OK. Then which church should we take our disagreements to, as Jesus instructed us? If not the (one) church that Christ founded, which one?
And if no such doctrinal authority exists, Christ's words would be void and meaningless, which is an impossibility, since He is God.
If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
Well it seems like our disagreements over global warming has been decided by the Roman Catholic pope...
of course the LORD Jesus Christ didn’t found the global warming heresy..
but then neither did He found the Roman Catholic Church...
Still posting your quite visible bias after being called on it SO many times; eh?
15 But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.
16 And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand.
17 And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.
Whatever the local congregation of genuine believers happens to be. I thought you had a hard question here.
That was speaking of the real and actual church and it's episcopacy, not the Latin Church alone with it's inherent corruptions of singular papacy (one bishop over all other bishops, etc.) among other things, including churches in more place than Rome alone having allowed influences from paganism and superstitions to become mixed & syncretized with the gospel.
Same to you, X10. You've probably posted that same comment a thousand times on this forum...so however may times, right back at where that came from...
How many times does it need to be explained?
There was no single 'pope' over the entire Church from the beginning.
It was not founded and designed to be that way.
When one can make it through all the blathering blarney to the contrary well enough that even Rome's own promoters are forced to admit to the truth of there having been no singular bishop over all others, then what comes out as the excuse making for that but 'acorn theory', with apologists for Rome trying to say it was always there "in essence" etc., in effort to justify past developments, inventions & corruptions.
There was rather loose & informal episcopacy in the beginning centuries of the Church, but there was not the bishopric of Rome named or created as bishop of bishops over all others. Rome Alone attributed that to their own bishopric. And it took many centuries for that to unfold.
Yet now, it is almost impossible to talk about how the church was in its more original inception, at least to Romanists.
Its as if they can't get it through their heads that significant portions of what they've been taught. was long ago corrupted, the truth twisted into what is not true, with that blended in with things which are true enough.
Yet these same Romanist insist everyone else is wrong and must agree with them, or not be part of the Church.
It's like squatters long ago took up residence within the Church, and turned it aside from its original charter, substituting doctrines of men in place of the gospel of Christ, and are now continuing to be confused about the actual order of Christianity itself, having become prisoner of their own inventions.
So drop that "if they refuse to listen to the Church" truncated, out of context citing of Matthew 18:17 noise, when that is addressed to Christians, on this forum, until the mistake of believing that the Roman Catholic Church was the one which was being spoken about, even to the exclusion of any and all others, at any point which they may disagree with 'Rome'.
The passage is about how to deal with a brother who is sinning against oneself.
In that view, being as the RCC has long sinned corporately against others in seeking to dominate all, even to the ends of the earth, blending kingdoms of the earth with the kingdom of God (even to having been tax assigners & collectors both, in past history!) then for those who turn aside and away from Rome as they would a heathen or tax collector, cannot have that shunning of the claims which 'Rome' makes exclusive of itself lodged against themselves as complaint, for the shunning is not without justification.
So hit the road, jack.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who is getting sick of hearing that passage being misapplied, as has been your own long habit of doing.