10 Reasons Why There Should Never Be Another Pope
After Joseph Ratzinger publicly announced his plans to retire, quite a few people who are aware of this website or the @Fire_the_Pope Twitter account remarked how I got my wish or, jokingly, how my website may have led to the first resignation of a pope in 600 years.
Yes, I’ve had Ratzinger’s picture prominently displayed on this site and, given his long record both as the pope and as the one person responsible for handling all sex-crime cases in the Church, I strongly believed him to be incompetent at best.
However, FireThePope doesn’t just mean fire Joseph Ratzinger. FireThePope isn’t a cause to bring down one man. FireThePope is an effort to expose the entire Roman Catholic Church, as is, as fraudulent and there is no better way to do that than to start at the top.
The Roman Catholic Church sets itself apart from all other religions, including Christian denominations, by claiming its head, the pope, is the successor of Peter and that Jesus anointed Peter to be the head of his church. The Church points to Matthew 16:13-20 to support this claim. Catholics conclude the Roman Catholic Church is the “one true church” of Jesus Christ and all other Protestant or non-Roman orthodox churches are inferior to it.
Roman Catholics call their church “the bride of Christ” and “Holy Mother Church”. These nicknames market the idea that Roman Catholicism dates back to the days of Jesus Christ and it – or “She”, as they say – is the very foundation of Christianity and all other religions are mere offshoots or sequels to Roman Catholicism.
Ultimately, Roman Catholicism rests solely on the supremacy of Peter and the apostles. Without the supremacy of Peter, there would be no pope. Without the supremacy of the apostles, there would be no priesthood as the Roman Church defines it. Without the superhuman powers of Catholic priests, bye-bye sacraments, indulgences, and the entire institution.
Today, let’s focus on the papacy. Following are ten reasons why there should never be another pope and, if there is, he should be completely ignored by the Catholic laity, the media, politicians, and the public at large.
Because the Vatican bases its very existence on a scene from the New Testament, it must also accept other verses of the NT in order to be consistent. Either the NT should be accepted as true, non-fictional accounts or not. Either those accounts must be taken literally or not. But, one cannot say this is a source of truth, inspired by the Holy Spirit and then pick and choose which passages the Church wants to follow or not.
1. The church of Jesus Christ in the bible was not a physical empire. Matthew 24:1-2 – “Jesus left the temple precincts then, and his disciples came up and pointed out to him the buildings of the temple area. His
comment was: ‘Do you see all these buildings? I assure you, not one stone will be left on another – it will all be torn down.'” 1 Corinthians 3:16 – “Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the spirit of God dwells in you?” Also, Peter 2:5-9 – “Be yourselves as living stones built into a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.” Jesus preached in homes and on hillsides, not in buildings. He only went in to temples to draw people out of them or to scold the church leaders. The word catholic, found in the bible with a lower-case c, means universal. In the first century, the word church (also lower-case c) meant a society of men, women, and children who are spiritually – not necessarily physically – united to serve God. According to the NT, Jesus established the catholic church – a universal society of believers who would offer spiritual sacrifices. I explain below who really instituted the Roman Catholic Church, which requires material (pagan) sacrifices.
2. The church of Jesus Christ was not built upon one man. The idea that the church of Jesus was built upon one man is preposterous. Yet, that is what the Roman Church claims. Its only foundation is the notion that Peter was chosen by Jesus to be the first pope and that all popes are Peter’s successors, chosen by the Holy Spirit and infallible in all of their declarations. Roman Catholicism teaches that the pope, acting on behalf of the Church (notice the capital C indicating the Corporation) has the power and a duty to act as a mediator between the Creator and his creatures. It has been a long-held tradition that the Vatican, the Magisterium, and the clergy would interpret the bible for the laity. However, 1 Corinthians 3:11 reads, “For other foundation no one can lay, but that which has been laid, which is Jesus Christ”. According to scripture, Jesus, not Peter, is the foundation of the Christian church. Jesus is also the sole mediator, so says 1 Timothy 2:5: “And the truth is this: ‘God is one. One also is the mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, and who gave himself ransom for all.” According to the New Testament where Catholics turn to justify the existence of their Church, there is only one mediator between God and the people and that is Jesus Christ, not Peter and not Joseph Ratzinger.
3. The church of Jesus Christ in the bible did not have a pope. The word pope is not in the bible, where the Roman Church points to as justification for itself. The early church described in the New Testament speaks of bishops who were overseers or local supervisors of the effort to spread Christianity. They were not rulers over the people. No one bishop had authority over any other. No one bishop was the head of the effort. There was a bishop in many major cities, including one in Rome. It so happened that certain Roman emperors (namely Constantine and Charlemagne) elevated the position and authority of the bishop of Rome, specifically, because they had the power to do so and because it was convenient as Rome was the seat of power. Emperors appointed bishops and abbots and usually appointed members of aristocratic families. The idea of a pope – one bishop over all others – was a corrupt power grab by murderous dictators and had nothing to do with Jesus Christ or anything in the bible.
4. The Peter of the throne was not the apostle but an impostor. Remember, the apostle Peter originally went by the name of Simon. Then, he was referred to as Simon Peter. Jesus named him Peter at the rock because the name Peter – or Petros (Greek) means rock. This Peter was from Cyprus, according to the bible. But, there is another Simon in the bible, this one from Samaria and he was a troublemaker. Locals called him Simon the
Magician. He claimed to be able to do magic tricks and held The Circus of Nero in Vaticanus Hill. Simon Magnus claimed he was God (hence, the magic) and he became a nemesis, a rival, and a thorn in the side of the apostle Peter. There was such trouble between the two that Emperor Nero set up a contest to settle their differences. Simon Magnus was killed after being thrown from his chariot and so Nero, who had favored him, had Peter arrested and thrown in jail. If there was a pope on a throne in the days of the early church, it was not Peter the Apostle but Simon the Magician. Simon sat on a throne; Peter never did. Simon claimed to be God; Peter never did. Simon claimed to have supernatural powers; Peter never did. Simon Magnus even started going by the name Peter in order to confuse people. They both had the same name, they both died in the same year – 67 A.D., and they both had spent time in Rome. The proof that the Simon of Samaria, not Cyprus, sat on the throne in Rome is the documentation that Magnus stayed in Rome for many years at a time while the apostle came and went quite often.
5. The apostle Peter never considered himself God or Jesus Christ. Again, the idea of the papacy rests on the supremacy of Peter. The Roman Church claims the pope is “Christ’s (sole) representative on earth”. The Peter whom the popes are supposed to have succeeded was married with at least one child – a daughter. He never sat on a throne and he never claimed to have magic powers or to be infallible. He never claimed to be better or more important than the other apostles or early leaders of the Christian church. He never dressed in fancy clothes, he never wore a ring to be kissed, and he never insisted on the red carpet treatment. Acts 10:25-27: “As Peter entered, Cornelius went to meet him, dropped to his knees before him and bowed low. Peter said, ‘Get up! I am only a man myself.'” When Nero sentenced Peter to death by crucifixion, Peter insisted on hanging on the cross upside down because he was unworthy to die as Jesus died. Peter the apostle, claimed by the Church as the first pope was never a pope and his philosophy and practices, according to the New Testament, were a far contrast to those of the papacy no matter who is holding the title.
6. The Roman Catholic Church was not established until the 4th Century. Roman Catholics claim Peter of the bible was the first pope and that there is an unbroken line of popes stretching from biblical times to present-day. This claim is nothing but a re-writing of history. The Church needs that lineage in order to justify itself and the papacy yet it does not have the facts on its side so they have to create a new reality. What the Church
has done is go back and list anyone who was a bishop of Rome as a pope. The actual papacy didn’t begin until the Roman Catholic Church began and that wasn’t until the 4th Century with Pope Constantine I – the emperor – who ruled from the “chair of St. Peter” from 306-337. Constantine came to the rescue of Christians who were being persecuted by Emperor Diocletian. It’s not that he was overcome by compassion but realized he could take political advantage from the growing number of Christians. This ties the pagan Roman Empire to the Catholic Church whose members also worship objects and offer material sacrifices.
7. The papacy was on life support as recently as 1870. In the mid-19th Century, there was an effort to unify Italy which was split in two by the Papal States governed by the pope, then Pope Pius IX (the one who dreamed up Immaculate Conception). Victor Emmanuel II, the new King of Italy, had seized all of the Church-controlled territory except a small segment of Rome. Napoleon, who had previously been an ally of Emmanuel, protected the pope and by having some of his troops stand guard at the Vatican. When the Franco-Prussia War intensified, Napoleon pulled his troops out of Rome, leaving the pope defenseless. The Italian troops moved in and the pope lost all of his temporal (civil) power minus rule over the tiny territory of the Vatican. Emmanuel allowed the pope to keep the Vatican and freed him from Italian rule but the pope was defiant. Pius IX refused to recognize Emmanuel’s new kingdom and he voluntarily kept himself a prisoner of the Vatican. He cried anti-Catholic bias until support and donations poured in for him, including from Catholics in America. The empire of the Roman Church was all but lost in 1870. It took more deception to keep it alive.
8. The papacy was corruptly propped back up by a fascist dictator. In the 1920’s, the Italian government wished to settle its differences with the Church. At the time, the Prime Minister of Italy was Benito Mussolini.
He conspired with the Vatican to shut out populist factions in the country in order to amass more power and control for himself. The Vatican silenced priests who favored a more democratic government. In return, Mussolini gifted the Church by officially recognizing the Vatican as an independent and sovereign city-state. Within the borders of Italy, popes would receive diplomatic immunity and the Church would receive financial reparations for its loss of the Papal States. Also, Roman Catholicism would be the one state religion in Italy. These agreements were called the Lateran Pacts and they are what revived the much weakened papacy. Mussolini would go on to become one of history’s most brutal dictators. Today, Vatican City, the whole 0.2 square miles of it, is recognized by the United Nations as a sovereign city-state of which the pope is head.
9. The pope is an absolute monarch at a time when most educated and reasonable human beings believe in freedom, democracy, and accountability. In 2011, the world witnessed what is now referred to as The Arab Spring. Ordinary people protested – many to their deaths – for freedom, respect, and democratic elections. Many citizens of some nations in the Middle East had been oppressed for generations and they finally decided it was time to take a stand against tyranny. It has been said there is a natural hunger to live freely, no matter what part of the world one lives. The pope is an absolute monarch, only one of a few that still exist and certainly the most powerful. As such, and because he enjoys diplomatic immunity both in Italy and out, he is accountable to no one. The pope is elected but not by the people he represents as in a democracy. He is elected by the same men whom he appointed to the College of Cardinals. Once a pope takes office, he is unaccountable to anyone inside the Church or out. This type of power is contrary to what the New Testament described when Jesus turned tables on the clergy. The pope, like Simon Magnus, claims to be God. Only someone with a God-complex would claim to be above the law and every other human being.
10. The papacy is not inspired by the Holy Spirit. If anything, it would be inspired by the spirit of Lucifer. As construction workers ready the Vatican chimney for the upcoming puffs of white smoke or black,
rational human beings are expected to believe that the Holy Spirit is guiding the process of the papal conclave. When cardinals vote a certain way, we are told, it was because the Holy Spirit told them to. It’s time for a reality check. Many of the men who will be voting – or running – for the next pope have blood on their hands – blood of children. Yet, we are supposed to believe they have an inside track to the Holy Spirit. From the beginning of the Roman Catholic Church, throughout its history, and including today, Roman Catholicism has been a corrupt empire disguised as a Christian religion. I’ve heard many people credit it merely because “it has been around for 2,000 years”. It hasn’t been around that long and does it matter that it has only survived as long has it has because it has succeeded in fooling gullible people? Does it matter that it has grown as large as it has because many of its converts joined only under the threat of death? Does it matter than the majority of Catholics were entered into the Church before the age of reason? Catholics are quick to remind us of “all the good the Church does”. There isn’t a tyrant in history that couldn’t claim the same. Evil almost always presents itself in disguise – as something good. When deception is the foundation of an institution, no amount of superficial acts that come out of it can make it good. Deeds and institutions can only be good if they are based in truth. Like it or not, the spirit that is guiding the Roman Catholic Church isn’t holy, it is evil. And the only way to kill a serpent is by chopping off its head.