Where does the Pope get his authority?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Jude Thaddeus

Active Member
Apr 27, 2024
154
44
28
72
ontario
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Clement I was the 4rth pope when the Apostle John was still alive. Why wasn't John the pope?
Because John wasn't the bishop of Rome. Only the bishop of Rome can qualify to be pope.

St Evodius was the second bishop of Antioch after St Peter.
In the Acts of the Apostles, Saint Luke mentions the city of Antioch and the great contribution it made to Christianity:

“So Barnabas went to Tarsus to look for Saul; and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. For a whole year they met with the church, and taught a large company of people; and in Antioch the disciples were for the first time called Christians.” (Acts 11:25-26)

However, Saint Luke does not go into the details about how this designation as “Christians” came about. For that, tradition gives us Saint Evodius, whose feast day is May 6.

Saint Peter the Apostle, the first pope, is said to have been the first bishop of Antioch and is believed to have founded the early Christian community there. While he did not remain in Antioch very long, Peter appointed a successor before he left. That successor was Saint Evodius, who became the second bishop of Antioch.

Saint Ignatius, who was the third bishop of Antioch, makes reference to him in one of his letters, saying, “Remember your blessed father Evodius, who was made your first pastor by the Apostles.”

Little is known about Saint Evodius, however one tradition states that he was one of the 70 disciples commissioned by Jesus Christ (cf. Luke 10:1). And it is also believed that Saint Evodius was principally responsible for naming the followers of Jesus “Christians” (in Greek Χριστιανός, or Christianos, meaning “follower of Christ”).

At the time Antioch was home to many Jewish Christians who fled Jerusalem after Saint Stephen was stoned to death. While there, they began to preach to the Gentiles. The new mission became very successful and resulted in a strong community of believers. Most biblical scholars see the designation of “Christian” as an early way to distinguish their growing community from other Jews in the city.

Tradition holds that Evodius served the Christian community in Antioch for 27 years, and the Orthodox Church teaches that he died a martyr’s death in the year 66 under the Roman emperor Nero.
source

1715828779487.jpeg
 
Last edited:

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
1,370
605
113
69
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Clement I was the 4rth pope when the Apostle John was still alive. Why wasn't John the pope?
Because John wasn't the bishop of Rome. Only the bishop of Rome can qualify to be pope.
Okay, I'll ask you the question John might have asked in 66 C.E. if you and he were having the conversation: Why could only the bishop of Rome qualify to be pope?
 

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
1,370
605
113
69
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Saint Peter the Apostle, the first pope, is said to have been the first bishop of Antioch and is believed to have founded the early Christian community there. While he did not remain in Antioch very long, Peter appointed a successor before he left. That successor was Saint Evodius, who became the second bishop of Antioch.

Saint Ignatius, who was the third bishop of Antioch, makes reference to him in one of his letters, saying, “Remember your blessed father Evodius, who was made your first pastor by the Apostles.”
"by the Apostles" plural? Not by Peter alone? What did Iggy know that we don't?
 

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,542
1,729
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Vatican I's Pastor Aeternus, Vatican I's Dogmatic Constitution Pastor aeternus, on the Church of Christ) | EWTN , is probably a good starting point for discussion.
Hey Reedfan,

That is a good starting point. Thank you. I have never completely read that.

You stated, "the challenge of Roman Catholicism is to demonstrate that the Bishop of Rome is the only bishop who cannot use his power to deviate from the One Doctrine of the One Church that is teaching One Truth." Doesn't any Protestant denomination have that same challenge? That they can't or haven't deviated from the teachings of Christ or the Apostles? That they can't or won't fall into doctrinal error? If they admit that they have deviated, why would anyone consider them to be The Church that Christ started? It all comes back to which Church (denomination) do you believe OR have evidence is The Church that Christ started that has not deviated from the teachings of the Apostles?

I believe that "Roman Catholicism" HAS demonstrated that the magisterium in Rome IS the head of The Church. I believe the dually elected Pope is holding the seat of Peter in fulfillment of Scripture (Acts 1:20). I believe that, as Scripture says, the Holy Spirit will not and has not allowed The Church to fall into doctrinal error because the Holy Spirit guides the men of The Church into the Truth.

With that said, you got the challenge wrong. The true challenge is to Protestantism; Prove that Rome isn't the head of The Church. Prove which Protestant denomination (they have thousands to choose from) is the head of The Church. They can't and you can't since they all started after the Protestant Revolution. Christian history is not on their side and Scripture is not on their side since they allow gay marriage and support a womans right to kill their baby among many other doctrinal errors.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jude Thaddeus

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,542
1,729
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
That's not exactly true. He did have authority, but it's up to you whether he has authority over you. It's much like an idol having worshippers. If no-one worshipped the carved block of rock, it would cease to be an idol. It's the same with papal authority. The Pope only has authority over those who submit to it. That's it. The choice is ours.
Scripture, once again, proves you to be wrong:

Obey them that have the rule over you and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

He who hears you hears Me, he who rejects you rejects Me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me.”
 

Augustin56

Well-Known Member
Apr 16, 2023
672
502
93
71
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Hey Reedfan,

That is a good starting point. Thank you. I have never completely read that.

You stated, "the challenge of Roman Catholicism is to demonstrate that the Bishop of Rome is the only bishop who cannot use his power to deviate from the One Doctrine of the One Church that is teaching One Truth." Doesn't any Protestant denomination have that same challenge? That they can't or haven't deviated from the teachings of Christ or the Apostles? That they can't or won't fall into doctrinal error? If they admit that they have deviated, why would anyone consider them to be The Church that Christ started? It all comes back to which Church (denomination) do you believe OR have evidence is The Church that Christ started that has not deviated from the teachings of the Apostles?

I believe that "Roman Catholicism" HAS demonstrated that the magisterium in Rome IS the head of The Church. I believe the dually elected Pope is holding the seat of Peter in fulfillment of Scripture (Acts 1:20). I believe that, as Scripture says, the Holy Spirit will not and has not allowed The Church to fall into doctrinal error because the Holy Spirit guides the men of The Church into the Truth.

With that said, you got the challenge wrong. The true challenge is to Protestantism; Prove that Rome isn't the head of The Church. Prove which Protestant denomination (they have thousands to choose from) is the head of The Church. They can't and you can't since they all started after the Protestant Revolution. Christian history is not on their side and Scripture is not on their side since they allow gay marriage and support a womans right to kill their baby among many other doctrinal errors.
Interesting side note: Every Protestant Reformer (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, et al) were Catholic before the Reformation! Every one of them! Then, through pride, they decided they knew better than the original teachings of Christ and His Church.
 

Augustin56

Well-Known Member
Apr 16, 2023
672
502
93
71
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Call no man Father , for your FATHER IS IN HEAVEN , you are brethren .
I never seemed to see one apostel call peter FATHER and the others brethren either . THEY WERE ALL EQUALS .
THIS is nothing more than man made traidtions by men who LOVED to have the pre emience , the recognition
and etc . They even call themselves MOST HOLY FATHER . THAT SHOULD BE THE TITLE OF GOD and not of man . this
instituion DUPED ITS PEOPLES BIG TIME .
amigo, all you've shown is that you don't know how to properly interpret Scripture. You use an English translation and filter it through your 21st century cultural lense, out of context. Error, error, error.
 

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,542
1,729
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Peter's successor, if elected or unanimously acclaimed, must have been elected or unanimously acclaimed the Bishop of Rome by some subset of Church leaders. Where is the legitimacy in that?
I think Scripture and the Council at Jerusalem are legitimate: ‘Let his dwelling place be desolate, And let no one live in it’; and, ‘Let another take his office.’
 

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,542
1,729
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Interesting side note: Every Protestant Reformer (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, et al) were Catholic before the Reformation! Every one of them! Then, through pride, they decided they knew better than the original teachings of Christ and His Church.
Good point. And to put it another way, they decided THEY knew the Truth (proper interpretation of Scripture) and everyone else was wrong including The Church.
 

Jude Thaddeus

Active Member
Apr 27, 2024
154
44
28
72
ontario
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Okay, I'll ask you the question John might have asked in 66 C.E. if you and he were having the conversation: Why could only the bishop of Rome qualify to be pope?
Because only the bishop of Rome succeeds Peter, who, with Paul, founded the church in Rome.
"by the Apostles" plural? Not by Peter alone? What did Iggy know that we don't?
You can find out by reading his 7 letters, accepted as authentic by several Protestant scholars, but rejected by Calvin as forgeries. That's where the opposing bias comes from.
 

Jude Thaddeus

Active Member
Apr 27, 2024
154
44
28
72
ontario
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Good point. And to put it another way, they decided THEY knew the Truth (proper interpretation of Scripture) and everyone else was wrong including The Church.
It's more complicated than that. Take away the politics and 'reformist' propaganda, the so called 'reformation' would have been a mere footnote in the putrid backwaters of history.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Augustin56

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,997
3,438
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Okay, I'll ask you the question John might have asked in 66 C.E. if you and he were having the conversation: Why could only the bishop of Rome qualify to be pope?
Because only the bishop of Rome succeeds Peter, who, with Paul, founded the church in Rome.
This is why the Early Church considered the Church at Rome to be Authority:

Ignatius of Antioch
You [the See of Rome] have envied no one, but others have you taught. I desire only that what you have enjoined in your instructions may remain in force (Epistle to the Romans 3:1 [A.D. 110]).

Irenaeus
With that church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree
, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition (Against Heresies 3:3:2 [inter A.D. 180-190]).

Cyprian
With a false bishop appointed for themselves by heretics, they dare even to set sail and carry letters from schismatics and blasphemers to the Chair of Peter and to the principal church [at Rome], in which sacerdotal unity has its source" (Epistle to Cornelius [Bishop of Rome] 59:14 [A.D. 252]).


Optatus
. . . anyone who would [presume to] set up another chair in opposition to that single chair would, by that very fact, be a schismatic and a sinner. . . . Recall, then, the origins of your chair, those of you who wish to claim for yourselves the title of holy Church" (The Schism of the Donatists 2:2 [circa A.D. 367]).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Augustin56

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,997
3,438
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No pope taught in the scriptures Therefore its heresy to claim a position of power that God never authorized.
Matt 16:16-19
And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. WHATEVER YOU BIND on earth shall be bound in heaven; and WHATEVER YOU LOOSE on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

John 21:15-19

When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon son of John, do you love me more than these?”
“Yes, Lord,” he said, “you know that I love you.”
Jesus said, “FEED MY LAMBS.”

Again Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you love me?”
He answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.”
Jesus said, “TAKE CARE OF MY SHEEP.”

The third time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?”
Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.”
Jesus said,
“FEED MY SHEEP.

YOUR turn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Augustin56

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,997
3,438
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Oh? Like the immaculate conception?
The Ark of the Covenant carried symbols of God’s power within it. It had to be inlaid with pure gold and purified and blessed.

How much MORE pure and blessed would the vessel that actually carried GOD Himself be?

OT - The Tabernacle that housed the Ark was overshadowed by the cloud of glory of the Lord (Shekinah glory) filled the Tabernacle (2 Chron. 5:13-14).
NT - Mary was overshadowed by the power of the Most High (Luke 1:35).

OT - The Word was written by God on Tablets of Stone (Ex. 25:10) placed inside the Ark (Deut. 10:1)
NT -
The Word of God became Flesh (John 1) conceived inside Mary (Luke 2:38) who carried the Word of God.

OT - "Who am I that the Ark of my Lord should come to me?" (2 Sam. 6:9)
NT -
"Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (Luke 1:43)

OT -
The When the Ark carrying the Word of God returned “David was leaping and dancing before the Lord” (2 Sam. 6:14)
NT -
When Mary came into Elizabeth's presence carrying the Word of God, the baby “leaped for joy” in Elizabeth's womb (Luke 2:38)

OT -
The Ark, carrying the Word of God is brought to the house of Obed-Edom in the hill country of Judea for 3 months, where it was a blessing. (2 Sam. 6:11)
NT - Mary (the new Ark) carrying the Word of God
goes to Elizabeth's house in the hill country of Judea for 3 months, where she is a blessing (Luke 1:56)

OT -
The Ark is captured (1 Sam 4:11) and brought to a foreign land and later returns (1 Sam 6:13)
NT -
Mary (the new Ark) is exiled to a foreign land (Egypt) and later returns (Matt. 2:14)

OT -
On the Day of the Dedication of the Temple which Solomon built, there were 120 priests present (2 Chron. 5:11). The Ark of the covenant was carried into the Temple (2 Chron. 5:7) and fire came down from Heaven to consume the burnt offering (2 Chron. 7:7).
NT - On the Day of Pentecost, there were 120 disciples of Jesus present in the Upper Room (Acts 1:15). Mary, the Mother of Jesus and the Ark of the NEW Covenant was also present while the Holy Spirit came down as tongues of fire (Acts 2:3).

In the Book of Revelation, we see the Ark of the Covenant in Heaven being spoken of at the very end of Chapter 11, verse 19: Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant could be seen in the temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a violent hailstorm.

The very next verse is in Chapter 12 (Rev 12:1): A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.

Verse 2 says: She was with child and wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give birth.

We know that this child is Jesus because in verse 4, we read: She gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod.
There is simply no getting around the fact that the Woman here in Revelation 12 is Mary.

Finally – the Greek word is kecharitomene that Luke used in his Gospel (v.1:28), which is the perfect passive participle, indicates a completed action with a permanent result. Thus it translates, “completely, perfectly, enduringly endowed with grace.” It is used as a title – a name.

The Angel didn’t say, “Hail Mary, full of grace.” He said, Hail,
Kecharitomene.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: Augustin56

Augustin56

Well-Known Member
Apr 16, 2023
672
502
93
71
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It's more complicated than that. Take away the politics and 'reformist' propaganda, the so called 'reformation' would have been a mere footnote in the putrid backwaters of history.
And had the German feifdoms in the northern/eastern part of what is now a united Germany not sided with Martin Luther, it would have faded away into a brief footnote of history. The German feifdoms who sided with Martin Luther didn't side with him because of his theology. They were hurting for money and figured they could confiscate Catholic monasteries with their vineyards, etc., and add to their coffers by doing so. In other words, it was for money, not theology.

Interesting side note, after WWII, when Germany was divided between East Germany (Communists) and West Germany (free), the line between the two was almost identical to the line that divided Protestants from Catholics in what is now Germany.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jude Thaddeus

amigo de christo

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2020
24,095
41,037
113
52
San angelo
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
amigo, all you've shown is that you don't know how to properly interpret Scripture. You use an English translation and filter it through your 21st century cultural lense, out of context. Error, error, error.
its the popes and vatican , as well as tons and scores of others even in the protestant realm WHICH NO LONGER
can interpret scrips . THEY BEEN FOLLOWING MEN FOR YEARS . wise scholary men that led them
FAR from GOD and CHRIST . and they all pretty much have one thing in common .
THE BIBLE TOO HARD for one to learn , COME SIT UNDER US they all say . YEAH , RIGHT . they twist stuff
to fit their own precepts .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marvelloustime

Augustin56

Well-Known Member
Apr 16, 2023
672
502
93
71
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
its the popes and vatican , as well as tons and scores of others even in the protestant realm WHICH NO LONGER
can interpret scrips . THEY BEEN FOLLOWING MEN FOR YEARS . wise scholary men that led them
FAR from GOD and CHRIST . and they all pretty much have one thing in common .
THE BIBLE TOO HARD for one to learn , COME SIT UNDER US they all say . YEAH , RIGHT . they twist stuff
to fit their own precepts .
Then you are accusing Jesus of lying. Jesus promised that the "gates of hell" would never "prevail" against His Church. Yet, you claim they have. The Catholic Church, which is the original Church, personally founded by Christ, recieved the entirety of Divine Revelation from Christ. It has never claimed the right to change any of Christ's teachings, and it never has.

Protestantism didn't begin until the 16th century. And every Protestant Reformer (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, etc.) were CATHOLICS before they turned their back on Christ's Church. They pridefully believed that they had the authority to change the doctrines of Christ according to their own interpretations. And what has been the result? Literally tens of thousands of man-made, doctrinally contradicting Protestant denominations (and counting), with NO unity of faith or belief. How can that possibly be the grounding for the fullness of truth which Christ brought us? Simply, it can't. Any truth you know about Christ came FROM the Catholic Church. Unless you claim that Christ came back and appeared to you personally? Or an angel? The New Testament came from the Catholic Church which preceded it. If you trust the Catholic Church to tell you which books belonged in the New Testament (which it decided in the late 4th century) then why not trust the Catholic Church to tell you how to interpret it? The Catholic Church has the interpretation of the Apostles. Not some bozo coming along 16 or more centuries later, personally interpreting Scripture according to his own light, out of context.

If the Catholic interpretation of Scripture is at odds with your personal interpretation of Scripture, your first reaction should be to assume that YOU are wrong, and you should seek to find out why. Not assume yours is correct.
 

Attachments

  • CatholicBible.png
    CatholicBible.png
    708.3 KB · Views: 1
  • Like
Reactions: Jude Thaddeus

Brakelite

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2020
8,668
6,462
113
Melbourne
brakelite.wordpress.com
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Good point. And to put it another way, they decided THEY knew the Truth (proper interpretation of Scripture) and everyone else was wrong including The Church.
Well, the church was wrong, in many many ways. What was Luther's 90 odd thesis all about that he nailed to the church door? Have you read them?
Obey them that have the rule over you
I agree with that. We just don't agree as to who has that rule. Priests, prelates, bishops, pastors, who do not themselves live according to truth?
if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
And when the church lives and behaves and teaches theories and fables similar to a pagan and tax collector? God gave you a modicum of intelligence to know that when the church itself fulfills what the apostle Paul warned about, the great falling away...
KJV 2 Timothy 3:1-5
1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

Such was the state of the church in the time of the reformers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amigo de christo

RedFan

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2022
1,370
605
113
69
New Hampshire
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Then you are accusing Jesus of lying. Jesus promised that the "gates of hell" would never "prevail" against His Church. Yet, you claim they have.
I wonder if we can all agree that the assault on the "gates of hell" has yet to be mounted. The prophecy that those gate will not withstand the Church's assault (not the Church repelling Satan, but Satan's gates being unable to repel the Church) is the end game. We're not there yet.