Now We will Begin POLEMICS and APOLOGETICS for the Defense of our Pope.

1. Pope Leo I (440–461) – Defender of the doctrine of Christ’s two natures and a strong promoter of papal authority; known as Leo the Great.

2. Pope Leo II (682–683) – Confirmed the condemnation of Monothelitism and reformed Latin liturgical pronunciation and music.

3. Pope Leo III (795–816) – Crowned Charlemagne and strengthened the papacy’s political and religious authority.

4. Pope Leo IV (847–855) – Rebuilt Rome after Saracen attacks and fortified the city with the Leonine Wall.

5. Pope Leo V (903) – Known for his ascetic and pious lifestyle during a very brief papacy.

6. Pope Leo VI (928) – Defended the Church’s autonomy amid political turmoil and aristocratic interference.

7. Pope Leo VII (936–939) – Invited Isaac of Gorze to initiate moral and monastic reforms.

8. Pope Leo VIII (963–965) – Sought cooperation with Emperor Otto I during a time of contested authority.

9. Pope Leo IX (1049–1054) – Leader of the Gregorian reform movement and opponent of simony; worked for East-West Church unity.

10. Pope Leo X (1513–1521) – Patron of Renaissance art; supported Michelangelo and the rebuilding of St. Peter’s Basilica.

11. Pope Leo XI (1605) – Remembered for his humility and virtue, despite a reign of only 27 days.

12. Pope Leo XII (1823–1829) – Promoted Catholic education and strengthened the Church’s teaching institutions.

13. Pope Leo XIII (1878–1903) – Founder of Catholic social teaching through Rerum Novarum; addressed modern social issues.

Saint Mar Ephrem the Syrian taught that there is a real change and he interpreted the Eucharistic words of Jesus in this sense that the bread and wine transform into the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ.

Another example of prots not knowing Holy Scripture

This happened at an Eastern Catholic Church. The Syro Malabar Catholic Church

Just finished Cooking an Atheist on Voice Chat and refuting him . I will make a Post showing How to Answer back the Atheist Pagans .

Abortion | 𝑯𝒆𝒂𝒗𝒆𝒏𝒍𝒚 𝑾𝒐𝒎𝒆𝒏

Below are some of the statements made in the past by Leo XIV.
1. [April 12, 1995] – Seminar at Villanova University (USA)
“Marxist theology seeks to replace grace with revolution, and ends up worshipping the State above God.”
2. [March 15, 2001] – Congregation in Lima, Peru
“Communism is the error of the 20th century that still threatens our most vulnerable communities. Its atheism is its first poison.”
3. [June 23, 2003] – Spiritual retreat in Cusco
“Christians must resist the ideological temptations of extreme collectivism that enslaves the soul in the name of social justice.”
4. [December 8, 2007] – Pastoral letter in the Diocese of Chiclayo
“Moral relativism promoted by certain Marxist currents denies the truth of Christ and corrupts the consciences of young people.”
5. [May 14, 2010] – Conference to Latin American bishops
“Communism has penetrated even Christian environments disguised as solidarity. It is our pastoral duty to unmask it.”
6. [January 7, 2012] – Radio interview in Peru
“They want to convince us that homosexuality is a neutral option. But God created man and woman, not a fluid identity.”
7. [September 3, 2014] – Youth Day in Chiclayo
“We cannot bless what God has not instituted. The union between persons of the same sex is not marriage.”
8. [November 27, 2016] – Homily at Santa María Reina
“Gender ideology is a cultural colonization that destroys the family from its foundations.”
9. [August 1, 2019] – Letter to Catholic educators
“Reject school textbooks that teach that gender is a construction. Educating in biological truth is to protect the child.”
10. [October 5, 2021] – Continental ecclesial summit
“The LGBT lobby seeks to impose liturgical and pastoral norms contrary to the Magisterium. It is a subtle form of persecution.”
11. [February 18, 2023] – Statement prior to the consistory
“Those who promote the abolition of the sexual binary want to reinvent Creation. This is modern hubris disguised as inclusion.”

The Catechism of the Catholic Church offers these explanations for the meaning of “bind and loose”:
During his public life Jesus not only forgave sins, but also made plain the effect of this forgiveness: he reintegrated forgiven sinners into the community of the People of God from which sin had alienated or even excluded them. A remarkable sign of this is the fact that Jesus receives sinners at his table, a gesture that expresses in an astonishing way both God’s forgiveness and the return to the bosom of the People of God. (CCC 1443)

ARGUMENTS AGAINST ATHEISM 👇
(Arguments for the existence of God)

★Aristotelian proof for the existence of God:

part 1

1. Change is a real feature of the world.
2. But change is the actualization of a potential.
3. So, the actualization of potential is a real feature of the world.
4. No potential can be actualized unless something already actual actualizes it (the principle of causality).
5. So, any change is caused by something already actual.
6. The occurrence of any change C presupposes some thing or substance S which changes.
7. The existence of S at any given moment itself presupposes the concurrent actualization of S's potential for existence.
8. So, any substance S has at any moment some actualizer A of its existence.
9. A's own existence at the moment it actualizes S itself presupposes either (a) the concurrent actualization of its own potential for existence or (b) A's being purely actual.
10. If A's existence at the moment it actualizes S presupposes the concurrent actualization of its own potential for existence, then there exists a regress of concurrent actualizers that is either infinite or terminates in a purely actual actualizer.
11
. But such a regress of concurrent actualizers would constitute a hierarchical causal series, and such a series cannot regress infinitely.
12. So, either A itself is a purely actual actualizer or there is a purely actual actualizer which terminates the regress that begins with the actualization of A.
13. So, the occurrence of C and thus the existence of S at any given moment presupposes the existence of a purely actual actualizer.
14. So, there is a purely actual actualizer.
15. In order for there to be more than one purely actual actualizer, there would have to be some differentiating feature that one such actualizer has that the others lack.
16. But there could be such a differentiating feature only if a purely actual actualizer had some unactualized potential, which, being purely actual, it does not have.
17. So, there can be no such differentiating feature, and thus no way for there to be more than one purely actual actualizer.
18. So, there is only one purely actual actualizer.

★Aristotelian proof for the existence of God:

Part 2

19. In order for this purely actual actualizer to be capable of change, it would have to have potentials capable of actualization.
20. But being purely actual, it lacks any such potentials.
21. So, it is immutable or incapable of change.
22. If this purely actual actualizer existed in time, then it would be capable of change, which it is not.
23. So, this purely actual actualizer is eternal, existing outside of time.
24. If the purely actual actualizer were material, then it would be changeable and exist in time, which it does not.
25. So, the purely actual actualizer is immaterial.
26. If the purely actual actualizer were corporeal, then it would be material, which it is not.
27. So, the purely actual actualizer is incorporeal.
28. If the purely actual actualizer were imperfect in any way, it would have some unactualized potential, which, being purely actual, it does not have.
29. So, the purely actual actualizer is perfect.
30. For something to be less than fully good is for it to have a privation -that is, to fail to actualize some feature proper to it.
31. A purely actual actualizer, being purely actual, can have no such privation.
32. So, the purely actual actualizer is fully good.
33. To have power entails being able to actualize potentials.
34. Any potential that is actualized is either actualized by the purely actual actualizer or by a series of actualizers which terminates in the purely actual actualizer.
35. So, all power derives from the purely actual actualizer.
36. But to be that from which all power derives is to be omnipotent.

37. So, the purely actual actualizer is omnipotent.
38. Whatever is in an effect is in its cause in some way, whether formally, virtually, or eminently (the principle of proportionate causality).
39. The purely actual actualizer is the cause of all things.
40. So, the forms or patterns manifest in all the things it causes must in some way be in the purely actual actualizer.
41. These forms or patterns can exist either in the concrete way in which they exist in individual particular things, or in the abstract way in which they exist in the thoughts of an intellect.

★Aristotelian proof for the existence of God:

Part 3


42. They cannot exist in the purely actual actualizer in the same way they exist in individual particular things.
43. So, they must exist in the purely actual actualizer in the abstract way in which they exist in the thoughts of an intellect.
44. So, the purely actual actualizer has intellect or intelligence.
45. Since it is the forms or patterns of all things that are in the thoughts of this intellect, there is nothing that is outside the range of those thoughts.
46. For there to be nothing outside the range of something's thoughts is for that thing to be ominiscient.
47. So, the purely actual actualizer is omniscient.
48. So, there exists a purely actual cause of the existence of things, which is one, immutable, eternal, immaterial, incorporeal, perfect, fully good, omnipotent, intelligent, and omniscient.
49. But for there to be such a cause of things is just what it is for God to exist.
50. So, God exists.

●The Neo-Platonic proof for the existence of God

Part 1

1. The things of our experience are composite.
2. A composite exists at any moment only insofar as its parts are combined at that moment.
3. This composition of parts requires a concurrent cause.
4. So, any composite has a cause of its existence at any moment at which it exists.
5. So, each of the things of our experience has a cause at any moment at which it exists.
6. If the cause of a composite thing's existence at any moment is itself composite, then it will in turn require a cause of its own existence at that moment.
7. The regress of causes this entails is hierarchical in nature, and such a regress must have a first member.
8. Only something absolutely simple or noncomposite could be the first member of such a series.
9. So, the existence of each of the things of our experience presupposes an absolutely simple or noncomposite cause.
10. In order for there to be more than absolutely one simple or noncomposite cause, each would have to have some differentiating feature that the others lacked.
11. But for a cause to have such a feature would be for it to have parts, in which case it would not really be simple or noncomposite.
12. So, no absolutely simple or noncomposite cause can have such a differentiating feature.
13. So, there cannot be more than one absolutely simple or non-composite cause.

●The Neo-Platonic proof for the existence of God

Part 2

14. If the absolutely simple or noncomposite cause were changeable, then it would have parts which it gains or loses which, being simple or non-composite, it does not have.
15. So, the absolutely simple or noncomposite cause is changeless or immutable.
16. If the absolutely simple or noncomposite cause had a beginning or an end, it would have parts which could either be combined or broken apart.
17. So, since it has no such parts, the absolutely simple or non-composite cause is beginningless and endless.
18. Whatever is immutable, beginningless, and endless is eternal.
19. So, the absolutely simple or noncomposite cause is eternal.
20. If something is caused, then it has parts which need to be combined.
21. So, the absolutely simple or noncomposite cause, since it has no parts, is uncaused.

22. Everything is either a mind, or a mental content, or a material entity, or an abstract entity.
23. An abstract entity is causally inert.
24. So, the absolutely simple or noncomposite cause, since it is not causally inert, is not an abstract entity.
25. A material entity has parts and is changeable.
26. So, the absolutely simple or noncomposite cause, since it is without parts and changeless, is not a material entity.
27. A mental content presupposes the existence of a mind, and so cannot be the ultimate cause of anything.
28. So, the absolutely simple or noncomposite cause, being the ultimate cause of things, cannot be a mental content.
29. So, the absolutely simple or noncomposite cause must be a mind.
30. Since the absolutely simple or noncomposite cause is unique, everything other than it is composite.
31. Every composite has the absolutely simple or noncomposite cause as its ultimate cause.
32. So, the absolutely simple or noncomposite cause is the ultimate cause of everything other than itself.
33. If the absolutely simple or noncomposite cause had potentialities as well as actualities, it would have parts

●The Neo-Platonic proof for the existence of God


Part 3

34. So, since it has no parts, it must have no potentialities but be purely actual.
35. A purely actual cause must be perfect, omnipotent, fully good, and omniscient.
36. So, there exists a cause which is simple or noncomposite, unique, immutable, eternal, immaterial, a mind or intellect, the uncaused ultimate cause of everything other than itself, purely actual, perfect, omnipotent, fully good, and omniscient.
37. But for there to be such a cause is just what it is for God to exist.
38. So, God exists.

■The Augustinian Proof for the Existence of God:

Part 1:

1. There are three possible accounts of abstract objects such as universals, propositions, numbers and other mathematical objects, and possible worlds: realism, nominalism, and conceptualism.
2. There are decisive arguments in favor of realism.
3. There are insuperable objections against nominalism.
4. There are insuperable objections against conceptualism.
5. So, some version of realism is true.
6. There are three possible versions of realism: Platonic realism, Aristotelian realism, and Scholastic realism.
7. If Platonic realism is true, then abstract objects exist in a "third realm" distinct from either the material world or any intellect.
8. If Aristotelian realism is true, then abstract objects exist only in human or other contingently existing intellects.
9. If Scholastic realism is true, then abstract objects exist not only in contingently existing intellects but also in at least one necessarily existing intellect.
10. There are insuperable objections against the claim that abstract objects exist in a "third realm" distinct from either the material world or any intellect.
11. So, Platonic realism is not true.
12. There are insuperable objections against the claim that abstract objects exist only in human or other contingently existing intellects.
13. So, Aristotelian realism is not true.
14. So, Scholastic realism is true.
15. So, abstract objects exist not only in contingently existing intellects but also in at least one necessarily existing intellect.
16. Abstract objects such as universals, propositions, numbers and other mathematical objects, and possible worlds are all logically related to one another in such a way that they form an interlocking system of ideas to one another in such a way that they form an interlocking system of ideas.

■The Augustinian Proof for the Existence of God:

Part 2:


17. The reasons for concluding that at least some abstract objects exist in a necessarily existing intellect also entail that this interlocking system of ideas must exist in a necessarily existing intellect.