True authority is founded in credibility. Absent credibility there is no true authority. Moses, Elijah, Jesus, Peter, and more all had credibility and it was upon that credibility that their authority was founded.
To say that a child raping Archbishop can have authority “when teaching authoritatively, to say things that ought to be listened to” is foolishness. Were Bishop Weakland to utter the gilded dulcet words of the angels themselves those words word be lost to me because of who was saying them.
My father used to have a favorite saying: “Who you are speaks so loudly that I cannot hear what you say.”
If the appointed church leader is beneath contempt, I really don’t care what he has to say. What I’m wondering is why he’s still in his job? Why isn’t he in jail? Why are his colleagues protecting him by their inaction in standing against him? Why are, in some cases, church leaders protecting child rapists in order to protect their own reputations?
See, even the most perfect message gets lost in all of that.
In the sum, the messenger cannot distract from the message.
And a church that thinks this way is no church of my God.
Stuff and nonsense.
True authority is founded in God, whether any human recognizes it or not.
Moses, Elijah, Jesus, Peter, and more all had credibility and it was upon that credibility that their authority was founded.
Nonsense again. They had true authority because God gave it to them, and for no other reason. It had nothing to do with something so amorphous and ephemeral as "credibility".
So ... the rest of your post is meaningless.