This is not a caucus thread. You are more than welcome to post your view.
Yes, I do believe what I posted simply because it is fact. Jesus founded one Church, not many. Christ stated that the Church was to be the final authority, not Scripture - "And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the Church: but if he neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican." (Matthew 18:17 ) The Church is Christ's bride (Ephesians 5:29) and has "no spot, wrinkle or blemish" (Ephesians 5:27). Christ also stated that the gates of Hell will not prevail against His Church (Matthew 16:18) so the Church cannot commit error. In its 2000 year history, not one pope (no matter how bad) has ever erred in matters of faith or morals. No other institution can make the same claim. This is testimony to the fact that the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit.
The Church is to be organized (1 Timothy 3:1,8; Titus 1:7 ). As for authority, it was St. Peter alone that was the "rock" upon which Christ established His Church (Matthew 16:18). And it was St. Peter alone that was given the task of "feeding" Christ's sheep (John 21:15-17 ). Scripture clearly points out St. Peter as Christ's representative on earth. According to Scripture, Christ wanted us to be one (John 17:22-23). We are all as a Church to be of one mind and to think the same (Philippians 2:2; Romans 15:5). There is only to be one "faith" (Ephesians 4:3-6), not many. For the Church is Christ's Body and Christ only had one Body, not many.
Scripture is very straightforward on this issue. One Church .. not many.
This is often quoted as "Jesus giving authority" to the church and church alone. Yet you completely take it out of context by ignoring what Jesus was commanding you to refer to the church; see Matthew 18:15-17 for the full context:
15 "If your brother sins (against you), go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother.16 If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that 'every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.'
17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.
The church has authority to adjudicate in sins between Christians, and only after you cannot resolve it between the two parties, or between the two parties and a few fellow believers; that is not in dispute, and is what Jesus actually said.
You twist the Word of Christ when you remove the context of His words. Clearly they relate to sins between Christians, not to all things possible in the World, and certainly not to who has authority over the teachings of Christ. And note that the church is to be appealed to only AFTER individuals or a small group cannot come to agreement. You are to take it to the church only at that point.
Scripture is clear on one Church. It is not correct that Peter was the Vicar of Christ, or that he passed on Apostolic Authority.
Some of the statements that you make are not only denied by non-Catholics, but even by Catholics. To say that the popes have never erred in doctrine or morals is about like someone saying Adolf Hitler never killed Jews. The problem is that the Church of Christ is not the same as the Roman Church. The Roman Catholic denomination is a purely human institution which has nothing in common with which Jesus instituted. The “rock” is not the person of Peter, but his confession. Christ is the head of the church, not the pope. It is Christ who will build is Church, and everyone that confesses that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, is the church.
*****not one pope (no matter how bad) has ever erred in matters of faith or morals.*****
OF course this is complete nonsense...
I found this little tid-bit in response to one of your statements:::
Question: I heard that there were very immoral popes, some of them had mistresses and children, and others used simony to obtain that office. Is it true?
Answer: There were some evil and immoral popes; but I am not convinced that it is particularly edifying to go through all the filth and corruption of papal history. A few examples should suffice.
Pope Honorius was condemned as a heretic by the Sixth Ecumenical Council. Pope Christopher became pope by forcibly dethroning his predecessor, Leo V, and putting him into prison. He was then driven from the chair by his successor, Sergius III. Pope John XII was a coarse, immoral man, whose life was such that the Lateran was spoken of as a a house of prostitution, and the moral corruption in Rome became the subject of general odium. Pope Benedict IX sold the papacy to Pope Gregory VI for a large sum of money. Pope Clement VI imposed taxes, sold beneficiaries and squandered the church riches on pompous banquets and receptions. Pope Alexander VI was known for murder, bribery, and selling positions of authority in the Catholic Church. Pope Gregory VII and his successors used forged documents in order to expand the power of the papacy.
Someone may say, “Granted, there were some evil Popes — what does that prove about the papacy as an institution?”
The Bible warns God’s people against false prophets and false teachers. Our Lord Jesus told his disciples: “Beware of false prophets.” And he told us how to identify them: “You will know them by their fruits” (Matthew 7:15, 16). The apostle Peter mentions their covetousness: “In their greed these teachers will exploit” the church (2 Peter 2:3); Jude mentions their immoral character: “ungodly men, who turn the grace of our God into lewdness...walk according to their own ungodly lusts...sensual persons” (Jude 1:4, 18, 19); while the apostle Paul describes the character of a genuine bishop: “blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money” (Titus 1:7).
We do not suggest that all popes were immoral like the ones mentioned above; in fact, most of them were not. Nor do we suggest that immorality only infects the Roman Catholic hierarchy. Pastors and teachers in evangelical churches, as well as Catholic popes, bishops and priests, have been exposed as hypocrites.
But there is a great difference. As evangelical Christians we identify and honour a pastor as a worthy minister of Christ if he faithfully preachers the apostolic message and if his life is consistent with his message. We do not hesitate to identify immoral and greedy ministers as false teachers no matter what they claim to be. They are false teachers!
Take Peter and Judas as examples. Both were apostles of Jesus Christ. Both made very serious mistakes — Peter denied the Lord, and Judas betrayed him. Yet Peter repented and was restored to the ministry, while Judas did not, and was disowned by the church.
But Catholics cannot follow the guidance of Scriptures to expose false teachers. They are not allowed by the magisterium. If a Pope had been lawfully elected, he must be considered a true Pope, the Vicar of Christ and head of the entire church, no matter how morally and spiritually decadent. One Catholic author wrote in all seriousness: “Even a bad and immoral Pope cannot be deposed. The faithful can only pray for his conversion of heart or that Saint Joseph bless him with a happy and speedy death if his behavior becomes scandalous.” Catholics are obliged to submit to “Judas” even after he is exposed as a false teacher by his treachery and impenitence.
Benedict XVI is the 265th Pope according to the current list of Popes – and these include the apostates mentioned above and others like them. They cannot take them out of the list, of course, even though they admit that they were grossly immoral; otherwise the Vatican would have nothing to hang its claim to apostolic authority. The chain must be intact. But what good is a chain if even one of its link is corroded, let alone if there are a score of rusty links? It still breaks down at the weak links and the claimed apostolic authority of the papacy falls to the ground and breaks in pieces.