Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I know that this is another debate for another thread, but I would add the Anglican Church to this list of churches possessing Apostolic Succession.The Orthodox and Coptic churches have apostolic succession. So their bishops have authority given to them by bishops going all the way back to Christ and the apostles.
Mr. Rick also denies that which was claimed at the Council of Chalcedon (451 AD)- that the pope is the head of all churches and his decrees are infallible on matters of faith.
Saint Cyprian made it clear, in 251 AD, that all who abandon the See of Peter, on which the Church is founded, are not of the Church.
The Bishop of Rome is more than a bishop or an apostle, he is the head of the Church, who was commanded to confirm his brethren. The Bishop of Rome is indeed an apostle, the successor of Saint Peter, upon whom Christ built the authority of His Church.
Rick relies on the authority of apostolic authority, rather than the authority of a single figure head, who Christ commanded to lead.
Sure I do but Paul wasn't talking about his present self but his former self, the old self that had passed away. Just because we are to now regard ourselves as a righteous son or daughter of God doesn't mean we can no longer talk about what we once were.you realize you're talking about the man who at the same time as saying what you quote there referred to himself as "the chief among sinners".
Thank you, very well said.Very true, in the eyes of the RCC the "apostleness" of the Pope is in the virtue of his office, not the virtue of his person.
Apostolic Succession from the Pope now backwards, historically,cannot be traced all the way back to the Apostolic Age.
I was just wondering your views about this?
Depends on which pope...Well Paul was an Apostle, does the pope's life emulate Paul's?
Depends on which pope...
Of course, there was also Peter, James, John, Andrew, etc.... all of whom were apostles, yet each were very different in both personality/style and in scope of their ministry...
The office does....You're right!
I do think there should be a similarity amongst them somehow though. That office should share something in common.
Father Rick-- Post 15 said:As some have previously stated... What do you mean by apostle?
In scripture we see various types of apostles. We see "the Twelve" (often referred to as "apostles of the Lamb"). We also see other apostles, called such by name, who came later-- such as Paul and Apollos.
We see some apostles who served primarily to pioneer new churches (Paul's missionary journeys), and others who served mainly to provide governance to churches already established (James in Jerusalem).
Certain things, however, do seem to be consist of all apostles:
1) They either pioneered new churches or governed the existing churches.
2) They trained, developed, and appointed leadership within the churches.
3) They were responsible for maintaining proper doctrine within the churches.
Current bishops certainly fulfill these same roles. While not all bishops serve as "pioneers" in the sense of traveling to undeveloped areas (as there are few undeveloped areas at this point in history), most will be responsible for the pioneering of new churches/missions/ministries within their diocese. All bishops oversee/train/develop/appoint leadership in the local churches (in fact this is one of their primary duties). All bishops also are to serve as defenders of doctrine.
So.. the pope, like any other bishop, would certainly fit the definition of an apostle.
Very true. Judas was also an apostle. As seen by the life of Judas, apostleship was not based on personal merit.Depends on which pope...
Of course, there was also Peter, James, John, Andrew, etc.... all of whom were apostles, yet each were very different in both personality/style and in scope of their ministry...
Such as?Ok,.. now he may be in the office and doing some of the things of the apostle,....is The Holy Spirit witnessing through him also?
In that, I mean is some of the same things that Paul and others did, is that happening through them also?
Such as?
Preaching the gospel...
Building churches...
Impacting nations for Christ...
anything in particular you are looking for?
I don't think that healings and speaking with conviction are necessarily signs of an apostle, but many popes possess those things. John Paul II sure did.Not that Rick, those aren't the things I'm talking about.
Their credentials are provided for by GOD. That is the highest office appointed by GOD to a person according to scripture, so The Holy Spirit should be witnessing aspects of His presence in their lives. Healings, speaking with conviction, etc, etc. That sort of thing.
It can't just be an outward appearance, GOD has to demonstrate His appointment of that office to the person.
Not that this was my question but I think what Dave01 is getting at is that both Peter and Paul had the annointing to pray for the sick and for them to be healed. Jesus told all the apostles that "these signs" would follow them. Have "these signs" followed the Popes?Such as?
Preaching the gospel...
Building churches...
Impacting nations for Christ...
anything in particular you are looking for?
Not that this was my question but I think what Dave01 is getting at is that both Peter and Paul had the annointing to pray for the sick and for them to be healed. Jesus told all the apostles that "these signs" would follow them. Have "these signs" followed the Popes?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?