Christ has chosen to endow with ecclesial authority only those successors of the apostles (i.e., bishops) who are the leaders of Christ's one historic Catholic Church---just as he did in the 1st-century Apostolic Church. Do you disagree with God's choice?
I'm asking if God knows that He can't endow anybody who hasn't first been chosen by your men.
He has chosen not to endow with authority one whom he has not also chosen by means of his Church's Magisterium---the other endowed men whom God has chosen in succession from the apostles to the present day.
No, since the bishop must also have the approval and sanction of his fellow bishops (Magisterium), and particularly of the Pope. It is the Church which possesses the authority, not merely one individual bishop.
Your repeated use of the word "cannot" is merely a Straw Man Fallacy on your part. The simple fact is that God has chosen to do things a certain way---after all, as you admit, "God can endow who he wills," right? And he wills to endow the bishops (Magisterium)---and not laymen like you and I---with his own power and authority. God's choice, whether it fits your high opinion of yourself or not.
Just another expression of your prior Straw Man Fallacy (see above).
Why---because they say so? No, only those who have been ordained and appointed by Christ's one historic Church (i.e., the Magisterium) can rightly consider themselves endowed with Christ's own ecclesial authority. That's just the way in which God has chosen to govern his Church. Sorry if this pokes a few holes in your self-styled religious identity.
Like yourself, I have no idea what you're talking about here. Example?
Correction of individuals comes by means of the bishops of Christ's one historic Church, just as it came through the apostles (i.e., the original Magisterium) in the 1st century.
Luther was not a bishop of Christ's Church, and thus possessed absolutely no divine authority whatsoever to try and replace the Church's established teachings with his own entirely non-authoritative interpretations and opinions. Your example here only serves to prove my point.
...except that they are. Try again.
Yes, I did. In any case, you've already been answered in Post #122 above.
Feel free to actually disprove the content of the source I provided (and note that mere disagreement does not equate to "proof").
Why wouldn't there have been? Human beings are inherently political and social creatures who often commit sins, and this certainly includes Christians. Note also that both capital punishment and religious warfare take place in the Bible itself.
Both are entirely in line with Divine Revelation, and have been believed and taught by Christ's one historic Church virtually from the beginning.
Jesus Christ himself directly equated himself (Head) with his Church (Body), and identified the Church's teachings with his very own---they are one and the same infallible body of truth (Lk. 10:16; 1 Tim. 3:15). Sorry for your confusion.
Yes, and he did so specifically by means of the authoritative teachings of his one historic Church (Mt. 16:18-19/ Is. 22:22; Mt. 28:18-20; Lk. 10:16; Ac. 15:2; 16:4; 2 Thess. 2:15; 3:4; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Jn. 4:6). See just above.
God is not. God is perfectly Just. Some much of RCC doctrine caters to the human creature and not to God.
Both are completely outside Divine revelation and lie entirely within in the wisdom (folly) of men.
There is no confusion. Jesus is the Head of the Christian faith of which RCC is but one sect. Jesus's church is not exclusive as you would have it be, Hos church is inclusive all who call Him Lord and Savior. Sorry for your loss.
Which the Roman church promptly corrupted for their own political advantage.
And yet, God chooses to work his purposes in and through imperfect human agents and agencies, most particularly through the bishops (Magisterium) of Christ's one historic Church. If you ever locate a group of human beings who are sinless, let me know. Until then, it should be no surprise to any believer that certain leaders in God's infallible Church sometimes fall into sin and engage in moral and practical error.
...according to the entirely non-authoritative opinions of your chosen recently-invented, man-made non-Catholic sect, anyway. And, once again, we're back to the question of doctrinal (teaching) authority, which the Catholic Magisterium possesses (Mt. 16:18-19/Is. 22:22; Mt. 28:18-20; Lk. 10:16; Ac. 15:2; 16:4; 2 Thess. 2:15; 3:4; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Jn. 4:6), and which your entirely fabricated Protestant sect decidedly does not.
There is nothing but confusion on your part, which is evidenced in the almost pathological habit you have of profoundly misrepresenting Catholic teaching and practice (i.e., engaging in the Straw Man Fallacy). Every single time you engage in a Straw man Fallacy, you provide evidence of your own deep doctrinal confusion.
Amen.
Now go ahead and actually historically document your claim with in-context quotations from the writings of the early Christian Church from the 1st through the 6th centuries. If you're right, it should be clearly reflected in the beliefs and teachings of the early Christian Church. So let's have it. Post your proof, please.
Impossible, given that Jesus Christ, the Divine Son of God, declared that it could never happen (Mt. 16:18-19; cf. 1 Tim. 3:15). Unless you wish to claim here that the Lord was either mistaken or lying (Prov. 19:5) in his unqualified declaration...? No? Then your claim is patently false.
Example...?
