Replies

If they were called "the twelve" even when there were only eleven, that implies that "apostle" is and office which is passed from person to person (just like the one who held the keys to the house in the OT was an office - starting to see the connection?). If "apostle" IS an office which is passed down, and we already agree that the apostles had authority (Paul spoke of it when choosing not to exercise it), and could speak infallibly (they certainly did when writing scripture)...then where did all the men holding that office go? You want some hints?

I believe you are interested in pursuing Apostolic Succession. I'm not. It means diddle to me. However; I refer you to this article:

. . . It is further strengthened by an objection made to St.Paul: because he was called in an extraordinary way to the Apostolate, he was obliged often to vindicate his Apostolic authority and proclaim that he had seen the Lord (I Cor., ix, 1). Instruction and appointment by Jesus were, therefore, the regular conditions for the Apostolate.

By way of exception. an extraordinary vocation, as in the case of Paul, or a choice by the Apostolic College, as in the case of Matthias, could suffice. Such an extraordinarily called or elected Apostle could preach Christ's doctrine and the Resurrection of the Lord as an authoritative witness. (Catholic Encyclopedia)

Let's see. Matthias replaced Judas, count is 12, Paul appointed by Jesus, count is 13. Were there really 13 Apostles? Who were the logical successors of the Apostles?
<
One more question:

After the accension who was appointed Bishop of the most prestigious church?

Starting with Clement, the bishop of Alexandria (150 - 215 CE), who confirms in Outlines, Bk. VI, "Peter, James (bar Zebedee) and John, after the ascension of the Saviour, did not claim pre-eminence because the Saviour had especially honored them, but chose James the Righteous as Bishop of Jerusalem."

Why isn't James the first "Pope"?

In the East, we speak of the 12 and the 70, to which are added Paul. Our tradition identifies numerous New Testament figures with the 70 disciples whom Jesus sent out (i.e. appointed as Apostles). The 12 would be the original 12 minus Judas plus Matthias.

The question of Petrine succession, is, of course, handled differently in the East. As did St. Gregory the Dialogist, Pope of Rome (called in the West St. Gregory the Great), we recognize three sees as having Petrine foundations: Antioch (where Peter was the first bishop--a fact never disputed by the Roman Church); Rome, where St. Peter was martyred, though there is some question as to whether he really was the first Bishop of Rome; and Alexandria, whose first bishop was St. Mark the Evangelist, who was consecrated by St. Peter. (incidentally, the Bishops of Alexandria are also titled Pope--so there are three Popes, the Pope of Rome, the Orthodox Pope of Alexandria, and the Coptic (monophysite) Pope of Alexandria).

We, of course, reject the notion that there is a special inheritable Petrine charism which inheres in the Bishops of Rome--the verse cited most often in support of this speaks of "founding" the Church, we regard part of the problem with Rome since the 11th century as their attitude that "founding" has to occur in every generation. The second most cited verse speaks of "the keys" and we regard this charism as identical to the power to bind and loose, which is also bestowed upon the other Apostles. The honor and administrative power of sees was always correlated with the position of the city in the Empire (cf. the canons of the Fourth Ecumenical Council, which attribute the preeminence of Rome to its position as Imperial Capital, and the fact that Jerusalem, despite its indisputable apostolic foundation, was suffragan to the Metropolitan of Ceasarea for centuries).

I suspect the Papal arrogation of power has its intellectual roots in the fact that Rome was the only Apostolic See in the West. In the East there are many (even if one only counts those founded by the 12), including two Petrine sees, and it is thus natural to hold to the conciliar model evidenced in Acts 15 and in the history of the Holy Ecumenical Councils.