Hundreds of thousands gathered in Rome and millions more around the world tuned in online to witness the funeral of Pope Francis. Without a doubt, they felt the overwhelming power of the Roman Catholic Church. On April 26, 2025, monarchs, presidents, prime ministers, dignitaries, and religious leaders from across the globe assembled to pay their respects to the pope during the solemn funeral mass. It was a global display of both the political and religious might of Papal Rome and the entire Roman Catholic Church. The visual impact of this event was further amplified by the monumental architecture of St. Peter’s Square, the imposing structure of St. Peter’s Basilica, and the awe-inspiring splendor of the liturgical ceremony. It was an extraordinarily evocative and impressive spectacle. Just a few days later, on May 7, the conclave began—a gathering of cardinals tasked with selecting the successor to Pope Francis. On May 8, the conclave elected a new religious and political leader of the Roman Catholic Church: Cardinal Robert Prevost, who chose the papal name Leo XIV. On Sunday, May 18, 2025, during a grand Mass held in St. Peter’s Square at the Vatican, Pope Leo XIV was formally enthroned.
This moment also marked an unprecedented historical milestone: for the first time in the history of the papacy, the newly elected pope hailed from the United States of America. For the 1.4 billion Catholics worldwide,1 and according to Catholic doctrine, the pope is the Bishop of Rome, the successor of Christ and the apostles, the Primate of Italy, the Archbishop and Metropolitan of Rome, the Sovereign of Vatican City, the servant of the servants of God, the first after God, the successor and representative of Jesus Christ on earth—the Vicar of Christ.2
Does the Bible confirm the legitimacy of using all these papal titles? Does the faith of Catholics in the pope as the Vicar of Christ, and in what they consider the holy Church find support in the Bible? What does the Bible say about the papacy and the Roman Catholic Church? It is extremely important to examine the papacy—a strange and mysterious geopolitical and religious power—from the perspective of God’s word.
The Successor of the Roman Empire
The roots of the papacy are, in fact, ancient, reaching back to the earliest centuries when the Roman Empire still existed. After the fall of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century, the papacy stepped in to fill the void left by the Roman emperors and became the direct successor to the Roman Empire. The very existence of the papacy owes much to the Roman emperors, most notably to Constantine the Great, who effectively became the ruler of the Church, and to Theodosius the Great, who granted the Church new rights and privileges. Under his reign, the Roman Church was officially given the status of state religion. Moreover, the significance of the Bishop of Rome increased further when, in the year 330, Constantine moved the imperial capital to Constantinople.3
The Idea of the Roman Emperor
The concept of the office of the pope as holding supreme authority over the entire Church originates from the idea of the emperor ruling over the whole Roman Empire. As the foundation for its claim to supremacy and hegemony over all of Christendom, the papacy embraced the theory of Petrine primacy and apostolic succession. According to Catholic doctrine, the primacy of Peter is based on the belief that the apostle Peter was the supreme head of the entire Church, possessing the fullness of authority. The doctrine of apostolic succession, in turn, leads to the conclusion that Peter’s authority was passed on to the succeeding Bishops of Rome. Therefore, they are considered the successors of the apostle Peter and thus the rightful leaders of the entire Christian Church on earth.4 In reality, however, according to historical evidence, the papacy is the successor to the Roman emperors, not to the apostle Peter. Both Scripture and the testimony of the early Church clearly demonstrate that the papacy cannot and does not legitimately claim succession from the apostle Peter.
The Ideology of the Roman Bishops
The primacy of the apostle Peter is one of the most essential elements of Catholic theology and serves as the foundation of the papacy. Catholics claim that when Christ established the Church, He appointed the apostle Peter as its leader, calling him the rock upon which the Church—as a Christian community—was to be built. “And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this Rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18). The entire authority of the papacy and the Catholic religion itself rest on this single statement of Jesus.5 It was Pope Leo I who first claimed (around AD 445) that his authority came directly from Christ, who had passed it on to the apostle Peter, and from Peter to the subsequent Bishops of Rome. It is Leo I—referred to by the Roman Catholic Church as “the Great”—who is considered the true architect of the doctrine of jurisdictional primacy of the Bishop of Rome. Thus, he is regarded as the first pope in the proper sense of the word and regarded even as the founder of the papacy. The position the papacy acquired in the fifth century was primarily due to the support of secular power—specifically, Emperor Valentinian III, who in AD 445, issued a decree officially establishing the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome’s authority within the Western Church.6
The Papal System
Thus, began the dark history of the imperial power of the popes supported by secular authorities. From this point forward, the papacy would be able to pursue its imperial ambitions by wielding the physical force of the state. It would establish the institution of the Inquisition, whose verdicts would be carried out by secular power, and it would conduct policies aimed at converting pagans through brutal violence.7 In this way, a new religious-political entity was born—the papacy, a worthy successor to the Roman emperors. Through its imperial policies, the papacy defiled the earth with an unimaginable scale of immorality, persecution, and systemic cruelty, manifested in the Inquisition, the mass slaughter of the Albigensians, Cathars, Waldensians, Protestants, Jews, and bearing more or less direct responsibility for some of the darkest chapters in human history. The papal system became one of the most oppressive regimes in the history of mankind, worthy of being called a beast opposing Christ and the eternal gospel, despite using Christian terminology and claiming to act in Christ’s name. Peter de Rosa, a Catholic historian devoted to his church, summarizes it this way: “There are millions of them; these people cannot accept that their church and all its popes, some of whom were canonized, were so cruel. … It is a tragic event, but there is an undeniable connection between the stakes, the crosses, papal laws, pogroms—and the gas chambers, crematoria, and Nazi death camps.”8
What Did Christ Say?
Did the words of Christ in the Gospel of Matthew refer to the apostle Peter? Was Peter truly meant to be the Rock of the Church? The original text of the New Testament uses two different Greek words to describe Peter and the Rock—petros and petra. Translated, the verse says: “You are Peter (petros), and on this Rock (petra) I will build My church.” The name Peter, in Greek petros, means a small stone or a movable fragment of rock.
In contrast, the word petra means a large rock or bedrock—an immovable, solid rock mass.9 Thus, the meaning of Christ’s statement is as follows: “You, Peter, are a ‘stone,’ but I will build My Church on the ‘rock,’ the unshakable mass of solid rock. Then the powers of death and evil will not prevail against it.” Jesus contrasted Peter (a small stone) with the Rock. The Church of Christ was built on the Rock of Ages, not on a shaky and movable stone.10 The Aramaic language spoken by Jesus also distinguishes between these concepts.
However, for Christians, the most important thing is the meaning that the Bible assigns to these two words.11 Peter de Rosa—a Catholic historian—confirms that even among the Apostolic Fathers and early Church Fathers, the concept of Peter as the “rock” does not appear: “It may come as a shock to Catholics to hear that the great Church Fathers did not see any connection between Jesus’ statement and the papal office. Not one of them applies the words ‘You are Peter’ to anyone other than Peter himself. … None of them calls the Bishop of Rome the rock or specifically attributes to him the promise concerning the keys. … For the Church Fathers, the ‘rock’ is either Peter’s faith or the Lord in whom Peter believed, not Peter himself. All Church councils, from Nicaea in the 4th century to Constance in the 15th century, agree that Christ alone is the foundation of the Church—that He alone is the Rock on which God built His Church. … None of the Church Fathers writes about Peter passing his authority on to his successors. … There is no mention of a Petrine office. … Thus, the early Church did not regard Peter as the Bishop of Rome and did not consider every Bishop of Rome as Peter’s successor.”12
Christ, the Only Rock of the Church
Truth does not depend on a disputed interpretation of a few verses but on the entirety of Scripture. It is in the Bible that the symbol of the rock has, from the earliest times, been used exclusively in reference to God: “The Lord is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer; my God, my strength, in whom I will trust; my shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold” (Psalm 18:2). Even God Himself asks rhetorically and answers: “Is there a God besides Me? Indeed, there is no other Rock; I know not one.” (Isaiah 44:8). The New Testament is even more precise, identifying Jesus Christ as the rock who accompanied the nation of Israel during their journey to the Promised Land: “All ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.” (1 Corinthians 10:3, 4)
Vicars of Christ?
The path to the primacy of the Bishop of Rome did not originate from the Apostle Peter, nor was it one of righteousness. The spirit revealed in these monarchial ambitions of the Roman bishops—the source of the idea of the Bishop of Rome’s primacy—was not, however, the spirit of Christ and the apostles.13 As the already quoted Catholic historian Peter de Rosa aptly observes: “Most Catholics never hear a bad word about any pope throughout their lives, neither at school nor in church. … Among them [the popes] were many married men who abandoned their wives and children in exchange for the papal office. Many were sons of priests, bishops, and popes; some were illegitimate children; one was a widower, another a former slave. Many were murderers, several were unbelievers. Some were hermits, a few heretics, sadists, and sodomites. Many committed simony to obtain the office and sold sacred treasures until the end of their lives. At least one worshiped Satan; some had children, others engaged in widespread immorality.”14
For Catholics, this is difficult to accept; however, the history of the papacy is a history of unrestrained lust for power, for which the Roman bishops were willing to resort to deceit, bribery, and even crimes.
The Hunger for Absolute and Global Power
After the fall of the Western Roman Empire in AD 476, the papacy further strengthened its position. In its power struggle with the Bishop of Constantinople, the papacy was supported by the Byzantine Emperor Justinian the Great, who granted it undisputed supremacy over the entire Church. However, the papacy’s ambitions did not stop there. On the contrary, it also desired political independence, which led to the creation of the state. This came to fruition in AD 755 with the establishment of the Papal States, thanks to the support of the Frankish king Pepin the Short, son of Charles Martel. But the papacy did not settle for these achievements.
Rome aspired to absolute power. This ambition was already evident during the reign of Pope Leo III (AD 795-816), when he crowned Charlemagne, the Frankish king. However, the full realization of these ambitions had to wait until the pontificate of Gregory VII (AD 1073-1085), who, among other things, humiliated the German Emperor Henry IV and initiated a turning point in the Church’s relationship with the state. This pope issued the document “Dictatus Papae” in AD 1075, (which contained a list of theses outlining what evolved into or stated the presumed basis of the church’s/pope’s power) in which he outlined the papacy’s program aimed at achieving absolute power not only over the church and state but over the entire world.15 Among other things, it states: “Only the pope may use imperial insignia” (thesis 8). “Only he has the right to have rulers kiss his feet” (thesis 9). “Only the pope has the power to depose rulers” (thesis 12). “No one has the right to judge the pope” (thesis 19). “The Roman Church has never erred and never will err” (thesis 22). “The pope, canonically elected, undoubtedly becomes a saint” (thesis 23).16
Symbol of Papal Megalomania
The papal policy, carried out according to the papal ideology—that is, the supremacy of papal authority over secular power—was initiated by Pope Gregory VII and subsequently developed by his successors. The peak of papal power came during the reign of the most ambitious pope, Innocent III (1198–1216). The symbol of this pope’s authority became the tiara (the triple crown), representing ecclesiastical authority, judicial power, and dominion over the entire world.17 This is truly the pinnacle of papal arrogance and megalomania. As can be seen, the history of the papal Church is a continuous pursuit of dominion over the world. It is an endless series of Church-state alliances, always aimed at making secular power a tool serving to defend the interests of the Roman Church.
Union of State and Church
The nature of the papacy, its genetic code, is the unity of Church and state, throne and altar, kingdom and priesthood, religion and politics. The Papacy is indeed a strange, peculiar, mysterious entity. It constitutes the greatest and unique power in the history of humanity. The papal authority is global and imperial, while at the same time, the pope is an absolute monarch. His power spans all continents, races, and nations. The pope arrogates to himself the right to be the “head of the Church” and simultaneously is the sovereign of the Vatican City State. Therefore, it must be fully understood that the papacy has always been, is, and will be a total institution—exerting control over all aspects of a person’s life, behavior, sexuality, and even the state of a Catholic after death.
It is a system of power in which the pope holds the highest legislative, executive, and judicial authority. In modern Western organizations, an independent judiciary has long existed. In the Roman Catholic Church, nothing like this exists—the pope remains the head of this structure as an absolute monarch. The pope’s authority is practically unlimited, surpassing the authority of the Holy Scriptures and God’s commandments, which he interprets and changes at his discretion, as history and papal teachings demonstrate. It is enough to compare, for example, the version of God’s commandments in the Catholic catechism with the commandments of God as written in the Bible. For the pope, truth is only what he recognizes as truth.18 The dual identity of the papacy represents a formal union of Church and state, in which religious authority and political power are united in one person—the pope.
Therefore, the papacy reveals the nature of all empires that existed before it, whose common feature was the unity of religion and state. This applies to the Babylonian Empire, and of course to the Roman Empire, in which the emperor was simultaneously the highest priest of the pagan religion, bearing the title Pontifex Maximus. This title was, of course, inherited by the popes as successors of the Roman Caesars.19 The State of Vatican, or more precisely the so-called Apostolic See, is thus the only theocratic absolute monarchy in Europe. This form of government is entirely at odds with the principles of modern Western states, especially the USA, where the separation of Church and state is meant to guarantee both religious and civil freedom.
I will develop the topic of the papacy and its prophetic role in one of the upcoming issues of LandMarks.
Marcin Watras lives with his wife and two children in Katowice, Poland. He is interested in the philosophy of religion and trends in society.
Endnotes:
- vaticannews.va/pl/watykan/news/2025-03/rosnie-liczba-katolikow-na-swiecie-to-juz-ponad-1-4-mld.html, accessibility: 07.13.2025
- Peter de Rosa, Namiestnicy Chrystusa, Ciemna strona papiestwa, publishing house Total-Trade 1995, p. 19
- Grodzicki, G. Kotarbińska, M. Miller, Kościół dogmatów i tradycji, publishing house Nowa Reformacja 2017, p. 427
- Ibiden, p. 414
- Dave Hunt, Kobieta jadąca na bestii, publishing house Fundacja Świadome Chrześcijaństwo 2024, p. 133
- Grodzicki, G. Kotarbińska, M. Miller, Kościół dogmatów i tradycji, publishing house Nowa Reformacja 2017, pp. 393, 423, 424
- Ibiden, pp. 423, 424
- Peter de Rosa, Namiestnicy Chrystusa, publishing house Total-Trade 1995, p. 14
- Władysław Polok, Opoka Koscioła, publishing house Znaki Czasu, published April 2011, pp. 14, 15
- Grodzicki, G. Kotarbińska, M. Miller, Kościół dogmatów i tradycji, publishing house Nowa Reformacja 2017, p. 392
- Władysław Polok, Opoka Koscioła, publishing house Znaki Czasu, published April 2011, p. 15
- Peter de Rosa, Namiestnicy Chrystusa, publishing house Total-Trade 1995, pp. 30-32
- Grodzicki, G. Kotarbińska, M. Miller, Kościół dogmatów i tradycji, publishing house Nowa Reformacja 2017, p. 420
- Peter de Rosa, Namiestnicy Chrystusa, Ciemna strona papiestwa, publishing house Total-Trade 1995, p. 36
- Grodzicki, G. Kotarbińska, M. Miller, Kościół dogmatów i tradycji, publishing house Nowa Reformacja 2017, pp. 427-432
- Dictatus papae, https://silesia.edu.pl/index.php/Dictatus_papae_Grzegorza_VII_z_1075_roku, accessibility: 07.16.2025
- Grodzicki, G. Kotarbińska, M. Miller, Kościół dogmatów i tradycji, publishing house Nowa Reformacja 2017, p. 434
- Ibiden, pp. 443-445
- Jonatan Dunkel, Apokalipsa, publishing house Orion plus 2001, p. 99