Posted on 10/25/2009 9:52:48 AM PDT by narses
“Either way, you’ve played this card far longer than any kind of virtue would permit.”
Virtue????????????????? Oh please! Get over yourself.
“Furthermore, as I don’t normally carry a priest,...”
Do you know any priest who will give you the time of day, pt? If so, ask him.
“That statement is as asinine as protestants directing us to other scriptures to “understand” Matthew 16:18. Jude 11 gives us the Holy Spirit’s authentication that the sin of Korah was gainsaying Moses.”
And? That’s pretty much obvious, isn’t it, pt? Did you need the HS to explain that one to you? That’s what the Fathers say it means. But they, either of the East or the West, never said anything as profoundly ridiculous as that it refers to the Pope of Rome.
“Or do you suppose I should draw inferences from the Fathers on writings tangential to Jude 11 instead of what The Holy Spirit concludes explicitly?”
Yes, well, you still don’t know what the Fathers say, do you, pt! What a sorry comment on the catechesis of the Latin Church your performance is. Given your propensity for one off, personal interpretations of scripture, you wouldn’t be a convert from protestantism or even a catechumen would you?
BTW, pt, do you read Jude 11 to mean that all who do not submit (I love to use that word with the Pope)to the Pope of Rome are cursed and will surely come to a bad end? Do you really believe that, pt? Please tell me yes so we can all have a good laugh at your expense. I’ll even ping the orthodox list if you’d like! :)
You cannot state that categorically.
See Letter to the Corinthians (Clement), Chapters 43 and 51. A challenge to the primacy of Aaron is seen as "sedition against Moses", and papacy is seen as prefigured in Aaron.
“...and papacy is seen as prefigured in Aaron.”
Where do you see that, Alex? +Clement doesn’t say that. No Father does.
There is no short prooftext of that, however, the logic of the letter is that the Church Catholic is likened to the priestly system established by Moses, and in the priestly system of Moses there was a chief priest Aaron. The call is then made to submit to that system and avoid the sedition.
This passage in Jude does not now and never has been considered in any way primacy of the Bishop of Rome over other bishops.
And you have been exposed to the logic of whims, contents of the stomach and the direction of the wind argument which says that every time one reads a new Scriptural verse in a different fashion, then one is justified in creating new theologies, which occur on every crossroads or mallfront stores that some individual happens on and rents. We are in it for the long term in which God is eternal, not some sort of electronic gadget that has to be reinvented every couple of years.
Even some Latins are caught up in the nonsense that the Pope is some sort of dictator and should cast pronouncements around like a robed Thor. That ain’t it and it never was. The Bishop of Rome was looked at as primus inter pares and that was really that. The fact that Rome was the buttress against heresy in the first millennium kinda helped (it wasn’t until the second that the forces of heresy moved west).
I understand the logic of infallible declaration and really, the Church has always taken that tack with its declarations of doctrine, albeit normally with hundreds of years of deliberation, thought and prayer.
In the end, the Church will continue; the Faith will continue and the novelties will be cast aside in the same manner that the Subordinationists or the Arians were.
“The call is then made to submit to that system and avoid the sedition.”
A “system” yes; the Fathers are surprisingly uniform about that; but the Pope? No mention anywhere, my brother.
Not literally — the word Papa was not in anyone’s vocabulary at that time. But what is a bishop of Rome doing telling the Church in Corinth (that would be in Greece, you know, far far away) to reinstate some priests, and bringing up the rod of Aaron to justify his authority?
Probably the same thing Blessed Augustine or +Athanasius the Great or +John Chrysostomos were doing when they used the same example for the same reason.
BTW, Corinth, far, far away from Rome, maybe as far as 3-4 days’ sailing from Italy, was within his jurisdiction, Constantinople not having been established at that point. Had he written to Christians at, say, Alexandria or Antioch making the same arguments, that might mean something. But so far as we know, he didn’t.
But if the 12 Apostles are prefugured in the 12 tribes of Israel, and the bishops are heirs of the Apostles, then which bishop holds the rod of Aaron?
That's a stretch. He was making a case for all priesthood, not just for Petrine (papal) authority. Deposing of bishops by the people of God is not unheard of in the Church and even Cyprian at one time argued for it, and it is not considered sedition.
The Church as a whole never compared the Pope/Bishop of Rome to Moses. Neither does the priesthood of the Apostolic Church parallel that of Judaism. The authority of the Apostles was delegated by Jesus to his 11 disciples (Mat 28:19) and they, in turn, delegated it to their successors, and they to theirs until today.
Judaic priesthood was assigned to the whole tribe and is inherited as birthright. There is no comparison to apsotolic authority and ordination.
“But if the 12 Apostles are prefugured in the 12 tribes of Israel, and the bishops are heirs of the Apostles, then which bishop holds the rod of Aaron?”
I don’t know; apparently The Fathers never carried the analogy that far. There were 12 Patriarchs too. Which one is Gad? By the way, the EP’s staff with intertwined serpents represents the bronze serpent on a staff of Moses. Do you suppose that Moses prefigured the EP?
LOL!
By the way, the EP’s staff with intertwined serpents represents the bronze serpent on a staff of Moses. Do you suppose that Moses prefigured the EP?
In her words...better submit to him or else...
It is not a stretch. The analogy to Aaron and Moses is an important part of the letter and its purpose is to establish the principle of there being an authority over other bishops.
It is true that the sacerdotal heredity in Christendom is spiritual and not biological like in Judaism, but that is also true of the Church replacing the ethnic community of Ancient Israel spiritually and not biologically.
That was an excellent post Mark.
It could be that the analogy of papacy to Aaronic line is not a common theme in patristic literature, yet this is an example of an important letter, early pre-nicene, that carries it to a point, namely, to establish St Clement’s authority over whoever local hierarch that dismissed the priests in question.
“The analogy to Aaron and Moses is an important part of the letter and its purpose is to establish the principle of there being an authority over other bishops.”
No. It is to show the people are to be under THEIR Bishop, or more correctly, elder. It is NOT an attempt or a claim to Rome being the ‘Bishop of Bishops’.
Chapter 43 has Moses stilling dissension with a miracle. I doubt Clement did that from Rome...
Chapter 44 has this: “We are of opinion, therefore, that those appointed by them, or afterwards by other eminent men, with the consent of the whole church, and who have blamelessly served the flock of Christ, in a humble, peaceable, and disinterested spirit, and have for a long time possessed the good opinion of all, cannot be justly dismissed from the ministry. For our sin will not be small, if we eject from the episcopate those who have blamelessly and holily fulfilled its duties.”
That is an appeal to their reason, sense of fairness, and to accept someone over them they know...not an imposition of Clement’s will to require anything. It would also have justified Luther’s Reformation, since the Popes of the time were NOT men “who have blamelessly served the flock of Christ, in a humble, peaceable, and disinterested spirit, and have for a long time possessed the good opinion of all”!
The letter is about Christian leadership, and obeying those who serve honorably. It is NOT an imposition of the Bishop of Rome over any other Bishop.
“But if the 12 Apostles are prefugured in the 12 tribes of Israel, and the bishops are heirs of the Apostles, then which bishop holds the rod of Aaron?”
Since there were 13 Apostles, including Paul, it makes an interesting question. Maybe you are trying to make leaps not justified by the text?
There was no lording of (any) one Apostle over other Apostles. There was no Petrine "juridsiction" over the Church, because Peter was first in Antioch and it was not the center of Christendom then.
As successors to the Apostles, the bishops do not have "jurisdiction" over other bishops except as regards ecclassial structure, which is not divinely delegated, but entirely man-made.
It is true that the sacerdotal heredity in Christendom is spiritual and not biological like in Judaism, but that is also true of the Church replacing the ethnic community of Ancient Israel spiritually and not biologically
It is not necessarily "true," but it is what the Christians communities believe.
Within his juridictional territory, of course. The point is, he was not telling other Apostolic Sees (such as the Church of Antioch or Alexnadria) how to 'behave.'
LOL! That is sooooo true!
There is no doubt that Clement simply argues that firing someone who has been without blemish is unfair and unChristian, rather than pulling rank.
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.