|
As a
4-year-old child in a family of devout Roman Catholics,
I could recite by heart Matthew 16:18 and 19 long before
I could read or write. On cue, when prompted by parent
or sibling, I would emote as follows:
"Thou art Peter, and
upon this rock I will build my church,
and the gates of hell
shall not prevail against it. And I will
give unto thee the
keys of the kingdom of heaven, and what-
soever thou shalt bind
upon earth shall be bound in heaven,
and whatsoever thou
shalt loose upon earth shall be loosed
in heaven.”
Those
words, I was taught, spoken by Christ to the Apostle
Peter, prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Peter was
the first pope, and that he was the rock on which Christ
built His Church - the Roman Catholic Church, the
only true Church. It is upon these two vitally
important Scriptures, therefore, that the entire Roman
Catholic monolith is supported. For, if Peter is not
Catholicism’s foundation rock, if he was not the
first pope, if he was not endowed with
infallibility, then all its popes have been frauds, and
all its claims of divine authorization are reduced to
wishful vagaries. In this critical matter, history – not
anti-Catholic "heretics" – is the Vatican’s most
relentless, indefatigable enemy.
It shows, for
example, that no bishop of Rome considered himself to
have any greater authority than the many other bishops,
nor sought monarchial authority over all Christendom,
until the 3rd century was well underway.
Then, Calixtus I, whose most celebrated accomplishment
recorded in Britannica is the transfer of the Roman
Christians’ cemetery from the Via Salaria to the Via
Appia, attempted to hijack our Lord’s legacy by citing
Matthew 16:18 as the establishment of Peter and all
succeeding bishops of Rome to be rulers over all the
churches. Putting a wagon in a garage does not make it
an automobile; and declaring oneself to be the boss
doesn’t produce a boss. The great Tertullian, bishop of
Carthage, ridiculed Calixtus and his claim, referring to
him as a “usurper.” In its Catechisms the Vatican quotes
Tertullian whenever it is expedient, but you won’t find
his appellation for Calixtus I in any RCC printed
matter.
Nor will you
find Rome confessing to the faithful Roman Catholic
laity, that the great Augustine, joined by Cyril,
Hilary, Basil, Ambrose, Jerome, Chrysostom, Gregory of
Nyssa, and delegates to the Council of Chalcedon,
declared the rock upon which Christ would build His
Church was Christ himself, not the Apostle Peter. That
is not this writer’s opinion or pipedream. That is hard,
cold, unyielding history. In his 13th sermon,
preserved I believe by divine intent, Augustine made his
belief perfectly clear.
“Thou art Peter, and on this Rock
– petra – which thou hast confessed,
on this rock which thou hast
known, saying: ‘Thou art Christ, the Son
of the living God,’ I will build
my church upon Myself, who am the Son
of the living God; I will build it
on Me, and not Me on thee.”
Roman
Catholic apologists have called this writer some
unflattering names for stating that there was no pope
and no papacy for more than 500 years after Christ
returned to heaven. But history is history, and all the
name calling in the world will not alter the fact that
Augustine spoke the previously quoted words during his
years in Africa as bishop of Hippo – get this, now – in
the first third of the FIFTH CENTURY. Moreover,
Augustine’s conviction – based on a correct
interpretation of the Scriptures - that Jesus Himself
was the foundation rock of Christianity, was shared
almost 100% by the churches existing at that time.
Following the
abortive attempt of Calixtus I to seize control of
Christendom, Stephen I, bishop of Rome AD 253-257, took
a shot at it citing as his authority some newly
discovered documents now known as the pseudo-Clementine
Letters and Homilies. This spurious collection contained
a forged letter allegedly written by Peter to James the
Lord’s brother in which he appoints Clement to be his
successor as bishop of Rome, with binding and loosing
authority unlimited. Since Linus and Cletus, according
to church historian Eusebius, were, in that order, the
first two known bishops of Rome, the authenticity of the
purported Petrine letter was at once an issue, and
Stephen’s effort failed as miserably as that of Calixtus
I.
So, even
when Constantine the Great convoked the famous Council
of Nicaea early in the FOURTH CENTURY there was no pope
and no papacy. Constantine, who is not listed as a pope
in Rome’s papal lineage, himself assumed the leadership
of the churches and took the title Pontifex Maximus –
highest priest. Inasmuch as the
Pontifex Maximus title is one of the many applied to
Roman Catholic popes, Sylvester, bishop of Rome at the
time, should have had that title if he was the reigning
pope. He was not the pope or a pope, and he was not even
in attendance at the AD 325 Council of Nicaea.
In that
fourth century, five episcopates emerged as
jurisdictional centers to which individual independent
churches could look for counsel in ecclesiastical
matters. These five were Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria,
Constantinople, and Rome. In AD 387, just before the
Roman Empire split into separate East and West
divisions, Siricius, another bishop of Rome, once again
tried to highjack Christendom, and with the same result
as Calixtus and Stephen. Nobody paid any attention.
More history,
easily checked by those seeking truth and not
vindication of false teachings: at the FIFTH CENTURY
Council of Carthage, (AD 412) convoked by that city’s
bishop Aurelius, the assembled prelates drafted a letter
to the bishop of Rome warning him not to accept for
ruling appeals from African bishops, deacons or other
clerics. Besides that, he was forbidden to send any
further emissaries or legates to the African churches.
In another council of African churches, that one at
Melvie, Augustine was the secretary. History shows he
fully supported the synod’s decree of excommunication
leveled at any in the African churches who would seek
settlement of appeals or disputes outside of Africa or
from the Roman See.
The actual
hijacking of Christendom by the bishops of Rome, then,
did not take place in the first 500 years after Christ.
In truth, it hasn’t really taken place at all, because
the eastern branch of Christendom has never accepted
Rome’s self-assumed primacy. For the beginning of
the successful takeover of the western branch of
Christianity – the Latin churches - we must move to the
very middle of the FIFTH CENTURY, to the episcopate of
Leo 1 (Leo the Great), bishop of Rome AD 440-461. He
assumed the title, “Primate of All Bishops,” and for
validation of his theft obtained the endorsement of
Western Roman Emperor Valentinian III. Wonderful!
A self-styled “Vicar of Christ” seeking – not the
approval of God - but the approval of a secular entity
to be the “Vicar of Christ.”
Leo
intimidated a lot of people by his various claims, one
of which was, “Lord of the Whole Church,” but when he
declared that resisting his absolute authority would
condemn a soul to the fires of hell, the delegates to
the AD 451 Council of Chalcedon put their collective
feet down. Leo was denied his endorsement, and at the
end of the fifth century, there still was no pope and no
papacy. What amazes about all this is how the Vatican
has been able to obliterate the actual early Church
history, successfully replacing it with the fairytales
of “apostolic succession” and an “unbroken chain of
popes” stretching all the way back to Peter.
The first
bishop of Rome to wield the kind of power for which the
papacy is now known, was Gregory 1 (Gregory the Great)
whose 14-year episcopate began in the very last decade
of the SIXTH CENTURY – AD 590-604. But this man was
adamantly opposed to the very papal office that the
Vatican insists he occupied as the 64th successor to the
Apostle Peter. In a letter to Maurice, the Emperor,
Gregory had this to say:
“I confidently
affirm that who so calls himself, or desires to be
called Universal Priest, (Pontifex Maximus), in his
pride goes before anti-Christ……St. Peter is not called
Universal Apostle ….Far from CHRISTIAN (not Catholic)
hearts be that blasphemous name.”
To the bishop of Antioch in
another letter, Gregory wrote that the title of
Universal (Catholic) Bishop was:
“profane, superstitious,
haughty, and invented by the first apostate."
No matter that Gregory I
refused such a signal honor, and believed that anyone
claiming to be universal (katholikos) bishop would in
fact be Anti-Christ. A successor, Boniface III, AD
607-8, coerced the Emperor, Phocas, to confer upon him
that very title of Universal Bishop, papa, or pope, of
all Christendom. The eastern churches refused to submit
to his self-assumed authority, however, so Boniface and
all his successors have had to settle for a partial
monarchy ruling only the western churches. Historically,
then Rome’s claims of a papacy begun with Peter and
stretching down the annals of time to the present are
proven falsehoods.
And, even after Boniface III
succeeded in gaining for bishops of Rome the coveted
title of papa, there was stubborn resistance to their
claimed authority lasting into the ninth century. Then,
in the episcopate of Nicholas I (Nicholas the Great),
bishop of Rome AD 858-867, documents known today as the
pseudo-Isidorean Decretals appeared on the stage of
history. Contained in this fortuitous discovery were
letters allegedly written by “popes” prior to Nicaea (AD
325) and from Clement 1 to Miltiades. All are
blatant forgeries! (They had to be, for there
were no popes and no papacy in that time frame.)
Also included in the
collection were letters of popes from Sylvester 1 (4th
century) to Gregory II (8th century) in which
are more than 40 falsifications. But the most
pope-friendly inclusion in the decretals was a document
entitled, “The Donation of Constantine.” Thought to be
authentic for 600 years, and used successfully by
bishops of Rome as grounds for their claims to primacy,
it actually contained the ultimate proof that popes and
the papacy are NOT DIVINELY ORDAINED, but are simply
another invention of mere mortals.
On the one hand, Rome teaches
that Christ ordained Peter as the head of His Church,
the rock on which it was founded, and the first pope.
But for 600 years – from the ninth to the fifteenth
century, the Donation of Constantine was invoked as the
historical event granting to bishops of Rome
ecclesiastical authority over all of Christendom and its
episcopates, and temporal power over Rome and the entire
Western Roman Empire.
Allegedly donated by Constantine the Great to Sylvester
1, bishop of Rome AD 314-335, it was used by Nicholas I
to dispel opposition to popes and the papacy, and
history shows that, from the ninth century to the
present, bishops of Rome have been unopposed as
exclusive occupants of the office of pope. In
AD 1054, Leo IX tried to use
the Donation of Constantine to secure control of the
eastern as well as the western churches. The patriarch
of Constantinople suggested Leo should mind his own
business, and the split of the eastern (Orthodox)
churches from Rome became permanent thereafter.
The Donation of Constantine
was shown to be a deliberate forgery in AD 1440 by
Lorenzo Valla, but not before the Vatican had used it to
permanently secure its position of primacy over the
entire western church, and to exercise nearly absolute
control over kings and nations for 500 years as well.
What is most interesting about this forged document and
Rome’s use of it, is the secular source from which Rome
allegedly derived its ecclesiastical and temporal power
- its papacy. Where in history do we find Constantine
invested with the power and authority to appoint a
monarch over the Church of the living God? Isn’t the use
of the Donation of Constantine by numerous popes
eloquent proof that popes and the papacy are frauds, not
initiated by Christ, but founded on the forged documents
of men greedy for power?
John
Schroeder is the author of
Heresies of Catholicism...The Apostate Church.
John was reared in a devout Catholic family, and
educated from elementary school through university in
Catholic institutions. At age 52, a gift Bible and the
guidance of the Holy Spirit brought about his conversion
to Biblical Christianity. Now retired, he resides with
wife, Claudia (also delivered from Catholicism into a
personal relationship with Jesus Christ), outside
Atlanta, Georgia. Contender Ministries is happy to
welcome him as a contributing author. He has a love and
a burden for the Catholic people surpassed only by his
love for God. Please visit
John’s website, "Escaped Catholics Saved by Grace".
|