Why won’t all other Christians recognize the Roman Catholic Pope as their leader?

[rbarcia]

Because Jesus Christ is the head of the church, the church are the members, not a separate institution.

1 Corinthians 11:3
But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

Ephesians 4:15
but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ—

Ephesians 5:23
For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body.

 

[guanophore]

No it is not. It is an innovation by post-schism Rome and defined by Pius IX in 1870.
Becuase infallibility is an innovation.

The Apostolic Teaching has always been considered infallible. If it were not, it could not have produced an inerrant-inspired New Testament. Here is an ancient reference to Apostolic infallibility:

Here is what the same St. John Chrysostom has to say about Saint John the Evangelist:

“For the son of thunder, the beloved of Christ, the pillar of the Churches throughout the world, who holds the keys of heaven, who drank the cup of Christ, and was baptized with His baptism, who lay upon his Master’s bosom with much confidence, this man comes forward to us now…. By this Apostle stand the powers from above, marveling at the beauty of his soul, and his understanding, and the bloom of that virtue by which he drew unto him Christ Himself, and obtained the grace of the Spirit. For he hath made ready his soul, as some well-fashioned and jeweled lyre with strings of gold, and yielded it for the utterance of something great and sublime to the Spirit” (St. John Chrysostom, First Homily on the Gospel of St. John).

“Were John about to converse with us, and to say to us words of his own, we needs must describe his family, his country, and his education. But since it is not he, but God by him, that speaks to mankind, it seems to me superfluous and distracting to enquire into these matters. And yet even thus it is not superfluous, but even very necessary. For when you have learned who he was, and from whence, who his parents, and what his character, and then hear his voice and all his heavenly wisdom, then you shall know right well that these (doctrines) belong not to him, but to the Divine power stirring his soul…. Not so this fisherman; for all he saith is infallible; and standing as it were upon a rock, he never shifts his ground. For since he has been thought worthy to be in the most secret places, and has the Lord of all speaking within him, he is subject to nothing that is human” (St. John Chrysostom, Second Homily on the Gospel of St. John).

 

[onenow1]

Hi, Moonweller

After rereading all the posts, I noticed I got your user name wrong and I want to apologize, it was not intentional !

Peace OneNow1

 

[Mickey]

The Apostolic Teaching has always been considered infallible. If it were not, it could not have produced an inerrant-inspired New Testament. Here is an ancient reference to Apostolic infallibility

The early Church adhered to the infallibility of the Council. You cannot show–and will never be able to show that the Church taught that the bishop of Rome has some type of supreme infallibility.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

The Holy Orthodox Church.
You will see many Church Fathers write about Old Rome as the capital of Christianity. You will see many Church Fathers write about St Peter as having a primacy of honor yet equal to all Apostles. But you will never read the Church Fathers talking about the Pope of Rome as a supreme universal infallible pontiff as was dogmatized by the ultramontanists of post-schism Rome and defined in 1870.

Of course not it was never a matter of debate or question until 1870 when the already excercised belief of infallibility was made doctrine, to clarify the already excercised infalliblility.

As time goes on in our life time, it may get excercised again if a Teaching from Jesus and the Apostles come under attack and threatend to be changed by man or secularism.

For example woman priestesses, “Thus says the Lord” (Ex Cathedra) did not have to be announced, because the Papa said Who is he but a man, to change what God has made. So this Infallible right to the body of Jesus Christ is not used lightly. But when it does have to be used, those who love Jesus will not be moved by every wind of doctrine that comes against her, Not even death can stop these Gospels from being proclaimed, thus 2000 years of Roman Catholicism.

 

[Mickey]

Of course not it was never a matter of debate or question until 1870 when the already excercised belief of infallibility was made doctrine, to clarify the already excercised infalliblility.

Not quite. The ultramontanes had been trying to force that doctrine through for a very long time–the council of Constance and Basel shot them down. But Pius IX finally succeeded in 1870

thus 2000 years of Roman Catholicism.

2000 years of Roman Catholicism! Are you serious?!?

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Not quite. The ultramontanes had been trying to force that doctrine through for a very long time–the council of Constance and Basel shot them down. But Pius IX finally succeeded in 1870

I rest my case:

2000 years of Roman Catholicism! Are you serious?!?

Yeah I am serious, when have you known Roman Catholics without Peter?

 

[Mickey]

Yeah I am serious, when have you known Roman Catholics without Peter?

1. St Peter is not relegated to the Latin Catholic Church only.
2. Do you know when the term Roman Catholic was first used.
   Some Catholics on this forum are even offended by the term.

 

[LutheranDK]

Why won’t all other Christians recognize the Roman Catholic Pope as their leader?

Leaders and leadership positions exist in every aspect of our lives.

A “chain of command” with a leader at the top and an upper echelon (central leadership) is essential to any large organization. Any organization without a central command, where authority is not passed down from the top, through a series of steps or positions, with each person accountable to the one(s) directly above them, leads to confusion, chaos and that organization is ultimately doomed to failure.

Christianity has never been a democracy and Christianity has always had leaders.

Decision-making responsibilities always originate from the “top” of any properly structured organization, from the higher levels of authority to the lower levels. This is called leadership.

Leadership encourages compliance without dissension. Most organizations’ have a ‘pyramid” type structure or something very close.

All Governments have various leadership positions.
All Businesses have various leadership positions.
All Militaries have various leadership positions
All Professional Sports Teams have various leadership positions.

They all have a leadership structure or “chain of command", which starts at the top from the higher levels of authority to the lower levels.

I can go on forever with examples of leaders, leadership and various organizations with a “chain of command”.

Leadership is “structure”, that’s all it is. Human beings have always craved “structure” in their lives, going all the way back to tribal leaders, it’s in our nature.

Structure is a good thing, it prevents confusion and chaos.

There are 2500+ Catholic Dioceses worldwide and one billion Catholics. It is unreasonable to expect there not to be a “chain of command” and a leadership structure in the Roman Catholic Church and this would include the head of the Church here on earth, the Pope.

The Pope is the “glue”, which holds it all together.

If it was not for the Roman Catholic Pope and the centrally organized structure of the Roman Catholic Church, there would not be a Bible today, there would not be Christianity today, and we would not be having this discussion.

Christianity would have been wiped from the face of the earth, well before any “Protestant” movement.

Why is it, that there are so many “Christians” who experience a “chain of command” or a hierarchy in ever aspect of their lives cannot accept this concept, when it comes to the Roman Catholic Church and the Pope?

Finally, all families have a “pecking order’ or various levels of authority, with the parents at the top, over their children. there is no democracy in a family. Christianity (Catholicism) is one big family, and our “papa” is the Pope.

Why won’t all other Christians recognize the Roman Catholic Pope as their leader?

I think it is characteristic that your reasons given here are organizational; not biblical.
It is true that the Church (and you and I define “Church” with a capital C quite differently, I imagine) has never been a democrazy (intentional typo…). I know of no confessional protestants who would claim that it SHOULD be.

I will not submit to the Pope, because the office, or rather: The position of absolute power to define truth, is unbiblical, and hence: Unchristian.
The Eastern Church is closer to the truth, in their episcopalian view. The Patriarch of Constantinopel is honored as a symbolic head of the Church, and of course has power over his dioscese, but is not granted the position of “pope” of the Eastern Church.*

*If I have misrepresented the Orthodox view, please correct it. I intended no deception.

 

[Jimmy_B]

(Responding to post #187)

Hello LuthernDK,

Actually, All my points are Biblical and I do use the Bible that the Roman Catholic Church put together, authorized and passed down to me (by the Roman Catholic Church), to defend my Roman Catholic Faith and to make my points here, (see posts 170 and 171 for starters).

“authorized” is a word derived from the word “authority”.

I find it amazing how so many non-Catholic Christians have a “problem” with the Catholic Pope; with his Authority and with the Pope’s Infallibility.

It was Catholic Popes, guided by the Holy Spirit, who approved and authorized the Bible, well before any “Protestant Movement".

Another “man” (about 1000 years after the fact) “authorized” the first King James Version (KJV), Protestant Bible, yet no one has a problem with King James’ ”Authority” or “Infallibility”.

Many follow many beliefs, started by another “man”, Martin Luther, yet no one has a “problem” his”Authority” or “Infallibility”.

All religions and denominations (and many posters here at CAF) claim “Infallibility” in their beliefs, they just won’t actually admit it; or actually use the word, “Infallible” but they all believe that they are in fact, “Infallible”.

Maybe, the word “infallible” is “way too Catholic” for many non-Catholics. The word “infallible” is in the dictionary, so it Ok if you use it.

What makes the Catholic Church different is that the Roman Catholic Church actually uses the word “Infallible”. That’s Ok though, because all of Christianity is based on the authority given to us by Jesus Christ to run His Church here on earth.

The Church is alive and Jesus Christ is present in the Church. If this isn’t true, then what was the need in having Twelve Apostles? If this isn’t true, then maybe you can explain the need for Pentecost.

If you are not “Infallible” and do not have “Authority” given to you by Jesus Christ, then why should I listen to, or believe a single word of yours?

Christian Truth can be found in Catholicism, the first Christian. If one were a Christian for the first 1500 + years after the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, they were Catholic.

One of the reasons I like Catholicism so much is because I like -Truth. As a Roman Catholic I do not have to give semantical arguments, I don’t have to use one Bible verse to try to disprove another and I don’t have to “dance” around words like “authority” and “infallibility”.

Infallibility, Infallibility, Infallibility, the Catholic Pope has Infallibility on the issues of Faith and Morals.

Authority, Authority, Authority, The Catholic Church has the Authority given to Her by Jesus Christ Himself.

It feels so good to be a Roman Catholic and to belong to Christ’s True Church.

Stand-by for Bible verses, which will support my comments here…

Thank you for your post and I look forward to your response.

God Bless You

 

[Jimmy_B]

Nevertheless, when he does speak, excathedra, it’s binding. And RC’ism presents its Magisterium (teaching authority) as infallible. It doesn’t concern you even a little bit that men assign to themselves a divine attribute?

Read post #188

 

[Jimmy_B]

I believe Unified Command would make for a better system in the “Body of Christ”. That is an Incident Coordination System (ICS) concept where leaders from different agencies (or in this case, denominations) make the decision jointly. It is different than the single command structure (single Incident Commander). I know it sounds like a weird comparison, but it makes sense in my emergency management mind.

-Mark

Hello EmercencyOps,

Then why isn’t there One Christian Religion? What do they actually “make decisions on” and where does their “authority” come from to make these “decisions”?

What is the difference between having a few “guys” at the top, in position’s of authority and “one guy”, the Roman Catholic Pope at the top?

I only difference I can see, is that they all believe that they are “Infallible” (they just won’t admit it) so they all disagree. (see post #188).

If they did not disagree there would be One Christian Religion.

I worked ‘Emergency Operations” too and we have always had one Chief in- charge.

God Bless You!. Be careful out there!

 

[Mickey]

Infallibility, Infallibility, Infallibility, the Catholic Pope has Infallibility

Innovation, innovation, innovation. Invented by post-schism ultramontanists and defined in 1870.

 

[Jimmy_B]

I am attempting to make some important points here, so here is a re-post of post #188, with fewer typo’s (I hope) and some additional words added.

Hello LuthernDK

,

Actually, All my points are Biblical and I do use the Bible that the Roman Catholic Church put together, authorized and passed down to me (by the Roman Catholic Church), to defend my Roman Catholic Faith and to make my points here, (see posts 170 and 171 for starters).

“authorized” is a word derived from the word “authority”.

I find it amazing how so many non-Catholic Christians have a “problem” with the Catholic Pope; with his Authority and with the Pope’s Infallibility.

It was Catholic Popes, guided by the Holy Spirit, who approved and authorized the Bible, well before any “Protestant Movement".

Another “man” (about 1000 years after the fact) “authorized” the first King James Version (KJV), Protestant Bible, yet no one has a problem with King James’ ”Authority” or his “Infallibility”.

Many follow many beliefs, started by another “man”, Martin Luther, yet no one has a “problem” his ”Authority” or “Infallibility”.

All religions and denominations (and many posters here at CAF) claim “Infallibility” in their beliefs, they just won’t actually admit it; or actually use the word, “Infallible” but they all believe that they are in fact, “Infallible”.

That is why I surrender to Jesus Christ and His Roman Catholic Church; I am not Infallible.

Maybe, the word “infallible” is “way too Catholic” for many non-Catholics. The word “infallible” is in the dictionary, so it Ok if you use it.

What makes the Catholic Church different is that the Roman Catholic Church actually uses the word “Infallible”. That’s Ok though, because all of Christianity is based on the authority given to us by Jesus Christ to run His Church here on earth.

The Church is alive and Jesus Christ is present in the Roman Catholic Church. If this isn’t true, then what was the need in having Twelve Apostles? If this isn’t true, then maybe you can explain the need for Pentecost.

If you are not “Infallible” and do not have “Authority” given to you by Jesus Christ, then why should I listen to, or believe a single word of yours?

Christian Truth can be found in Catholicism, the first Christian Religion. If one were a Christian for the first 1500 + years after the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, they were Catholic.

One of the reasons I like Catholicism so much is because I like -Truth. As a Roman Catholic I do not have to give semantical arguments, I don’t have to use one Bible verse to try to disprove another and I don’t have to “dance” around words like “authority” and “infallibility”.

Infallibility, Infallibility, Infallibility, the Catholic Pope has Infallibility on the issues of Faith and Morals.

Authority, Authority, Authority, The Catholic Church has the Authority given to Her by Jesus Christ Himself.

It feels so good to be a Roman Catholic and to belong to Christ’s True Church.

Stand-by for Bible verses, which will support my comments here…

Thank you for your post and I look forward to your response.

God Bless You

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

1. St Peter is not relegated to the Latin Catholic Church only.
2. Do you know when the term Roman Catholic was first used.
   Some Catholics on this forum are even offended by the term.

Come on Mickey, St. Peter is not relegated to the English or any other language. Yes Latin is the official language of the Roman Catholic church. You appear to be putting emphasis on your bias opinon of authority. Lets just stick to the facts.

The Roman Catholic pontiffs have an unbroken line of Succession from Peter “Rock” Whom Jesus christ himself appointed to build his church, that church Jesus promised to never leave her. Peter is still here, and The Catholic faith is still here also.

Now I have answered the OP many a times here, what is your answer to the OP? Please dont say infallible is what keeps you from the Popes authority.

 

[moondweller]

Jesus founded His Church here on earth on 'men"

Jesus said, “I will build My church.” Not all, such as Augustine, interpreted Matt. 16:18 as referring to the person of Peter, but to rather to his confession. Which seems to fit the context far more accurately since Jesus said, “…and upon this (toute) rock I will build my church.” And further we see in Eph. 2:20 that the church is built not upon Peter as the foundation, but of the Apostles (plural) and N.T. prophets, Christ Himself being the corner stone.

BTW, it was Calixtus I (218-223) that first based his claim of superiority on Matt. 16:18. Tertullian called him a “usurper” in speaking as if Bishop of Bishops.

and there is and has always been a hierarchy in Christ’s Church here on earth.

Not a “hierarchy” as we see historically developed in Christendom, and especially in the RCC. Paul speaks of no “hierarchy” when he states 1 Cor 12:27 "Now you are Christ’s body, and individually members of it. And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, {various} kinds of tongues.And also:Eph 4:11 "And He gave some {as} apostles, and some {as} prophets, and some {as} evangelists, and some {as} pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ;"These do not at all describe a “hierarchy,” but rather ministers in the body of Christ for the purpose of “equipping the saints” for the work of service to the Lord. We read in the Book of Acts and in the Epistles the appointment of a board of “elders” and “deacons” in local churches. But no high ranking “Bishops” as developed in Christendom after the Apostolic age.

It was men, not Christ, who erected ecclesiastical hierarchies (pecking orders) in Christendom, with their idea of “metropolitan Bishops” and eventually “Patriarchal Bishops,” which included the Bishop of Rome. It was men who lusted for ecclesiastical superiority and assigned themselves unbiblical positions to achieve it. This deviation began to occur shortly after the Apostolic age and blossomed into full bloom when church and state united in the days during and after emperor Constantine.

The authority and the infallible “attributes” of the Roman Catholic Church come directly from God.

Yes, that is the boast of the RCC.

Jesus Christ, Himself said that the Church was infallible, not the Church.

(1) Jesus never defined His “church” as the RCC. That name, with all its connotations, occurred after the rupture between East and West. (2) That “the gates of Hades will not overpower it” (Matt. 16:19b, NASB) states nothing about His church, or anyone within it, possessing “infallibility.” The reason why the gates of Hades will not overpower the church Christ is building is because the Father raised Christ from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly {places,} far above all rule and authority and power and dominion (Eph. 1:21:Eph 1:22 "…And He (God the Father) put all things in subjection under His (Christ’s ) feet, and gave Him (Christ) as head over all things to the church,"It’s Christ Himself who preserves His church, not any ecclesiastical, hierarchical government formed and established by mere men. If anything, heresies are more likely preserved by such “infallible” governors.

 

[Mickey]

Come on Mickey, St. Peter is not relegated to the English or any other language.

I am saying that the Pope of Rome does not have exclusive rights to St Peter.

The Roman Catholic pontiffs have an unbroken line of Succession

All bishops have Apostolic succession from all Apostles.

Please dont say infallible is what keeps you from the Popes authority.

Supreme infallibility is an invention of post-schism Rome. This innovation was eventually defined and forced through a Roman Council by Pius IX in 1870 to the pleasure of the Ultramontanists.

 

[Mickey]

Jesus said, “I will build My church.” Not all, such as Augustine, interpreted Matt. 16:18 as referring to the person of Peter, but to rather to his confession. Which seems to fit the context far more accurately since Jesus said, “…and upon this (toute) rock I will build my church.” And further we see in Eph. 2:20 that the church is built not upon Peter as the foundation, but of the Apostles (plural) and N.T. prophets, Christ Himself being the corner stone.

Amen, my brother in Christ.
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/17/17_1_29.gif

 

[Jimmy_B]

Innovation, innovation, innovation. Invented by post-schism ultramontanists and defined in 1870.

Hello Mickey,

That’s all ya got for me… “innovation”, “innovation”, “innovation”.

Who is the person or persons who were so “innovative’ and where did they derive all of their “authority” from, to be so “innovative? This one word does not explain away the Truth found in Catholicism.

God Bless You!

 

[Swan]

Nevertheless, when he does speak, excathedra, it’s binding. And RC’ism presents its Magisterium (teaching authority) as infallible. It doesn’t concern you even a little bit that men assign to themselves a divine attribute?

Well, Moondweller, from what I’ve seen here I can only conclude that it doesn’t, even a little bit.