The pope was Head Of The Church Before1535?

yes. the pope has been the head of the Church since the 1st pope

• Simon Peter. Christ granted him leadership when he said, "You are

Peter, and on thie rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven" (Matt 16:18-19). In the Old Testament, the man who had the keys to the Davidic kingdom was second in charge. Since Christ is the head and always first in charge, and since the pope's role is to serve as Christ would until He returns, Christ is here giving Peter authority over the rest of the apostles. He is also establishing a Church, although it won't come into effect until Pentecost.

Also, in the list of apostles, Peter's name always comes first (ex. Matt 10:1-4). In Jesus' time, the first person's name in a list of names was always the most important.

In Luke 22:31-32, Jesus says, "'Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your faith might not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren."' When Christ says that Satan demanded to have "you" so that he might sift "you," he used the Word "you" in the plural tense, referring to all of the apostles. However, in verse 32 when he says, "I have prayed for you," he used the Word "you" in the singular form, implying Peter. Christ told Peter that he had to strengthen the rest of the apostles, thus implying leadership.

In John 21:15-17, Christ tells Peter to feed his lambs and sheep. He did not say this to the rest of the apostles. Today, the pope leads Christ's flock on earth. Although all of the apostles were priests and bishops, Peter is clearly the leader, thus the pope.

In Acts 2, Pentecost is described, and right after the disciples are filled with the Holy Spirit, Peter goes out and preaches to the people. The fact that he spoke, and not the rest of the apostles, implies to all of the people listening that Peter is the leader of the group. The rest of them spoke eventually, as told in Acts 2:42, but the author of the book emphasized Peter's speech, thereby also indicating leadership. People were baptized, they broke bread, and they prayed together, and thus the Church began (Acts 2:41-42).

Saint Paul could not have possibly helped to start the Church, because it says in Acts 9:1 that he persecuted Christians. The fact that there is a group of people calling themselves Christians indicates that the Church has already began. Saint Paul no doubt did great work to further spread and strengthen the Church. He was the Church's greatest missionary. However, he could not have co-started the Church.

The entire first half of the book of Acts is filled with examples of Peter's leadership and authority over the rest of the apostles and show that he is the head of the Church. When Peter and another apostle go somewhere, Peter is always the one recorded speaking (Acts3-4:22; Acts 8:20-23). When it is discovered that Ananias and Sapphira have held back some property, they are brought to Peter (Acts 5:1-11). Peter is also the one who's healings are mentioned specifically, and sometimes he is the one specifically called to do the healing (Acts 3:1-10; 9:32-43). He is also the one to make major decisions under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (Acts 11:1-18). The book even describes the first Church council (Acts 15:1-21). All of the apostles and elders gathered, but Peter was the one who conducted the council and made the final decision by remembering what the Holy Spirit had revealed to him.

Peter was never specifically called the pope in the first few centuries. For that matter, neither were the next 30 or more. This is because the Word "pope" didn't even come into being until the 3rd century (Robert Louis Wilken, p.281). This doesn't mean that there weren't any popes. There was always one bishop in particular that was the head of the Church.

Back then, many bishops did not have a specific stationary place. Rather, like Saint Paul and the rest of the apostles, they travelled to different places to establish Churches. We call Peter the Bishop of Rome because he worked and was martyred in Rome. There is no controversy about that: all scholars agree. His first letter was "written almost undoubtedly from Rome, since the salutation at the end reads: "The church that is in Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you: and so doth my son Mark" (5:13). Babylon must here be identified with the Roman capital; since Babylon on the Euphrates, which lay in ruins, or New Babylon (Seleucia) on the Tigris, or the Egyptian Babylon near Memphis, or Jerusalem cannot be meant, the reference must be to Rome, the only city which is called Babylon elsewhere in ancient Christian literature (Revelation 17:5; 18:10; "Oracula Sibyl.", V, verses 143 and 159, ed. Geffcken, Leipzig, 1902, 111)." There are also many of the early Christians who have written to attest to Peter being bishop in Rome (see attached link).

Although bishops do have some authority in the Church, the pope had, and still does have, greater authority than the rest of the bishops. There have been 21 Ecumenical Councils throughout the past 2,000 years, however only when there has been a heresy among the Christian faithful and/or a need to define a dogma or doctrine (with the exception of Vatican II - Vatican II was called to clarify and refresh Church doctrine for modern times). Although they had a significant impact on the Church, 21 councils over 2,000 years is hardly enough to run a Church. Even during the councils, they have all been run like the first council in the book of Acts. The bishops all get together to look over Scripture and Church documents, but the pope, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, ultimately makes the final decision. He is infallible when making a statement of faith or morals. Likewise, the bishops (including the pope - bishop of Rome) can have infallibility when all are in agreement on a particular belief or doctrine of the Church. We are all called to obey our bishop, however if the pope writes or states something that contradicts what the bishop says, we are obliged to follow and obey the pope rather than our local bishop if it is a matter of faith or morals.