Replies

"I find this silly. Ask them if they repented from the act of divorce. heh."

This shows a misunderstanding of the issue. The Church does not object to divorce per se, especially if it is needed to protect a spouse or family from abuse; or if the failed marriage was invalid from the git-go, and therefore the vows were defective.

"This is between them and God. The idea that humans can step in between a person and God and claim authority to tell you what God thinks is ridiculous."

Not so much if you value Biblical teaching. It was a public dispute about the validity of Herod's marriage that led to the beheading of John the Baptist, who dared to rebuke Herod and "tell him what God thinks" in public.

It was a dispute about the permissibility of divorce which cause the Pharisee to ask Jesus for his ruling on the matter as a rabbi. The Jewish tradition definitely put their religious leaders in a position to judge.

In two of his letters St. Paul affirms the indissolubility of marriage.In neither case is remarriage an acceptable Christian option:

“To the married I give charge, not I but the Lord, that the wife should not separatefrom her husband, but if she does, let her remain single or else be reconciled to her husband – and that the husband should not divorce is wife”
(1 Cor 7:10-11).

“Thus a married woman is bound by law to her husband as long as he lives; but if her husband dies she is discharged from the law concerning the husband. Accordingly,she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies she is free from that law, and if she remarries another she is not an adulteress”
(Rom 7:2-3).

"The Bible doesn’t grant that power to any mortal human."

Quite the contrary: Paul as an authorized leader in the Church --- as an Apostle --- had that power: that's why he was within his authority to make these rulings. He also ruled on other marriage cases: one where he condemns the Corinthians for tolerating a case of marriage between a man and his stepmother; and his judgment is clear: the man must be removed from the congregation. He tells the Corinthians to expel him.

He also made a ruling about divorce and remarriage when a Christian is married to an unbelieving spouse.

"But if the unbeliever departs, let him depart; a brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases. But God has called us to peace. For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife?"

What he;s saying here (if you read the whole thing) is that if they are willing to stay together, they should do so, because the believing spouse may convert the unbeliever; but, if the unbelieving spouse leaves, the believer can let him or her depart, and is not "under bondage" in such cases: in other words, they are free to remarry.

It was to settle disputes of all kinds --- including this kind --- that the Church was empowered by Christ to hear disputants and make a ruling. That's why Christ said --- well, see the tagline... :o)

1) While Peter was central in the early spread of the gospel (part of the meaning behind Matthew 16:18-19), the teaching of Scripture, taken in context, nowhere declares that he was in authority over the other apostles or over the church (see Acts 15:1-23; Galatians 2:1-14; 1 Peter 5:1-5). Nor is it ever taught that the bishop of Rome was to have primacy over the church. Rather, there is only one reference in Scripture of Peter writing from “Babylon,” a name sometimes applied to Rome, found in 1 Peter 5:13. Primarily from this, and the historical rise of the influence of the bishop of Rome (due to the support of Constantine and the Roman emperors who followed him), come the Roman Catholic Church’s teaching of the primacy of the bishop of Rome. However, Scripture shows that Peter’s authority was shared by the other apostles (Ephesians 2:19-20) and that the “loosing and binding” authority attributed to him was likewise shared by the local churches, not just their church leaders (see Matthew 18:15-19; 1 Corinthians 5:1-13; 2 Corinthians 13:10; Titus 2:15; 3:10-11).

2) Nowhere does Scripture state that in order to keep the church from error, the authority of the apostles was passed on to those they ordained (the idea behind apostolic succession). Apostolic succession is “read into” those verses that the Roman Catholic Church uses to support this doctrine (2 Timothy 2:2; 4:2-5; Titus 1:5; 2:1; 2:15; 1 Timothy 5:19-22). What Scripture DOES teach is that false teachings would arise even from among church leaders and that Christians were to compare the teachings of these later church leaders with Scripture, which alone is cited in the Bible as infallible. The Bible does not teach that the apostles were infallible, apart from what was written by them and incorporated into Scripture. Paul, in talking to the church leaders in the large city of Ephesus, makes note of coming false teachers. Paul does NOT commend them to “the apostles and those who would carry on their authority,” but rather to “God and to the word of His grace” (Acts 20:28-32).

Again, the Bible teaches that it is Scripture that is to be used as measuring stick to determine truth from error. In Galatians 1:8-9, Paul states that it is not WHO teaches but WHAT is being taught that is to be used to determine truth from error. While the Roman Catholic Church continues to pronounce a curse to hell, or “anathema,” upon those who would reject the authority of the pope, Scripture reserves that curse for those who would teach a different gospel (Galatians 1:8-9).

3) While the Roman Catholic Church sees apostolic succession as logically necessary in order for God to unerringly guide the church, Scripture states that God has provided for His church through the following:

(a) Infallible Scripture, (Acts 20:32; 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Matthew 5:18; John 10:35; Acts 17:10-12; Isaiah 8:20; 40:8; etc.) Note: Peter speaks of Paul’s writings in the same category as other Scripture (2 Peter 3:16),

(b) Christ’s unending high-priesthood in heaven (Hebrews 7:22-28),

(c) The provision of the Holy Spirit who guided the apostles into truth after Christ’s death (John 16:12-14), who gifts believers for the work of the ministry, including teaching (Romans 12:3-8; Ephesians 4:11-16), and who uses the written Word as His chief tool (Hebrews 4:12; Ephesians 6:17).

While there have seemingly been good (humanly speaking) and moral men who have served as pope of the Roman Catholic Church, including Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI, and Pope Francis I, the Roman Catholic Church teaching about the office of the pope should be rejected because it is not “in continuity” with the teachings of the original church related to us in the New Testament. This comparison of any church’s teaching is essential, lest we miss the New Testament’s teaching concerning the gospel, and not only miss eternal life in heaven ourselves, but unwittingly lead others down the wrong path (Galatians 1:8-9).