Do you know how many Catholics I personally have heard witness for Christ in my life? None. This is not to say they are not out there, I just have never met any of them. Every Catholic I have met has been gung-ho about how wonderful their church is, how nothing is possible without Mary, how praying to the dearly departed is so beneficial but never about surrendering to Jesus.
I know. But then again:
Who is best to interpret Scripture: [1] Christ's one historic Church which he himself founded and endowed with his own power and authority (Mt. 28:18-20; Lk. 10:16; Ac. 16:4; 2 Thess. 2:15; 3:4; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Jn. 4:6)---and which by the Holy Spirit produced and canonized the Scriptures themselves---or [2] every individual lay believer like CM, each privately interpreting the Bible according to his preferred merely man-made, recently-invented sect?
Both are men. Still no mention of prayer on your part.
Yes. On one hand, [1] the apostles and bishops (Magisterium) of Christ's one historic Church who have been endowed by Christ with his own spiritual power and doctrinal authority, and on the other hand [2] individual lay believers (and sects) who possess no binding authority in the church whatsoever, and whose claims can never be raised above the level of mere human opinion.
The bishops spend a great deal of time in prayer regarding the teachings which they deliver to the faithful, just as did the apostles before them.
You're daft. It has been proven numerous times by both myself and other Catholics on this forum. Your unwillingness to affirm the facts of Church history---or perhaps your simple inability to mentally grasp those facts---is another matter entirely.
That's a whole lot of justification to say you want to rely on men. Your choice.
No more than you do. The difference is that I rely on the God-endowed Magisterium of Christ's one historic Church for divine doctrine, while you rely on the mere men who invented your preferred Protestant sect and who possess no more authority to formulate Christian doctrine than you do (which is none whatsoever).
And yours.
Your magisterium is comprised of humans, correct?
Yes, in the very same way that the Apostolic College was composed of humans, that is, men who had been specifically endowed by Jesus Christ to guide and teach the faithful in his own name and by his very authority (Mt. 16:18-19/Is. 22:22; Mt. 28:18-20; Lk. 10:16; Ac. 15:2; 16:4; 2 Thess. 2:15; 3:4; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Jn. 4:6).
Name even one.
In a New Testament context, it was solely the apostles and bishops (Magisterium) who were endowed by Christ with his own power and authority. Lay believers were not so endowed.
Nonsense. The early Church Fathers---including those who were personal disciples of the apostles---testify unanimously to the historical fact of Papal Succession. Try again.
Now go ahead and actually document your claim from qualified ecclesiastical historians. Proof, please.
Again: Post your proof.
Once again, your ignorance shines through, since Paul mentions Peter half-a-dozen times in the epistle to the Galatians alone. In any case, Peter speaks for himself in the book of Acts and in his (Peter's) canonical epistles. Try again.
This and your other wholly unsubstantiated assertions in this post are noted. Still waiting for actual proof.
Rather, Catholic teaching often opposes the entirely non-authoritative opinions of your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect, which is another matter entirely from disagreeing with "Jesus and the apostles." Big difference there. Try again.