How are the members and the Church going to reverse the teachings of Christ?
______________________________________
That ship sailed in the 3rd Century. When Roman Catholicism began.
4th, not 3rd.
And which teachings were those?
That is historically false
You can read it in scripture in Matthew 16:18-19, John 21:15-17 and most especially the Church's birth at Pentecost circa 33 AD when the Holy Spirit descended on the apostles, and Peter preached, baptizing 3,000 (Acts 2:41). This marks the public beginning of the Christian community under apostolic leadership. This shows a ructured community led by Peter and the apostles in Jerusalem within the 1st century.
This is also corroborated historically by early Christian writings
1 Clement 42–44: Clement, the fourth pope, writes that the apostles appointed bishops and provided for their succession, indicating continuity from the 1st century.
Early sources like Ignatius of Antioch (circa 107 CE, Letter to the Romans) and Irenaeus of Lyons (circa 180 CE, Against Heresies 3.3.2) affirm Peter’s leadership in Rome and the Roman church’s preeminence.
Ignatiurs of Antioch in his letters c. 197 AD refers to the “Catholic Church” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 8.2), one of the earliest uses of the term, describing a universal Church with a clear structure of bishops, including Rome’s prominence.
This is also corroborated in the Didache - dated to 55 AD which describes baptism, Eucharist, and communal prayer, mirroring Catholic practices.
And Justin Martyr’s First Apology (circa 150 CE) details a liturgy recognizable as Catholic, including Eucharist and readings, rooted in 1st-century traditions.
This is proven archaeologically when the excavations beneath St. Peter’s Basilica in the 1940s–1960s uncovered a 1st-century necropolis with a tomb venerated as Peter’s, marked by inscriptions and early Christian graffiti (e.g., “Peter is here”). Pope Pius XII (1942) and later studies confirmed its association with Peter’s martyrdom (circa 64–67 CE). --> the veneration of Peter’s tomb in Rome by the 1st century supports the claim that the Roman church was a central apostolic seat from its earliest days.
The House churches and catacombs like the Catacomb of San Sebastiano from the 1st–2nd centuries show organized Christian worship, consistent with a structured Church.
nwrep's nonsense about the 4th century is the familiar Constantine myth - easily disproved by the fact that the Assyrian Church under the Sassanid Persian empire, and the Marthomite church in Kerala, India, had split from the CAtholic-Orthodox-Oriental Church in 240 AD and they retain the episcopal structure, the dogma about the Theotokos, Trinity etc, the belief in the True Presence of Christ in the Eucharist etc.
The fact is that historically, linguistically and archaeologically, the Church was founded in the 1st century - evidenced through biblical texts (Matthew 16:18–19, Acts 2), early Christian writings (1 Clement, Ignatius, Irenaeus), archaeological evidence (Peter’s tomb), and liturgical continuity (Didache, Justin Martyr). Claims of a 3rd/4th-century origin reflect the Church’s institutional growth post-Constantine, not its founding, as pre-Constantinian evidence shows an established Roman church with apostolic roots.