The papacy represents the Roman Catholicism’s solidarity with the world system of government as opposed to Christ’s. The RCC recognizes the Pope as its titular head. He is said to be Christ’s Vicar or representative here on earth. He is called the Holy Father, and his pronouncements, when he speaks and writes ex cathedra (“from the chair” – authority derived from one’s office or position), are supposed to be infallibly correct, even if he contradicts Scripture.
The office of the papacy was a logical outgrowth of the doctrine of the elevation of the clergy class over the common people or the laity. I showed how the clergy-laity divide is antithetical to the New Covenant in my previous article on the priesthood. Once a group accepts a clergy class and accepts the concept that the church has the form of a worldly kingdom complete with a king, it is only natural to end up with a Pope. Jesus made it clear that his kingdom is not of this world, however.
Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm.” John 18:36 (NASB95) —
The Roman Catholic Church claims is that it is the only church whose spiritual lineage of leaders goes all the way back to the Apostle Peter in Rome. Peter is considered to be the first pope from whom the current pontiff is descended spiritually through successive ordinations.
What the RCC does not comprehend is that every New Covenant believer is part of the new creation initiated by Jesus, the “second Adam” (1 Corinthians 15:45) through the new birth. The entire church goes back to Christ. Even if it were true that Peter were the first pope, it would not matter one whit relating to a spiritual pedigree. The only pedigree that matters is what comes via the new birth, something disconnected from any church organization. (You may wish to read my first article in this series for more on this topic.)
Historically the papacy claimed and exerted even greater religious and secular power than it does today. In his papal Bull of 1302, Pope Boniface VIII (on the right) wrote: “Indeed we declare, say, pronounce, and define that it is altogether necessary to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”
Boniface’s assertions of papal plenitude of power did not go beyond those of his predecessors in the 13th century. They were in fact more moderate than, for instance, those of Innocent IV and were in any case well within the range of the opinions gradually elaborated in the schools of theology and canon law in the period between the age of Gregory VII, the great 11th-century reformer, and that of Boniface.2
Although such secular authority is not currently claimed by the Pope, during the Middle Ages the papacy was the most powerful political force in European Christendom, having the ability to leverage kingdoms and even excommunicate recalcitrant rulers in order to bring them into line. For many centuries most of these kingdoms were nominally Catholic and looked to the Pope. Such power did not go uncontested, however. Some secular rulers vied with the papacy over the right to appoint bishops, etc. Wars were waged by kingdoms under the auspices of the Pope in a contest for power. Money was a big part of what was at stake, and, as one would expect, great power was accompanied by great corruption, and the “Vicar of Christ” was often a very poor representative of our Lord.
The early church had no such office as Pope. Jesus warned his disciples against having such pretensions of power and greatness.
Then they began to argue among themselves about who would be the greatest among them. 25 Jesus told them, “In this world the kings and great men lord it over their people, yet they are called ‘friends of the people.’ 26 But among you it will be different. Those who are the greatest among you should take the lowest rank, and the leader should be like a servant. 27 Who is more important, the one who sits at the table or the one who serves? The one who sits at the table, of course. But not here! For I am among you as one who serves. Luke 22:24–27 (NLT) —
The desire to be considered a “great” person with commensurate power and authority is rooted in our sin nature and is antithetical to Christ’s teachings.
Adam and Eve wanted to be great, which led to their downfall. Satan’s told them that they could be “like God,” knowing good from evil for themselves, rather than having to rely upon God. This desire continues in the human makeup and manifests itself over and over again. The tower of Babel was constructed by a group who wanted to “make a name for themselves” and be famous. (Genesis 11:4) This evil desire originated in Satan, who is thought to be represented in the following passage from Isaiah, which is ostensibly written about the King of Babylon, but seems to be about the prince of darkness, too.
How you are fallen from heaven, O shining star, son of the morning! You have been thrown down to the earth, you who destroyed the nations of the world. 13 For you said to yourself, ‘I will ascend to heaven and set my throne above God’s stars. I will preside on the mountain of the gods far away in the north. 14 I will climb to the highest heavens and be like the Most High.’ Isaiah 14:12–14 (NLT) —
Any time a church group elevates an individual to a position of enormous power and prestige, whether it is the RCC or any other organization of believers, we can be sure that it is not something birthed by God’s Holy Spirit.
The early church did not have an hierarchy. Instead it made decisions by coming together to seek the Lord’s will and discuss important issues in order to arrive at a consensus. This can only happen where there is unity and humility. The first big issue that arose was whether Gentile converts should be required to keep the Mosaic Law, specifically circumcision. The church in Jerusalem, quite naturally, had many Jewish converts; whereas, Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, witnessed multitudes of Gentiles believing the gospel. As might be expected, the Jews viewed Christianity as an extension of Judaism and wanted these new Gentile believers to become full-fledged Jews in addition to putting their faith and allegiance in Christ.
Paul was in the eye of the storm. Having observed uncircumcised Gentiles being filled with the Holy Spirit without being circumcised, a proof of their complete acceptance by God, he taught that we are saved by faith alone and that circumcision is not necessary. This agreed with the passage in Genesis which says that Abraham was justified by faith in God’s promise before circumcision was even introduced. (Genesis 15:6) Paul wrote:
For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God. Romans 2:28–29 (NASB95) —
However, Paul’s view was contested. People called Judaizers followed Paul and injected their legalistic teaching on circumcision into the congregations that Paul started. As a result, people were getting confused, and Paul believed that the integrity of the gospel message was at stake. As he saw it, the future of the church hung in the balance. Therefore, the believers turned to the apostles in Jerusalem for the answer.
Some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” 2 And when Paul and Barnabas had great dissension and debate with them, the brethren determined that Paul and Barnabas and some others of them should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders concerning this issue. Acts 15:1–2 (NASB95) —
This was not because Paul recognized them as the supreme authority. He made that clear in his letter to the church in Galatia many years later.
Then after an interval of fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along also. 2 It was because of a revelation that I went up; and I submitted to them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but I did so in private to those who were of reputation, for fear that I might be running, or had run, in vain... 6 But from those who were of high reputation (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)—well, those who were of reputation contributed nothing to me. 7 But on the contrary, seeing that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised 8 (for He who effectually worked for Peter in his apostleship to the circumcised effectually worked for me also to the Gentiles), 9 and recognizing the grace that had been given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, so that we might go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. Galatians 2:1-2, 6–9 (NASB95) —
After much discussion, in which Peter voiced his strong viewpoint in agreement with Paul, James, the Lord’s brother, who appeared to be the leader among the apostles and elders, stood to give the decision. Here is what he said.
Everyone listened quietly as Barnabas and Paul told about the miraculous signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles. 13 When they had finished, James stood and said, “Brothers, listen to me. 14 Peter has told you about the time God first visited the Gentiles to take from them a people for himself. 15 And this conversion of Gentiles is exactly what the prophets predicted...19 “And so my judgment is that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead, we should write and tell them to abstain from eating food offered to idols, from sexual immorality, from eating the meat of strangled animals, and from consuming blood. 21 For these laws of Moses have been preached in Jewish synagogues in every city on every Sabbath for many generations.” 22 Then the apostles and elders together with the whole church in Jerusalem chose delegates, and they sent them to Antioch of Syria with Paul and Barnabas to report on this decision. The men chosen were two of the church leaders—Judas (also called Barsabbas) and Silas...[the letter contained the following statement] 25 it seemed good to us, having become of one mind, to select men to send to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, Acts 15:12-15, 19–22, 25 (NLT) —
James, not Peter, took the lead. This significantly undermines the RCC’s assertion of Peter’s being the first Pope.
Every group needs a leader, but not a pope. The leaders God uses are those who humbly submit to the written word of God, listen to the Holy Spirit and to the counsel of those around them, and humbly use their authority in the fear of the Lord. James’ leadership was not codified or otherwise made official. It seemed to be organic and based upon natural and spiritual gifts. There is no record that any sort of policy of succession existed in the early church.
It is true that God raised up Moses to be a very strong leader who exercised enormous authority. He was followed by Joshua who operated in the same way. It should be noted, however, that God used those two leaders to lead Israel out of slavery in Egypt and bring them into their inheritance in Canaan. The enormous mission required great leadership and commensurate authority. In addition, these two leaders fulfilled another purpose in God’s larger plan. Moses represented the Law and Joshua, the New Covenant. Moses, the Law, could not bring them into the promises, but Joshua (another form of the name, Jesus) did. The obvious significance is that legalism can never save us. Only Christ can do that through the new birth. Their leadership fulfilled a larger purpose in foreshadowing God’s plan of salvation.
Joshua conquered Canaan and later died. After that Israel entered the period of the Judges during which God changed how he raised up leaders. Without any policy or line of succession, God raised up men and a woman to lead the nation as the need required. As long as these judges exercised leadership, the nation prospered. When they died, the nation was again leaderless until God raised up the next judge, making the people feel insecure and vulnerable. Nevertheless, this is how God chose to do things.
God wants us to be dependent upon him rather than upon organizations with dynastic rulers.
Over time, the nation grew weary of God’s way of doing things and asked to have a king, “like the nations” (1 Samuel 8:20), whose sons would provide a ongoing succession of rulers, ensuring continuity of government. Samuel was judge and a prophet when this took place. He brought the people’s request to God, who regarded it as a rejection of his rule.
Then all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah; 5 and they said to him, “Behold, you have grown old, and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now appoint a king for us to judge us like all the nations.” 6 But the thing was displeasing in the sight of Samuel when they said, “Give us a king to judge us.” And Samuel prayed to the LORD. 7 The LORD said to Samuel, “Listen to the voice of the people in regard to all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from being king over them. 1 Samuel 8:4–7 (NASB95) —
God wants his people to be content to be in a place of liminality or uncertainty in which we have nothing firm to cling to but him. This is the “place” where our faith and knowledge of God grows.
If we can become “comfortable” by faith with God’s being our only real security, we will experience God’s ongoing leadership, protection, and provision. (2 Corinthians 5:7) We are most free and happy when we rely upon the Lord. (John 8:31-32) Human beings in general, however, do not like this set up. We usually will trade freedom for a sense of security. This is what happened in Israel and is an ongoing pattern of behavior in every group, including the church.
The Lord allowed the people to get their way, and Saul was appointed as the first king. (It should be noted that God had a larger purpose in mind. His ultimate ruler, our Lord Jesus, would descend from the line of David to be Israel’s, the church’s, permanent king.)
“And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name Him Jesus. 32 “He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David; 33 and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end.” Luke 1:31–33 (NASB95) —
The history of the kings of Israel is mainly one of sin and corruption, with several good kings, preeminently David, sprinkled into the mix. Contrarily, there is no record of a bad judge. If we allow God to raise up leaders from among the people as he sees fit, things will go much better.
Unfortunately, there is something built into human nature, going back to Babel, that wants to establish a system and build and empire to provide security and continuity. (You can read more on this subject in a previous article.)
The early church was decentralized, having no pope or other centralized rule. This was part of the genius God built into the church, which allowed it to survive and thrive during years of intense persecution. This same genius has enabled the Chinese underground church to multiply despite decades of suppression by the communist regime there. When a group or movement is decentralized, it is nearly impossible to “kill” it. There are no buildings to seize or central leaders to threaten or kill. If one leader is removed, another one springs up. Meetings can be conducted “underground” in homes and other suitable temporary venues. (If you wish to read more about the genius of decentralization, check out my summaries of The Starfish and the Spirit and The Insanity of Obedience .)
The early church was governed by elders.
When the Holy Spirit gave birth to a church through Paul’s preaching, one of his first orders of business was the appointment or ordination of elders, older men of proven character who had a spiritual gift and calling to shepherd or care for and oversee that local church.
When they had appointed elders for them in every church, having prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord in whom they had believed. Acts 14:23 (NASB95) —
Paul retained a fatherly sort of authority in each of the churches which he preached into existence.
For even if you had ten thousand others to teach you about Christ, you have only one spiritual father. For I became your father in Christ Jesus when I preached the Good News to you. 1 Corinthians 4:15 (NLT) —
Just as natural fathers train and prepare their children to become self-governing responsible adults, so Paul expected the churches he founded to be governed by the local elders or presbytery.
Grown sons govern their own families, but sometimes turn to their earthly fathers for advice and direction. In such cases, fathers do not have the right to rule their sons, but can influence them. Any father who seeks to do otherwise violates his son’s authority as husband and father of his own wife and family and stunts their growth. Likewise, Paul was able to exercise fatherly authority to assist churches in difficulty as invited and allowed. Those churches that honored Paul’s authority benefited immensely. Those who refused it generally suffered.
Nevertheless, Paul’s apostolic authority over the churches he founded depended on the willingness of the local elders to accede to it.
This is the biblical model for all ecclesiastical authority. Local churches are intended to be self-governing but not arrogantly independent. At times local elders need the wisdom and guidance of fatherly spiritual leaders who have their best interests at heart. This can only happen when relationships of trust have been built over time.
The institutionalized church tries to take a “short cut” by appointing overseers or bishops (the episcopate) who rule over the churches under them by means of positional rather than relational authority. This is a violation of the New Testament pattern and keeps people spiritually immature, a condition nurtured by overbearing leaders who prefer power to producing mature disciples.
After the conversion of the Emperor Constantine, the church began to morph into something more like an earthly kingdom, complete with a king or Pope. The church gained prestige, power, property, and wealth after it became the official religion of the empire. Instead of being a persecuted fringe minority, it became socially and professionally advantageous to be a Christian. Church leaders grew in power and wealth over time, rising to the heights of the papacy in the Middle Ages. God may have used this period of church history for some good, as he does in every case for those who believe (Romans 8:28), but by and large this was a dark age for the church. The corruption, abuse, and divergence from biblical truth became so great that it erupted into a massive and turbulent period of reformation. The evil surrounding the office of the Pope provoked Martin Luther and other reformers to consider that he was the biblical Antichrist. 1
At the time of the Reformation, Leo X was the Pope. He was one of the more ungodly pontiffs of all time. Leo X was the head of the de Medici family from Florence, Italy, when he became the pope. Interestingly he was not even a priest at the time of his appointment. He reigned over the RCC from 1513 until 1521. He used his considerable political skills in his years as Pope, appointing family members, writers, and poets to key church positions. His lavish lifestyle quickly emptied Rome’s coffers; so, he came up with ways to replenish the church’s bank account. One of the most famous methods was the selling of papal indulgences. People were told that when they gave money, the souls of the their loved ones were immediately released from Purgatory, a place of suffering where the heaven-bound remained until their last sins were completely expiated (another extra-biblical doctrine about which I will write later). This egregious abuse of power to enrich Rome became one of the main offenses that provoked Luther to post his 95 Theses on the church door in Wittenberg, Germany. Leo X engaged in wars and intrigue as well, joining the emperor of Germany and the kings of Spain and England to drive the French out of northern Italy. Interestingly, the reason he failed to quickly deal with Luther (put him to death as a heretic) was because of his preoccupation with these struggles. Much to his regret, by the time he got around to Luther, it was too late. The Reformation had already gained momentum and Luther came under the protection of powerful secular rulers who had the ability to thwart the Pope’s desires.
The RCC bases its doctrine of papal infallibility and rule on a much debated passage of Scripture.
He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. 18 “I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. 19 “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.” Matthew 16:15–19 (NASB95) —
The RCC believes this passage made Peter the first Pope, giving him binding authority to rule. However, if one properly exegetes or pulls out the true meaning of this passage, instead of reading into it what one wishes to see (isogesis), it is obvious that this is not what Jesus meant.
Jesus made a play on words in this passage. Peter’s name, petros, means little stone. The Greek word for rock is petra. It should be apparent that the little stone is not the rock. Peter just confessed that Jesus is the Lord. This confession is the rock upon which the church is built. The acknowledgement of Christ’s lordship along with our declared allegiance to him gives us entrance into the kingdom of God, producing in Christ’s followers the “obedience of faith.” (Romans 1:5) Paul summarized the importance of our confession of Christ’s lordship in the following passage.
that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. Romans 10:9–10 (NASB95) —
The phrase “keys of the kingdom” refers to God’s giving Peter the authority or privilege to preach the gospel and open the door of salvation both to the Jews and to the Gentiles. Peter is the one God selected to first preach to the Jews in Jerusalem on Pentecost, and he was given the privilege of unlocking the door of salvation to the Gentiles when he preached to the Roman centurion and his family in Acts 10. Peter recognized this God-given favor, as recorded in Acts.
After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. Acts 15:7 (NASB95) —
Regarding binding and loosing in the disputed passage, it is important to note that Peter was authorized to bind and loose what had already been bound and loosed in heaven. It is clear that this was not an authorization for Peter to wield power. I have already shown that he was not even the recognized leader of the church in Jerusalem. Instead this must refer to the his ability to loose people from spiritual darkness through the preaching of the gospel. On Pentecost, he concluded his message with these words.
And with many other words he solemnly testified and kept on exhorting them, saying, “Be saved from this perverse generation!” 41 So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls. Acts 2:40–41 (NASB95) —
His exhortation to be set free or loosed from sin resulted in the conversion of about 3000 people! Peter also exercised his authority to bind when he confronted Simon Magus, an evil magician who resisted the gospel message and tried to purchase the power to baptize converts in the Holy Spirit.
But Peter said to him, “May your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money! 21 “You have no part or portion in this matter, for your heart is not right before God. 22 “Therefore repent of this wickedness of yours, and pray the Lord that, if possible, the intention of your heart may be forgiven you. 23 “For I see that you are in the gall of bitterness and in the bondage of iniquity.” 24 But Simon answered and said, “Pray to the Lord for me yourselves, so that nothing of what you have said may come upon me.” Acts 8:20–24 (NASB95) —
The RCC erred by seeking to use this passage to confer on the Pope an almost limitless authority and set him apart as the official Vicar of Christ. It is clear from other verses, that the entire church is Christ’s representative here on earth, carrying the authority of Christ to preach the gospel, heal the sick, cast out demons, and make judgments.
For God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, no longer counting people’s sins against them. And he gave us this wonderful message of reconciliation. 20 So we are Christ’s ambassadors; God is making his appeal through us. We speak for Christ when we plead, “Come back to God!” 2 Corinthians 5:19–20 (NLT) — And as you go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ 8 “Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Freely you received, freely give. Matthew 10:7–8 (NASB95) — When one of you has a dispute with another believer, how dare you file a lawsuit and ask a secular court to decide the matter instead of taking it to other believers! 2 Don’t you realize that someday we believers will judge the world? And since you are going to judge the world, can’t you decide even these little things among yourselves? 3 Don’t you realize that we will judge angels? So you should surely be able to resolve ordinary disputes in this life. 1 Corinthians 6:1–3 (NLT) —
The natural human propensity to seek order and security by appointing a permanent succession of rulers, as was done in Israel, always leads to tyranny, as God warned his people through Samuel the prophet. (1 Samuel 8:10-18) Nevertheless, just as Israel preferred the tyranny of an earthly ruler they could see over the rule of God, so the RCC choose to elevate men to a position of supreme authority instead of allowing God to raise up leaders as he saw fit.
This is part of the human condition and is not limited to the RCC. Protestant Christianity has often fallen into the same trap.
Often what began as Spirit-led movements morphed into man-made organizations or denominations, complete with centralized government, hierarchical leadership, power, money, and other assets. The modern megachurch movement is largely a capitulation to a business model for doing church, rather than the kingdom model adopted by Constantine.
The true church is a spiritual entity, an organism more than an organization. God meant it to remain decentralized and dependent upon his continuing leadership.
At the time of this writing, the RCC is in turmoil because of the words and actions of the current pontiff, Francis. The Catholic News Agency reported on May 1, 2019: “A group of nineteen Catholics, including some prominent academics, have published an open letter to the bishops of the world accusing Pope Francis of heresy.” 3 This is a huge problem since the is no means to remove the Pope.
Among specific heretical beliefs the letter accuses the pope of holding is the position that a Catholic can, with full knowledge of divine law, violate that law and not be in a state of grave sin. The letter also references a number of bishops, cardinals, and priests whom the authors claim are themselves heretical and the pope either appointed or allowed to remain in office, as further proof of the Holy Father’s “heresy.” The letter also suggests that a cross and staff used by the pope during the 2018 Synod on Young People liturgies were respectively “satanic” and proof of a pro-homosexual agenda.
Fr. Thomas Petri, O.P., Petri, vice president and academic dean at the Pontifical Faculty of the Immaculate Conception at the Dominican House of Studies in Washington, DC, told CNA that the letter is”frankly disappointing.” “I cannot understand how one could accuse the pope of heresy based on low-level appointments forwarded to him for pro-forma approval or on vestiture given to him to use for a liturgy.” “It’s quite stunning to include such ‘facts’ as evidence of heresy,” Petri said.
Canon law defines heresy as the “obstinate denial or doubt, after baptism, of some truth to be believed with divine and Catholic faith.” Attached to the letter is a four-page canonical rationale, in which the writers cite previous declaration by Pope Leo II that his predecessor, Pope Honorius, had supported the monothelite heresy in the seventh century. The letter acknowledges that “it is agreed that the Church does not have jurisdiction over the pope, and hence that the Church cannot remove a pope from office by an exercise of superior authority, even for the crime of heresy.” Nevertheless, the letter asserts, a pope with “heretical views cannot continue as pope.” The letter then suggests that the pope could lose office de facto as a result of obstinately holding public heretical views and that the bishops of the Church have an “absolute duty to act in concert to remedy this evil.” The Code of Canon Law explicitly provides for the punishment of Catholics who “make recourse against an act of the Roman Pontiff to an ecumenical council or the college of bishops.” Canon law also defines that both an ecumenical council and the college of bishops can only ever act with and under the authority of the pope. 4
This is the kind of predicament we get into when we violate God’s way of doing things and resort to man-made methods. In light of other areas in which the RCC has diverged from biblical truth, it is not surprising, however.
To conclude, the papacy is just one more error in the RCC, which is a result of its departure from absolute adherence to the scriptures. Serious errors always follow this most basic one. God does not want his church to be organized and ruled like an earthly kingdom. The Lord is the only king of the church. He has appointed no one specific person as his vicar or representative on earth. The Holy Spirit fills each believer, and God raises up leaders on a local level as needed.
The Roman Catholic Church’s decision to institutionalize leadership under the papacy reveals that it is not committed to Christ’s rule through the Holy Spirit or to adhering to the Scriptures.
1 https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1087&context=pd
2 https://www.britannica.com/biography/Boniface-VIII/Bonifaces-capture
3 https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/41164/theologians-accuse-pope-of-heresy
4 Ibid.
