox Catholics?

He may well be.

What I wish he would do, is to heed the following scripture–which is shown below from two Roman Catholic translations of the Bible:

3 Dearly beloved, taking all care to write unto you concerning your common salvation, I was under a necessity to write unto you: to beseech you to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints. (Jude 3, DRB)

3 My dear friends, at a time when I was eagerly looking forward to writing to you about the salvation that we all share, I felt that I must write to you encouraging you to fight hard for the faith which has been once and for all entrusted to God’s holy people. (Jude 3, NJB)

If Pope Leo XIV would really do that, it would be an exciting and great course of action.

He hinted that the churches of the east, that are in communion with Rome, should do that–and they should.

But the Church of Rome, as well as all other churches, should do so as well.

That said, in May of 2009, my wife Joyce and I visited the headquarters of the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople –the leading “see” within the world of the Eastern Orthodox.

The Above Building is Where the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Meets with Dignitaries
(Photos by Joyce Thiel–Bob Thiel shown in the first photo)

Here is some of what I posted about that back on May 16, 2009 (https://www.cogwriter.com/news/prophecy/orthodox-must-reject-unity-with-the-roman-catholics/):

A couple of weeks ago, my wife and I went to Istanbul and visited the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople–the leading “see” within the world of the Eastern Orthodox. Unlike Vatican City, this place is not particularly impressive. After seeing the Church of St. George there, we privately met with a staff member who gave us a tour of the area where the Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople (currently Bartholomew I) meets with dignitaries.

The staff member (who was a Greek-American who used to live in San Diego) told us that when Pope Benedict visited in November 2006, one of the Pope’s aides told one of the Patriarch’s aides that if the Orthodox would accept Roman supremacy, that the Catholics would accept pretty much all of the Orthodox doctrinal differences (such as the so-called filioque clause of the so-called Apostles Creed).

While the Orthodox officially accept the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, according to the staff member we met with, they are still adamant that they will not accept Roman supremacy and the related governmental ramifications. But the Bible and I disagree with the Orthodox on this point as we in the Living Church of God believe that unity with Rome is inevitable.

Perhaps I should add here that there is a fringe Catholic private prophecy warning against the Catholics making this deal with the Orthodox. Notice the following:

Priest Paul Kramer “The errors of Orthodoxy and of Protestantism will be embraced by that false church, it will be an ecumenical church because the Anti-Pope will be recognized by the world — not by the faithful, but by the world — by the secular world and the secular governments. The Anti-Pope will be recognized as the legitimate Pope of the “church,” and the legitimate head of the Vatican State. That “church” will be united with all the false religions. They will be united together under the universality of the Masonic umbrella. In that motley ecumenical union will be the established religion of the so-called civilized world. This is how we will get into the time of great persecution such as the world has never seen (Kramer P. The Imminent Chastisement for Not Fulfilling Our Lady’s Request. An edited transcript of a speech given at the Ambassadors of Jesus and Mary Seminar in Glendale, California, September 24, 2004. THE FATIMA CRUSADER Issue 80, Summer 2005, pp. 32-45 http://www.fatimacrusader.com/cr80/cr80pg32.asp viewed 4/06/08).

Not only am I convinced that the deal will occur, there are other Catholic prophecies in favor of this deal. Notice the following:

Abbott Joachim (died 1202)…A remarkable Pope will be seated on the pontifical throne, under special protection of the angels. Holy and full of gentleness, he shall undo all wrong, he shall recover the states of the Church, and reunite the exiled temporal powers. As the only Pastor, he shall reunite the Eastern to the Western Church…This holy Pope shall be both pastor and reformer. Through him the East and West shall be in ever lasting concord. The city of Babylon shall then be the head and guide of the world. Rome, weakened in temporal power, shall forever preserve her spiritual dominion, and shall enjoy great peace…At the beginning, in order to bring these happy results, having need of a powerful assistance, this holy Pontiff will ask the cooperation of the generous monarch of France (Great Monarch)… A man of remarkable sanctity will be his successor in the Pontifical chair. Through him God will work so many prodigies that all men shall revere him (Connor, Edward. Prophecy for Today. Imprimatur + A.J. Willinger, Bishop of Monterey-Fresno; Reprint: Tan Books and Publishers, Rockford (IL), 1984, pp. 31-33).

Venerable Bartholomew Holzhauser (Born in the 17th century, in Germany) …God will bind Satan for a number of years until the days of the Son of Perdition…there will be an ecumenical council which will be the greatest of all councils. By the grace of God, by the power of the Great Monarch, and by the authority of the Holy Pontiff, and by the union of the most devout princes, atheism and every heresy will be banished from the earth. The Council will define the true sense of Holy Scripture, and this will be believed and accepted by everyone (Dupont, Yves. Catholic Prophecy: The Coming Chastisement. TAN Books, Rockford (IL), p. 40).

I suspect that the Catholics will make some type of deal with the Orthodox resulting in an acceptance of certain Orthodox doctrines, while allowing the Orthodox to come in with a little more autonomy than other Catholics. However, when the false prophet (apparently the final pontiff) begins to do miracles, then the Orthodox will end up accepting full Vatican authority.

The Orthodox staff member and I also discussed the Ukraine. He told me that while the Patriarchate of Constantinople deferred to Russian administration of the Ukraine during the time of the Soviet Union, that Constantinople used to administer it and is having talks with the Ukraine to try to get this to occur. If this does occur, it may be one of the reasons that the Russian Orthodox may not enter into the type of unity with Rome that the bulk of the Orthodox will. (The Russian Orthodox walked out of one “unity” meeting last November, see Eastern Orthodox: Pope #1; But Russian Orthodox Unclear).

Anyway, I thought it was interesting that the way I have tended to see Greco-Roman unity with Rome and the Orthodox, other than the Russians, seems to be happening. And as this process continues, we are getting closer to the time of the end.

Those wishing to see some of the rest of Constantinople (including the Church of St, George and the Hagia Sophia) should click on Joyce’s Photos of Constantinople.

Since then, the calls for unity between the Roman and Eastern Orthodox Catholics, as well as the Protestants, have intensified.

Doctrinal compromise is expected.

That will NOT bring true unity of faith.

Some items of related interest may include:

Early Christianity in Edessa and the Church of the East Could there have been Christian leaders there? Might Judas of Jerusalem went there? Could Macarius have been a faithful Christian?Here is a link to a related sermon video: Original Church of the East.

Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original.

The Last Pope of the Malachy Prophecies: Do Biblical and Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies Point to Pope Leo XIV? This 154 page book has biblical and Greco-Roman Catholic prophecies related to the last pope, an antipope who will be the final Antichrist. It is also available on Kindle: The Last Pope of the Malachy Prophecies: Do Biblical and Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies Point to Pope Leo XIV?-Kindle.

Pope Leo XIV
(Photo from Edgar Beltrán of The Pillar via Wikipedia)

COGwriter

Pope Leo XIV is showing that he is an Augustinian who promotes a non-biblical form of Mary as well as ecumenism:

Pope Leo’s core identity is Augustinian …

Pope Leo XIV leads prayers at the Shrine of Our Lady of Good Counsel in Genazzano, Italy, southeast of Rome, … The shrine, with a famous image of Mary, is run by the pope’s Augustinian confreres.

June 10, 2025

After stepping out to the main balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica as Pope Leo XIV, he mentioned no nationality and instead identified himself as “a son of St. Augustine, an Augustinian.” …

Augustinian Sister Marlene Quispe, who has known the pope from his early days in Peru, said the order’s charism is focused on unity, https://catholicreview.org/pope-leos-core-identity-is-augustinian-say-religious/

On the morning of Monday, June 9, Pope Leo XIV presided at Mass on the occasion of the Solemnity of St. Mary, Mother of the Church … 06/09/25 https://zenit.org/2025/06/09/mary-mother-of-the-church-marian-solemnity-explained-by-pope-leo-xiv-to-vatican-workers/

As far as Augustinians and Mary, notice the following at Wikipedia:

The particular devotional practices connected with the Augustinian Order, and which it has striven to propagate, include the veneration of the Blessed Virgin under the title of “Mother of Good Counsel” (Mater Boni Consilii), whose miraculous picture is to be seen in the Augustinian church at Genazzano in the Roman province. This devotion has spread to other churches and countries, and confraternities have been formed to encourage it.^[37] Several periodicals dedicated to the honour of Our Lady of Good Counsel are published in Italy, Spain and Germany by the Augustinians. The Augustinians, with the approbation of Pope Leo XIII, also encourage the devotion of the Scapular of Our Lady of Good Counsel. (Wikipedia, accessed 06/10/25)

As far as the scapular goes, Leo XIV’s namesake, also promoted that:

Pope Leo XIII … is well known for his intellectualism and his attempts to define the position of the Catholic Church with regard to modern thinking. … He influenced the Mariology of the Catholic Church and promoted both the rosary and the scapular. … Leo XIII issued a record of eleven papal encyclicals on the rosary, earning him the title of the “Rosary Pope”. In addition, he approved two new Marian scapulars. (Pope Leo XIII. Wikipedia, accessed 05/08/25)

Notice more about that came from:

Since the 15th century, popular devotion to Our Lady of Mount Carmel has centered on the Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, also known as the Brown Scapular, a sacramental associated with promises of Mary’s special aid for the salvation of the devoted wearer. (Wikipedia, accessed 09/13/17)

In 1917 in Fatima, Portugal, three children, Lúcia, Francisco, and Jacinta, claimed to see a ‘Lady’ once per month for six month. One of them, Lúcia, claimed, “The Rosary and Scapular are inseparable.”

A brown scapular originally was a wool object that sometimes comes in the form of metals instead. It seems to be worn like a medallion.

“Sister Lúcia has said all Catholics should wear the Brown Scapular as part of the Fatima message.”

Supposedly, when the apparition of the ‘Lady’ appeared on October 13, 1917, Lúcia, Francisco, and Jacinta saw her hold a brown scapular in her hand.

“At the end of the 40s…Lúcia… recalled that the Blessed Virgin…wished that devotion of the holy Scapular be propagated.”

Of course, if Jesus’ mother Mary actually wanted this, it seems odd that it took Lúcia decades to tell this to anybody.

“The Brown Scapular is part of a religious habit belonging in its own right to the Carmelite order. Devotion for the Scapular of Our Lady of Carmel was born in the 13th century when after being purchased from Palestine by the Saracens, the Carmelite brothers encountered great difficulties in getting established in Europe and elsewhere…

Simon Stock, elected Prior General of the order in 1247, had, a few years later an apparition…presenting the Scapular to him as a sign of salvation for his brothers.”

Pope Leo XIV calls for unity in inaugural Mass at the Vatican

May 18, 2025

Pope Leo XIV called for unity in the Catholic Church during his inaugural mass in St. Peter’s Square … During the Mass, the pontiff appeared to choke up when the two potent symbols of the papacy were placed on him  …

“I would like that our first great desire be for a united church, a sign of unity and communion, which becomes a leaven for a reconciled world,” https://www.cbsnews.com/news/pope-leo-xiv-inaugural-mass-vatican/

In my book titled The Last Pope of the Malachy Prophecies: Do Biblical and Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies Point to Pope Leo XIV? I have the following:

Leo XIV will be ecumenical. …

From May 20, 325 A.D./C.E. to August 325, the Roman Emperor Constantine convened the Council of Nicea. One of his political objectives was to get ecumenical unity in certain matters. In 2025, there are meetings to mark the 1700^th anniversary of this, which are expected to include ecumenical discussions.

Pope Francis had expected to participate. So we would expect that his replacement, Pope Leo XIV, to get involved somehow in this. Actually, before the conclave to elect Pope Leo XIV was called, Patriarch Barthlomew of Constantinople extended an invitation for the next pope to attend the 1700^th anniversary of Nicea. Like Emperor Constantine, Pope Leo XIV would like to ecumenical reconciliation for religious and political reasons.

Last month, Pope Leo met with eastern Catholic Churches (see Pope Leo XIV met with ‘Churches of the East’–what did 1st century Christians believe?). He urged them to hold fast to their traditions–yet sadly, they changed from the original faith (watch: Original Church of the East).

His appeal towards unity is NOT limited Roman Catholics and churches that are in full communion with the Bishop of Rome.

And there are other groups that he wants and that want to be more ecumenical with him.

Leo XIV plans to meet to celebrate some version of the 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicea on or near 30 November 2025.

Among other things, the original Council of Nicea agreed to a non-biblical date for Passover, which is commonly been renamed  by many as Easter. Yet, in time, the Eastern Orthodox and the Roman Catholics diverged on the date. I expect that the CHurch of Rome and the Eastern Orthodox will agree on the same date again for Easter. That could happen within the next year.

Notice some other statements in my book The Last Pope of the Malachy Prophecies: Do Biblical and Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies Point to Pope Leo XIV?:

Abbott Joachim (died 1202): A remarkable Pope will be seated on the pontifical throne, under special protection of the angels … he shall recover the states of the Church, and reunite the exiled temporal powers. As the only Pastor, he shall reunite the Eastern to the Western Church … Through him the East and West shall be in ever lasting concord. The city of Babylon shall then be the head and guide of the world …

Even though the Bible warns against end time Babylon (cf. Revelation 18:4; Jeremiah 50,51), Abbot Joachim is trying to teach that it is good.

While Pope Francis took ecumenical steps, could Pope Leo XIV be the one that will seal unity with the Eastern Orthodox Catholics?

Leo XIV could well be the pontiff that is involved in that unity. And he could do so, even if he is not the last pope.

And unless he does various signs and wonders, he is not the last pope.

Yet he is ecumenical and is promoting a non-biblical version of Jesus’ mother Mary.

Pope Leo XIV is one to watch (cf. Mark 13:37).

My hope and prayer is to for him to heed the following scripture–which is shown below from two Roman Catholic translations of the Bible:

3 Dearly beloved, taking all care to write unto you concerning your common salvation, I was under a necessity to write unto you: to beseech you to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints. (Jude 3, DRB)

3 My dear friends, at a time when I was eagerly looking forward to writing to you about the salvation that we all share, I felt that I must write to you encouraging you to fight hard for the faith which has been once and for all entrusted to God’s holy people. (Jude 3, NJB)

If Pope Leo XIV would really do that, it would be an exciting and great course of action.

And the Church of Rome, as well as all other churches, should do so as well.

While that could cause a schism, advocating for the original faith is what all who claim to be Christian should do.

Some items of related interest may include:

Mary, the Mother of Jesus and the Apparitions Do you know much about Mary? Are the apparitions real? What happened at Fatima? What might they mean for the rise of the ecumenical religion of Antichrist? Are Protestants moving towards Mary? How do the Eastern/Greek Orthodox view Mary? How might Mary view her adorers? Here is a link to a related sermon video: Truth About Mary, Mother of Jesus. Here is a link to a YouTube video Marian Apparitions May Fulfill Prophecy. Here is a link to a sermon video: Why Learn About Fatima?

Why Should American Catholics Fear Unity with the Orthodox? (And the Protestants) Are the current ecumenical meetings a good thing or will they result in disaster? Is doctrinal compromise good? Here is a link to a related video Should you be concerned about the ecumenical movement?

Early Christianity in Edessa and the Church of the East Could there have been Christian leaders there? Might Judas of Jerusalem went there? Could Macarius have been a faithful Christian?Here is a link to a related sermon video: Original Church of the East.

Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original.

The Last Pope of the Malachy Prophecies: Do Biblical and Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies Point to Pope Leo XIV? This 154 page book has biblical and Greco-Roman Catholic prophecies related to the last pope, an antipope who will be the final Antichrist. It is also available on Kindle: The Last Pope of the Malachy Prophecies: Do Biblical and Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies Point to Pope Leo XIV?-Kindle.

Logo of Messianic Jews

COGwriter

Several groups do keep the seventh day Sabbath, but are not part of the Church of God (COG).

Although they keep the Sabbath and Holy Days, plus do not eat biblically unclean animals, Messianic Jews are NOT in the Church of God. Unlike those in the CCOG, they consider that the Protestants are real Christians.

Here is some of what one Messianic group says about their history:

Messianic Judaism as a distinct movement faded in the seventh century, there have always been individual Jewish Believers in Yeshua. Beginning in the early 1800s increasing numbers of Jewish people began believing in Yeshua. The modern Messianic Jewish movement came to fruition in the 1960s and 1970s. (What is Messianic Judaism? Congregation Shema Yisrael. viewed 09/07/14)

Furthermore, they tend to push 613 requirements:

So what relationship does the Gentile Christian have to the 613 laws of the Torah? The book of Acts records that Messiah’s Emissaries (the Apostles) and the Elders of Messiah’s Holy Community met to decide this very issue. In the Messianic Jewish community we commonly refer to this meeting, recorded in Acts 15, as “the First Jerusalem Council”. (What is Messianic Judaism. Congregation Shema Yisrael. http://shema.com/messianic-judaism/what-is-it/ viewed 12/30/19)

Let it be stated that the apostles did NOT meet to discuss the ‘613 laws of the Torah’ in Acts 15. There is no such thing biblically. Messianic Jews should not try to kid themselves that the list was the issue.

The list of 613 comes from Jewish tradition and a misnomer about pomegranates (supposedly they have 613 seeds, but they range from about 165 to over 1000). In Acts 15, we learn that the council of apostles and elders got together to decide whether or not Gentile Christians had to be physically circumcised. Many of the 613 ‘mitzvot’ are not laws of the Torah, but are Jewish traditions.

This Messianic movement considers itself to have the “same core beliefs” as professing Christian groups like Protestants (ibid).

While beliefs vary, Messianics tend to consider heaven the reward of the saved, that God is a trinity, Jesus was killed on a Friday, and that it is fine to celebrate Christmas and Easter (https://www.shema.com/frequently-asked-questions-12659/ accessed 12/20/19). Those are also positions of the SDAs (Seventh-day Adventists) and SDBs (Seventh Day Baptists)–groups which also endorse the use of crosses as a religious symbol.

The Messianics differ in that they advocate wearing things like tassels (specially knotted ritual fringes worn by observant Jews, also known as tzitzits) as well as “a Star of David, or a Star of David with a cross in it” (ibid). We in the CCOG do not. Some Messianic men wear head coverings known as kippah (also called a yarmulke) even at times they would be biblically-prohibited (cf. 1 Corinthians 11:4,7).

The New Testament demonstrates the apostles did not appear to look like Jewish rabbis or Levitical priests, though many Messianic leaders seem to try to do so. When, for one example, the Apostle Paul was arrested, the authorities did not recognize him as a Jew, but thought he was an Egyptian (Acts 21:37-38). Paul had to tell the military commander he was a Jew (Acts 27:39). Thus, Paul did not look like a Jewish rabbi, nor was he apparently wearing distinguishing phylacteries or tzitzits as the Messianic Jews do. Christians have God’s laws written on their hearts (Hebrews 10:16), hence do not need to wear visual reminders.

Many Messianics use Hebrew names for deity. For some of them, it is based on the wrong idea that the New Testament was primarily written in Hebrew or Aramaic, which it was not. Other than a very few Aramaic quotes, the New Testament was written in koine Greek. When one accepts that fact, one can see that God did not intend nor expect people to use Hebrew names for deity. Furthermore, because of the early lack of vowels in Hebrew, no one actually can be certain how those Hebrew names were originally pronounced.

Messianic Jews tend to consider themselves as at least similar to Protestants who accept Jesus, but believe that they should live somewhat like Orthodox Jews.

The Messianic Jewish movement is not part of the Church of God.

Related to the Seventh-day Baptists and Adventists, the old Worldwide Church of God published the following:

 By 1800, Protestant doctrines were prevalent in the Sabbath-keeping congregations. Many began to form a denomination. This group officially adopted the name “Seventh-day Baptist” in 1818.

Ten or 12 congregations — in the Pennsylvania to Rhode Island area alone — would not at first affiliate with this denomination of men. Even as late as 1828, only 16 to 20 congregations were being represented at the Seventh-day Baptist Conference meetings, while they spoke disparagingly of other “fanatical and unworthy” Sabbath keepers (The Seventh-day Baptists in Europe and America. pp. 153,175).

As always, the few had refused to go along, and had remained faithful to the name and doctrine of the Church of God!

In the middle of the century these remnants of God’s people are found in fellowship with Sabbath-keeping people who were part of a great Advent movement.

When the Adventists organized themselves as a denomination in 1860, only a few — mostly in the states of Ohio, Iowa and Missouri — did not go along. The printing plant and the magazine formerly published in the name of the Church of God were taken over by the Adventists.

But a group of the faithful in1861 began the publication of a new monthly paper called The Remnant of Israel, later changed to The Sabbath Advocate and finally to The Bible Advocate. (Armstrong HW. The Church They Couldn’t Destroy. Good News, December 1981)

The Continuing Church of God has the following sermon about some of the reasons certain Sabbath observing groups are not COG on our ContinuingCOG channel:

1:20:28

Seventh Day Baptists/ Adventists/ Messianics: Protestant or COG?

Although Seventh Day Baptists (SDBs), Seventh-day Adventist (SDAs), and Messianic Jews keep some version of the seventh day Sabbath, are they Protestant or Church of God. What do they claim? What do they teach? What do SDAs and Messianic Jews teach about their history? Do SDBs cite groups who held Church of God (COG) and not SDB doctrines? Which group teaches the original biblical Christian faith? How do the SDAs, Messianics, and SDBs agree with Protestants on issues such as salvation, history, and the Godhead, which differ greatly from the Continuing Church of God (CCOG)? Are there really 613 laws of the Torah? What are 28 ways the SDAs differ from the CCOG? Are ‘Black Israelites’ right about Jesus being a black African? Was the Day of Atonement on October 22, 1844 according to Rabbinical or Karaite Jews? Did the SDAs or COG come out of the Millerite movement? Did Ellen White make false prophecies that she insisted came from God? If so, what were some of them? Did the SDA church send out literature it knew was clearly wrong? Was Ellen G. White’s sanctuary interpretation the “complete system of truth”? Did SDAs once teach crosses were pagan, but now include them in their official logo? Which of the 4 church’s (SDB,SDA, Messianic, CCOG) doctrines have the most biblical and historical support? Dr. Thiel addresses these issues and more.

Here is a link to the sermon video: Seventh Day Baptists/Adventists/Messianics: Protestant or COG?

Some items of possibly related interest may include:

Messianic Judaism Beliefs Differ from the Continuing Church of God Both groups keep the seventh-day Sabbath, but have important differences in doctrines and practices. Here is a link to a related sermon: Messianic Jewish Beliefs.
Which Laws were Superceded? Which Remain? What about the Ten Commandments? What about the 613 regulations (called 613 Mitzvot) in the Old Testament? Which were ‘done away’?
The Sardis Church Era was predominant circa 1600 A.D. to circa 1933 A.D. Discusses early history of the Seventh Day Baptists, Seventh-day Adventists, and COG-7th Day.
Seventh Day Baptists are Protestant, not Church of God This article explains reasons why Baptists, include seventh day ones (SDBs) do not have the historical and doctrinal ties to the original church that many have claimed. Here are two related sermons in the English language: Seventh Day Baptists/Adventists/Messianics: Protestant or COG? and Protestant, Baptist, and CCOG History.
SDA/CCOG Differences: Two Horned Beast of Revelation and 666 The genuine Church of God is NOT part of the Seventh-day Adventists. This article explains two prophetic differences, the trinity, differences in approaching doctrine, including Ellen White. Did Ellen White make prophetic errors? Did Ellen White make false prophecies? Here is a version in the Spanish language: SDA/COG Diferencias: La bestia de dos cuernos de Apocalipsis y 666. Here is a sermon in the English language: CCOG and SDA differences and similarities.
The Sardis Church Era was predominant circa 1600 A.D. to circa 1933 A.D. Discusses some early history of the Seventh Day Baptists, Seventh-day Adventists, CG7-Salem, Jerusalem 7DCG, and COG-7th Day-Denver. Here are links to two historical sermons: Sardis Church Era: Beginnings, Doctrines, and Leaders and Sardis: SDBs, SDAs, & CG7s.
What is the Origin of the Cross as a ‘Christian’ Symbol? Was the cross used as a venerated symbol by the early Church? Two related YouTube videos would be Beware of the ‘Ecumenical Cross’, The Chrislam Cross and the Interfaith Movement, and Origin of the Cross.
Did Early Christians Think the Holy Spirit Was A Separate Person in a Trinity? Or did they have a different view? A related sermon is available: Truth about the Holy Spirit: What THEY do not want you to know!
Did the True Church Ever Teach a Trinity? Most act like this is so, but is it? Here is an old, by somewhat related, article in the Spanish language LA DOCTRINA DE LA TRINIDAD. A related sermon is available: Trinity: Fundamental to Christianity or Something Else? A brief video is also available: Three trinitarian scriptures?
Did the Archangel Michael become Jesus? The Jehovah’s Witnesses teach this, and SDA Ellen White did, but does the Bible allow for this?
Binitarianism: One God, Two Beings Before the Beginning This is a longer article than the Binitarian View article, and has a little more information on binitarianism, and less about unitarianism. A related sermon is also available: Binitarian view of the Godhead.
Which Laws were Superceded? Which Remain? What about the Ten Commandments? What about the 613 regulations (called 613 Mitzvot) in the Old Testament? Which were ‘done away’?
Tradition and Scripture: From the Bible and Church Writings Are traditions on equal par with scripture? Many believe that is what Peter, John, and Paul taught. But did they? A related sermon is titled Tradition and Scripture.
Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism The CCOG is NOT Protestant. This free online book explains how the real Church of God differs from mainstream/traditional Protestants. Several sermons related to the free book are also available: Protestant, Baptist, and CCOG History; The First Protestant, God’s Command, Grace, & Character; The New Testament, Martin Luther, and the Canon; Eucharist, Passover, and Easter; Views of Jews, Lost Tribes, Warfare, & Baptism; Scripture vs. Tradition, Sabbath vs. Sunday; Church Services, Sunday, Heaven, and God’s Plan; Seventh Day Baptists/Adventists/Messianics: Protestant or COG?; Millennial Kingdom of God and God’s Plan of Salvation; Crosses, Trees, Tithes, and Unclean Meats; The Godhead and the Trinity; Fleeing or Rapture?; and Ecumenism, Rome, and CCOG Differences.

(Photo by BibleHub)

COGwriter

The Church of Rome is claiming laying on of hands apostolic succession has again occurred in their church:

The apostolic succession continues

May 22, 2025

Since bishops have no children, though one could sarcastically point to more than a few exceptions in church history, apostolic succession refers not to a legal inheritance, but to the human chain formed by successive bishops. Each one is ordained by the laying on of hands from a bishop ordained before him. From bishop to bishop, ordination to ordination, the line traces back to the apostles. …

The election of Pope Leo XIV highlights the power of that historical continuity. As bishop of Rome, the pope is a direct link in that chain. …

The takeaway? That the mission of handing on the faith continues. And whether we realize it or not, each of us becomes a part of that same apostolic succession https://international.la-croix.com/opinions/the-apostolic-succession-continues

No, the Church of Rome does not have faithful laying on of hands apostolic succession.

While it is true that since the 2nd century, it has had a succession of bishops, it does not have faithful succession, nor did it even have bishops/overseeing pastors in the first century.

The term apostolic succession has several possible meanings. But for the purpose of this article, the following definition from a Roman Catholic priest and scholar will be used:

Apostolic Succession … In its strict sense, apostolic succession refers to the doctrine by which the validity and authority of the Christian ministry is derived from the Apostles. The outward sign by which this connection is both symbolized and effected is the laying on of hands by the Bishop at ordination.

In its broader sense, apostolic succession refers to the relationship between the Christian church today and the apostolic church of New Testament times. Thus, apostolic succession refers to the whole church insofar as it is faithful to the word, the witness, and the service of the apostolic communities. Understood in this way, the church is not simply a collectivity of individual churches; instead, it is a communion of churches whose validity is derived from the apostolic message that it professes and from the apostolic witness that it lives (McBrien R.P. Apostolic Succession. http://mb-soft.com/believe/txo/apossucc.htm 01/30/17).

In other words, according to the above priest, apostolic succession is actually related to the acceptance of the succession of biblical truth, as taught by the original apostles–spiritual apostolic succession is the most important factor to consider when it comes to the subject of apostolic succession. Yet the ‘laying on of hands‘ is also an essential factor as that is how one is ordained (note: an overseer or overseeing pastor is the same spiritual position as bishop according to what the Bible teaches and most Roman Catholic scholars realize).

Spiritual matters are important.

Jesus said:

23 But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. 24 God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth. (John 4:23-24, NKJV unless otherwise specified)

True successors of Jesus’ disciples would worship God in spirit and truth–the faith once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3).

The Church of Rome claims its succession came from the Apostle Peter. Now, there are different ideas about who was Peter’s successor. There are late traditions, some of which contradict, as well as indications in the Bible (that does not contradict).

The Apostle Paul noted that there were three leaders in Jerusalem during one of his visits there:

9 James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars (Galatians 2:9).

Paul undoubtedly listed James first because James was the leader who actually lived in Jerusalem (the others were mainly visiting then). But notice that Paul then listed Cephas, who is Peter, and then John. This may suggest that Paul considered that Peter, at that time, had higher authority, sometimes called primacy, than John then did. It also shows that Peter apparently conferred with John, hence Peter helped train him as a potential successor.

Yet, possibly around 64-67 A.D., Peter was killed, hence he no longer held physical primacy over the remaining apostles.

Now, John greatly outlived Peter and is believed to have lived as late as 98-105 A.D. (he also outlived James).

John was an apostle, the early leaders of Rome (other than when someone like the Apostle Paul was there) were only presbyters.

The Bible clearly teaches that apostles were first (I Corinthians 12:28). Notice that even Roman Catholic scholars understand:

Unlike Peter, the pope is neither an apostle nor an eyewitness of the Risen Lord (McBrien, Richard P. Lives of the Popes: The Pontiffs from St. Peter to Benedict XVI. Harper, San Francisco, 2005 updated ed., p.33).

Since that is true, it makes no sense that the Apostle John would be somehow subordinate to Linus, Anacletus, Clement, and Evaristus, all of whom have been claimed to have been “bishop of Rome” and supposedly had primacy over all Christianity after Peter died and while John was still alive.

Note that Paul wrote:

28 And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles (1 Corinthians 12:28).

11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers (Ephesians 4:11).

And since the Bible teaches that the true church is first led by apostles and other positions are lower ranked, there is no way that the Apostle John would have been below any bishop (essentially a pastor) in rank–Note that although the Bible uses the Greek term for pastor more than the one for bishop, it seems to show that the terms are interchangeable (see I Peter 2:25).

Hence, after Peter died (as well as the other apostles), it is clear that the was one true successor–who had been appointed by Christ Himself–would be the Apostle John (the last of the original apostles to die) and that true apostolic successors would probably have had contact with him. John was the successor to Peter. This is consistent with the Bible.

It is important to note that even Roman Catholic scholars recognize that there is no proof that anyone was actually considered to be a bishop in Rome until sometime in the second century. Hence even Roman Catholic scholars understand that it is not certain that either Linus or Cletus or Clement were even bishops (actually there are enough contradictions concerning Cletus/Anencletus that even the existence of some of the early claimed bishops is questionable–please see the article What Do Roman Catholic Scholars Actually Teach About Early Church History?).

One such Roman Catholic scholar, A. Van Hove, wrote this about early bishops:

• This local superior authority, which was of Apostolic origin, was conferred by the Apostles upon a monarchic bishop, such as is understood by the term today. This is proved first by the example of Jerusalem, where James, who was not one of the Twelve Apostles, held the first place, and afterwards by those communities in Asia Minor of which Ignatius speaks, and where, at the beginning of the second century the monarchical episcopate existed, for Ignatius does not write as though the institution were a new one.
• In other communities, it is true, no mention is made of a monarchic episcopate until the middle of the second century (Van Hove A. Transcribed by Matthew Dean. Bishop. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume II. Copyright © 1907 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York).

In other words, although there were bishops in Jerusalem and Asia Minor in the first and second centuries, there is no mention of a monarchic episcopate (a bishopric or pastorate) in other places, like Rome, until the middle of the second century.

Furthermore, even some more recent Roman Catholic scholars understand that the New Testament provides no support for the idea that one of the apostles appointed someone to be “bishop of Rome.” Priest Sullivan wrote:

“Was there a Bishop of Rome in the First Century?”… I have expressed agreement with the consensus of scholars that the available evidence indicates that the church in Rome was led by a college of presbyters, rather than by a single bishop, for at least several decades of the second century (Sullivan F.A. From Apostles to Bishops: the development of the episcopacy in the early church. Newman Press, Mahwah (NJ), 2001, pp. 80,221-222).

The consensus of scholars is that there was NOT an apostolic succession of bishops starting from Peter in Rome.

And notice that according to Roman Catholic scholars, the first clear bishop of Rome was not until the middle or latter half of the second century:

ALTHOUGH CATHOLIC TRADITION, BEGINNING IN the late second and early third centuries, regards St. Peter as the first bishop of Rome and, therefore, as the first pope, there is no evidence that Peter was involved in the initial establishment of the Christian community in Rome (indeed, what evidence there is would seem to point in the opposite direction) or that he served as Rome’s first bishop. Not until the pontificate of St. Pius I in the middle of the second century (ca. 142-ca. 155) did the Roman Church have a monoepiscopal structure of government (one bishop as pastoral leader of a diocese). Those who Catholic tradition lists as Peter’s immediate successors (Linus, Anacletus, Clement, et al.) did not function as the one bishop of Rome (McBrien, Richard P. Lives of the Popes: The Pontiffs from St. Peter to Benedict XVI. Harper, San Francisco, 2005 updated ed., p.25).

To begin with, indeed, there was no ‘pope’, no bishop as such, for the church in Rome was slow to develop the office of chief presbyter or bishop…Clement made no claim to write as bishop…There is no sure way to settle on a date by which the office of ruling bishop had emerged in Rome…but the process was certainly complete by the time of Anicetus in the mid-150s (Duffy, Eamon. Saints & Sinners: A History of the Popes, 2nd ed. Yale University Press, London, 2001, pp. 9, 10,13)

…we have good reason to conclude that by the time of Anicetus (155-66), the church of Rome was being led by a bishop whose role resembled Ignatius or Polycarp (Sullivan F.A. From Apostles to Bishops: the development of the episcopacy in the early church. Newman Press, Mahwah (NJ), 2001, p. 143).

That is an astounding admission. These Roman Catholic scholars are essentially admitting that there was no possible succession of bishops beginning with Peter in Rome, but that the succession of a bishop from the Apostle John to Polycarp did occur (and it occurred probably 60 years earlier). It appears that in the areas of Alexandria and Rome, those there decided that since Polycarp was a bishop, that they needed to have a bishop themselves, and near the time of Polycarp’s martyrdom, they had leaders that were then called bishops.

There simply is no contemporaneous evidence that either Rome clearly had bishops before the second half of the second century–hence Rome should not be considered to have true, immediate, physical succession (and of course, neither have the more important spiritual succession).

While there were certainly a lot of early religious leaders in Rome, since the actual Christian Church (according the Roman Catholics and nearly all those who profess Christ) began in Jerusalem on the first Pentecost after Christ’s crucifixion, it is important to realize that both the Bible and Roman Catholic approved writings support the idea that there were true churches in the region the Bible refers to as Asia Minor (nearly all of which is now part of the country of Turkey)–and it is through the region of Asia Minor and Antioch that the Church of God claims apostolic succession.

In the 19th century, Francis Patrick Kenrick wrote:

Ephesus was an autocephalous see…which it derived from the apostles Paul and John, its founders (Kenrick FP. The primacy of the Apostolic see vindicated. Murphy, 1875. Original from Harvard University, Digitized Aug 26, 2008, p. 179).

The Apostle John reportedly was taken to Rome from Ephesus in Asia Minor, then suddenly exiled to Patmos, by Emperor Domitian, and, “after the tyrant’s death, he returned from the isle of Patmos to Ephesus” (Eusebius. Church History. Book III, Chapter 23).

It has been suggested that Timothy (who Paul had once placed in charge of the church at Ephesus) was martyred sometime prior to John’s return from Patmos (Aherne, Cornelius. Epistles to Timothy and Titus. The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 14. Nihil Obstat. July 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1912. 18 Jan. 2010 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14727b.htm>).

When the Apostle John, for example, wrote the Book of Revelation, he was the last of the original 12 apostles to remain alive (and as an Apostle he ALSO would have been was part of the foundation of the church as Ephesians 2:19-22 teaches).

And he specifically addressed Revelation “to the seven churches which are in Asia” (Revelation 1:4), and later listed those seven (vs. 1:11) all of which were in Asia Minor (here is an article on The Seven Churches of Revelation). He also never positively addressed the church in Rome in that or any other or his known writings (nor, except in his gospel account, did he ever mention Peter).

Furthermore, The Catholic Encyclopedia records this about John:

John had a prominent position in the Apostolic body…the Apostle and Evangelist John lived in Asia Minor in the last decades of the first century and from Ephesus had guided the Churches of that province (Fonck L. Transcribed by Michael Little. St. John the Evangelist. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VIII Copyright © 1910 by Robert Appleton Company Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

But there is no scriptural reason to think that John only considered that the churches in Asia Minor were under his leadership. Actually, in one of his other letters, John also wrote “To the elect lady and her children” (2 John 1)–which appears to be a reference to the entire Church (see also Revelation 12:17). Hence, he obviously felt he had a leadership position related to the entire Church, not just those in Asia Minor.

This also appears to be confirmed from this quotation that Eusebius records:

Take and read the account which rims as follows: “Listen to a tale, which is not a mere tale, but a narrative concerning John the apostle, which has been handed down and treasured up in memory. For when, after the tyrant’s death, he returned from the isle of Patmos to Ephesus, he went away upon their invitation to the neighboring territories of the Gentiles, to appoint bishops in some places, in other places to set in order whole churches, elsewhere to choose to the ministry some one of those that were pointed out by the Spirit…” (Eusebius. Church History, Book III, Chapter 23. Translated by the Rev. Arthur Cushman McGiffert. Excerpted from Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series Two, Volume 1. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace. American Edition, 1890. Online Edition Copyright © 2004 by K. Knight).

Hence it is clear that John, the last of the original apostles, was the true physical and spiritual successor to Peter, James, and Paul, while he remained alive. Roman Catholic scholars know that John was important and that the Bible teaches that Peter was fallible:

The conferral of the power of the keys of the kingdom surely suggests an imposing measure of authority, given the symbolism of the keys, but there is no explicit indication that the authority conferred was meant to be exercised over others, much less that it be absolutely monarchical in kind…In Acts, in fact, Peter is shown consulting with other apostles and even being sent by them (8:14). He and John are portrayed as acting as a team (3:1-11; 4:1-22; 8:14). And Paul confronts Peter for his inconsistency and hypocrisy…Paul “opposed him to his face because he was clearly wrong” (Galatians 2:11; see also 12-14) (McBrien, Richard P. Lives of the Popes: The Pontiffs from St. Peter to Benedict XVI. Harper, San Francisco, 2005 updated ed., pp. 30-31).

By being a ‘team,’ this also shows that Peter would have kept Passover the same date as the Apostle John.

Unlike Rome, Asia Minor had a bishop directly traced from an apostle. And Asia Minor, even according to Roman Catholic scholars, clearly had bishops BEFORE Rome did (Sullivan F.A. From Apostles to Bishops: the development of the episcopacy in the early church. Newman Press, Mahwah (NJ), 2001, p.217 and Van Hove A. Transcribed by Matthew Dean. Bishop. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume II. Copyright © 1907 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York).

Furthermore, notice what the theologian and historian John M. Neale explained in 1850:

The See of Ephesus has always been esteemed one of the first in the Church … This dignity arose, not so much from the fact that Ephesus was the residence of the Proconsul of Asia, as because the Church there was planted by S. Paul, and regarded S. John as its second founder. That S. Timothy was its first Bishop, ecclesiastical tradition is constant in asserting: on his suffering Martyrdom, S. John is related to have consecrated a namesake of his own as second Prelate. From that time the See of Ephesus possessed Patriarchal authority over the whole Dicecese of Asia: till, as we have related, it became subject to Constantinople, not without many struggles … (Neale JM.  A history of the Holy Eastern Church.  Masters, 1850.  Original from the Bavarian State Library, Digitized Oct 8, 2008, p. 36)

Consider that Ephesus (which included the Smyrnaeans) was originally the real true church with “apostolic succession” and that it took struggles for Constantinople to claim to be above it (even though what was recognized as that see at the time of Constantine had compromised). And since it had “authority over the whole Dicecese of Asia,” and Polycarp clearly had that (see The Martyrdom of Polycarp, 12:2), this supports my assertion that the “Smyrnaneans” (which included leaders from Ephesus) were in fact the “Ephesus see.”

Interestingly and along those lines, James C. Wall wrote: “Polycarp, the successor of St . John in the see of Ephesus” (Wall JC. The first Christians of Britain. Talbot & Co., 1927. Original from the University of California, Digitized Sep 25, 2007, p. 34).

Perhaps the most famous successor appointed by the Apostle John was Polycarp of Smyrna. Polycarp is unique among any claimed to be a direct successor to any of the apostles:

1. Polycarp is the only possible direct apostolic successor considered by any church I am aware of that there was a letter written to him while he was alive (yes, there were letters written in the New Testament to leaders, but none of them are in any of the ‘accepted’ succession lists I have seen).
2. He is the only possible direct apostolic successor considered by any church I am aware that to have written any document that we still possess to this day (there is a letter claimed to have been written by Clement of Rome, however, it does not say that he wrote it, nor is Clement considered to be the direct successor of any apostle–the Roman Catholic Church currently claims that Linus was Peter’s direct successor; there are also letters written by Ignatius of Antioch, but the two Antiochian Churches I am aware of claim that Evodius, not Ignatius, was Peter’s direct successor).
3. Polycarp is the only possible direct apostolic successor considered by any church I am aware that to have any significant document written about him within a few weeks of his death.
4. Polycarp is the only possible successor to the apostles that was clearly called “bishop” while he was alive.
5. Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and Church of God historians all teach that Polycarp was a spiritually faithful Christian leader. Yet, Polycarp refused to accept the authority of the Roman Bishop Anicetus.
6. Polycarp is also the only possible successor to have a writing perhaps directed to him in the Bible. Some scholars believe that when John wrote to the “angel of the church Smyrna” that this actually was addressed to the leader of the church (the Greek term translated as “angel” can mean human representatives, e.g. Luke 7:24) who they feel was Polycarp.
7. Polycarp is also the only possible early successor who was declared to be the Shepherd of the Catholic Church throughout the world (The Martyrdom of Polycarp). No other early leader had that written about him within weeks of his life.

Unlike the early Roman leaders, a letter to Polycarp circa 108-115 A.D. states that he was a bishop. Ignatius notes:

…to Polycarp, bishop of the Smyrnaeans … So approving am I of your godly mind, which is as it were, grounded upon an unmovable rock, that my praise exceeds all bounds… (Ignatius.  Letter to Polycarp. In Holmes M.W. The Apostolic Fathers, Greek Texts and English Translations. Baker Books, Grand Rapids (MI), 2004, p. 194-201).

Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians contains a lot of information about what he believed and taught. That letter shows that he held positions still held by the Church of God. It is very important to note that Polycarp held positions that clearly differ from those now held by the Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox churches (much of Polycarp’s teachings are discussed in the article Polycarp of Smyrna). Polycarp was clearly the spiritual successor to the original apostles. And it is the spiritual succession that counts.

There was also a letter written about his martyrdom by the Smyrnaeans which gives additional insight into him:

The church of God which sojourns at Smyrna to the Church of God which sojourns in Philomelium and to all the congregations of the Holy and Catholic Church in every place … the elect, of whom this most admirable Polycarp was one, having in our own times been an apostolic and prophetic teacher, and bishop of the Catholic Church which is in Smyrna … the Shepherd of the Catholic Church throughout the world. (The Smyrnaeans. The Encyclical Epistle of the Church at Smyrna Concerning the Martyrdom of the Holy Polycarp, 0:1, 16.2. In Ante-Nicene Fathers by Roberts and Donaldson, Volume 4, 1885. Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody (MA), printing 1999, p. 42)

Notice that Polycarp is declared to have been the Shepherd of the Catholic Church throughout the world. This is NOT said about any other early leader who may have succeeded the apostles.

As previously mentioned, he is also discussed in writing by such early writers as Ignatius who write an entire letter to him (circa 110 A.D.), Irenaeus who claimed Polycarp was faithful (circa 180 A.D.), Polycrates who claimed that Polycarp was faithful (circa 190 A.D.), Tertullian who claimed that the true Christian church could be traced through him (circa 195 A.D.), and Eusebius who wrote that Polycarp was faithful to the apostolic traditions (circa 330 A.D.).

Here is our early succession list:

Peter/Paul/James through death circa 64-68 (mainly oversaw churches from Asia Minor and Jerusalem, though Paul was imprisoned in Rome)
John through death circa 98-102 (oversaw churches from Ephesus of Asia Minor)
Polycarp through death circa 155-157 (oversaw churches from Smyrna of Asia Minor) 1  
Thraseas through death circa 160 (oversaw the churches from Eumenia, but died in Smyrna)
Sagaris through death circa 166-167 (died in Laodicea of Asia Minor)
Papirius through death circa 170 (oversaw churches from Smyrna of Asia Minor)
Melito through death circa 170-180 (oversaw churches from Sardis of Asia Minor)
Polycrates through death circa 200 (oversaw churches from Ephesus of Asia Minor)

A list to present day is in various books and articles, including the following link: Laying on of Hands Succession and List.

Some have wondered if the Church of God, Seventh Day and the old Radio & Worldwide Church of God taught apostolic succession.

Well they did–though many have not realized that.

One who claimed to be an early 20th century Church of God “successor” was A.N. Dugger of the Church of God, Seventh Day. Notice some of what he wrote:

Apostolic Succession…

“The view that a wise and perfect form of church government and organization was set in order by the New Testament founders of the church, which has right to continue, and that that order has been handed down by the apostolic succession, was maintained by many.”… — Britannica Encyclopaedia, volume 5, page 759, article, “Church.”…

That succession of the apostolic power has come down unbroken… Gladstone attacks this in a friendly criticism, by expressing doubt as to why a church would remain silent for some thirteen centuries and then be able to speak. This mystery, however, is made clear with a correct understanding of the prophecy of Revelation, where it was clearly shown beforehand that it would be so. The church was to go into the wilderness and be nourished there for 1260 years, from the face of her persecutor, the beast. Then as the earth helped the woman, she was to come forth again. This actually took place, and while remaining in silence, as far as the world was concerned, yet she is not only able to speak, but divinely empowered with the right to do so.

Britannica Encyclopaedia, volume 2, page 194 says, “Very early, however, the notion that the apostleship is essentially an hierarchical office, found entrance into the church…”

The Scriptures teach us most emphatically that the apostolic virtue and power was handed down from apostle to apostle by the divine ordinance of laying on of hands and prayer. — Numbers 8:10, 27:28; Acts 6:6; 13:3; I Timothy 4:14; II Timothy 1:5.

That the Sabbath-keeping “Church of God,” has a most definite link of connection back through holy men to the days of the apostles is certain. The very same faith, and practice in divine worship, have been definitely handed down to the present time by strong men of God, filled with His blessed Holy Spirit, zealous for the precious commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus, fervent in zeal, and faithful unto death. (Dugger AN, Dodd CO. A History of True Religion, 3rd ed.  Jerusalem, 1972 (Church of God, 7th Day).  1990 reprint, p. 308)

Some will claim that these are simply A.N. Dugger’s assertions, yet only those who kept the original apostolic practices could have “apostolic succession.” (The clergy itself does not give God’s Spirit at baptism nor ordination. The clergy beseeches the Father to give the person His Holy Spirit via prayer and the laying on of hands. The Spirit is given by the Father, if the Father answers the clergy’s prayer — which is mainly dependent upon the sincerity/repentance of the person. Therefore, even if the specific clergy member who performed the ceremony has issues or falls away from the truth, the procedure is still valid.)

Herbert W. Armstrong claimed that A.N. Dugger had been unfaithful to the word of God (and he was) and that A.N. Dugger/CG7 no longer possessed the ‘mantle’ of leadership past 1933 (if not sooner, and if he ever had it. An other Sardis era leader, John S. Stanford, may have held it instead of A.N. Dugger). The old Worldwide Church of God taught:

Since Church leaders are appointed and not voted into office, and since, therefore, the members are not watchdogs over the leaders, who is responsible for keeping these leaders on track spiritually and administratively?

1. The answer is that God’s government in His Church is a government of faith. Simply put, this means members believe that behind the physical, outward appearance of the Church, is the unseen hand of Jesus Christ, who directs its affairs.

2. True Christians today trust Christ to direct the Church, bless it, correct it or its officers if need be and steer its general course.

3. From the time of Moses and the rebellion of Korab (a leader in the congregation who was killed by God for insubordination — Numbers 16), through the age of the apostles and the rejection of Judas Iscariot from his apostleship, to the present day, Christ has demonstrated His ability to:

   1. run His Church,

   2. place capable men in their proper positions,

   3. discipline those who need it,

   4. and reject from the Church those unfit to wear the Christian mantle.

4. The very existence of the Church and the Church’s continuing vitality proves this beyond dispute! (Doctrines of the Church: Church Governance. Worldwide Church of God, 1986/1987)

From the time of Moses and the rebellion of Korah (a leader in the congregation who was killed by God for insubordination — Numbers 16) , through the age of the apostles and the rejection of Judas Iscariot from his apostleship, to the present day, Christ has demonstrated His ability to run His Church, place capable men in their proper positions, discipline those who need it and reject from His Church those unfit to wear the Christian mantle. The very existence of the Church and the Church’s continuing vitality prove this beyond dispute! (Prove All Things: Governance in the Church. Good News, May 1986)

This is important as, even though many have had hands laid upon them, they were not always faithful, yet the true Church has continued from the time of the apostles. But leaders who are not truly faithful, lose the mantle.

The old Radio Church of God did teach that the true church always had laying on of hands succession. Notice:

Paulician Church Government

The Paulicians claimed to be THE “holy universal and apostolic church” founded by Jesus Christ and his apostles. Of the false churches, they would say: “We do not belong to these, for they have long ago broken connection with the church.”

They taught that the Church is not a building, not just an organization, but an organism — the body of truly converted baptized persons, which has continued unbroken with the apostolic traditions from its beginning. Jesus Christ was and is the HEAD of that Church. …

Four of their greatest leaders, the Paulicians called APOSTLES and PROPHETS. These directed the other ministers — “synecdemi” (itinerant evangelists), “poimenes” (pastors) and “notarii” (teachers who also had the responsibility, in the absence of printing, to laboriously hand-copy the Holy Scriptures). These ministers exercised the power of “binding and loosing.” …

Did Jesus Christ Himself put men directly into the highest office of this chain of authority? And did He “ordain” them by the laying on of His hands? Mark 3:14; John 15:16. …

Only by the choice of Jesus Christ, by the Scriptural ordinance of the laying on of hands, were different ranks of ministers ordained to authority, and that by those who were ministers before them. The succession of ministers thus begun by the hands of Jesus Christ remained unbroken in the True Church through all ages.

(Lesson 50 – I Will Build My Church, Part 2. 58 Lesson: Ambassador College Bible Correspondence Course, 1965)

Regarding prophets, those in the Church of God believe that prophecy is one of the gifts of the Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:10). And that one would have to have to be anointed one to become a prophet in the Christian era.  Here is something the Radio Church of God published in 1965:

God gives special gifts-special powers of His Spirit-to those who are set apart by the laying on of hands. Remember that it was by the laying on of hands that Timothy received the added ability, called “prophecy” by the King James translators…(I Tim. 4:14 and II Tim. 1:6)…This spiritual gift of inspired preaching was conferred to Timothy by the laying on of hands. (Ellis, William H. Why We Have the Laying on of Hands Ceremony. Good News. April-May 1965)

More on prophets can be found in the articles Church of God Leaders on Prophets and Does the CCOG have the confirmed signs of Acts 2:17-18?

In my own case, hands were laid upon me by an elder in the Living Church of God. LCG minister Gaylyn Bonjour, while laying hands on me, was moved by the Holy Spirit to pray that God would grant me a “double portion” of His Spirit, which Gaylyn Bonjour said was reminiscent of the passing of the mantle from Elijah to Elisha as recorded in 2 Kings 2:9-13. He has always publicly concurred with me that is what happened.

Furthermore, on November 28, 2019, Gaylyn Bonjour stated that he believed that God answered his prayer regarding Him granting me a double-portion of His Spirit. Additionally, on November 28, 2019, Gaylyn Bonjour also stated that he tells those who ask:

I have known Bob Thiel since 1986. He has always been honest, dedicated, and sincere.

And that includes what I have written about him, dreams, and the prophet matter. My teaching about what happened is accurate and not false. I have not lied about this.

The Book of Proverbs teaches:

16 The lazy man is wiser in his own eyes
Than seven men who can answer sensibly. (Proverbs 26:16)

Satan hopes that YOU will be lazy and not believe. Satan hopes YOU will not take the time to check out the truth on this. Satan does NOT want YOU to accept that God really has been providing and fulfilling dreams in the 21st century.

Satan wants YOU to think that there are no serious differences between the legitimate COGs so not being part of CCOG is fine.

Satan wants YOU, like most Christians these days, to be Laodicean and not see if these things are so.

God used the laying on of hands in the Old Testament.

In the New Testament, God used the laying on of hands to grant His Holy Spirit to the baptized as well as to those that are to be in His ministry. Plus, it is a tool God uses, when people avail themselves of it, for healing.

Church of God leaders have recognized the doctrine of the laying on of hands throughout history. We also have been faithful to the original teachings of the apostles.

Hence the Church of God, not the Church of Rome, possesses true apostolic succession.

The true Church of God has had laying on of hands succession from the time of the apostles in Acts chapter 2 to present.

The laying on of hands is an elementary doctrine of the true church (Hebrews 6:1-2).

It is an official belief of the Continuing Church of God (see Statement of Beliefs of the Continuing Church of God).

More details on succession and the associated named groups can be found in the free online book: Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession?

Here is a link to a related sermon: Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession.

Artist Interpretation of the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D.
(Wikipedia)

COGwriter

Today, May 20th, marks the 1700 anniversary of the start of the Council of Nicea.

Rome’s Pope and Constantinople’s Patriarch plan meet later to commemorate that council:

May 19, 2025

Leo and Bartholomew will hold a joint event later this year to commemorate the 1,700th anniversary of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea. The gathering is expected to take place in Iznik, Turkey, the ancient city of Nicaea, where the landmark council was held in 325 AD.

Sources noted that the meeting may be scheduled for the end of November, potentially coinciding with the feast day of Andrew the Apostle, the founder of the Church of Constantinople. Such a visit would provide the pope with an opportunity to visit the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul. …

Convened by Emperor Constantine I, the council aimed to resolve theological disputes, … like the date of Easter and church organization. …

While modern terms like “Orthodox” and “Catholic” are often used today, at the time, there was no formal division between Eastern and Western Christianity. The Church was still unified, often referred to as the “Catholic” (universal) Church, with “Orthodox” used more so to signify virtuous belief rather than a separate branch. https://greekreporter.com/2025/05/19/ecumenical-patriarch-pope-leo-agree-joint-event-nicaea/

Pope Leo XIV wants ecumenical unity:

19 May 2025

Pope Leo XIV held a special audience on Monday for ecumenical and interreligious delegations that took part in the Solemn Mass for the Inauguration of his Petrine Ministry.

In his address, the Holy Father highlighted Pope Francis’ emphasis on universal fraternity, continuing the initiatives of previous popes, especially St John XXIII.

Pope Francis, “the Pope of Fratelli tutti, promoted both the ecumenical path and inter-religious dialogue,” Pope Leo said, “above all by cultivating interpersonal relations, in such a way that, without taking anything away from ecclesial bonds, the human trait of the encounter was always valued. May God help us to treasure his witness!”

True unity is unity in faith

Speaking first to other Christian Churches and ecclesial communities, Pope Leo XIV took note of the 1,700th anniversary of the Council of Nicea, emphasizing that unity among Christians “can only be unity in faith.”

He added that the pursuit of full and visible communion of all Christians is one of his priorities as Bishop of Rome.

At the same time, he recalled the close links between ecumenism and synodality, and assured the delegations of his commitment to follow Pope Francis in “promoting the synodal character of the Catholic Church.”

A common path in the spirit of human fraternity

Turning to representatives of non-Christian religious traditions, Pope Leo XIV said our “common path” can and must be understood to involve everyone, “in a spirit of human fraternity.”

Today, he said, “is the time for dialogue and building bridges.” https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2025-05/pope-leo-xiv-now-is-the-time-for-dialogue-and-building-bridges.html

Pontifex Maximus, a title for pagan Roman Emperors, and now popes, basically means “greatest bridge builder.” By non-Christian religions, Pope Leo means Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and others. He wants the 1700th anniversary of Nicea to promote ecumenical and other types of unity.

The ecumenical 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicea could have major ramifications:

Together, pope and patriarch return to Nicaea on 1,700th anniversary of defining moment in Christendom

Joseph MacKinnon

May 19, 2025

The pope and the patriarch’s joint trip to Nicaea signals fraternity, renews hope of possible reunification.

Seventeen centuries ago, bishops from around the known world gathered in Nicaea … Now, as the anniversary of that defining moment in Christendom approaches, leaders on either side of the Great Schism are preparing to return, drawing East and West closer and renewing hope in the promise of Christian unity.

In the year 325, Emperor Constantine I called over 250 bishops — 318, according to tradition — to convene during the pontificate of Pope Sylvester I in the Bithynian city of Nicaea, 55 miles southeast of present-day Istanbul. It was the largest gathering of bishops in the church’s history up until that time. …

This dogmatic council was of critical importance both then to the unified church and now to Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans, and other Protestants …

Pope Leo XIV and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople are making a joint trip to the place where their predecessors met 17 centuries earlier. While various obstacles some figured to be insurmountable still stand in the way of full reunification, the meeting of the Christian leaders on this particular anniversary and the anniversary itself have sparked renewed interest in Christian unity and the ground that the faithful share in common.

Of popes and plans

Prior to his passing, Pope Francis proposed celebrating the 1,700th anniversary with Orthodox leaders in a Nov. 30 letter to Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople, who previously indicated a joint trip was expected to happen in late May.

Pope Francis noted in his letter to the patriarch that the Catholic Church’s “dialogue with the Orthodox Church has been and continues to be particularly fruitful,” yet acknowledged that the “ultimate goal of dialogue, full communion among all Christians, sharing in the one Eucharistic chalice, has not yet been realized with our Orthodox brother and sisters,” which “is not surprising, for divisions dating back a millennium, cannot be resolved within a few decades.”

‘It is good whenever the pope and the patriarch meet.’

Prior to heading back to Toronto from Rome, where he participated in the conclave that elected the new pope, Archbishop Emeritus Thomas Cardinal Collins told Blaze News, “The 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea is most important for all Christians, because it was there that the bishops clarified the basic Christian faith in the divinity of Christ. The Nicene Creed, from this council and the next one, in Constantinople a few years later, is still the basic expression of our faith in the Trinity.”

“The division of East and West that occurred much later in 1054 is most unfortunate and has impeded the spread of the gospel,” continued Collins. “But the churches of East and West, while having different theological and liturgical styles, recognize one another’s apostolic succession and, with a few issues still in dispute, basically agree on doctrine as well. One thing that divides us is historical memories, but increased cooperation has brought some healing there.”

‘The remembrance of that important event will surely strengthen the bonds that already exist.’

Cardinal Collins noted further that “it is good whenever the pope and the patriarch meet. All Christians, facing so many external dangers, need to work together. The anniversary of Nicaea, which occurred long before the division of East and West, is a perfect opportunity to deepen our knowledge and love for one another, but especially Jesus. The closer we are to Him, the closer we will be to one another.”

Pope Francis, then evidently of a similar mind, told Patriarch Bartholomew I that the anniversary would be “another opportunity to bear witness to the growing communion that already exists among all who are baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”

“This anniversary will concern not only the ancient Sees that took part actively in the Council, but all Christians who continue to profess their faith in the words of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed,” wrote Pope Francis. “The remembrance of that important event will surely strengthen the bonds that already exist and encourage all Churches to a renewed witness in today’s world.”

The interest in a joint trip was evidently mutual.

During a March address in Harbiye, Turkey, Patriarch Bartholomew underscored his desire for a joint celebration of the anniversary, reported the Orthodox Times. He also emphasized the importance of the Council of Nicaea.

“The Council of Nicaea stands as a landmark in the formation of the Church’s doctrinal identity and remains the model for addressing doctrinal and canonical challenges on an ecumenical level,” said Patriarch Bartholomew.

The Chicagoan steps up to the plate

Various leaders in the Christian East welcomed the new bishop of Rome following his May 8 election.

Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, among them, expressed hope that Pope Leo XIV will “be a dear brother and collaborator … for the rapprochement of our churches, for the unity of the whole Christian family, and for the benefit of humankind,” reported Vatican News.

Days later, Pope Leo XVI reportedly stated, “The meeting with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew will take place; we are preparing it.”

When asked about the significance of the joint trip, the likelihood of East-West reunification, and Orthodox interest in such reunification, Fr. Barnabas Powell, a parish priest in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America speaking on his own behalf, told Blaze News, “There is simply no way one can be faithful to Christ and not long for the unity of all Christians.” …

Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew’s joint trip to Nicaea with Pope Leo XIV is hardly the only celebration of the anniversary that has brought East and West together.

Earlier this month in Freehold, New Jersey, hierarchs, clergy, seminarians, and faithful from Eastern and Western traditions — including elements of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA, the Serbian Orthodox Church, the Orthodox Church in America, the Greek Orthodox Metropolis of New Jersey, the Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Passaic, the St. Thomas Syro-Malabar Eparchy, and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn — participated in an ecumenical prayer service “testifying to the unifying power of the Nicene Creed and the enduring vision of the Council Fathers.”

Similar celebrations have been held elsewhere across the world. https://www.theblaze.com/news/together-pope-and-patriarch-return-to-nicaea-on-1700-anniversary-of-defining-moment-in-christendom

The original Council of Nicea was called by the Roman Emperor Constantine.

In my book titled The Last Pope of the Malachy Prophecies: Do Biblical and Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies Point to Pope Leo XIV? I have the following:

Leo XIV will be ecumenical. …

From May 20, 325 A.D./C.E. to August 325, the Roman Emperor Constantine convened the Council of Nicea. One of his political objectives was to get ecumenical unity in certain matters. In 2025, there are meetings to mark the 1700^th anniversary of this, which are expected to include ecumenical discussions. …

we should expect Leo XIV to promote interfaith dialogue in order to build closer connections with Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and others.

Let me mention that the Council of Nicea did not represent “all Christendom” as no Church of God leaders attended. But that council, and subsequent ones, did result in the adoption of doctrines that the Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and most Protestants ended up accepting. Several of which were not held by the original apostles or their faithful followers.

Notice what a former Roman Catholic priest wrote about Constantine:

Constantine … No one was ever more devoted to than he to the sun god, Sol … Emperor Constantine never relinquished his title of Pontifex Maximus, head of the pagan state cult … Twice married, he murdered Crispus his son by his first wife, in 326. He had his second wife drowned in the bath; killed his eleven year old nephew, then his brother-in-law, after giving him assurances of safe conduct under oath …

Constantine was a soldier at a time when shedding blood was unacceptable to the church … When Constantine called bishops his beloved brethren and styled himself ‘Bishop of Bishops’, which popes later appropriated, he was not a Christian, not even a catechumen. Yet no one remotely approached his stature and authority. Even the Bishop of Rome … was in comparison, a non-entity … All bishops agreed that he was ‘the inspired oracle, the apostle of Church wisdom’ …

It is another paradox of history that it was Constantine, a pagan, who invented the idea of a council of all Christian communities … At Nicaea the Founding Father of Ecumenical Councils gathered 300 hundred bishops, having laid on free transport … Maybe he simply wanted to show that he was in charge. He proposed what came to be called ‘the orthodox view’ of God’s Son being ‘of one substance’ with the Father. All dissident bishops caved in, except for two whom Constantine promptly deposed and sent packing … His cynical use of Christ, in which everyone including the Roman Bishop acquiesced, meant a profound falsification of the Gospel message and the injection of standards alien to it. (De Rosa, pp. 35,36,43,44)

A committed sun god/Mithras devotee came up with the Council of Nicea.

It was about one year after conquering the Eastern Empire (thus resurrecting the combined Roman Empire) the sun-worshiping Emperor Constantine convened the Council of Nicea. That Council declared:

1) The Roman Sun-day or day of the Sun was to be the Christian Sabbath.

2) Rules regarding seasonal prayers, penance, and indulgences.

3) That the Greco-Romans believed that Jesus was one substance with God the Father.

4) Passover would be on Sunday and not the biblical date of Nisan 14.

Perhaps it should be mentioned that this Council did not prohibit pagan sun-worship, but instead decreed that true Christians should not keep the seventh-day Sabbath nor should they be allowed to keep Passover on the 14^th.

Here is some of what the Greco-Roman Catholic historian Epiphanius wrote in the mid-4th Century:

… the emperor … convened a council of 318 bishops … in the city of Nicea … They passed certain ecclesiastical canons at the council besides, and at the same time decreed in regard to the Passover that there must be one unanimous concord on the celebration of God’s holy and supremely excellent day. For it was variously observed by people …

Eventually, those in parts of Europe (e.g. Britain and Germany) changed the name from Passover to Easter (Ostern in German). Easter and Ostern are other names for the Babylonian goddess Ishtar (which can be pronounced as Easter), the so-called queen of heaven (also called Ashtaroth in the Bible in 1 Samuel 12:10). The “Queen of Heaven” is also a title that has been associated with Europa, for whom the continent of Europe is named.

 The Catechism of the Catholic Church goes so far as to claim:

1170 At the Council of Nicea in 325, all the Churches agreed that Easter, the Christian Passover, should be celebrated on the Sunday following the first full moon (14 Nisan) after the vernal equinox.

This simply is not really true, and it should not be taught in the modern Catechism. Passover was still kept on the correct day by the scattered faithful church and always has been, since the time of Christ. The fact that the Emperor got an agreement from those he summoned did not change the Bible (or its truly faithful followers).

It should be noted that it is understood, even by some Roman Catholic scholars, that “Judeo-Christian” churches were not represented on at that Council. Notice what priest Bellarmino Bagatti wrote:

…the inhabitants of Syria, of Cilicia and of Mesopotamia were still celebrating Easter {Passover} with the Jews…

The importance of the matters to be discussed and the great division that existed had led Constantine to bring together a big number of bishops, including confessors of the faith, in order to give the impression that the whole of Christendom was represented.

In fact…the churches of Jewish stock had had no representation…From this we can conclude that no Judaeo-Christian bishop participated in the Council.  Either they were not invited or they declined to attend.  And so the capitulars had a free hand to establish norms for certain practices without meeting opposition or hearing other view points. Once the road was open future Councils would continue on these lines, thus deepening the breach between the Christians of two-stocks.  The point of view of the Judaeo-Christians, devoid of Greek philosophical formation, was that of keeping steadfast to the Testimonia, and therefore not to admit any word foreign to the Bible, including Homoousion.

So, there were Christians who believed in basing doctrine only on the Bible, but they did not attend Nicea or any of the later Councils. Mainly, if not only, those who seemed to accept “Greek philosophical formation” attended. Thus, no true Christian should consider that these Councils were called of God.

Constantine’s church historian, Eusebius, recorded the following details about Constantine convening that Council:

But before this time another most virulent disorder had existed, and long afflicted the Church; I mean the difference respecting the salutary feast of Easter{Passover}. For while one party asserted that the Jewish custom should be adhered to, the other affirmed that the exact recurrence of the period should be observed, without following the authority of those…

Then as if to bring a divine array against this enemy, he convoked a general council, and invited the speedy attendance of bishops from all quarters, in letters expressive of the honorable estimation in which he held them. Nor was this merely the issuing of a bare command but the emperor’s good will contributed much to its being carried into effect: for he allowed some the use of the public means of conveyance, while he afforded to others an ample supply of horses for their transport.  The place, too, selected for the synod, the city Nicæa in Bithynia… In effect, the most distinguished of God’s ministers from all the churches which abounded in Europe, Lybia, and Asia were here assembled… Constantine is the first prince of any age who bound together such a garland as this with the bond of peace, and presented it to his Saviour as a thank-offering for the victories he had obtained over every foe, thus exhibiting in our own times a similitude of the apostolic company…

The result was that they were not only united as concerning the faith, but that the time for the celebration of the salutary feast of Easter was agreed on by all…

What was the justification for this, or for Eusebius calling those who kept biblical practices “this enemy”?

Well, although the word Pascha (which means Passover) is mistranslated as Easter above and below, Constantine clearly felt that the Jews were detestable and that he did not want his church to follow practices like theirs. Notice what Constantine declared:

At this meeting the question concerning the most holy day of Easter {Passover} was discussed, and it was resolved by the united judgment of all present, that this feast ought to be kept by all and in every place on one and the same day. For what can be more becoming or honorable to us than that this feast from which we date our hopes of immortality, should be observed unfailingly by all alike, according to one ascertained order and arrangement? And first of all, it appeared an unworthy thing that in the celebration of this most holy feast we should follow the practice of the Jews, who have impiously defiled their hands with enormous sin, and are, therefore, deservedly afflicted with blindness of soul. For we have it in our power, if we abandon their custom, to prolong the due observance of this ordinance to future ages, by a truer order, which we have preserved from the very day of the passion until the present time. Let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd; for we have received from our Saviour a different way. A course at once legitimate and honorable lies open to our most holy religion. Beloved brethren, let us with one consent adopt this course, and withdraw ourselves from all participation in their baseness.

It perhaps should be noted that Jesus kept Passover on the 14^th.  Calling the “Jewish crowd” detestable is not appropriate for real Christians. Jesus did not implement Sunday Passover as a “different way.” This is further evidence that those who are following Constantine’s decrees are not following those made by a true Christian.

The Greco-Roman Catholic Epiphanius, himself, actually admitted that the church used to observe the 14^th for Passover when he wrote:

Audians…they choose to celebrate the Passover with the Jews–that is they contentiously celebrate the Passover at the same time as the Jews are holding their Festival of Unleavened Bread. And indeed that this used to be the church’s custom.

Thus, Epiphanius seemed to realize that Passover on the 14^th was the original Passover date, even for the early Greco-Romans, since he wrote “this used to be the church’s custom.”  See also the article The Passover Plot.

So, the unity that came from the pagan emperor’s Council of Nicea was against the original faith and practices of Christians.

A 10^th-11^th century Islamic Arab document professes to have a Judeo-Christian perspective of the Council of Nicea. Here is some of what Shlomo Pines summarized from that Arabic report of that Council and one that preceded it:

Constantine called a gathering of Christian monks with a view to the formulation of obligatory religious beliefs…However, some of them disagreed with this text…There was a scission and the symbol of faith which had been formulated was not regarded as valid.

Thereupon, three hundred and eighteen men gathered in Nicaea and formulated a symbol of faith, which was accepted and made obligatory by Constantine. People who dissented from it were killed and professions of faith differing from it suppressed.

In this way people who professed the religion of Christ came to do all that is reprehensible; they worshipped the cross, observed the Roman religious rites and ate pork.  Those who did not eat it were killed. (Pines, pp. 32,43)

So, according to an Islamic reporter, there were Christians who were upset by the changes that Emperor Constantine enforced, such as crosses and Roman religious rites. Furthermore, the same reporter stated that the “Jewish Christians” denounced the use of incense in Christian churches as “an adaptation of a Pagan custom” and that they had to become a clandestine group.

Regarding this early time period, the theological historian Bart Ehrman noted:

By the early fourth century, Christianity had almost completely separated from Judaism, the religion of Jesus and his apostles…By early fourth century, non-Jewish Christianity had become a major world religion. (Ehrman B. From Jesus to Constantine: A History of Early Christianity, Part 2. The Teaching Company, Chantilly (VA), 2004, p. 47)

The church councils, first started by Emperor Constantine, really ended up with a new religion, which could be called “Constantinian Christianity.” Constantinian Christianity included elements of Greco-Roman compromises, a church-state alliance, and pagan elements synchronized to become the religion of the State.

Perhaps it should be mentioned, that according to Eastern Orthodox Catholic sources, at the time of the Council of Nicea in 325, “There is no mention of the bishop of Constantinople due to the fact that this “see” was as yet an insignificant little town” (^{Patsovas L. The Primacy of the See of Constantinople in Theory and Practice.  © 2010 Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/primacy-constantinople viewed 02/09/10}).  But many of the Orthodox and others will overlook that.

Consider numerous Roman Catholic, Aramaic, Protestant, and  Eastern Orthodox translations of one verse in the Bible:

3 Dearly beloved, taking all care to write unto you concerning your common salvation, I was under a necessity to write unto you: to beseech you to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints. (Jude 3, DRB)

3 My dear friends, at a time when I was eagerly looking forward to writing to you about the salvation that we all share, I felt that I must write to you encouraging you to fight hard for the faith which has been once and for all entrusted to God’s holy people. (Jude 3, NJB)

3 My beloved, I write to you with all diligence concerning our common salvation, and it is needful that I should write and exhort you also to contend earnestly for the faith which was once delivered to the saints. (Jude 1-3, Lamsa Bible)

3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write to you about our common life, it was necessary for me to write to you, as I am to persuade you to compete for the faith, which was once delivered to The Holy Ones. (Jude 3, Aramaic Bible in Plain English)

3 I write to you and encourage you to continue your fight for the Christian faith that was entrusted to God’s holy people once for all time. (Jude 3, God’s Word Translation)

3 Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. (Jude 3 NKJV/OSB)

3 Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I felt it needful to write to you in order to encourage you to fight hard for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. (Jude 3 EOB)

If those that meet for the 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicea would really do that–do what their own accepted translation of the Bible say–it would be an exciting and great course of action.

Now, back in 2014, then Pope Francis and Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople met together and announced an intended ecumenical meeting in honor of the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D.:

May 29, 2014

Istanbul (AsiaNews) – On his return from Jerusalem , where he met with Pope Francis at the Holy Sepulchre, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew I, has revealed an important appointment for unity between Catholics and Orthodox: a gathering at Nicaea in 2025, where the first real ecumenical council of the undivided Church was celebrated.

Speaking exclusively with AsiaNews, Bartholomew says that together with Pope Francis “we agreed to leave as a legacy to ourselves and our successors a gathering in Nicaea in 2025, to celebrate together, after 17 centuries , the first truly ecumenical synod, where the Creed was first promulgated”. 
http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Bartholomew:-With-Francis,-we-invite-all-Christians-to-celebrate-the-first-synod-of-Nicaea-in-2025-31213.html

As far as the Creed goes, it came from the later Council of Constantinople. For details you may wish to check out the article What Was the Original Apostles’ Creed? What is the Nicene Creed?

But note that Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew is referring to an ECUMENICAL synod.

September 10, 2024

Next May, Pope Francis will undertake a significant trip to Turkey, an event that promises to be both ecumenical as well as politically relevant. This journey, announced by the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew I, will commemorate the 1700 years of the first Ecumenical Council of Nicaea, held in 325 in present day Iznik, Turkey.

Bartholomew I revealed that both religious leaders have agreed to celebrate this important anniversary at the end of May. Up to now, the Holy Father had mentioned this event as a possibility, but now the Patriarch has confirmed the date. This meeting will not only be a historical celebration, but also an opportunity for the Orthodox and Catholic Churches to discuss the possibility of unifying the date of Easter. At present, these Churches celebrate Easter on different dates, due to the use of the Gregorian (Catholics) and Julian (Orthodox) calendars. Although the Assembly of the Orthodox Bishops of Istanbul has shown its support to a common date, a concrete proposal is yet to be presented. In 2025, Easter will fall on the same day, April 20, for both Christian Traditions.

Pope Francis’ trip will have a broader framework, namely, the 2025 Ordinary Jubilee. https://zenit.org/2024/09/10/pope-francis-will-visit-turkey-in-may-2025-says-patriarch-of-constantinople/

Regarding Pope Francis’ “Jubilee” check out the following post from this earlier this Summer: ‘Pope Francis invites Orthodox delegation to participate in Jubilee 2025 and confesses he wants to go to Nicaea’ and Roman ‘Catholic church in Portland hosts Tibetan Buddhist monks for talk on non-Christian meditation’.

Back in 2014, we put together the following video:

The Continuing Church of God is pleased to announce our latest video on our Bible New Prophecy YouTube channel:

10:44

3rd Council of Nicea in 2025?

The first ecumenical Council of Nicea was in 325 A.D. The Second Council of Nicea began in 787 A.D. The Roman Catholic Pope Francis and the Eastern Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople have called for a meeting between the Orthodox and the Vatican to take place in the year 2025. What was the result of the earlier councils? Does the Bible support this 2025 meeting? What are some of the dangers?

Written information on the first Council of Nicea is included in the post Ecumenical meeting in Nicea planned for 2025: What happened in 325 and what could happen in/by 2025?

It still looks like this council will take place.

Now some may say, they believe ecumenical unity between the Catholics of Rome, the Eastern Orthodox Catholics, and Protestants is a good thing. And if they were intent on contending earnestly for “the faith once for all delivered to the saints” (June 3), it could be.

But it is not.

Now, what will be the result of the planned 2025 Council of Nicea?

As far as can be determined, both Pope Leo XIV and Patriarch Bartholomew hope that greater ecumenical unity will occur between their respective organizations.

According to an Eastern Orthodox seer the final (the Eastern Orthodox recognize seven previous ones) ecumenical synod council satisfies what “heretics” want:

Saint Neilos the Myrrh-Gusher (died 1592): During that time the Eighth and last Ecumenical Synod will take place, which will satisfy the contentions of the heretics…(Tzima Otto, p. 111).

By satisfying “heretics”, clearly this council compromises and changes the religion, which will be called “Catholic.”  If heretics are truly heretics, should their complaints be satisfied?

Will that happen in 2025?  It very well may–though perhaps only some parts will be updated related to unity. The Orthodox had called for an eighth ecumenical council in 2016, which could be this (see Orthodox agree to eighth ecumenical council: If Orthodox prophecy is correct on it, this council marks a major step towards the end!). But if not, it may be in 2025 or shortly thereafter some type of council will result in the type of ecumenical unity that Pope Leo XIV and Patriarch Bartholomew want.

Perhaps it should be noted that there are a lot of Roman Catholic private prophecies that point to further changing compromise by ecumenical efforts of that church. Here are a a few of them from by book The Last Pope of the Malachy Prophecies: Do Biblical and Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies Point to Pope Leo XIV?:

Roman Catholic prophecies warn that a major “antipope” and major schism is to come. Since there has not been a formally recognized antipope since the 15^th century, for numerous reasons these could be interpreted to mean that a 21^st century pope will be an antipope who will implement changes:

Anne Catherine Emmerick (May 13, 1820): I saw again a new and odd-looking Church which they were trying to build. There was nothing holy about it … THIS IS BABEL.[i]

Yves Dupont {writer interpreting A. Emmerick}: They wanted to make a new Church, a Church of human manufacture, but God had other designs … The Holy Father shall have to leave Rome, and he shall die a cruel death. An anti-pope shall be set up in Rome.[ii]

Anne Catherine Emmerich (January 12, 1820):  There is now some question of Protestants sharing in the government of the Catholic clergy.[iii]

Anne Catherine Emmerich (July 1820):  I came to the church of Peter and Paul (Rome) and saw a dark world of distress, confusion, and corruption…[iv]

Anne Catherine Emmerich (January 27, 1822):  I saw many Christians returning to the bosom of the Church, entering through the walls.  That Pope will be strict, he will remove the lukewarm, tepid Bishops—but it will be a long time before this happens.[v]

Anne Catherine Emmerich (October 22, 1822): I saw in Germany among the worldly-wise ecclesiastics, and enlightened Protestants, plans formed for the blending of all religious creeds …[vi]

Anne Catherine Emmerich (April, 1823): They built a large, singular, extravagant church which was to embrace all creeds with equal rights: Evangelicals, Catholics, and all denominations, a true communion of the unholy with one shepherd and one flock.  There was to be a Pope, a salaried Pope without possessions.[vii]

Melanie Mathieu (19^th century): Rome will lose faith and become the seat of Antichrist.[viii] …

Priest Paul Kramer (21^st century): The errors of Orthodoxy and of Protestantism will be embraced by that false church, it will be an ecumenical church because the Anti-Pope will be recognized by the world — not by the faithful, but by the world — by the secular world and the secular governments. The Anti-Pope will be recognized as the legitimate Pope of the “church,” and the legitimate head of the Vatican State. That “church” will be united with all the false religions.[ix]

Priest Paul Kramer (21^st century): The counterfeit “Catholic” Church — the counter-church, the anti-church — the mystery of the dragon, whose tail swept down a third of the “stars of Heaven,” i.e. one third of the Catholic hierarchy under the leadership of a heretical antipope.[x]

[i] Dupont, pp. 60, 116

[ii] Dupont, p. 116

[iii] ^{Emmerich AC. The Life and Revelations of Anne Catherine Emmerich. Schmöger edition, Vol. II. Approbation: Bishop of Limbourg Peter Joseph. Reprint TAN Books, Rockford (IL), 1976, p.274}

[iv] ^{Ibid, p.130}

[v] ^{Ibid, p. 344}

[vi] ^{Ibid, p. 346}

[vii] ^{Ibid, p. 353}

[viii] ^{Culligan E. The Last World War and the End of Time. The book was blessed by Pope Paul VI, 1966. TAN Books, Rockford (IL), pp. 173.  Note this was approved for publication by the Catholic Bishop of Lecce, Italy in 1879 per Culligan, p. 169}

[ix] Kramer P. The Imminent Chastisement for Not Fulfilling Our Lady’s Request. An edited transcript of a speech given at the Ambassadors of Jesus and Mary Seminar in Glendale, California, September 24, 2004. THE FATIMA CRUSADER Issue 80, Summer 2005, pp. 32-45 http://www.fatimacrusader.com/cr80/cr80pg32.asp viewed 4/15/08

[x] ^{Kramer P. The Third Secret Reveals the Great Chastisement. The Fatima Crusader, 77, Summer 2004, p. 4}

Now, let me add that some Roman Catholic writings look forward to this change as they believe it will result in the end of Protestantism and the reign of their church. The following are also in my book The Last Pope of the Malachy Prophecies: Do Biblical and Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies Point to Pope Leo XIV?:

Notice what some other Roman Catholics have written about future ecumenical plans:

Oba Prophecy: It will come when the Church authorities issue directives to support a new cult, when priests are forbidden to celebrate in any other, when the highest positions in the Church are given to perjurers and hypocrites, when only the renegades are admitted to occupy those positions.[i]

D.A. Birch (20^th century): “The Pope calls an Ecumenical Council which will be viewed as the greatest in the history of the Church. The world is spiritually and materially prosperous as never before and many Jews, Mohammedans, heathens and heretics will enter the Church”.[ii] …

The Bible … teaches that the successful ecumenical religion (Revelation 13:4,8) will not have God’s approval (Revelation 14,18).

Yet, certain private prophecies seem to praise the success of this ecumenical movement:

Blessed Anna-Maria Taigi (19th century): Whole nations will come back to the Church and the face of the earth will be renewed. Russia … and China will come into the Church.[iii]

St. Bridget (14th century): Before Antichrist comes, the portals of Faith will be opened to great numbers of pagans.[iv]

Venerable Magdalene Porzat (died 1850) (Great Monarch) … shall … restore to their dominions the legitimate kings. A just and pious man born in Galacia shall be the Supreme Pontiff: then the whole world will be united and prosperous. One faith only and one emperor shall reign over the whole earth.[v]

Cardinal La Roque (c. 18th century): A regeneration of Faith will appear in Asia.[vi]

Mother Alphonse Eppinger (1867): After God has purified the world faith and peace will return. Whole nations will adhere to the teachings of the Catholic Church.[vii]

[i] Dupont, p. 115

[ii] Birch, p. 555

[iii] Dupont, p.45

[iv] Birch, 449

[v] Connor, p. 38

[vi] Culleton, The Prophets and Our Times, p. 193

[vii] Connor, p.25

The type of ecumenical unity that came from the original Council of Nicea was terrible as it ruled against beliefs and practices of the original Christian church.

There is no reason to believe that a possible meeting there in 2025 will result in true good. Let me add that the World Council of Churches has also been preparing for this 1700th anniversary of Nicea.

All should contend earnestly for the original faith. I pray that Pope Leo XIV and Patriarch Bartholomew will do so.

Before going further, let me state that I am pleased that Pope Leo XIV has come out and confirmed the original Christian view on genders–which was Jesus’ position (cf. Matthew 19:4).

As far as ecumenism goes, however, the Bible teaches that the only true unity of the faith will happen AFTER the false ecumenical movement is eliminated which happens with the return of Jesus Christ (e.g. Zechariah 2:6-11).

What certain religious leaders are trying to do related to Nicea is not the will of God. But likely will result in the fulfillment of certain biblical prophecies.

The ‘Mary’ in the Basilica of Mary Major That Pope Francis Prayed To
(Photo by Joyce Thiel, June 2013)

COGwriter

The Associated Press (AP) posted the following:

Why popes and other Catholics pray to the Virgin Mary

May 17, 2025

Pope Leo XIV closed his first public blessing as pontiff with a Hail Mary, after invoking the feast day of Our Lady of Pompei. On his first papal trip, he went to the Sanctuary of Our Mother of Good Counsel in the medieval village of Genazzano and on the drive back stopped to pray by Pope Francis’ tomb in the Basilica of St. Mary Major in Rome.

That’s just three of a myriad Virgin Marys around the world, whose veneration is central to Catholics from the pope to the ordinary faithful. Even many of the less-than-devout know what it means to throw a Hail Mary.

The month of May is dedicated to Marian celebrations, …

The oldest title for Mary is precisely “mother of God,” or Theotokos in the original Greek. It was chosen after heated theological debate in the first centuries of Christianity.

St. Mary Major is the oldest still-standing sanctuary dedicated to that, said Giuseppe Falanga, professor of liturgy at Pontificia Universita della Santa Croce in Rome. It was built on one of Rome’s hills in the 5th century — according to tradition, because of the pope’s dream and an August snowfall there on what is now also celebrated as the day of Our Lady of the Snows. …

There are three major categories of titles for Mary — first, those related to dogma and major events in her life.

The Assumption on Aug. 15, for instance, celebrates Mary being taken body and soul into heaven. …

Then there are titles related to apparitions. …

“It’s almost like there’s a Mary for everything,” said Kayla Harris, professor and director of Marian Library at University of Dayton in Ohio.

It’s also why the rosary is one of the most widely used prayers …

It’s that relatability as a mother figure that makes Mary so universally appealing as an intercessor before God, Harris said.

Since the 19th century, May has been devoted to the Virgin Mary — though already in Greek and Roman times, goddesses of fertility were celebrated in this month of springtime blooming, she added. https://apnews.com/article/pope-leo-xiv-pope-francis-virgin-mary-rosary-rome-6ae8d6e94b83837f0a5fe74af85c1b6c

On the day in 2013 Francis became pope, he went and knelt down before the image claimed to be of Jesus’ mother Mary in the church known as the Basilica of Mary Major (officially called Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore). He also went and prayed to that image before and after his foreign trips. My wife Joyce and I visited that Basilica in June of 2013 and asked a nun there where it was that Pope Francis would kneel and pray there. She pointed to the location shown in the photo at the beginning of this post. Pope Francis was interned there after his death.

That said, calling Mary “Theotokos ” was NOT an original belief or practice.

Roman Catholic scholars admit prior to the 4th century (which is when the Council of Nicea was) that there was not much related to Marian veneration, but they suspect that it may have existed. Thus, it was NOT documented as a part of the original faith nor among the earliest faithful traditions. This is a MAJOR CHANGE, then, as Marian adoration is a big deal within the faith that now calls itself “Catholic.”

In the late fourth century, the Greco-Roman Catholic Bishop Epiphanius warned that some were worshipping Mary and were causing ”excess awe of the saint” (Epiphanius. Section VII, pp. 618-629)–he thus seemed to clearly condemn what is now referred to by Roman Catholics as veneration of Mary.

And in the fifth century, another Bishop complained that “If Mary is called the Mother of God, she will be made into a goddess…” (Chapman, John. “Nestorius and Nestorianism.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 10. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911. 4 Aug. 2011 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10755a.htm>).

Yet, the term started to pop-up, perhaps as early as the third century “from the Alexandrian Bishop Alexander, head of the Egyptian Church” (Mark Miravalle, Raymond L. Burke; (2008). Mariology: A Guide for Priests, Deacons, Seminarians, and Consecrated Persons ISBN 978-1-57918-355-4 p. 178). Perhaps it should be mentioned that, the term Theόtokos, as such, is even older than Christianity and has a pagan origin” (Miravalle, p. 178)–Theόtokos means “God bearer.”

We in the Continuing Church of God do teach that Mary was the mother of Jesus and that Jesus is now God. However, since Mary cannot grant divinity and Jesus emptied Himself of His divinity when He came in the flesh (Philippians 2:7) and did not retain it until after His resurrection (cf. John 20:28), we do not use the expression “God-bearer” or “Mother of God” to describe Mary.

Holy Scripture does not contain the explicit titled, “Mother of God.” (Mark Miravalle, Raymond L. Burke; (2008). Mariology: A Guide for Priests, Deacons, Seminarians, and Consecrated Persons ISBN 978-1-57918-355-4 p. 170)

Scholar Jesse Hurlbut observed:

About 405 A.D. images of saints and martyrs began to appear in the churches, adored, worshiped. The adoration of the Virgin Mary was substituted for the worship of Venus and Diana (Hurlbut, JL. The Story of the Christian Church. Zondervan, 1967, p.62).

Therefore it should be clear that Marian worship/veneration was not originally part of the catholic faith, but was a later innovation that even some with ties to that faith denounced. Bowing down before images of Mary is a form of idolatry, thus much Marian veneration is essentially the same as Marian worship.

Here is some of what Wikipedia reports about that picture at the beginning of this post:

Salus Populi Romani (English: Salvific Health of the Roman People) is a Roman Catholic title associated with the venerated image of the Blessed Virgin Mary in Rome.
… in the year 1240 it began to be called Regina Caeli (English: “Queen of Heaven”) (Salus Populi Romani. Wikipedia, accessed 04/25/25)

So, this icon was named the ‘Queen of Heaven.’

The Bible warns against burning incense to the Queen of Heaven (Jeremiah 44), but many Roman Catholics do that with scented candles in various of their churches.

As far as the date of August 15th for the claimed Assumption of Mary, that was the same date that pagans celebrated the return to heaven by the goddess Diana–the two dates are NOT coincidental, but on purpose.

Thérèse at age 15

COGwriter

The Bible prophesies that there will be signs and lying wonders:

9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders,

10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie,

12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. (2 Thessalonians 2:9-12)

Now, consider that Thérèse of Lisieux was canonized as a Roman Catholic saint on May 17, 1925, by Pope Pius XI. She died in 1897. She became quite popular in the 20th century and is still popular now.

Her remains have traveled the world. They have been viewed, adored, worshiped and prayed to by various Roman Catholics in more than 40 nations. Some claim her remains have even restored sight to the blind. Several years ago, about two million turned out to see St. Terese’s remains when they were in Ireland (The Independent, August 23, 2009).

Here is some of what Catholic OnLine reported about her:

Over the years, some modern Catholics have turned away from her because they associate her with over- sentimentalized piety…

Therese became so ill with a fever that people thought she was dying. The worst part of it for Therese was all the people sitting around her bed staring at her like, she said, “a string of onions.” When Therese saw her sisters praying to statue of Mary in her room, Therese also prayed. She saw Mary smile at her and suddenly she was cured. She tried to keep the grace of the cure secret but people found out and badgered her with questions about what Mary was wearing, what she looked like. When she refused to give in to their curiosity, they passed the story that she had made the whole thing up…

Every time Therese even imagined that someone was criticizing her or didn’t appreciate her, she burst into tears. Then she would cry because she had cried! Any inner wall she built to contain her wild emotions crumpled immediately before the tiniest comment. http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=105

Both biblical (2 Thessalonians 2:9-12) and non-biblical sources suggest that signs and wonders will deceive many at the end. I believe that she, partially because of her promoting her false view of Jesus’ mother Mary, but also because of other false doctrines she promoted, has been used as part of Satan’s Plan.

Some of the warnings of the Bible about lying wonders will likely involve apparitions claiming to be Mary as well as people who have claimed to somehow see Mary.

The prevalence of such claims this century even caused the Vatican to issue statements and policies warning against many of them (see Mary, the Mother of Jesus and the Apparitions).

It needs to be emphasized that just because a Roman Catholic nun claims to have seen Mary and passes on messages, that this does not mean that the messages are from God–and even the Church of Rome teaches that (for some documentation please see Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies: Do They Mirror, Highlight, or Contradict Biblical Prophecies?).

In August 1895, in her “Canticle to the Holy Face” Thérèse wrote:

“Jesus, Your ineffable image is the star which guides my steps. Ah, You know, Your sweet Face is for me Heaven on earth. My love discovers the charms of Your Face adorned with tears. I smile through my own tears when I contemplate Your sorrows”. (Wikipedia)

This should set off warnings to all as the reality is that she never actually saw Jesus’ face/image, hence to claim that it was His image that guided her steps cannot be correct.

The Apostle John wrote:

1 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world (1 John 4:1).

And that is what all should do. God’s true prophets do not ever claim God told them something and then been shown to have been in error.

Thérèse of Lisieux is popularly known as “The Little Flower of Jesus” or “The Little Flower.” She was declared a Roman Catholic ‘doctor of the church’ in 1997.

Pope Francis once claimed that the deceased Thérèse of Lisieux responded to his request for peace through his version of ‘Mary’ back in 2013:

On Sunday 8 September, the day after the long prayer vigil for peace in Syria – when some passages from texts written by Saint Thérèse of Lisieux were read out – Pope Francis received a white rose as a surprise. Francis considers the flower to be a “sign” linked to the devotion of the saint. The Archbishop of Ancona and Osimo, Edoardo Menichelli broke the news, with Francis authorisation…

“The Pope told me he received the freshly-picked white rose out of the blue from a gardener as he was taking a stroll in the Vatican Gardens on Sunday 8 September,” Mgr. Menichelli said. “The Pope sees this flower as a “sign”, a “message” from Saint Thérèse of Lisieux, whom he had turned to in a moment of worry the day before.”…

Bergoglio mentions it in “El Jesuita” (“The Jesuit”), a book interview written by Sergio Rubin and Francesca Ambrogetti when he was still a cardinal. In a description the two journalists give of Bergoglio’s library in Buenos Aires, they write: “We pause before a vase full of white roses standing on a shelf in the library. In front of it is a photograph of Saint Thérèse. “Whenever I have a problem,” Bergoglio explained to the journalists, “I ask the saint not to solve it, but to take it into her hands and to help me accept it and I almost always receive a white rose as a sign.” Pope Francis’ devotion for the Carmelite mystic who died at the young age of 24 in 1897, was canonized by Pius XI and proclaimed a Doctor of the Church by John Paul II in 1997, is common knowledge. http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/28151/

So, we have heard about supposed ‘signs’ associated with Pope Francis. This should give pause to those in the real Church of God as we know more are coming with an end time pontiff:

24 For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you beforehand. (Matthew 24:24-25; cf. 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12).

Pope Francis was a big promoter of Mary as well as the apparition in Fatima. He consecrated his pontificate to ‘Mary’ and even further had his pontificate consecrated to the Lady of Fatima (Pope Francis’ pontificate consecrated to ‘Lady of Fatima’). Now as far as ‘peace’ coming to Syria, what happened back in 2013 is that the USA decided not to intervene militarily because of Syrian use of chemical weapons–this did not lead to peace–instead it got opposition leaders to Syria’s President Assad to turn further away from the USA, and ultimately support the group calling itself the Islamic State. Thus, the flower ‘sign’ that Pope Francis allegedly received from Thérèse of Lisieux was not of God.

Thérèse of Lisieux was not a true prophet of God (see How To Determine If Someone is a True Prophet of God), but instead is one of many throughout history that seems to have been used to set people up for the deception that is still going to come (Matthew 24:24) who do not truly have the “love of the truth” (2 Thessalonians 2:8-12).

That said, notice the following:

The Vatican’s doctrine office will publish a new document … on discerning Marian apparitions and other supernatural events. …

Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, the prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), will unveil new norms for discernment regarding “apparitions and other supernatural phenomena” on Friday, May 17.

In an interview with the National Catholic Register, CNA’s sister news partner, last month, Fernandez said that the document will provide “clear guidelines and norms” for discernment.

The new norms will be the first time that the Vatican’s doctrinal office has issued a general document on apparitions in four decades. Pope Paul VI approved norms on “the discernment of presumed apparitions or revelations” in 1978. 05/-7/24 https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/257600/vatican-to-publish-new-document-on-marian-apparitions-next-week

What those guidelines SHOULD SAY would be that 1) the dead know nothing (Ecclesiastes 9:5) hence are not appearing 2) messages that contradict the Bible are fraudulent and may come from demons, and 3) likely all Roman Catholic accepted apparitions are demonic or frauds.

Now here is what they do say in a document with today’s date at the Vatican’s website:

These six possible determinations allow the Dicastery and the Bishops to handle in a suitable manner the issues that arise in connection with the diverse cases they encounter.

As a rule, these potential conclusions do not include the possibility of declaring that the phenomenon under discernment is of supernatural origin—that is, affirming with moral certainty that it originates from a decision willed by God in a direct way. Instead, as Pope Benedict XVI explained, granting a Nihil obstat simply indicates that the faithful “are authorized to give [the phenomenon] their adhesion in a prudent manner.” Since a Nihil obstat does not declare the events in question to be supernatural, it becomes even more apparent—as Pope Benedict XVI also said—how the phenomenon is only “a help which is proffered, but its use is not obligatory.”^[5] At the same time, this response naturally leaves open the possibility that, in monitoring how the devotion develops, a different response may be required in the future.

Moreover, it should be noted that reaching a declaration affirming the “supernaturalness” of an event, by its very nature, not only requires a suitable amount of time to carry out the analysis but it can also lead to the possibility that a judgment of “supernatural” today might become a judgment of “not supernatural” years later—and precisely this has happened. An example worth recalling is a case involving alleged apparitions from the 1950s. In 1956, the Bishop issued a final judgment of “not supernatural,” and the following year, the Holy Office approved the Bishop’s decision. Then, the approval of that veneration was sought again. In 1974, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith declared the alleged apparitions to be “constat de non supernaturalitate.” Thereafter, in 1996, the local Bishop positively recognized the devotion, and in 2002, another Bishop from the same place recognized the “supernatural origin” of the apparitions, leading to the spread of the devotion to other countries. Finally, in 2020, at the request of the Congregation, a new Bishop reiterated the Congregation’s earlier “negative judgment,” requiring the cessation of any public disclosures regarding the alleged apparitions and revelations. Thus, it took about seventy excruciating years to bring the whole matter to a conclusion.

Today, we have come to the conviction that such complicated situations, which create confusion among the faithful, should always be avoided. This can be accomplished by ensuring a quicker and clearer involvement of this Dicastery and by preventing the impression that the discernment process would be directed toward a declaration of “supernaturalness” (which carries high expectations, anxieties, and even pressures). Instead, as a rule, such declarations of “supernaturalness” are replaced either by a Nihil obstat, which authorizes positive pastoral work, or by another determination that is suited to the specific situation.

The procedures outlined in the new Norms, which offer six possible final prudential decisions, make it possible to reach a decision in a more reasonable period, helping the Bishop to manage a situation involving events of alleged supernatural origin before such occurrences—without a necessary ecclesial discernment—acquire very problematic dimensions.

Nevertheless, the possibility always remains that the Holy Father may intervene exceptionally by authorizing a procedure that includes the possibility of declaring the supernaturalness of the events. Yet, this is an exception that has been made only rarely in recent centuries.

At the same time, as stipulated in the new Norms, the possibility of declaring an event as “not supernatural” remains, but only when there are objective signs that clearly indicate manipulation at the basis of the phenomenon. For instance, this might occur when an alleged visionary admits to having lied or when evidence shows that the blood on a crucifix belongs to the alleged visionary. …

10. By following the Norms below, the Church will be able to fulfill its duty of discerning: (a) whether signs of a divine action can be ascertained in phenomena that are alleged to be of supernatural origin; (b) whether there is that anything conflicts with faith and morals in the writings or messages of those involved in the alleged phenomena in question; (c) whether it is permissible to appreciate their spiritual fruits, whether they need to be purified from problematic elements, or whether the faithful should be warned about potential risks; (d) whether it is advisable for the competent ecclesiastical authority to realize their pastoral value.

11. While the following provisions foresee the possibility of a discernment in the sense described in Par. 10 (above), it must be noted that, as a general rule, it is not foreseen in these Norms that ecclesiastical authority would give a positive recognition of the divine origin of alleged supernatural phenomena.

12. Whenever a Nihil obstat is granted by the Dicastery (cf. Par. 17, below), such phenomena do not become objects of faith, which means the faithful are not obliged to give an assent of faith to them. Rather, as in the case of charisms recognized by the Church, they are “ways to deepen one’s knowledge of Christ and to give oneself more generously to him, while rooting oneself more and more deeply in communion with the entire Christian people.”^[15]

13. Even when a Nihil obstat is granted for canonization processes, this does not imply a declaration of authenticity regarding any supernatural phenomena present in a person’s life. This is evident, for instance, in the decree of canonization of St. Gemma Galgani: “[Pius XI] feliciter elegit ut super heroicis virtutibus huius innocentis aeque ac poenitentis puellae suam mentem panderet, nullo tamen per praesens decretum (quod quidem numquam fieri solet) prolato iudicio de praeternaturalibus Servae Dei charismatibus.”^[16]

14. At the same time, it should also be acknowledged that some phenomena, which could have a supernatural origin, at times appear connected to confused human experiences, theologically inaccurate expressions, or interests that are not entirely legitimate.

15. The discernment of alleged supernatural phenomena is carried out from the start by the Diocesan Bishop (or by another ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Part II, Arts. 4-6) in dialogue with the Dicastery. However, since special attention to the common good of the entire People of God can never be lacking, “the Dicastery reserves the right to evaluate the moral and doctrinal elements of that spiritual experience and the use that is being made of it.”^[17] It is important not to overlook that sometimes the discernment may also deal with problems, such as delicts, manipulation, damage to the unity of the Church, undue financial gain, and serious doctrinal errors that could cause scandals and undermine the credibility of the Church.

B. Conclusions

16. The discernment of alleged supernatural phenomena may reach conclusions that are usually expressed in one of the terms listed below.

17. Nihil obstat – Without expressing any certainty about the supernatural authenticity of the phenomenon itself, many signs of the action of the Holy Spirit are acknowledged “in the midst”^[18] of a given spiritual experience, and no aspects that are particularly critical or risky have been detected, at least so far. For this reason, the Diocesan Bishop is encouraged to appreciate the pastoral value of this spiritual proposal, and even to promote its spread, including possibly through pilgrimages to a sacred site.

18. Prae oculis habeatur – Although important positive signs are recognized, some aspects of confusion or potential risks are also perceived that require the Diocesan Bishop to engage in a careful discernment and dialogue with the recipients of a given spiritual experience. If there were writings or messages, doctrinal clarification might be necessary.

19. Curatur – While various or significant critical elements are noted, at the same time, the phenomenon has already spread widely, and there are verifiable spiritual fruits connected to it. In this situation, a ban that could upset the People of God is not recommended. Nevertheless, the Diocesan Bishop is asked not to encourage this phenomenon but to seek out alternative expressions of devotion and possibly reorient its spiritual and pastoral aspects.

20. Sub mandato – In this category, the critical issues are not connected to the phenomenon itself, which is rich in positive elements, but to a person, a family, or a group of people who are misusing it. For instance, the spiritual experience may be exploited for particular and undue financial gain, committing immoral acts, or carrying out a pastoral activity apart from the one already present in the ecclesiastical territory without accepting the instructions of the Diocesan Bishop. In this situation, the pastoral leadership of the specific place where the phenomenon is occurring is entrusted to the Diocesan Bishop (or to another person delegated by the Holy See), who, if unable to intervene directly, will try to reach a reasonable agreement.

21. Prohibetur et obstruatur – While there are legitimate requests and some positive elements, the critical issues and risks associated with this phenomenon appear to be very serious. Therefore, to prevent further confusion or even scandal that could erode the faith of ordinary people, the Dicastery asks the Diocesan Bishop to declare publicly that adherence to this phenomenon is not allowed. At the same time, the Diocesan Bishop is asked to offer a catechesis that can help the faithful understand the reasons for the decision and reorient the legitimate spiritual concerns of that part of the People of God.

22. Declaratio de non supernaturalitate – In this situation, the Dicastery authorizes the Diocesan Bishop to declare that the phenomenon is found to be not supernatural. This decision must be based on facts and evidence that are concrete and proven. For instance, if an alleged visionary admits to having lied or if credible witnesses provide elements of proof that allow one to discover that the phenomenon was based on fabrication, an erroneous intention, or mythomania.

23. In light of the aforementioned points, it is reaffirmed that, as a rule, neither the Diocesan Bishop, nor the Episcopal Conferences, nor the Dicastery will declare that these phenomena are of supernatural origin, even if a Nihil obstat is granted (cf. Par. 11, above). It remains true, however, that the Holy Father can authorize a special procedure in this regard. https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2024/05/17/0403/00842.html#en

The above misses many scriptural points.

Yet, because signs and lying wonders are prophesied to occur, the document above will allow for demonic source messages to be accepted, though it will not say demonic.

And yes, I expect ‘Marian apparitions’ in the future that will deceive many.

Some items of related interest may include:

Mary, the Mother of Jesus and the Apparitions Do you know much about Mary? Are the apparitions real? What happened at Fatima? What might they mean for the rise of the ecumenical religion of Antichrist? Are Protestants moving towards Mary? How do the Eastern/Greek Orthodox view Mary? How might Mary view her adorers? Here is a link to a YouTube video Marian Apparitions May Fulfill Prophecy. Here is a link to a sermon video: Why Learn About Fatima?
Satan’s Plan Does Satan have a plan? What is it? Has it already been successful? Will it be successful in the future? Here are links to a two-part sermon series: What are Some of the Parts of Satan’s Plan? and Satan’s Plan is More Dramatic than Many Realize.
The Great Monarch: Biblical and Catholic Prophecies Is the ‘Great Monarch’ of Catholic prophecies endorsed or condemned by the Bible? Two sermons of related interest are also available: Great Monarch: Messiah or False Christ? and Great Monarch in 50+ Beast Prophecies.
Feast of the Immaculate Conception? Did early Christians teach Mary had an immaculate conception and led a sinless life?
Origin of the Marian Dogmas: Where Do Catholic Scholars Say The Four Dogmas of Mary Came From?
Assumption of Mary Did Mary die? Was she taken to heaven on August 15th? What is known? What does the Bible show?
The ‘Lady’ of Guadalupe: Any Future Ramifications? It is claimed that a female apparition appeared near Mexico City on December 12, 1531. How has it affected the world? What might it suggest about the future? A video of related interest is titled: The ‘Lady of Guadalupe’ and Prophecy.
Pope Francis: Could this Marian Focused Pontiff be Fulfilling Prophecy? Pope Francis has taken many steps to turn people more towards his version of ‘Mary.’ Could this be consistent with biblical and Catholic prophecies? This article documents what has been happening. There is also a video version titled Pope Francis: Could this Marian Focused Pontiff be Fulfilling Prophecy?
Fatima Shock! What the Vatican Does Not Want You to Know About Fatima, Dogmas of Mary, and Future Apparitions. Whether or not you believe anything happened at Fatima, if you live long enough, you will be affected by its ramifications (cf. Isaiah 47; Revelation 17). Fatima Shock! provides concerned Christians with enough Catholic-documented facts to effectively counter every false Marian argument. In addition to the print version, there is a Kindle version of Fatima Shock! which you can acquire in seconds.
Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies: Do They Mirror, Highlight, or Contradict Biblical Prophecies? People of all faiths may be surprised to see what various Roman and Orthodox Catholic prophets have been predicting as many of their predictions will be looked to in the 21st century.
The Falling Away: The Bible and WCG Teachings Who is 2 Thessalonians 2:3 referring to? Are there multiple falling aways? Here is a related link in Spanish/español: La Apostasía: Enseñanzas de la Biblia y de la WCG. There are also two YouTube videos on the subject that you can watch The Falling Away Part 1: From the Bible and Church History and The Falling Away Part 2: Positions Presented by Others.
Who is the Man of Sin of 2 Thessalonians 2? Is this the King of the North, the ten-horned beast of Revelation 13:1-11, or the two-horned Beast of Revelation 13:12-16? Some rely on traditions, but what does the Bible teach? Here is a related link in Spanish/español: ¿Quién es el Hombre de Pecado de 2 Tesalonicenses 2?; here is a link to a video in Spanish: ¿Quién es el ‘hombre de pecado’? Here is a version in Mandarin: N;ÿ Œ
f/’Y’jNº’ÿ Here is a link to a related English sermon video titled: The Man of Sin will deceive most ‘Christians’.
Some Doctrines of Antichrist Are there any doctrines taught outside the Churches of God which can be considered as doctrines of antichrist? This article suggests at least three. It also provides information on 666 and the identity of “the false prophet.” Plus it shows that several Catholic writers seem to warn about an ecumenical antipope that will support heresy. You can also watch a video titled What Does the Bible teach about the Antichrist?
Does the CCOG have the confirmed signs of Acts 2:17-18? Does any church have the confirmed dream and prophetic signs of Acts 2:17-18? Should one? Here is a link in the Spanish language: ¿Tiene la CCOG confirmadas las señales de Hechos 2: 17-18? Here is a link in the French language: Est-ce que l’Église Continue de Dieu confirme les signes d’Actes 2:17-18?
Church of God Leaders on Prophets Have there been prophets throughout the church age? Are any supposed to be around in the last days? What have COG leaders stated or written about prophets? Here is a link to a related sermon: Church of God Leaders on Prophets.
How To Determine If Someone is a True Prophet of God There are many false prophets. How can Christians determine who is a true prophet? There is also a sermon-length video titled How to determine if someone is a true prophet of God. Here is a related link in Spanish/español: ¿Cómo determinar si alguien es un verdadero profeta de Dios?
Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original.

Logo of the Chaldean Catholic Patriarche
(Via Wikipedia)

COGwriter

Pope Leo XIV met with leaders from the ‘Churches of the East’ this week:

Eastern church leaders welcome election of Pope Leo XIV

May 16, 2025

Church leaders in the Christian East welcomed the election of Pope Leo XIV on May 8, noting his first words to the crowd in St. Peter’s Square were about peace.

Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople was at an event in his honor in Athens when he learned of the election, according to a report in The Orthodox Times. …

The ecumenical patriarch, who had hoped to visit Iznik, Turkey, with Francis in May to mark the 1,700th anniversary of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea, said he hoped Leo would “combine a visit to Nicaea with an official visit to the Ecumenical Patriarchate, on the occasion of our feast of St. Andrew on Nov. 30.” https://www.ncronline.org/news/eastern-church-leaders-welcome-election-pope-leo-xiv

It was the Council of Nicea that declared that certain aspects of original Christianity be officially changed. This was not a proper Christian things to do. Nor is it to celebrate that. True Christians, according to the Bible are to diligently contend for the original faith:

1 JUDE, the servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James, to the Gentiles who have been called and are beloved by God the Father and are protected by Jesus Christ: 2 Mercy and peace, with love, be multiplied to you. 3 My beloved, I write to you with all diligence concerning our common salvation, and it is needful that I should write and exhort you also to contend earnestly for the faith which was once delivered to the saints. (Jude 1-3, Lamsa Bible)

3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write to you about our common life, it was necessary for me to write to you, as I am to persuade you to compete for the faith, which was once delivered to The Holy Ones. (Jude 3, Aramaic Bible in Plain English)

3 My dear friends, at a time when I was eagerly looking forward to writing to you about the salvation that we all share, I felt that I must write to you encouraging you to fight hard for the faith which has been once and for all entrusted to God’s holy people. (Jude New Jerusalem Bible)

Note the three above are used by various “Churches of the East” (including the first group which is NOT in communion with the Church of Rome) with the last one a Roman Catholic translation.

Anyway, those at Nicea agreed to changes that were NOT part of the “faith once delivered to the saints.”

That said, here is more related to Pope Leo XIV’s visits with leaders from the ‘Churches of the East’  (bolding in source):

May 15, 2025

Pope Leo XIV welcomed Eastern Catholics to the Vatican with the traditional Easter greeting, “Christ is risen! He is truly risen!”

Addressing the faithful from the 23 sui iuris Churches in full communion with Rome, … “The Church needs you!” Pope Leo said. “The contribution that the Christian East can offer us today is immense,” … “It is vital then, that you preserve your traditions without attenuating them,” he said. …

“Who better than you,” he asked, “can sing a song of hope even amid the abyss of violence.” …

He went on to thank God for all those who are “sowing peace,” …

“Today more than ever,” concluded Pope Leo XIV, “the splendour of the Christian East demands freedom from all worldly attachments, and from every tendency contrary to communion, in order to remain faithful in obedience and in evangelical witness.” https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2025-05/pope-leo-xiv-to-eastern-catholics-the-church-needs-you.html

May 14, 2025

On the morning of Wednesday, May 14, the Pope received in a special audience in the Paul VI Hall of the Vatican City Catholics from various Eastern rites, accompanied by their Patriarchs, Major Archbishops, and clergy. … We now offer the English translation of the Pope’s words.

I would also like to mention Pope Leo XIII, the first Pope to devote a specific document to the dignity of your Churches, inspired above all by the fact that, in his words, “the work of human redemption began in the East” (cf. Apostolic Letter Orientalium Dignitas, 30 November 1894). Truly, you have “a unique and privileged role as the original setting where the Church was born” (SAINT JOHN PAUL II, Orientale Lumen, 5). It is significant that several of your liturgies – which you are now solemnly celebrating in Rome in accordance with your various traditions – continue to use the language of the Lord Jesus. … Over a century ago, Leo XIII pointed out that “preserving the Eastern rites is more important than is generally realized”. (Pope asks to define principles, norms, and guidelines for Latin rite priests accompanying Eastern rite Catholics arriving in the West. ZENIT, May 14, 2025 https://zenit.org/2025/05/14/pope-asks-to-define-principles-norms-and-guidelines-for-latin-rite-priests-accompanying-eastern-rite-catholics-arriving-in-the-west/)

Yes, the Church of Rome needs to return to the original beliefs–that would help more than immensely. We have an e-book that would assist the Vatican: Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession?

Who better than those who hold to the beliefs of the original catholic church, those of us who have remained pacifists, can sing a song of hope even amid the abyss of violence? That would be us of the Continuing Church of God! See also Military Service and the Churches of God: Do Real Christians Participate in Carnal Warfare or Encourage Violence? We are sowing peace, not attached to politics of this world, and faithfully looking for the coming Kingdom of God. But telling the Eastern Churches not to attenuate, it seems like Pope Leo XIV is unknowingly advocating for Jude 3.

Note that while the ORIGINAL eastern rite practices should be retained, what is happening in those eastern churches in communion with the Church of Rome is NOT that. Nor do they speak quite the same language as Jesus did (Was the New Testament Written in Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic?)–they speak Syriac Aramaic, whereas Jesus spoke Palestinian Aramaic.

But we in the CCOG do hold to the liturgy and rites of the ORIGINAL CHURCH OF THE EAST.

Regarding what else could be called the Church of the East, the 17th century historian and Sunday-keeper William Cave reported that the early Christians, both Jews and those in the east, kept the Sabbath:

… the Sabbath or Saturday (for so the word sabbatum is constantly used in the writings of the fathers, when speaking of it as it relates to Christians) was held by them in great veneration, and especially in the Eastern parts honoured with all the public solemnities of religion. For which we are to know, that the gospel in those parts mainly prevailing amongst the Jews, they being generally the first converts to the Christian faith, they still retained a mighty reverence for the Mosaic institutions, and especially for the sabbath, as that which had been appointed by God himself, (as the memorial of his rest from the week of creation,) settled by their great master Moses, and celebrated by their ancestors for so many ages, as the solemn day of their public worship, and were therefore very loth that it should be wholly antiquated and laid aside. … they assembled on Saturdays, not that they were infected with Judaism, but only to worship Jesus Christ, the Lord of the sabbath. …

Thus stood the case in the Eastern Church; (Cave William, D.D. Primitive Christianity: or the Religion of the Ancient Christians in the First Ages of the Gospel. 1840 edition revised by H. Cary. Oxford, London, pp. 83-85)

Notice also the following 19th century report:

There has been no period since the time of Christ when there were not Sabbath-keeping Christians in the church … 302 A.D. From that time until English missionaries entered Armenia early in the present century, Sabbath keeping continued without interruption. The … Chaldean Christians have also continued their original practice of Sabbath keeping through the present century. (Sanford EB. A Concise Cyclopedia of Religious Knowledge: Biblical, Biographical, Geographical, Historical, Practical and Theological. S.S. Scranton, 1890, pp. 853,854)

Commenting on that 19th century report, then evangelist in the Worldwide Church of God Dean Blackwell wrote, “They were the ancestors” (Blackwell D. A HANDBOOK OF CHURCH HISTORY: A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Ambassador College Graduate School of Theology. April 1973, p. 182)–meaning they were the spiritual ancestors of certain later faithful Sabbatarian Christians.

That said, it should be pointed out that the Chaldean Catholic Church is an Eastern Catholic Church which is in full communion with the Pope in Rome. Like other Greco-Roman Catholic churches, it observes Sunday as the day of worship.

Roman Catholic priest Malachi Martin lived and worked in Vatican City for years. He was deeply involved in researching and writing about Church history, theology, and the inner workings of the Roman Catholic Church. He wrote:

Jewish Christians … occupied the oldest Christian churches in the Middle East and whose leaders were always from the family of Jesus himself.  … their first bishop was James, first cousin of Jesus. …

Jewish Christians had composed the only church ever in Jerusalem until the year 135. … Jewish Christian churches were set up all over Palestine, Syria, and Mesopotamia … observe the Torah … (Martin M. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church. Bantam edition, 1983, pp. 30-31).

Throughout the church age, the faithful have often had to move, and that impacted people in the east.

But the beliefs and practices of the original church of the east are still taught by the Continuing Church of God which still contends earnestly for them. Since Pope Leo XIV alluded to that, perhaps he and others associated with him will look more into the truth about what the original beliefs were.

More details on history, beliefs, and original practices can be found in the free ebook: Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession?

Some items of related interest may include:

Early Christianity in Edessa and the Church of the East Could there have been Christian leaders there? Might Judas of Jerusalem went there? Could Macarius have been a faithful Christian?

Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original.

The Malachy Prophecies and “Peter the Roman” An Irish bishop allegedly predicted something about 112 popes in the 12th century. Pope Benedict XVI was number 111. Francis could be number 112–if he counted. What about Pope Leo XIV? Could he reign until Rome is destroyed. May he be an antipope/final Antichrist? Here is a link to a related sermon: Pope Leo XIV & Antichrist Prophecies.

The Last Pope of the Malachy Prophecies: Do Biblical and Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies Point to Pope Leo XIV? This 154 page book has biblical and Greco-Roman Catholic prophecies related to the last pope, an antipope who will be the final Antichrist. It is also available on Kindle: The Last Pope of the Malachy Prophecies: Do Biblical and Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies Point to Pope Leo XIV?-Kindle.