Question:

When was the Roman Catholic Church started and is their proof that Peter was the founder and the first Pope.

Answer:

I have already answered a similar question with regard to when the Roman Catholic Church started at the site.  I am copying and pasting below.

As for Peter, as far as I know, no one claims that he began the church in Rome.  The church in Rome was started rather early–probably by AD 50 and there is no evidence that Peter came to Rome before AD 63.  You may have found a Roman Catholic friend who claims that Peter founded the church in Rome.  In that case, this was not a particularly sophisticated Catholic, as well-informed Catholics would not make such an obviously false claim.  What Catholic apologists do claim is that Peter was the first bishop of Rome and that the succession of bishops of Rome can be traced all the way back to Peter.  They do this in order to make the claim that the church in Rome has ultimate authority of the Christian Church.  Historical facts do not back this claim. There was no one like a “pope” in the first two centuries in Rome, but eventually, by the fourth century, the head bishop in Rome began to take on a much greater authority, especially over churches in the West.  They even began to claim to have primacy over all of the churches.  It was not until the fifth century before there was anything remotely like a pope in Rome.  Some say that Leo was the first true pope. His reign was from AD 440-461.  Who the first “pope” was is debatable, but one thing we can say with absolute confidence is that Peter was not the first pope, as there was no pope for the first 300+ years of the church in Rome.  Also, historical evidence from the earliest of the church historians do not support the claim that Peter was even first bishop of Rome, although he did spend time there and was very likely martyred in Rome.

The conclusion on Peter is that he certainly did not found the church in Rome, he certainly was not a pope, and therefore obviously was not the first pope. However, is possible that he was at one time one of the bishops (elders) in Rome. The evidence is not conclusive on this. Although he may have been one of the elders/bishops in Rome, there is no evidence he was ever the head bishop there.  Claims to the contrary are made only to support the authority of the Roman Catholic Church and are not based on evidence.

John Oakes

Answer:

I will assume you are talking about the Roman Catholic Church.  There is also the Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church and the Coptic Catholic Church.  These names are in a sense oxymorons, since the word catholic means universal.  By definition, there cannot be more than one universal church.

In any case, the Roman Catholic Church traces its beginning back to the original church which was established at Pentecost in AD 30.  Christians started the church in Rome almost certainly by AD 50.  Paul visited the well-established church in AD 63.  The Roman Catholic Church can trace its roots all the way back to the original Christian church in Rome.

This fact may be confusing to you, because you are probably aware that the Roman Catholic Church today is very far from holding to biblical Christianity, with its popes, vestments, sacraments, incense, celibate priests, nuns, church calendar and much more.  The Roman Catholic Church is clearly a very corrputed version of Christianity.  Nevertheless, it is a historical fact that the church in Rome can literally trace its roots in a more or less uninterrupted line to the time of the apostles.  Of course, Catholics, like Orthodox Christians, are very proud of their historical roots.  My suggestion is that you not argue with this claim because it is true.  The Episcopalian, Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, Pentecostal and other denominations cannot claim what the Roman Church can claim historically.  Of course, genaeology does not equal truth and the fact that a particular group cannot trace its history back to Pentecost does not mean that they are not true Christians, but the facts of history are the facts of history.

Having said that, you should not be intimidated by the facts of history.  The facts of history show that gradually, over several hundred years, the early church, and especially the church in Rome added many man-made traditions to the simple truth of Christianity.  By the third century, they were baptizing babies and worshipping at the graves of “saints.”  By the fifth century the Catholic Church accepted Original Sin and Transubstantiation.  Eventually, the Catholic Church invented false teachings and practices such as the Immaculate Conception of Mary, Purgatory, indulgences, celibate priests papal infallibility and the like.   Some of these are unbiblical traditions, others are false doctrines.   What you should do is try to find a church which is strongly committed to biblical Christianity and is willing to put biblical principles into practice.

John Oakes