British Non-Catholic Historian on Historical Longevity of the Roman Catholic Church.

[Nishant Xavier]

To the Militant Atheist Fake Messiah: Oh pls, I have already answered many of your objections multiple times. Just don't feel like doing so right now, will get back to it when work is done, as you know I will. Now, want to come back to something else Macaulay said:

"The proudest royal houses are but of yesterday, when compared with the line of the Supreme Pontiffs. That line we trace back in an unbroken series, from the Pope who crowned Napoleon in the nineteenth century to the Pope who crowned Pepin in the eighth; and far beyond the time of Pepin the august dynasty extends, till it is lost in the twilight of fable. The republic of Venice came next in antiquity. But the republic of Venice was modern when compared with the Papacy; and the republic of Venice is gone, and the Papacy remains."

It's true that the Papacy endures far beyond the time of Pepin, the republic of Venice etc. However, it extends back further than Macaulay thought. When I find the source, I will quote Protestant Historian Philip Schaff in History of the Christian Church. He frankly admits that the Papacy and Bishops of Rome goes back to St. Peter, and the 2nd, 3th, and 4th Popes historically where St. Linus, St. Cletus and St. Clement. Even Wikipedia admits this now btw.

Here's Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popes Later.