Jesus came into this world to Undo the traditional practices that seemed to harm the faith and worship of the lord. Jesus understood that as time goes on word's meanings and definitions would be twisted just like how "Literally" in webster's dictionary is now a contridiction. He gave the keys to the kingdom to Peter so that the bishop of Rome could continue to keep the teachings pure. Look at the bible and the fact there is a thousand contradictions. People always claim its taken out of context but that's because of the context changing over time. The church's job is to study and explain the pure original meaning of the bible instead of the twisted version most none Catholic denominations view it as.
While the bible doesn't establish the office of pope, Jesus did give Peter the keys to the kingdom and on many circumstances made it clear that Peter was to lead the church. All the pope is is the bishop of Rome, but because those bishops descend from Peter it makes them the leaders of the church.
While it is true that Peter was given the authority to lead the church, in definition, the pope is the “earthly representative of Christ” according to Catholics. Catholics consider the papacy to be infallible, or “never wrong”.
As we know, the name “Peter” means “rock”. In the book of Matthew, Jesus claimed that He shall build his Church on “the rock”. I interpret this as giving Peter the authority and burden of building the foundation of the Christian church on his shoulders as he travels to let Christianity grow. However, the Bible does not mention passing down this authority to others in the form of a papacy (the college of cardinals for the reelection of popes). Also, Jesus did not consider Peter “infallible.” Thus, the Catholic definition of the pope and the Bible’s description of Peter, who was considered the first pope, is in an inequality.
The invention of the papacy was most likely a people’s matter: people wanted an earthly representative… a vicar of the Son of God, to spread order throughout Christianity. In fact, there is a gap in the papal authority line between the pre-Schism papal line and the post-East/West Schism papal line.
The pope after Peter, St.Linus, was not even selected by Peter himself. He was appointed by other Christian leaders of a pre-papacy and he was only mentioned as an apostle along with three others in Timothy.
So in conclusion, the pope is neither Biblically validated nor directly mentioned in the Holy Scripture.
While not mentioned, neither are ministers as far as I remember. Bishops, yes. I personally don't think god cares about church governance that much. It matters more what is being taught. If a church wants their leaders elected by the body (congregational) or by the clergy (ecclesiastical, I think) it should be up to each church. Believe Jesus was a monarchist anyway.
While not mentioned, neither are ministers as far as I remember. Bishops, yes. I personally don't think god cares about church governance that much. It matters more what is being taught. I kinda view it as do I find an organization more compatible if the leaders are elected by the body (congregational), elected by the clergy (ecclesiastical, I think), or some other method. Should the leader be both CEO and chairman? Things like that