Replies

(Acts 6) 3 Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. 4 But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word. 5 And the saying was liked by all the multitude. And they chose Stephen, a man full of faith, and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte of Antioch. 6 These they set before the apostles; and they praying, imposed hands upon them. 7 And the word of the Lord increased; and the number of the disciples was multiplied in Jerusalem exceedingly: a great multitude also of the priests obeyed the faith.

ROFLOL

This is your defense of your theory of Apostolic succession?

If you bother to read the passage closely you will find that the men selected were ALREADY filled with the Holy Spirit, so the laying on of the hands was a symbolic show of support. Also if you read the entire passage you will find it is the twelve, not one, that decided that they needed a group of good men to see to the distribution to the widows. Actually, a good example of how the early church was congregational and not a monobishoporic structure.

The breathless ease with which the enemies of the Church ignore the scripture they profess to follow is amazing.

As the passage above illustrates, it is the teachings of the RCC that perverts Scripture. It is the RCC that had to invent traditions in order to get people to believe that it is the mediator between man and God.

If you bother to read the passage closely you will find that the men selected were ALREADY filled with the Holy Spirit, so the laying on of the hands was a symbolic show of support

Those who are called to be priests are already filled with the Holy Spirit; otherwise they wouldn't be called. Christ Himself called on the 12 and made them His priests. One of them was the devil. So, even now, some priests are not priests.

The NT is clear that in the Church some are apostles, some teachers, prophets, and not everyone is an apostle, teach and prophet. Not all of us are "royal priesthood" of believers. Most of us are hopeful (and even hopeless) followers.

St. Justin Martyr speaks of the "president" of the congregation who leads the Sunday liturgy as early as 145 AD. And St. Ignatius (c. 105 AD) says that "where there is a bishop, there is the catholic [universal] Church." And he was a disciple of the living Apostles. Apostle John (towards the end oft he 1st century) calls himself a presbyter/elder, so disciples are his successors.

St. Paul speaks of bishops (episkpoi) in Phil 1:1 (probably somewhere between 50 and 60 AD). Obviously, the Apostles had to ordain the first bishops, and they in turn had to ordain others. The faith is from God, handed down to the Apostles, and from them to bishops and priests to administer and lead. It's where the Church gets its authority.

Those who deny Apostolic succession deny the Apostlic authority. Yet the same deniers accept Apostolic testimony as inspired and "authoritative," but no their commission. One can only speculate why, but envy and jealousy comes to mind.