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.
Its an unbiblical hiearchy of power and authority
mantelofaprophet said:Pope, Priest, Cardinals, most of all Catholicism is a manmade hiearchy, Its unbiblical at every turn, but since you follow tradition more than the biblical mandates you get what you pay for. your hiearchy is simple, simply in error of the living Word of God.
Old testiment= old covenant In the new covenant there are only the God appointed positions in the church Ephesians 4:11 apostles, prophets, evangelist, pastors and teachers .......also in each church there were Elders and deacons and bishops...........every position beyond the scope of these God given appointments is an unbiblical position and merely a man made hiearchy of error
Pope, Priest, Cardinals, most of all Catholicism is a manmade hiearchy, Its unbiblical at every turn, but since you follow tradition more than the biblical mandates you get what you pay for. your hiearchy is simple, simply in error of the living Word of God.
just so you understand your protestant counter parts are not in line either with the God appointed positions
bet your the only one that knows the truth huhjust so you understand your protestant counter parts are not in line either with the God appointed positions
Unbiblical?
You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church and the Gates of Heaven will not prevail against it.
2000 years later, with a late frail and Parkinson-Ridden Pope and now with a frail 80 year Pope, Here She rides on the waves, not by the strength of frail looking Popes and sin-ridden men but by the wind of the Holy Spirit. Up to now, the promises have been fulfilled and nothing in the Church makes us believe it wont be fulfilled in the future.
Presbyters (priests) and episcopoi (bishops) are in the NT. The pope is formally the Bishop of Rome. The Cardinals are bishops and deacons nominally appointed to a parish in Rome so that they elect the bishop of Rome.
You can argue that some or all of those have become distorted over time, but not that they were flatly made up out of thin air.
MarkRohfrietsch said:I have a question for my Catholic brothers and sisters...
We know that St. Peter appointed Pastors (Presbyters) and Bishops.
It would seem logical (and as a Lutheran I understand that applying human logic to theology usually ends up with a very flawed interpretation) that in order for Apostolic Succession to be truly intact, the Pope should himself appoint a successor. The present tradition of the Cardinals, who are first and foremost Pastors, electing the Pope seems to me no different than our Lutheran practice of Prsebyterial consecration of Bishops and Presidents. Considering this, it would seem to me that our hierarchy and that of the Anglican Church would remain valid (but illicit in the light of Catholic Canon Law); if I'm missing something here please enlighten me .
I have a question for my Catholic brothers and sisters...
We know that St. Peter appointed Pastors (Presbyters) and Bishops.
It would seem logical (and as a Lutheran I understand that applying human logic to theology usually ends up with a very flawed interpretation) that in order for Apostolic Succession to be truly intact, the Pope should himself appoint a successor. The present tradition of the Cardinals, who are first and foremost Pastors, electing the Pope seems to me no different than our Lutheran practice of Prsebyterial consecration of Bishops and Presidents. Considering this, it would seem to me that our hierarchy and that of the Anglican Church would remain valid (but illicit in the light of Catholic Canon Law); if I'm missing something here please enlighten me .
I have a question for my Catholic brothers and sisters...
We know that St. Peter appointed Pastors (Presbyters) and Bishops.
It would seem logical (and as a Lutheran I understand that applying human logic to theology usually ends up with a very flawed interpretation) that in order for Apostolic Succession to be truly intact, the Pope should himself appoint a successor. The present tradition of the Cardinals, who are first and foremost Pastors, electing the Pope seems to me no different than our Lutheran practice of Prsebyterial consecration of Bishops and Presidents. Considering this, it would seem to me that our hierarchy and that of the Anglican Church would remain valid (but illicit in the light of Catholic Canon Law); if I'm missing something here please enlighten me .
Bishops have to be consecrated by bishops who themselves are in the apostolic succession. That succession exists in the whole college of bishops.
The method of choosing has varied over time.
That is something that only specialists may answer. You have to know if the succession was broken or not. Moreover, if you consecrate for the same purposes or not.
It is different to consecrate so that you celebrate the Eucharistic which is the Body and Blood of Christ and consecrate so that you Celebrate the Eucharist which is the symbol of Christ. You consecrate with 2 completely different objectives.
But I am an ignorant on the subject. The Holy See has got specialists on the matter but even these get such problems that they cannot see clearly what they got on hands.
It may not be necessary to add this, but because "appoint" is part of your question...for Apostolic Succession to be intact, it is necessary for the consecrating bishop to actually lay hands upon the candidate. How the latter is chosen to be consecrated varies from communion to communion. We Anglicans believe, for example, that he has in some way to be elected by the people of God, not merely selected by the Pope or some other bishop, etc.
"It is different to consecrate so that you celebrate the Eucharistic which is the Body and Blood of Christ" Such is indeed the intent of both Lutheranism and Anglicanism.
This is why Anglicans and Lutherans accept the validity of both our Churches polity and our Eucharist; my question is regarding why Rome neither considers Anglican and Lutheran polity and Eucharist as valid. I understand why they would consider it illicit.
It may not be necessary to add this, but because "appoint" is part of your question...for Apostolic Succession to be intact, it is necessary for the consecrating bishop to actually lay hands upon the candidate. How the latter is chosen to be consecrated varies from communion to communion. We Anglicans believe, for example, that he has in some way to be elected by the people of God, not merely selected by the Pope or some other bishop, etc.
I have a question for my Catholic brothers and sisters...
We know that St. Peter appointed Pastors (Presbyters) and Bishops.
It would seem logical (and as a Lutheran I understand that applying human logic to theology usually ends up with a very flawed interpretation) that in order for Apostolic Succession to be truly intact, the Pope should himself appoint a successor. The present tradition of the Cardinals, who are first and foremost Pastors, electing the Pope seems to me no different than our Lutheran practice of Prsebyterial consecration of Bishops and Presidents. Considering this, it would seem to me that our hierarchy and that of the Anglican Church would remain valid (but illicit in the light of Catholic Canon Law); if I'm missing something here please enlighten me .
I don't know if you're right here. Paul was an apostle without ever having hands laid on him, until much later in his ministry.
But I think most Protestants would have to admit and acknowledge that the rampant splintering of groups within Protestantism is generally not a great thing.
Interesting question, and thread.
As a novice church historian, I would say that the Reformation was needed at that time, and that over the centuries since the RCC has made certain alterations and its tone has changed. Generally, for the better.
But I think most Protestants would have to admit and acknowledge that the rampant splintering of groups within Protestantism is generally not a great thing. If you dig into things closely, both groups would see that there are important aspects to learn from the other end of the spectrum.
Best,
Ken
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?