Posted on 06/12/2015 3:29:33 PM PDT by NYer
Legitimate succession was always a matter of concern in biblical religion. The book of Genesis is careful to give the lineage of the patriarchs, from the first man, Adam, to Noah (Gen. 5). The book of Exodus takes similar care as it sets down the priestly generations (Exod. 6). The Chronicles make clear that the monarchy was legitimately passed from father to son (1 Chron. 3). Indeed, the Old Testament histories assure us that “all Israel was enrolled by genealogies” (1 Chron. 9:1).
This article is from the Catholic Viewer’s Guide to AD: The Bible Continues (airs Sundays at 9/8c). Read more of this fascinating history in Ministers and Martyrs.
And the concern for lineage did not pass away in the New Testament. To establish Jesus’ credentials as Messiah, the Gospels detailed His lineage through generations, going back to Abraham (Mt. 1) and even through Adam to God (Luke 3).
In the Old Testament, succession took place in the natural order, through genetic transmission. In the apostolic age, we see a new principle at work. St. Paul was a man who made a firm commitment to live a celibate life (see 1 Cor. 7:1, 7-8), yet he could pass along the grace he had received — by means of the same act by which he himself received the grace: the laying on of hands (Acts 13:2-3).
St. Paul discussed the act in his later letters to Timothy, whom he had ordained (1 Tim. 4:14; 5:22; 2 Tim. 1:6). From Paul we learn that ordination is a “gift of God,” although it is conferred by one man upon another. We know that it is a supernatural event consummated by the prayers of those who are authorized to give such “prophetic utterance.” We know that the gift is given through “elders” in the Faith to those of a new generation in ministry — who will in turn give it to another generation. As the Father sent the Son, so the Son sent the Apostles — and so the Apostles sent their disciples to serve as bishops.
As time passed and the Faith spread to new lands, the Church valued apostolic succession all the more. It was a safeguard against heresy. The Church could point to a succession that was public and sacramental, whose authenticity could be easily verified. One of Paul’s Roman disciples, a man named Clement, spoke of the matter:
The Apostles received the Gospel for us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ was sent forth from God. So Christ is from God, and the Apostles are from Christ. Both therefore came of the will of God in the appointed order. Having received their orders . . . they went forth with the good news that the kingdom of God was to come. So preaching everywhere, in country and town, they appointed their first-fruits, when they had proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons to those who should believe. . . .
Our Apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be contention over the office of bishop. That is why, having received complete foreknowledge, they appointed the aforesaid persons, and afterward they gave the offices a permanent character, that if these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed to their ministry (Saint Clement of Rome, To the Corinthians 42:1-4; 44:1-2).
And so they still succeed today, to the offices established by the Apostles.
Catholic ping!
Silly doctrine not commanded in Scripture.
One Apostle was chosen by lot to replace Judas.
One Apostle was chosen by the glorified Christ by being struck blind on his way to Damascus.
Neither method is followed by those who claim to replace Apostles.
Nowhere does Scripture teach Apostles will be replaced.
Scripture does teach they were a foundation for the Church.
Since Paul was the apostle to the (Gentile) Church, who are his successors???
In addition to reading this book I would encourage everyone to dig a little deeper into the Early Church Fathers. Answers are in both places.
Thanks for posting this.
Acts 13: 2As they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for Me Barnabas and Saul for the work I have called them to."33Then after they had fasted, prayed, and laid hands on them, they sent them off.
Nothing here about the transference of.."grace" ....
Where did Christ ever teach that the grace or gifts GOD gives are "transferable??
It is interesting to note that Cephas here could refer to Peter, in which case Paul is specifically condemning the apostolic succession that would be claimed by later Roman Catholics. But even if it is a different Cephas (unlikely), the rest of the passage makes clear that Paul condemns any succession other than from Christ to the believer.
Don’t they vote on it?
“Silly doctrine not commanded in Scripture.”
The Holy Spirit disagrees with you.
Acts 1:20
“The Holy Spirit disagrees with you.”
God prophesied that Judas place would be filled. It was.
That’s it partner. Done.
+1
Old Testament The steward Given keys to Davids Kingdom was replaced.
Christ told Peter upon this rock I build my Church whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven Whose sins you shall retain they are retained
Peter then was Given the Keys to Heaven By Jesus the Keys were passed down to Pope Francis Today.
In Hebrew tradition a person given a new name is a Promtion in Power and Position.
Think Abram to Abraham
Think Simon to Peter
Think Saul to Paul
The 1st Pope Peter thru the 32nd Pope St Miltiades were all martyred I think they would differ they didn’t die for their Faith and position of succession.
Wow. I rarely see so many fallacies in one post.
The keys to David’s Kingdom were not replaced.
Peter was not given the power to forgive sins. You need a more accurate translation of Greek.
Peter was not given the Keys of Heaven.
The keys were not passed to any “pope” in history nor to the Global Warming pope.
Not every Hebrew person ever given a new name is “promoted.”
I admire your enthusiasm, but it is not based on facts.
Best.
“That’s it partner. Done.”
Nope. More men were chosen and made bishops. That’s Apostolic Succession.
That’s why the Protestant J. N. D. Kelly, wrote the following:
“Unlike the alleged secret tradition of the Gnostics, it was entirely public and open, having been entrusted by the apostles to their successors, and by these in turn to those who followed them, and was visible in the Church for all who cared to look for it.” (Early Christian Doctrines, 37)
In 1 Timothy 1:6 and 4:14, Paul tells Timothy that the office of bishop was conferred on him through the laying on of hands. In 1 Timothy 5:22 Paul tells Timothy not to be too quick in handing on this authority to others. In Titus Paul describes the apostolic authority Titus had received. (Titus 1:9; 2:5,15)
However, in Ephesias, the office of Apostle is mentioned as being one of the what we call the five-fold ministry. I tend to think that today’s apostles are what we call missionaries - they plant churches around the world. I certainly don’t agree with the Catholic doctrine of “Apostolic Succession.”
Exactly, Peter was an apostle to the Jews. Catholics seem to ignore this very basic fact.
AMEN!
This is one of the greatest heresies in Catholic teaching. Jesus wasn’t saying He was building His church upon Peter - but, upon the word of knowledge given to Peter as to Christ’s identity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.