Author Topic: Apostolic Succession  (Read 8782 times)

Peter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 8702
  • the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
Apostolic Succession
« on: April 04, 2008, 06:44:49 PM »
This is one of the most important initial subjects for folks in the Roman Church.

The doctrine of apostolic succession was a third century suggestion by Cyprian, but didn't become Roman Church dogma until the 11th century.

Peter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 8702
  • the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
Re: Apostolic Succession
« Reply #1 on: June 28, 2008, 04:38:31 PM »
Table of Contents to "Catholic Concerns" and path to the PDF http://petewaldo.com/catholic_concerns.htm

by Mary Ann Collins

The Roman Catholic Church paints a picture of an orderly chain of succession of popes who followed in the footsteps of the Apostle Peter. If even one of these men was not a valid Pope, then the chain is broken.

What does it take to be a valid Pope? What does the Bible say are the minimum requirements for Church leaders? A Pope is not only the head of the Catholic Church, he is also the Bishop of Rome. Therefore, he must at least meet the Biblical requirements for being a bishop.

The Apostle Paul gave Timothy and Titus instructions regarding the necessary qualifications for bishops. He said,

    "A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker [not violent], not greedy of filthy lucre [money]; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil." (1 Timothy 3:1-7, emphasis added)

    "For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker [not violent], not given to filthy lucre [money]; But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate; Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers." (Titus 1:7-9, emphasis added)

We are going to look at some popes and compare their lives with the Biblical qualifications for being a bishop. In the process, we will learn about some distressing things. However, we should not be surprised. Jesus told us that there would be tares among the wheat. (Matthew 13:24-30) He also warned us that there would be wolves among the sheep. (Matthew 7:15) So did the Apostle Paul. (Acts 20:29-30)

Every church has had its share of tares and wolves. However, the Catholic Church claims to have apostolic succession-an unbroken chain of valid popes that go all the way back to the Apostle Peter. My reason for telling you about these "wolf" popes is to demonstrate that some popes were not even valid bishops, let alone valid popes. And that breaks the "chain" of apostolic succession.

I apologize for putting you through this, but I can't adequately make my point without giving you this information.


Pope Honorius reigned from 625 to 638 A.D. He was condemned as a heretic by the Sixth Ecumenical Council (680-681). He was also condemned as a heretic by Pope Leo II, as well as by every other pope until the eleventh century. [Note 1]

In 769, Pope Stephen IV came to power with the help of an army which conquered the previous Pope. Stephen gave orders for his papal rival to be flogged, have his eyes cut out, have his kneecaps broken, and be imprisoned until he died. Then Pope Stephen sentenced a second man to die a slow, agonizing death. He had pieces of his body cut off every day until he finally died. [Note 2]

Pope Leo V only reigned for one month (July 903). Cardinal Christopher put Leo in prison and became Pope. Then Christopher was put in prison by Cardinal Sergius. Sergius killed Leo and Christopher while they were in prison. He also killed every cardinal who had opposed him. [Note 3]

Pope John XII reigned from 955 to 964. He was a violent man. He was so lustful that people of his day said that he turned the Lateran Palace into a brothel. He drank toasts to the devil. When gambling he invoked pagan gods and goddesses. He was killed by a jealous husband while in the act of committing adultery with the man's wife. [Note 4]

In the tenth century, a wealthy Italian noblewoman named Marozia put nine popes into office in eight years. In order to do that, she also had to get rid of reigning popes. Two of them were strangled, one was suffocated, and four disappeared under mysterious circumstances. One of the popes was Marozia's son; he was fathered by a Pope. [Note 5]

In 1003, Pope Silvester II was murdered by his successor, Pope John XVII. Seven months later, John was poisoned. [Note 6]

Pope Benedict VIII reigned from 1012 to 1024. He bought the papacy with bribery. He kept a private force of "pope's men" who were known for torture, maiming, and murder. When Benedict VIII died, his brother seized power and became Pope John XIX. He had himself ordained a priest, consecrated as a bishop, and crowned as pope, all in the same day. John died under suspicious circumstances. [Note 7]

In 1095, Pope Urban II called for a Crusade to take Jerusalem (the "holy land") back from the Muslims. This was a "holy war." The Pope said that Crusaders would have full remission of their sins, and if they died in battle they would be martyrs. As the Crusaders went through Europe on their way to Jerusalem, they slaughtered European Jews. When they reached Jerusalem, they were brutal in their conquest of the city. Many Muslims were beheaded, but some were tortured and then burned to death. This began a conflict between Islam and the West that is still going on today. Later popes called for other Crusades. At first they targetted Muslims, but the Fourth Crusade (in 1198) was against Orthodox Christians in Constantinople. [Note 8]

Pope Benedict IX reigned from 1032 to 1044, in 1045, and from 1047 to 1048. He became Pope through bribery. He squandered the wealth of the Papacy on prostitutes and lavish banquets, and he had people murdered. The citizens of Rome hated Benedict so much that, on two occasions, he had to flee from Rome. Benedict sold the papacy to Pope Gregory VI. As part of the deal, he continued to live in the Lateran Palace, with a generous income. Benedict filled the Lateran Palace with prostitutes. [Note 9]

In 1298, Pope Boniface VIII ordered that every man, woman, child, and animal in the Italian town of Palestrina be slaughtered. He was known for torture, massacre, and ferocity. [Note 10]

Pope Clement VI reigned from 1342 to 1352. He ordered the slaughter of an entire Italian town. He lived a life of luxury and extravagance. He openly admitted that he sold church offices and he used threats and bribery to gain power. Clement purchased a French palace, which became famous for its prostitutes. [Note 11]

Pope Alexander VI (the Borgia Pope) reigned from 1492 to 1503. He was known for murder, bribery, and selling positions of authority in the Catholic Church. He enjoyed luxurious living. The art book "Treasures of the Vatican" shows a portrait of him wearing gold vestments that are covered with jewels. They look like pearls, emeralds, large rubies, and other jewels. His tiara (the papal crown) is gold, with three rows of large jewels on it. Alexander had four children by mistresses. His son Cesare was known for the kinds of murderous intrigues that make good opera plots. According to "The Oxford Dictionary of Popes," Cesare and Alexander killed people and seized their property. Pope Alexander was so hated that when he died, the priests who came to say prayers for him were driven away by the palace guards, and his body was left unattended. [Note 12]

Pope Julius II reigned from 1503 to 1513. He became Pope through bribery. He was ruthless and violent. He had a reputation for lust, drunkenness, rages, deception, and nepotism. [Note 13]

Pope Leo X reigned from 1513 to 1521. He mixed paganism with Christianity. He had performances of Christ's crucifixion and ancient mythology. He filled Rome with splendid Church processions and statues of Greek gods and goddesses. He put a statue of himself in Rome's Capitol, to be saluted by the public. [Note 14]

Pope Gregory VII reigned from 1073 to 1085. He required kings and emperors to kiss his foot. Gregory and his successors used forged documents in order to expand the power of the papacy. Some Roman Catholics tried to expose these forgeries but they were excommunicated for it. However, the Orthodox Church kept records and wrote detailed information about the forgeries. [Note 15] (For more information about this, see my article "Forged Documents and Papal Power".)

Simony was rampant among clerics. It was commonplace for priests to pay money in order to become bishops and abbots. Pope Gregory VII said that he knew of more than 40 men who became Pope by means of bribery. [Note 16]

Pope Innocent III reigned from 1198 to 1216. He said that the Pope is the ruler of the world and the father of princes and kings. He claimed that every priest and bishop must obey the Pope even if the Pope commands something evil. Pope Innocent wanted to get rid of the Albigensian heretics who lived in France. He forced the King of France to kill hundreds of thousands of French citizens. The Albigensians lived mingled among the French Catholics. Pope Innocent commanded that every person in the region, including the Catholics, be killed. This was called the Albigensian Crusade, or the Albigensian Massacre. The Pope gave the Albigensian Crusaders a special indulgence which was supposed to guarantee that if they died in battle then their sins would be remitted and they would go to Heaven. [Note 17]

Would you want any of these men to be your pastor?

Sometimes two or more men would claim to be Pope at the same time. All of these claimants to the papacy had followers. Eventually one contender would be declared to be Pope, and the other would be declared to be an antipope. For centuries, Roman Catholic books differed as to which men they considered to be the genuine popes. However, today there is much more agreement about which men were popes and which men were antipopes. According to the "Catholic Encyclopedia," there were thirty antipopes. [Note 18]

None of these men met the biblical requirements for being a bishop, let alone a Pope. Therefore, they were not valid popes. There are so many breaks in the chain of apostolic succession that it is not a chain at all.

There is one Biblical qualification for being a bishop which most popes have not met since the first few centuries of the church. The Apostle Paul said,

    "A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife..." (1 Timothy 3:1, emphasis added)

    "One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)" (1 Timothy 3:4-5, emphasis added)

Even deacons were required to be married men whose home lives demonstrated their ability to rule the Church.

    "Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well." (1 Timothy 3:12)

Pope Gregory VII wanted to increase the power of the papacy. For reasons of politics and power, he abolished clerical marriage. In 1074 he passed laws requiring that priests be celibate, and he got rid of married priests. [Note 19]

As a result, since 1074 no Pope has been able to meet the Apostle Paul's requirement for bishops.

Peter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 8702
  • the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
Re: Apostolic Succession
« Reply #2 on: June 28, 2008, 04:44:42 PM »
Now I realize that some individuals (such as the Apostle Paul) are called to be celibate. I could understand a few exceptions to the rule. But for nearly a thousand years, not one Pope or cardinal or bishop has ever been able to meet Paul's qualifications for being a bishop.

While I was reviewing this chapter about the popes, someone played a classical CD that includes Schubert's "Ave Maria." This is a beautiful song--full of beauty, purity, and peace. The contrast between that music and what I was reading suddenly hit me. The popes called themselves the "Vicars of Christ," men who claimed to represent Jesus Christ and speak on His behalf. When people looked at those popes, how could they understand what Jesus was really like? No wonder they turned to Mary. She was pure, and humble, and gentle. And safe. She wouldn't hurt anybody. And my heart broke for those people, who turned to Mary, because they didn't know the love and faithfulness and goodness of Jesus, who came to give us life, and joy, and peace.

Lord Acton was a nineteenth century historian. He said, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." The popes that I described demonstrate that principle. The problem is our fallen human nature. None of us really knows how we would behave if we suddenly had tremendous wealth and power. We all need to follow the example of David, who prayed,

    "Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts: And see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting." (Psalm 139:23-24)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Asbridge, Thomas, "The First Crusade: A New History: The Roots of Conflict Between Christianity and Islam," New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Chamberlin, Russell, "The Bad Popes," Phoenix Mill, England: Sutton Publishing Limited, 2003.

Chazan, Robert, "European Jewry and the First Crusade," Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 1996.

De Rosa, Peter, "Vicars of Christ: The Dark Side of the Papacy," Dublin, Ireland: Poolbeg Press, 1988, 2000. The author used to be a priest. He is still a practicing Catholic. While he was a priest, he did research in the Vatican archives.

"Fox's Book of Martyrs: A History of the Lives, Sufferings, and Deaths of the Early Christian and Protestant Martyrs," Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1967. This book was originally written by John Fox (also spelled Foxe), who died in 1587. After Fox's death, other men added accounts of later martyrs. This edition of the book ends with a martydom in 1824. It has the name Miles J. Stanford on the cover, so evidently Stanford wrote some accounts of more recent martyrs. You can read the book online.

    http://bible.crosswalk.com/History/AD/FoxsBookofMartyrs/

    http://www.ccel.org/f/foxe/martyrs/home.html

    http://www.biblebelievers.com/foxes/findex.htm

    http://www.sacred?texts.com/chr/martyrs/

Hillenbrand, Carole, "The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives," New York: Routledge Publishing, 2000.

Johnson, Paul, "A History of Christianity," New York: Touchstone, Simon & Schuster, 1995. The author is a Catholic.

Kelly, J.N.D., "The Oxford Dictionary of Popes," New York, Oxford University Press, 1996.

K'ng, Hans, "The Catholic Church: A Short History" (translated by John Bowden), New York: Modern Library, 2001, 2003. The author is a Catholic theologian.

Martin, Malachi, "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church," New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1981. The author was a Catholic priest.

McBrien, Richard P.," Lives of the Popes: The Pontiffs from St. Peter to John Paul II," San Francisco, California: Harper, 2000. The author is a Professor of Theology at the University of Notre Dame.

Phillips, Jonathan, "The Fourth Crusade and the Sack of Constantinople," New York: Viking Press (The Penguin Group), 2004.

Rendina, Claudio, "The Popes: Histories and Secrets," Santa Ana, California: Seven Locks Press, 2002.

Riley-Smith, Jonathan, "The Crusades: A History" (second edition), New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 2005.

Webster, William, "The Church of Rome at the Bar of History," Carlisle, Pennsylvania: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1995. The author is a former Catholic.

Wylie, J.A., "The History of Protestantism," Rapidan, VA: Hartland Publications, 2002. "The History of Protestantism" was first published in 1878. Since this work is large, it is presented in segments of books. Earlier editions had 24 books in 3 volumes. The 2002 edition has 24 books in 4 volumes, with page numbers in sequence as if it was one long work. (For example, Volume II begins with page 499.) You can buy the 2002 edition online at the publisher's website, http://www.hartlandpublications.com.

You can read the older, 3-volume work online.

    http://www.doctrine.org/history/

    http://www.reformedreader.org/history/wylie/protestantism.htm

You can download PDF files of all 3 volumes.

    http://http://www.reformation.org/wylie2.html

You can download a PDF file with the first 12 books.

    http://www.bpc.org/reading_room/books/wylie/protestantism.html

USE OF THIS ARTICLE

I encourage you to link to this article. You have permission to quote from this article, as long as you do it fairly and accurately. You have permission to make copies of this article for friends and for use in classes.

NOTES

1. William Webster, "The Church of Rome at the Bar of History," pages 63-71. Peter de Rosa, "Vicars of Christ," 208-209. (De Rosa is a practicing Catholic and a former Catholic priest. While he was a priest, he did research in the Vatican Archives.) Hans K'ng, "The Catholic Church: A Short History," page 60. (K'ng is a Catholic theologian.) Claudio Rendina, "The Popes: Histories and Secrets," pages 112-114. J.N.D. Kelly, "The Oxford Dictionary of Popes," pages 70-71. Richard P. McBrien, "Lives of the Popes," pages 101-103.

2. Claudio Rendina, pages 153-157. Richard P. McBrien, pages 124-125. Malachi Martin, "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church," pages 85-89. (Martin was a Catholic priest.)

There is some confusion as to whether this Pope was Stephen III or Stephen IV. This is because an earlier Stephen (who would have been Stephen II) was elected Pope but he died before he was consecrated. (Richard P. McBrien, page 121.)

3. Richard P. McBrien, pages 150-151, 435. Malachi Martin, page 123. Claudio Rendina, pages 215-217. J.N.D. Kelly, pages 118-120. (Martin and Kelly tell about the murders.)

4. Russell Chamberlin, "The Bad Popes," pages 40-61. Peter de Rosa, pages 211-215. Hans K'ng, page 79. Richard P. McBrien, pages 157-159, 435. Claudio Rendina, pages 226-229. J.N.D. Kelly, pages 126-127.

5. Russell Chamberlin, pages 25-39. Malachi Martin, page 119. Hans K'ng, page 79. Richard P. McBrien, pages 153 (under "John X"), 154-155 (under "John XI").

6. Malachi Martin, page 131. Claudio Rendina, pages 243-247. (Martin tells about the murders.)

7. Malachi Martin, pages 130-132. Claudio Rendina, pages 248-251. Richard P. McBrien, pages 168-170. (Martin gives detailed information about Benedict's cruelty.)

8. Jonathan Riley-Smith, "The Crusades: A History." Thomas Asbridge, "The First Crusade: A New History: The Roots of Conflict Between Christianity and Islam." Jonathan Phillips, "The Fourth Crusade and the Sack of Constantinople." Robert Chazan, "European Jewry and the First Crusade." Carole Hillenbrand, "The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives."

9. Russell Chamberlin, pages 62-76. Malachi Martin, page 132. Peter de Rosa, pages 54-56. Claudio Rendina, pages 251-254. J.N.D. Kelly, pages 142-144. Richard P. McBrien, pages 170-172.

10. Russell Chamberlin, pages 77-126. Malachi Martin, page 171-176. Claudio Rendina, pages 376-379. Paul Johnson, "A History of Christianity," pages 191, 218-219. Richard P. McBrien, pages 229, 232, 435. (Chamberlin, Martin and Rendina tell about the destruction of Palestrina.)

11. Peter de Rosa, pages 84-88. Richard P. McBrien, pages 240-242. Claudio Rendina, pages 376-379. (De Rosa tells about destroying a village.)

12. Peter de Rosa, pages 103-110. Richard P. McBrien, pages 267-269, 437. Russell Chamberlin, pages 161-208. J.N.D. Kelly, pages 252-254. Hans K'ng, pages 119-120. Claudio Rendina, pages 431-436. Paul Johnson, pages 280, 363. (McBrien, Kelly and de Rosa tell how Pope Alexander VI and his son Cesare murdered people and seized their property.)

In the Vatican, there is a portrait of Pope Alexander VI wearing gold vestments that are covered with jewels. There is a large, full-color picture in Albert Skira, "Treasures of the Vatican," page 86. There is a smaller full-color picture in the National Geographic book, "Inside the Vatican," page 49. (Although it is smaller, you can still see the gold and jewels.) There is also a small black-and-white picture in Richard P. McBrien, "Lives of the Popes." (Following page 392 there is a series of numbered pictures. The portrait of Alexander VI is Picture 10.)

13. Peter de Rosa, pages 111-113. Paul Johnson, page 280. Claudio Rendina, pages 438-441. J.N.D. Kelly, pages 255-256. Richard P. McBrien, pages 270-272.

14. Russell Chamberlin, pages 209-252. Malachi Martin, pages 202-203. Claudio Rendina, pages 441-446. J.N.D. Kelly, pages 256-258.

15. Paul Johnson, pages 194-198, 161. Peter de Rosa, pages 57-66. Hans K'ng, pages 85-92.

A scholarly article about this is online. William Webster, "Forgeries and the Papacy: The Historical Influence and Use of Forgeries in Promotion of the Doctrine of the Papacy." The author is a former Catholic.
http://www.christiantruth.com/forgeries.html

16. Malachi Martin, pages 141-142. Claudio Rendina, pages 309-316. (Page 314 gives information about his persecution of the Albigensians and other "heretics.")

17. "Fox's Book of Martyrs," pages 45-47. J.A. Wylie, "The History of Protestantism," book 1, pages 39-45. Paul Johnson, pages 199-201, 252. Peter de Rosa, pages 66-74, 152-155. Hans K'ng, pages 87-103.

18. Richard P. McBrien, pages 466-468. "Antipope," "The Catholic Encyclopedia," Volume I, 1907. (You can read this online if you search for "The Catholic Encyclopedia" + antipope.)

19. Malachi Martin, pages 141-142. Peter de Rosa, pages 406-407 and 420-421. Hans Kung, pages 92-93.

Peter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 8702
  • the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
Re: Apostilic Succession - Mary Ann Collins
« Reply #3 on: June 13, 2009, 08:19:46 AM »
The one question that I have not been given a satisfactory answer to is, if there is an unbroken chain of apostolic succession, how is the succession of those Popes explained who were responsible for the persecution and murder of millions of Jews, Muslims and Christians?  These links in this chain would seem to be some of the blackest hearts in the history of mankind. How could "infallible" doctrine come from mass murderers?

Read Fox's Book of the Martyrs and Martyrs Mirror for free on those links.

amos45

  • Guest
Re: Apostilic Succession - Mary Ann Collins
« Reply #4 on: October 02, 2010, 04:53:29 AM »
The one question that I have not been given a satisfactory answer to is, if there is an unbroken chain of apostolic succession, how is the succession of those Popes explained who were responsible for the persecution and murder of millions of Jews, Muslims and Christians?  These links in this chain would seem to be some of the blackest hearts in the history of mankind. How could "infallible" doctrine come from mass murderers?

Read Fox's Book of the Martyrs and Martyrs Mirror for free on those links.

Completely agree....."infallible doctrine" does not come from men, let alone those you describe as mass murderers.
Have just been anle to get a copy of Foxes book & will perouse it in the near future, also bought a Guttenberg bible & a set of Ante-nicene fathers.....some serious reading ahead.

Much can be gleaned from writings so close to the Apostlolic time, that is overlooked by modern religions...we need to return to the simple truths as originally taught, if we wish to worship Yahweh the way He has set out in scripture.

Amos


resistingrexmundi

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 678
    • View Profile
Re: Apostilic Succession - Mary Ann Collins
« Reply #5 on: October 02, 2010, 10:26:36 AM »
The one question that I have not been given a satisfactory answer to is, if there is an unbroken chain of apostolic succession, how is the succession of those Popes explained who were responsible for the persecution and murder of millions of Jews, Muslims and Christians?  These links in this chain would seem to be some of the blackest hearts in the history of mankind. How could "infallible" doctrine come from mass murderers?

Read Fox's Book of the Martyrs and Martyrs Mirror for free on those links.

Completely agree....."infallible doctrine" does not come from men, let alone those you describe as mass murderers.
Have just been anle to get a copy of Foxes book & will perouse it in the near future, also bought a Guttenberg bible & a set of Ante-nicene fathers.....some serious reading ahead.

Much can be gleaned from writings so close to the Apostlolic time, that is overlooked by modern religions...we need to return to the simple truths as originally taught, if we wish to worship Yahweh the way He has set out in scripture.

Amos



I would caution you in reading some of those so-called "church fathers". Some of them had an anti-semitic streak by the mid to late 2nd century and also some of the words they used do not carry the same meaning as the one's we currently attribute to them. ie Catholic.
Doth that man love his Lord who would be willing to see Jesus wearing a crown of thorns, while for himself he craves a chaplet of laurel? Shall Jesus ascend to his throne by the cross, and do we expect to be carried there on the shoulders of applauding crowds? Charles H. Spurgeon

Peter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 8702
  • the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
Re: Apostolic Succession
« Reply #6 on: September 21, 2012, 12:23:50 PM »
From: Dr. Robert A. Morey



Jesus Christ Holds Supreme Authority:


“Then Jesus came to them and said, ‘All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.’ ” Matthew 28:18-20


Jesus Christ is the one who holds all authority on earth and has never ceased from having this power. The Bible nowhere states that Christ has given his authority to another, whether persons or organizations.


To try to justify the Pope’s right as head over the flock of Christ (i.e., the Church), many Catholics use Apostolic authority and succession i.e., that the Pope is the successor to Simon Peter, the Lord’s Apostle who was the first Roman Pontiff. Attempts are even made to present a list of successive Popes (or Bishops) from the time of Peter until the present day, thus trying to prove Papal supremacy.


Yet, this assertion is problematic for the following reasons:


1. Peter’s mission was to the Jews with Paul being the one sent to the Gentiles. (cf. Galatians 2:7-8). This is not to suggest that Peter did not preach and convert non-Jews since he certainly did witness to Gentiles (cf. Acts 8:14-17, 10:9-48), but that his mission was mainly geared towards the Israelite nation.


2. The idea that Peter’s first letter was written in Rome does not hold weight, since the letter was written at Babylon (i.e., Mesopotamia [1 Peter 5:13]). According to Encyclopedia Judaica, in its discussion on the Babylonian Talmud’s production, there were still “great academies of Babylon” in existence during the first century A.D. It would thus be natural for Peter to go and preach there, since his calling, as noted, was to all the tribes of Israel. Those who try to make “Babylon” read into a cryptic code used by Peter for Rome have no evidence supporting such a claim.


3. Jesuit John Mckenzie, former professor of theology at Notre Dame, wrote: “Historical evidence does not exist for the entire chain of succession of church authority.” (The Roman Catholic Church [New York, 1969], p.4)


The New Catholic Encyclopedia, declares:


“...the scarcity of documents leaves much that is obscure about the early development of the episcopate...” (Vol. I, p.696 [1967])


4. Popes are not allowed the right of marriage, forcing them to remain celibate. This fact makes it highly unlikely for Peter to be Rome’s first Pope since Peter was married:
“Now Simon’s mother-in-law lay sick with a fever...” Mark 1:30 R.S.V.


5. Although early church history records Peter’s crucifixion taking place in Rome, he is never credited with establishing the church there. It is also interesting to note that Peter is never mentioned in the list of persons to whom Paul sends his greetings at the church of Rome. (c.f. Romans 16:3-16) An interesting omission had Peter indeed been the head of the Roman church.


6. The Bible indicates that Peter, alongside James and John, was one of the pillars of the Jerusalem church, never Rome (c.f. Acts 15:4-29; Galatians 1:9)


7. Furthermore, the early church never held to the belief in the Roman Bishop’s universal authority over the flock, since they believed in the individual church’s rights to retain their self-governing privileges. This is clearly seen in the Council of Nicea’s sixth cannon:
Let the ancient customs in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis prevail, that the Bishop of Alexandria have jurisdiction in all these, since the like is customary for the Bishop of Rome also. Likewise, in Antioch and the other provinces, let the churches retain their privileges. (A.D. 325)


Eighty years later, at the Council of Carthage, Cyprian would state:
For neither does any of us set himself up as a bishop of bishops, nor by tyrannical terror does any compel his colleague to the necessity of obedience, since every bishop, according to the allowance of his liberty and power, has his own proper right of judgment, and can no more be judged by another than he himself can judge another.


The 35th Apostolic Cannon (dated from the 2nd to 5th century) states:


The bishops of every country ought to know who is the chief among them and to esteem him as their head, and not to do any great thing without his consent; but everyone manage only the affairs that belong to his own parish, and the places subject to it. But let him not do anything without the consent of all; for it is by this means there will be unanimity, and God will be glorified by Christ, in the Holy Spirit.


8. When the disciples argued amongst themselves over John and James’ desire to be seated at Jesus’ right and left, the Lord emphasized servanthood as a requirement for greatness. Had Peter been the head of the group and the first pope, Christ should have clearly stated this. Yet, he never even hinted at the possibility that Peter held a greater position from the rest, something odd had Peter indeed been the rock of Mt. 16:18 (c.f. Mt. 20:20-28)


9. Most importantly, Peter never addressed himself as the head of God’s flock but as, “a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ...” (c.f. 1 Peter 5:1)


10. Finally, the idea of Peter being the first Bishop or “Pope” did not arise until the 2nd and 3rd centuries. J.N.D. Kelly notes:
In the late 2nd or 3rd century the tradition identified Peter as the first bishop of Rome. This was a natural development. Once the monarchial episcopate, i.e., government of the local church by a single bishop as distinct from a group of presbyter-bishops, finally emerged in Rome in the mid-2nd cent. (The Concise Dictionary of Christianity [Liturgical Press, 1992], p.6)

All this evidence tends to strongly indicate the weakness behind the so-called “Apostolic Succession” theory.

http://www.faithdefenders.com/articles/worldreligions/Ten_reasons_why_Christ_Catho.html