My God is So High, You Can’t Get Over Him….A Meditation of the Feast of the Holy Trinity

There is an old Spiritual that says, My God is so high, you can’t over him, he’s so low, you can’t under him, he’s so wide you can’t round him, you must come in, by and through the Lamb.

Not a bad way of saying that God is other, He is beyond what human words can tell or describe, He is beyond what human thoughts can conjure. And on the Feast of the Most Holy Trinity we do well to remember that we are pondering a mystery that cannot fit in our minds.

A mystery though, is not something wholly unknown. In the Christian tradition the word “mystery” refers to something partially revealed, much more of which lies hid. Thus, as we ponder the teaching on the Trinity, there are some things we can know by revelation, but much more is beyond our reach or understanding.

Lets ponder the Trinity by exploring it, seeing how it is exhibited in Scripture, and how we, who are made in God’s image experience it.

I. The Teaching on the Trinity Explored – Perhaps we do best to begin by quoting the Catechism which says, The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons: [Father, Son and Holy Spirit]…The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire. (Catechism, 253).

So there is one God, and the three persons of the Trinity each possess the one Divine nature fully. The Father IS God, He is not 1/3 of God. Likewise the Son, Jesus, IS God. He is not 1/3 of God. And so too, the Holy Spirit IS God, not a mere third of God. So each of the three persons possesses the one Divine nature fully.

It is our experience that if there is only one of something, and I possess that something fully, there is nothing left for you. Yet, mysteriously each of the Three Persons fully possess the one and only Divine Nature fully while remaining distinct persons.

One of the great masterpieces of the Latin Liturgy is the preface for Trinity Sunday. The Preface, compactly, yet clearly sets for the Christian teaching on the Trinity. The following translation of the Latin is my own:

It is truly fitting and just, right and helpful unto salvation that we should always and everywhere give thanks to you O Holy Lord, Father almighty and eternal God: who, with your only begotten Son and the Holy Spirit are one God, one Lord: not in the oneness of a single person, but in a Trinity of one substance. For that which we believe from your revelation concerning your glory, we acknowledge of your Son and the Holy Spirit without difference or distinction. Thus, in the confession of the true and eternal Godhead there is adored a distinctness of persons, a oneness in essence, and an equality in majesty, whom the angels and archangels, the Cherubim also and the Seraphim, do not cease to daily cry out with one voice saying: Holy Holy, Holy….

Wowza! A careful and clear masterpiece, but one which baffles the mind as its words and phrases come forth. So deep is this mystery that we had to invent a paradoxical word to summarize it: Triune (or Trinity). “Triune” literally means, “Three-one” (tri+unus) and “Trinity is a conflation of “Tri-unity” meaning the “three-oneness” of God.

If all this baffles you, good. If you were to say, you fully understood all this, I would have to call you a heretic. For the teaching on the Trinity, while not contrary to reason per se, does transcend it.

A final picture or image, before we leave our exploration stage. The picture at the upper right is an experiment I remember doing back in High School. We took three projectors, each of which projected a circle:  One was red, another green, another blue. As we made the three circles intersect, at that intersection, was the color white (see above). Mysteriously, three colors are present there, but only one shows forth. There are three but there is one. The analogy is not perfect (no analogy is, it wouldn’t be an analogy) for Father, Son and Spirit do not “blend” to make God. But the analogy does manifest a mysterious three-oneness of the color white. Somehow in the one, three are present. (By the way, this experiment only works with light, don’t try it with paint  🙂  )

II. The Teaching on the Trinity Exhibited : Scripture too presents images and pictures of the Trinity. Interestingly enough most of  the pictures I want to present are from the Old Testament.

Now I want to say, as a disclaimer, that Scripture Scholars debate the meaning of the texts I am about to present, that’s what they get paid the big bucks to do. Let me be clear to say that I am reading these texts as a New Testament Christian and seeing in them a Doctrine that later became clear. I am not getting in a time machine and trying to understand them as a Jew from the 8th Century BC might have understood them. Why should I? That’s not what I am.  I am reading these texts as a Christian in the light of the New Testament, as I have a perfect right to do. You of course, the reader are free to decide if these texts really ARE images or hints of the Trinity from your perspective. Take them or leave them. Here they are:

1. Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…  (Gen 1:26) So God speaks to himself in the plural: “let us….our.”  Some claim this is just an instance of the “Royal We” being used. Perhaps but I see an image of the Trinity. There is one (God said) but there is also a plural (us, our). Right at the very beginning in Genesis there is already a hint that God is not all by himself, but is in a communion of love.

2. Elohim?? In the quote above, the word used for God is אֱלֹהִ֔ים (Elohim). Now it is interesting that this word is in a plural form. From the view point of pure grammatical form Elohim means “Gods.”  However, the Jewish people understood the sense of the word to be singular. Now this is a much debated point and you can read something more of it from a Jewish perspective here: Elohim as Plural yet Singular. My point here is not to try and understand it as a Jew from the 8th Century BC or a Jew today might understand it. Rather, what I observing is that it is interesting that one of the main words for God in the Old Testament is plural, yet singular, singular yet plural. It is one, it  is also plural. God is one, yet he is three. I say this as a  Christian observing this about one of the main titles of God. I see an image of the Trinity.

3.  And the LORD appeared to [Abram] by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat at the door of his tent in the heat of the day.  He lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, three men stood in front of him. When he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them, and bowed himself to the earth,  and said, “My Lord, if I have found favor in your sight, do not pass by your servant.  Let a little water be brought, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree,  while I fetch a morsel of bread, that you may refresh yourselves, and after that you may pass on — since you have come to your servant.” So they said, “Do as you have said.” (Gen 18:1-5).  Now this passage from a purely grammatical point of view is very difficult since we switch back and forth  from singular references to plural. Note first that the Lord (singular) appeared to Abram. (In this case יְהוָ֔ה Yahweh  (YHWH) is the name used for God). And yet what Abram sees is three men. Some have wanted to say, this is just God and two angels. But I see the Trinity being imaged or alluded to here. And yet when Abram address “them” he says, “My Lord” (singular). The “tortured” grammar continues as Abram asks that water be fetched so that he can “wash your feet” (singular) and that the “LORD” (singular) can rest yourselves (plural). The same thing happens in the next sentence where Abram wants to fetch bread that you (singular) may refresh yourselves (plural) In the end the LORD (singular) gives answer but it is rendered: “So they said”  Plural, singular….. what is it? Both. God is one, God is three. For me, as a Christian,  this is a picture of the Trinity. Since the reality of God cannot be reduced to words we have here a grammatically difficult passage. But I “see” what is going on. God is one and God is three, he is singular and yet is plural.

4. Having come down in a cloud, the Lord stood with Moses there and proclaimed his Name, “Lord.” Thus the Lord passed before him and cried out, “The Lord, the Lord, a merciful and gracious God, slow to anger and rich in kindness and fidelity” (Exodus 34:5). Here we see that when God announces his name He does so in a threefold way: Lord!…The Lord, the Lord. There is implicit a threefold introduction or announcement of God. Coincidence or of significance? You decide.

5.  In the year that King Uzziah died I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; and his train filled the temple. Above him stood the Seraphim; each had six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. And one called to another and said: “Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory. (Is 6:1-3) God is Holy, Holy, and yet again, Holy. Some say this is just a Jewish way of saying “very Holy” but as Christian I see more. I see a reference to each of the Three Persons. Perfect praise here requires three “holys”, why? Omni Trinum Perfectum (all things are perfect in threes), but why? So, as a Christian I see the angels not just using the superlative but also praising each of the Three persons. God is three (Holy, Holy, Holy) and God is one, and so the text says, Holy  ”IS the Lord.” Three declarations “Holy”: Coincidence or of significance? You decide.

6. In the New Testament there are obviously many references but let me just refer to three quickly. Jesus says, The Father and I are one (Jn 10:30). He says again, To have seen me is to have seen the Father (Jn. 14:9). And, have you ever noticed that in  the baptismal formula Jesus uses is “bad” grammar? He says, Baptize them in the Name (not names as it grammatically “should” be) of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Matt 28:19). God is One (name) and God is three (Father, Son and Holy Spirit).

Thus Scripture exhibits the teaching of the Trinity, going back even to the beginning

III. The Teaching of the Trinity Experienced – We who are made in the image and likeness of God ought to experience something of the mystery of the Trinity within us. And sure enough we do.

For, it is clear that we are all distinct individuals. I am not you, you are not me. Yet it is also true that we are made for communion. Humanly we cannot exist apart from one another. Obviously we depend on our parents through whom God made us. But even beyond physical descent, we need one another for completion.

Despite what old songs say, no man is a rock or an island. There is no self-made man. Even the private business owner needs customers, suppliers and shippers, and other middle men. He uses roads he did not build, has electricity supplied to him over lines he did not string, and speaks a language to his customers and others he did not create. Further, whatever the product he makes, he is likely the heir of technologies and processes he did not invent, others before him did. And the list could go on.

We are individual, but we are social. We are one, but linked to many. Clearly we do not possess the kind of unity God does, but the three oneness of God echoes in us. We are one, yet we are many.

We have entered into perilous times where our interdependence and communal influence are under appreciated. That attitude that prevails today is a rather extreme individualism wherein “I can do as I please.” There is a reduced sense at how our individual choices affect the whole of the community, Church or nation. That I am an individual is true, but it is also true that I live in communion with others and must respect that dimension of who I am. I exist not only for me, but for others. And what I do affects others, for good or ill.

The “It’s none of my business, what others do” attitude also needs some attention. Privacy and discretion have important places in our life, but so does having concern for what others do and think, the choices they are making and the effects that such things have on others. A common moral and religious vision is an important thing to cultivate. It is ultimately important what others think and do, and we should care about fundamental things like respect for life, love, care for the poor, education, marriage and family. Indeed, marriage an family are fundamental to community, nation and the Church. I am one, but I am also in communion with others and they with me.

Finally there is a rather remarkable conclusion that some have drawn, that  the best image of God in us is not a man alone, or a woman alone, but, rather, a man and a woman together in lasting a fruitful relationship we call marriage. For, when God said, “Let us make man in our image” (Genesis 1:26) the text goes on to say, “Male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27). And God says to them, “Be fruitful and multiply” (Gen 1:28). So the image of God (as God sets it forth most perfectly) is the married and fruitful couple.

Here of course we must be careful to understand that what we manifest sexually, God manifests spiritually. For God is not male or female in His essence. Thus, we may say, The First Person loves the Second Person, and the Second Person loves the First Person. And so real is that love that it bears fruit in the Third Person. In this way the married couple images God, for the husband loves his wife and the wife loves her husband, and their love bears fruit in their children. [1]

So, today as we extol the great mystery of the Trinity, we look not merely outward and upward to understand but also inward to discover that mystery at work in us who are made in the image and likeness of God.

25 Replies to “My God is So High, You Can’t Get Over Him….A Meditation of the Feast of the Holy Trinity”

  1. Just one point to add to that last part —

    The love revealed by the spousal meaning of the human body, made in the image of the Trinity, is not limited to the sexual, and the fruits of such love are not limited to biological children.

    Like Jesus and His Bride, the human couple which best manifest the Holy Trinity are Mary and Joseph, whose virginal love for each other is not only unitive, resulting in a communion of persons, but is also procreative in that very virginity (pure and complete dedication of self to God), producing fruits beyond number, including not only spiritual children, but all of the fruits of the Spirit of Love.

    Not being limited to sexual acts, all of us are called to this “spousal” love, not merely those joined in the Sacrament of Matrimony, but priests and religious as well.

    1. No. No. No. Tripel No.

      There is no “human couple” who manifest the Holy Trinity.
      There is NOTHING FEMALE in The Holy Trinity.

      To claim so is Pure blasphemy.
      You have “God The Father”, who is all male
      You have “God The Son” , who is all male.
      You have “God The Holy Spirit” represented to Mary by Gabriel, and whom made Mary pregnant who is also all male. To claim there is any female in God is to claim HE (notice the word) had a lesbian relationship with Mary, witch is PURE HERESY.

      So no, no, no, no and not to mention: No.
      Forget it. Never. No.

      I see what you are trying to do, and it will not work.
      God is not Female. Not the Father. Not the Son. Not the Holy Spirit.

      What you are trying to do is to elevate your modernist views on “gender-equality” into theology, and it will not work. The Trinity is God and God is MALE; MALE; MALE.

      If you have a problem with this, leave the Church and join The National Organisatan for Women instead. (NOW)

      God is male and HIS CHURCH is His Bride.
      The Church is a singular entity seperated from God, in that the members of the Church are humans, and thus sinners. The Church it self is NOT part of Trinity.

      I resently read another article about “liberal” Catholics infiltrating the Church with their Feminist views and heresies and now I understand what The Article was talking about. Apparently it was talking about people like you, Bender.

      Luckily however:

      Monsignore Pope asked if Gods presentation of Himself as “LORD; LORD; LORD” was a coincidence, and the answer to that is NO. It was not a coincidence. God emphasized 3 times that He was a Male.
      (LORD means Male Master) .

      To say LORD; LORD; LORD means that He is MALE; MALE; MALE.
      In every respect. And for ever and ever and ever:
      Male Master = LORD.

      Take your 1960`s Gender equality elsewere.
      It does not have any place in the house of The LORD.


        1. I agree

          I think male and female are designation of relationships as well. Male being that which gives, female being that which receives in the circle of life. We can see God as male only in relation to Creation which receives from him. But in himself, God has no gender.
          Even among the human being, perhaps it could help to emphasize the giving and receiving.
          In a Family, the man is male in relation to the woman whom he fertilizes. But also a woman is male in relation to the baby whom she breasfeeds.

  2. Father,

    Thank you for this beautiful commentary, especially in shining the light of your understanding and reflection on the examples from the Old Testament. If I may, I would like to add to this a beautiful explanation (or perhaps, allegory) of the trinity that I heard in a podcast by Fr. Robert Barron.

    He likened the Trinity to the inner life of a human being. Within our conscious life, there is a play of Beholding and Begetting (the Father) an inner vocalization of our will and reason (the Word/the Son), and the resultant, and sometimes mysteriously independent inner movement or feeling that is inexpressible (the Spirit). Each aspect of inner dialogue is distinct, but neither is more or less or separately the individual; all are essentially the same being. In God, whose image each of us reflects, these aspects are so infinitely alive that we are tempted to explain them as separate gods, but are so infinitely in love from all eternity that they remain one being, and one God.

    When I first heard this likening, I had that experience in which everything just clicks, like the mental rush of the punchline of a well-constructed joke. I would love to hear your own thoughts and clarifications on this analogy, to which I hope I have done some justice! 😀

  3. Sorry, but this is just wrong. God is male.

    Jesus said “to see me, is to see the Father”
    When you saw Jesus, you saw a man. You did not see some genderless hermafrodite.

    Take a look at the Shroud if you are in doubt. You clearly see a male.
    No-one who has seen God has ever described him as Genderless. Not Abraham. Not Ezechiel. Not Jesus.
    They have all described him as MALE. And that is the way He is described by Jesus, and that is the way He describes Himself.

    I have written to the Pope about this and asked him to correct this misconception in Cathechism 239.
    I understand The Holy Catholic Church has some issues with sexuality, but to claim God is genderless or some sort of Hermafrodite is simply blasphemy.

    Jesus had two parents. His mother was Mary – a woman / female, and hence the name “MOTHER”
    And His Father was God – a male / the King of the Universe / The Lord of Heaven, and hence the name “FATHER”

    And again I repeat “To see the Son is to see the Father” and that means if you saw a male when you saw the Son, you would have seen a Male if you saw the Father.

    Apart from that: Good talk, but Cathechism 239 is simply wrong, and will hopefully be corrected very soon.
    Thank you.

    It is as simple as that.

    1. And by The Way: Jesus referred to Himself as The Son of MAN.

      Since His mother was clearly female, and the only other parent he had was God, you can safely assume that the “Man” in question was The ULTIMATE MAN, namely YAHWE.

      Who is the Man`est Man in the entire universe.
      And if you combine YAHWE`s “I am that I am”, with Jesus` claim to be the “Son of MAN”
      You end up with

      “I am that I am: THE MAN.”

    2. Enough Gabriel, enough. Stop ridiculing and calling blasphemous what you obviously don’t understand. The document I have quoted is from the US Bishops, and is standard Catholic theology. God in his essence as God is not male or female, or hermaphrodite as you accuse. God transcends human sexual distinctions. In revealing himself to us as Father and the use of Male pronouns in the Scriptures are images we are bound to maintain but God is using the sacramentality of the body in speaking to us this way. Elsewhere God is said to have arms and legs, but God does not really have these, He is pure Spirit and as such the language that attributes such things to God is both analogical and sacramental. Cosmologically all creation is female in relation to God, who acts upon creation, creation being acted upon or receiving the action of God and is thus feminine in relation to Him.

      1. “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to them,”


        But here is my point Monsignore:

        If we agree that Jesus is God, and that Jesus was ressurected, body, hair, kidneys, blood, gender and wounds, and we agree that He was taken up to Heaven in the same state, and we agree that He currently is alive and well, and more importantly presumably still resides within His ressurected male body…

        When was it He suddenly ceased to be a male God?
        And when was it that He started “trancending the human sexual distinctions”?

        As I recall He was ressurected in one piece. And since He certainly seemed to be a man while on Earth, why would He cease to be a man upon entering Heaven?

        If Jesus is risen and His body ressurected, ( and He is) , and if Jesus is God, ( and He is ), and if God does not change, ( and He does not) , then by all that is comprehendable, God is still a Man, reciding within the risen Christ.

        The ressurected body was intact upon ressurection. It even had the wounds. Thomas put his finger in them.
        Allthough the wounds probably will have healed by now, to say that The Lords gender somehow have changed or suddenly “trancended definition” defies not only logic and reason, but it goes against the entire Gospel of His Majesty.

        Jesus lives. In His ressurected body. That is the whole point of Christianity.

        Furthermore His body was male at birth, and male at ressurection.
        His body certainly did not “trancend any sexual definitions” while on earth, so there is nothing to suggest it does it now.

        So, God has a body. It is the risen body of His son Jesus Christ. Including arms, legs, hair, kidneys and stuff.
        And God therefore does not trancend any sexual definitions, because His body is that of a man.

        So God is a man and He lives in Heaven, or another conveniant place of His choosing. Arms, legs, hair, kidneys and stuff.

        Simple as that.

        Should this be wrong, then a serious and profound explanation is owed as to what has happened to the risen body of Jesus Christ and why it would no longer be in use.

        And it better be good, since it otherwise renders the entire concept of bodily ressurection meaningless if The Lord is not still The Lord. Arms, legs, hair, kidneys and stuff.


        ” and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.”

        1. We’re done here Gabriel, you are making up your own version of the faith, something you have no standing to do. No more comments of your in this thread will be approved. You seem to lack the proper sophistication to understand what the Catechism is clearly teaching. God has God has no body. God is God, not man. Jesus’ human nature does not change his divine nature.

  4. And double-by the way:

    God made Adam IN HIS IMAGE.
    Adam was MALE. And so is God.

    Had God not been MALE, then Adam would not have been either.

    1. And if this misconception of God is not cleared up, I will leave the Holy Catholic Church and convert to Islam.
      And trust me, you do not want that.

      1. You have shown many Islamic tendencies in your responses over the years, I would surely not recommend Islam for you. As you imply it would probably send you over the radical edge with which you flirt now.

    2. The argument is a little more sophisticated than you imply, but Jesus as both male in his humanity and as Groom, even in his divinity is surely a factor in the Male Priesthood.

  5. Or are you claiming that Jesus had 3 parents?

    “The married couple” you refer to as “God” on one hand,
    and Mary on the other?

    No. No. NO.

    If God had been “A married couple” Jesus would have said “Our Parents who are in Heaven, hallow be your names..”

    He did not say that. He did however mention “His Father”. On multiple occasions. Time and time again.
    So to be honest, this sounds more like an attempt at sanctification of unholy “gender-equality”, something God has specifically forbidden, than a sermon.
    I hope that is not the case.

  6. Monsignore:

    The reason for this controversy is to be found in Cathecism 239 witch currently states:

    “By calling God “Father”, the language of faith indicates two main things: that God is the first origin of everything and transcendent authority; and that he is at the same time goodness and loving care for all his children. God’s parental tenderness can also be expressed by the image of motherhood,62 which emphasizes God’s immanence, the intimacy between Creator and creature. The language of faith thus draws on the human experience of parents, who are in a way the first representatives of God for man. But this experience also tells us that human parents are fallible and can disfigure the face of fatherhood and motherhood. We ought therefore to recall that God transcends the human distinction between the sexes. He is neither man nor woman: he is God. He also transcends human fatherhood and motherhood, although he is their origin and standard:63 no one is father as God is Father. ”

    If this was changed to simply state:

    “By calling God “Father”, the language of faith indicates three main things: that God is the first origin of everything, that He transcendent authority & that He is 100% Male”.

    then that would clear up everything.

    The God I worship is a proud and jealous God (exodus 20:5),
    He is filled with vengeance and wrath (Nahum 1:2)
    He is a warrior by profession and The LORD is His Name( Exodus 15:3)

    The God I worship is 100% Male and very proud of that. He therefore uses words like “Warrior”,
    “King” “Lord” & “Father” to describe Himself, simply to let there be no doubt as to His Manliness.

    Personally I would never bow down and worship any form of “Shemale” or “genderless trancention” or anything that “trancends the human distinction between the sexes”, what ever that is supposed to mean.
    I also find such a description deeply, deeply offensive and I am sure God does too.

    It is therefore my duty to see to it that He is not being dishonered or offended by descriptions who leave doubt as to His manliness, gender or masculinity. Every description that implies any gender-bending, hermafrodism or any kind of sissyness is ofcourse deeply offensive to The Lord, King, Master, Father & Sovereign of The Universe. Fear of The Lord is the beginning of wisdom.

    But I do understand that this is not within your authority to change.
    I will therefore take this up with The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in greath depth and make my case before them. It should not proove very difficult. I am sure they are reasonable people.

    Thanks for making me aware that such misconceptions are found in Cathecism, so I can see to it that they are corrected.

    Happy Fathers day.


    1. Gabriel, you are rejecting the Catechism and misrepresenting me. I affirm the language of faith wherein God is revealed in masculine terms and affirm that we must use them. We not permitted to call God mother or her. But that does not mean God is male. Male as a sexual distinction refers to those with bodies. Hence God, who is pure Spirit has no sex, neither do angels. God is beyond such distinction. He is not man and he is not male.

      Jesus, in terms of his human nature took up the male sex, but as God, he is the Word, and pure Spirit.

      God is not “100% Male” he is beyond your little human and earth bound category. You want to quote the Catechism # 239 but reject the part which says God transcends the human distinction between the sexes, He is neither man nor woman: He is God

      If your God is 100% male and you insist on rejecting the Catechism (an exercise of the formal magisterium) you might want to consider that you have made up your own god. Last time I checked, making up your god and worshiping it is called Idolatry.

  7. Wow! A lot of discussion about males n females. The trinty is a beautiful awesome “thing”. Too bad some people/person was distracted by male n female distinctions in humans.

  8. Msgr. Pope,

    Thank you for a great article about the Holy Trinity, the science experiment helps to understand the mystery. The Trinity is hard to understand, but it wouldn’t be a mystery if we knew everything about it.

    Gabriel, I want to thank you for helping me open up the Catholic Catechism to # 239 and reading about how God is neither male or female. God is God. The Catholic faith is so rich in meaning and truths that many catholics take it for granted. It’s when I have a chance to slow down and just think about God and how God loves us (today was about the Holy Trinity), It recharges my faith in the Catholic Church.

    Msgr Pope, there are two things you mentioned in the blog that I want to comment one (one serious and the other not so serious). In Gen 18: 1-5 when Abram was at the door of his tent and he saw three figures in front of him, he recognized them as the Lord. My comment is how did Abram know that they were the Lord. There was no doubt in Abram’s mind as he ran to meet them. While thinking on this, I was also thinking about my own presence and that of others in church. Do we really see the Lord in the Blessed Scrament of the Eucharist. Do we have any doubt and hurry to be with him.

    Wowza, now really Msgr Pope. I haven’t heard Wowza since my kids stopped watching Inspector Gaget.
    Go, go gaget ADW Blog. Have a great day.

  9. One day soon, I expect that the world is going to wake up and recognize why Jesus Christ took the time to organize his church upon a rock foundation (Peter) and pass on his divine authority (all power of heaven and earth) to only those eleven Apostles led by the a leader Apostle Peter and SENT them forth to teach the entire world until the consummation of time. Jesus did not SEND Martin Luther, nor Mohammed, nor Joseph Smith, and most assuredly did not send that pesky self-educated “Gabriel” who continues to beat his drums because of his inordinate pride in his opinion.

    How wise it was our Lord to grant that power, and to send those with it forth to teach all the world until the end. Glory be to God. And God save us from all those who make up their own gods.

    Sorry you had to joust with that misguided person Msgr. Pope. We thank God for his Magisterium to keep the purity and fullness of truth alive in our lives. And to all the clergy, priest, religious and laity who continue to believe and communicate with the Church he founded 2011 years ago.

Comments are closed.