Replies

"If this interpretation is correct, I don't believe there is a SCRIPTURAL basis that these humans, empowered with supernatural powers, were given the ability to pass these powers on to whom they choose."

That's a good point, wmfights. If, however, by supernatural powers, we are talking about the gifts which Christ gave the Apostles, then we do have precedents in Scripture for those gifts being transmitted from the Apostles to others.

The more definitive case, and the case which pertains to our discussion, is the handing down of the ability to confer the Sacraments. The Church holds that there are seven Sacraments, handed down from Christ. I think that you and I agree that Baptism and the Lord's supper are Sacraments, and that the ability to celebrate these Sacraments has been handed down through the Church from the time of Christ to the present day. We don't have anywhere in Scripture that tells us that someone is delegated by the Apostles to celebrate the Eucharist or administer Baptism, but we can see that it definitely occurred during the time the New Testament was being written, because we see other people conferring these Sacraments..

Now we know that our sins are actually forgiven in Baptism, and that the Lord's Body and Blood become truly present in the Eucharist. The Lord commanded the Apostles to Baptize and commemorate the Lord's Supper. We also know that the ability to confer these Sacraments was handed on to the Successors of the Apostles. So in that sense, it is clear that "supernatural powers" that is, the authority to confer the Sacraments was handed down from Christ to His Apostles, and from the Apostles to their successors.

In Scripture, we can certainly see Ordination (Holy Orders), Baptism, and Consecration of the Eucharist, as being given by Christ, to the Apostles. We see the continuation of this, a type of Apostolic Succession if you will, in the Acts of the Apostles and the New Testament Epistles. We Catholic also believe that Holy Matrimony is a Sacrament. You may not agree with me on that point, but you and I both understand that Marriage has a connection to Church, and that it is an ongoing tradition. God joins man and woman into one in marriage, "and what God has joined, let no man split assunder." We Catholics also believe in a Sacramental final preparation for death, the Last Rites, and it is documented in the New Testament that there certainly was a practice of anointing the sick, and that this again had been passed from the Apostles to their successors. So, I think we can agree that the ability to confer the Sacraments is definitely passed on to the successors of the Apostles, even if we don't agree on the number of Sacraments. Since we Catholics also understand that Reconciliation is a Sacrament, we are reasoning that the ability to confer this Sacrament too has been passed on to the successors of the Apostles.

"These individuals may follow a long historical line, but they did not walk with JESUS when he was on the earth. They are not Apostles and I do not believe they were given supernatural powers when they became priests."

You are absolutely correct, wmfights, that the bishops are not Apostles. They are the successors of the Apostles. Christ did not write a Bible, he founded a Church, within which the Bible was written, preserved, canonized and handed down to posterity. The successors to the Apostles have to have been given some "supernatural powers" For example, we believe that they had the ability to recognize declare the books of the New Testament were inspired, rather than simply historical accounts of the first Christians. We also know that they had to have been given other such "supernatural abilities" as well, particularly with regards to the Sacraments. For example, we know that sins are forgiven in Baptism, and that this is not something that ceased with the last of Christ's disciples. Clearly, the authority to Baptize was given by Christ to His disciples, who then handed it down to others. We also know from Scripture that Body and Blood of Jesus Christ are physically present in the Eucharist. We know this because Jesus said the Eucharist is His Body and Blood, and we know that it is an ongoing practice to celebrate the Eucharist, because 1) Jesus told us to do so, and 2) we see it being done in the New Testament, that it is an established practice by the time the Apostle Paul is writing to the Church at Corinth. We begin with Bread and Wine, and, in accordance with Scripture, it becomes the Body and Blood of Christ.

"I think the quote "do this in remembrance of me" is perfect illustration of how investing supernatural powers in your priesthood can lead to a body of believers being misled. In my faith we do not believe in transubstantiation. We partake of communion in remembrance of our LORD JESUS CHRIST."

We partake of the Eucharist in remembrance of our Lord as well, wmfights, and Scripture is clear and unambiguous that it is the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. The Eucharist is both a memorial of the Last Supper and it is also the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, the two terms do not exclude each other.

"Is it possible that the SCRIPTURES exist for the very reason of teaching us?'

Most certainly that is the case.

"The SCRIPTURES existed well before they were canonized."

Yes, for about 300 years before they were canonized. The core doctrines of the Church, however, existed before the Scripture was completely written. For example, the Apostles understood that Christ was physically present in the Eucharist long before the New testament canon was written, in fact, they almost certainly understood this before the first book of the New Testament was even written.

As important as the Scriptures handed down by the Church is the Church within which those Scriptures were produced and protected. The Church received not only the Scriputures, but the sense of the faithful. That is, the sense of those who studied with and under the Apostles and their successors, as to what true Christianity was.

the Apostles understood that Christ was physically present in the Eucharist long before the New testament canon was written, in fact, they almost certainly understood this before the first book of the New Testament was even written.

There's no proof for this that I've ever seen in NT writings.

"That's a good point, wmfights. If, however, by supernatural powers, we are talking about the gifts which Christ gave the Apostles, then we do have precedents in Scripture for those gifts being transmitted from the Apostles to others."

The supernatural powers to which I'm referring are the ability to forgive sin, or deny the forgiveness of sin. If the Apostles had this power I don't subscribe to the thought that it was passed on to future priests.

I enjoyed reading your post, but you continue to state as fact issues that I do not believe are SCRIPTURALLY supported. I don't see any sense in arguing what are sacraments and what aren't, your church has decided on its list and my church has stuck with the original two; communion and baptism.