ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH BUILT ON LIES!
It has taken me 60 years to come to realise that the Roman Catholic Church is built upon several serious lies!
Lie 1: That Peter - the head of the Apostles - was in Rome.
Lie 2: That Peter was the first "Bishop of Rome".
Lie 3: That Peter's body is buried in Rome under St Peter's Basilica.
Lie 4: That Rome is the primary "see" of the Christian church.
1. PETER IN ROME:
There is no evidence either from the New Testament or from historical sources that Peter was ever in Rome. Peter being in Rome is not mentioned anywhere in the New Testament!
Peter was designated by Jesus to be the apostle to the Jews or the "circumcised". It was Paul who was the "Apostle to the Gentiles" and Rome was very definitely a gentile city. "To me was committed the gospel of the uncircumcision, as to Peter was that of the circumcision" (Galatians 2:7). For a longer and expert discussion of this google:
|Professor Otto Zwierlein|
PETRUS IN ROM (April 2010)
PETRUS UND PAULUS IN JERUSALEM UND ROME (November 2012)
The Vatican was so worried about Otto Zwierlein's scholarship that they called two separate conferences to refute his findings - but failed. The Vatican regard Zwierlein as an enemy of the Church.
Professor Zwierlien was born in 1939. He is a German classical scholar. He is a professor emiritus of the University of Hamburg and in 1986 he was the Neville Wallace Lecturer at the University of Oxford.
2. PETER THE FIRST BISHOP OF ROME:
If Peter was never in Rome he could not have been the first Bishop of Rome. It he had ever visited Rome (which is unlikely) neither could he have been the first Bishop of Rome. Why have a visitor - who is going away again - as bishop.
Saint Paul was the founder of the Church in Rome and there is ample evidence of Paul's present in Rome. It was Paul, not Peter who wrote the New Testament book - The Letter to the Romans.
Also the role of "apostle" is very different from the role of "bishop" or overseer/episcopi.
The Apostles were missionaries and founders of churches - not bishops. Their mission was to the whole church - not to one church in any one place. Father Sullivan says:
a. The Apostles were not bishops in our present day understanding of bishops but they were instead missionaries and founders of churches.
b. Some early local churches did have bishops but it is not at all clear that these bishops were ever appointed or ordained by Saint Paul or by any other apostle.
For a ful discussion of this point google Father Frank A Sullivan SJ or read his fascinating book:
|Father Frank Sullivan SJ|
3. PETER'S BODY BURIED IN ROME?
The Roman Catholic Church claims that the body and bones of Saint Peter are buried under the main altar of St Peter's Basilica in Rome. This is NOT TRUE!
Father Bellarmino Bagatti - an Italian Franciscan priest and skilled archeologist found a stone ossuary / coffin in 1954 during and archeological dig under the DOMINUS FLAVIT (Jesus wept) chapel on the Mount of Olives in Jeruslame. The insctiption on the coffin read: SHIMON bar YONAH - Simon the son of Jonah.
|Father Bellarmino Bagatti OFM|
Father Bagatti reported his findings to Pope Pius X11 who replied:
"Well, we will have to make some changes....but for the time being keep this thing quiet!
His priestly and archeology colleague Father J T Milke said of his work:
Yet in spite of al this scholarship Pope Paul V1 in the 1960's declared that the bones of Saint Peter were in The Vatican and just a few months ago Pope Francis put those bones on display! All the scientists can say - without DNA evidence - about the bones in the Vatican are that they belonged to a man of sixty or seventy from the 1 st century. They could be anybody's bones. They are not St Peter's bones!
|Fake bones of St Peter at the Vatican|
The Christian Church was founded in Jerusalem. If any episcopal see is the primary see of the Christian Church it must be Jerusalem.
Jesus never intended to found a new religion. He intended to reform Judaism. Christians are really the "New Jews" who accepted Jesus as the Savious and Messiah.
When the Christian Church in Jerusalem was persecuted it moved to Antioch. Antioch therefore would be entitled to claim primacy way before Rome.
The Apostles were not "bishops" but missionaries and founders of churches. There would be some foundation to the claim that Peter as the head of the Apostles might have been the first "bishop" of the church and of Jerusalem.
When after the persecution the early church moved to Antioch Peter appears to have stepped back in favour of James - the "Brother of the Lord". James would have a good claim to have been the first "bishop" of Antioch.
"But it must be remembered that the Early Church was not organised centralistically. It was a community of the faithful in which presbyters, deacons and episkopoi served various functions.
The monoepiscopacy did not develop until that late 2nd century in the fight against the gnostic movements.
ALL the bishops of the Christian communities sawthemselves as successors of the apostles on whom the Holy Spirit had been poured out INDISCRIMINATELY at the feast of Pentecost.
The primacy of the bishp of Rome is due to PURELY historical reasons and it took time to develop into an absolute monarchy, which it still is today by adopting Roman imperial law in the High Middle Ages". (Zwierlien)
The above has been a VERY BRIEF summary of how the Roman Catholic Church is established upon lie after lie.
I am continuing to study all these matters and would appreciate all comments.