Am I also really to believe that Tim Staples "took great delight in convincing Catholics that their belief in the Pope's authority was just a lot of Romanist nonsense"? I mean really. Who takes great delight in that? I have relatives, who are Roman Catholics. I don't sit around taking great pleasure in that sort of thing. In fact, I find it most difficult to explain to a person that their faith is misplaced.
If there's one thing that unites non-Catholics of all stripes, it's a refusal to accept the Church's teaching on the authority of the pope. Tragically, that refusal has led to wide divisions among, and heated arguments between, Christians all over the world.
Catholic apologist Tim Staples knows these arguments all too well. Having once been a "Bible-believing Fundamentalist" himself, he took great delight in convincing Catholics that their belief in the Pope's authority was just a lot of Romanist nonsense based on human tradition instead of Scripture.
But then Staples was challenged to actually study the faith he was bashing. After scouring Scripture, history, and the writings of the, Staples was forced to conclude that Christ himself had established the institution of the .
So the rejection of the authority of the Pope is my main mission in life. I am out to get Roman Catholics to reject the Pope. I guess in a sense that is true. I would like to see not only Papists reject the Pope as the ultimate authority, but I would also like to see Jehovah's Witnesses reject the authority of the Watch Tower, Mormons reject the authority of Utah, Muslims reject their tribal leaders such as Osama Bin Laden, Buddhists reject Buddha, and so on and so on.
Are we really going to believe that Roman Catholics are more united than everyone else? There really is no division among RCs at all that would be as significant as divisions among Protestants? If you believe that, then I guess if a lie is told often enough it will be believed.
But also notice that Tim Staples claims to have found this doctrine in Scripture. Was his study of Scripture his own private interpretation? Does he offer an infallible exegesis of certain texts? In other words, was Scripture sufficient to explain to Tim Staples that Scripture is not sufficient to explain to Tim Staples and that he needs the Pope to rightly understand the text of Scripture?
The claim that God is not able to sufficiently tell His church through His Word what needs to be believed and that some man must be looked to in His place is simply blasphemous.