Being an ex-Catholic, I know where you are coming from. But History is a great teachers if one only takes the time to learn from it, which I do the best I can to learn the truth it contains. I take it you are not all that aquainted with history. Up to the end of the fourth century the popes called themselves "vicars of Peter", but since the fifth century, "vicars of Christ". The name "pope" (papa) or "father", was in AD 500 "appropriatd to the Roman pontiff, it having formally been the title of all bishops alike" (Gibbon, vii, i., page 37). That title, which you apply to all "priests" also, was given by a Roman Council to Gelasius, Bishop of Rome in the 5th century: "We behold in thee Chirst's vicar" (Hardouin, ii., 946-947).
Cardinal Bellarmine, in his Treatise on the Roman Pontiff (De Rom. Pont. Lib. ii. Ch. XXXI., Ingoldstadt, 1839), said: "Pope: Father of Fathers; the Pontiff of Christians, High Priest, the Vicar of Christ, the Head of the Body, that is of the Church, the foundation of the building of the Church; the Father and Doctor of the faithful; the Ruler of the House of God; the Keeper of God's Vineyard; the Bridegroom of the Church; the Ruler of the Apostolic See; the Universal Bishop." And in his "De Conciliorum Auctoritate Lib. ii., ch. XVII." "All the names which are given in the Scriptures to Christ (where it appears that He is superior to the Church) - all these names are given to the Pope."
What more do you want me to say? This is so far from being what was taught in the beginning of the church that it is nothing but the pride of mortal men to bring glory and power to themselves. All Christians should be preaching the good news of Christ, not a church. It is Christ that saves, not an organization.
Further, Coptic patriarchs all are called popes. It is just a word, something I rarely have the mind to argue about.
Thanks.
AMEN, TD.
INDEED! INDEED. That is exceedingly true.