Peter was not the head of the apostles. That title belongs to Christ alone.
"Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am." -- John 13:13
The bishops are not the "successors" to the apostles. The apostles had no successors and Peter had no successor because in order to succeed the apostles a man needed to be a witness to Christ's resurrection.
Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection." -- Acts 1:21-22"Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
The Magisterium is not the authoritative teacher of the church. That title belongs to the Holy Spirit alone.
"But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." -- John 14:26
He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you." -- John 16:13-14"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
"But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him." -- 1 John 2:27
And the primary means of this instruction is the word of God made known to us by the gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit.
I realize this unsettles many members of the RCC who feel adrift at having to search the Scriptures for themselves, and thus they prefer to rely on what they are told by an authoritarian body of fallible, inconsistent men. But that is not God's plan or purpose in giving us His word.
According to Catholic doctrine, [Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century] do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery[19] cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called "Churches" in the proper sense[20].
According to Scripture, there is no such thing as "apostolic succession." Those who have been given true faith in Jesus Christ are the church of Christ, guided by teachers and pastors, none of whom are "successors to the apostles."
According to Scripture, there is no such thing as "sacrament of orders." There are only two sacraments in the New Testament, Baptism and the Lord's Supper.
According to Scripture, there is no "sacramental priesthood;" there is the priesthood of all believers who make up Christ's church on earth.
The "eucharistic mystery," or transubstantiation is a pagan abomination of the true spiritual sustenance Christ instituted at the Last Supper of our Lord.
The church of Jesus Christ on earth is made up of all the elect of God, from all the nations and races and eras, chosen by Him from before the foundation of the world to be among His family.
"According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved." -- Ephesians 1:4-6"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." -- Romans 10:13
As for being "proper," there are some churches more pure than others. As the Westminster Confession of Faith states (including footnoted Scriptural proofs)...
"V. The purest Churches under heaven are subject both to mixture and error;[10] and some have so degenerated, as to become no Churches of Christ, but synagogues of Satan.[11] Nevertheless, there shall be always a Church on earth to worship God according to His will.[12]
The Westminster Confession of Faith
Chapter XXV
Paragraph VI:
There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ.[13] Nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God.[14]
Acts 1:21-22 says no such thing.
I've been thinking of this question recently, and this is why I asked it of Tao Yin. I'd be interested to hear what you think of it.
As I asked Tao Yin, if the Holy Spirit can guide and teach individual men truth (which I do believe He can, I just don't believe that can be used as a justification for rejecting Church authority), then why can't He guide an entire Church in the same way? After all, the Church (on Earth) is comprised of men, so, if we believe the Holy Spirit can and does teach men on an individual level, then why is it so hard to believe He would teach an entire body of men, or at least keep that body of men from making any mistake that would doom them for eternity (which is really less than actually "teaching" them something, it's just keeping them from error)?
Thank you for sharing your own personal interpretation of Scripture.
This analysis makes Christ a liar.
Truly I believe the difference between Catholicism and Protestantism is the perspective of the observer - physical or spiritual.
The Gospel of John reveals Jesus as God. The Gospel of Luke reveals Jesus as Man. Both are Truth. It’s not an either/or.
Following the revelation that God is Light (I John 1:5) - I have often used the metaphor of a seven-faceted diamond (God’s revelation to us) to illustrate the difference in perspective between Catholics and Protestants as if two people are looking at the same seven-faceted diamond but from different facets.
The one sees images in the diamond - himself, his forebears, saints, etc. - and thus sees that to honor those images is to honor the Light which illuminates them. His emphasis is on the images, the physical. In this case, the physical Apostolic succession by laying on of hands.
The other looks into the diamond and is blinded by Light. He sees no images at all and thus, to him, seeing images in the diamond is to miss the revelation of God altogether. His emphasis is on the Light alone, the Spiritual. In this case, the Spiritual succession, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit by the will of God alone.
It is the same diamond and the same Light. As long as the one is aware of analogical knowledge (the picture of a man is not the man, the statue of Christ on the cross is not Christ on the cross) - he will not fall into Spiritual error.
Protestants, for instance, focus on God accomplishing His will through men of His own choosing; Catholics, the submission of the saints to God’s will (e.g. Mary.)
Likewise, Catholic doctrine focuses on Jesus as Man and thus the involvement of Mary (the illuminated image in the diamond) whereas Protestants focus on Jesus as God (the Light itself.)
In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. - John 1:1-5
I submit that it is a matter of perspective – not either/or. For one to be “right” the other doesn’t have to be “wrong.”
The bottom line is that no matter what one "sees" in the diamond, there is only one Great Commandment:
John 13:13 does not say "alone". Peter was renamed, promised to become the foundation of the Church and keeper of the gate to the Kingdom, and indeed was told to "feed the sheep". He is called "chief of the apostles" a number of times in the patristic literature. Everyone is aware of these scriptures, and no one is disputing that Christ is the Lord.
The apostles had no successors
Wrong, Timothy and Titus are successors to St. Paul. Acts 1:21-22 that you quote only refers to the apostels themselves and not the bishops they consecrate. You should really read the Bible every once in a while between posts, "doctor".
The Magisterium is not the authoritative teacher of the church [John 14:26, John 16:13-14, 1 John 2:27]
Sure it is, Matthew 18:18. No one is disputing that the Holy Ghost leads the Church, just like the verses you quote explain.
According to Scripture,...
According to what scripture? You did not quote anything remotely pertinent.