Jesus direction to Peter to “feed my sheep” three times in response to Peter's proclaiming his love for Jesus, is often quoted by Catholics to show how that charge devolved upon the Popes in the particular and the Catholic church in the general. O.K., then that solemn charge absolutely must be accomplished or the unproductive tree will be cut down.
“Thinking for a minute what “a billion members on the books” means would suggest the natural conclusion that controlling this outfit is virtually impossible.”
For all the reasons that you enumerated before this.
The exact structure of the New Testament Church is not set forward in the Scriptures other that the various necessary functions had men appointed to fulfill them and it was apparently a form that could be expanded upon as Jesus also commissioned his followers (not just a clerical class) to make disciples and teach in all the nations.
In Matthew he said that the gospel or good news would, in fact, be preached in all the inhabited earth.
Whatever organizational structure that attempts to copy or professes to be that Christian church admits that it is under Jesus’ charge also and must accomplish the work.
So if Jesus asks Peter if Peter did feed the sheep and Peter says there was just too many to care for, that the under shepherds were too busy because not enough men were entering the seminaries and those that did lost the respect of the sheep and were involved in turf wars and the whole organization was just too unwieldy to get the job done?
I don't think that would fly, I really don't. It sounds like Ford Motors saying the company structure didn't lend its self to safety and so Pintos should be expected. Other than that it does well on safety.
Given a choice, if that is the choice, between a long established structure of reverends, cardinals, eminences, nuncios, prelates, on and on, And...and accomplishing the feeding and shepherding of Jesus’ sheep....no contest.
“It's harder to forgive them when they are jerks or vicious sinners, but it's just as important as any forgiveness is.”
In 1 Cor. 5:1-5 Paul tells the congregation to deal with what was apparently an incestuous relationship and further advises the removal of the wicked from the congregation.
The moral cleanness and protection of the congregation was the priority but even as Paul reports in his second letter this same man evidently repented and was restored.
Forgiveness followed the repentance.
So yes, perhaps unfair but unjustified? maybe not so much.
Early in Acts we see the life of the Church as teaching, fellowship, breaking of bread, prayers. Deacons are appointed to RELIEVE the apostles of administrative duties, because, the twelve said, it was not right for them to leave the word of God to wait on tables.
So, I'm winging it here, but it SEEMS that the deal is the twelve teach, break bread, say prayers. It's pretty much consistent with Catholic thought, I'd venture that that's what we expect of our popes and bishops.
In the actual history what seems to happen is that a Patrick, Dominic, Francis, Ignatius Loyola, and so forth, go to the Pope and say, pretty much, "Here am I, send me." (or "Here are we; send us.") So in terms of the Apostles' teaching and fellowship, the breaking of bread, and the prayers, we're doing that. We've been doing it, with bumps in the road, all along. Protestants don't even hear of Francis Xavier, Bartolome de las Casas, of the martyrs and missionaries of Vietnam, Japan, China, Korea, Uganda, and up and down North (Isaac Jogues), Central (Dominican Sisters, inter alia, NOT part of a clerical class) and South America (Peter Clavier).
Given a choice, if that is the choice, between a long established structure of reverends, cardinals, eminences, nuncios, prelates, on and on, And...and accomplishing the feeding and shepherding of Jesus’ sheep....no contest.
I'm sorry, but Protestants just don't get it, by and large.
Look. I ran sheep. I feed them, medicated them, vaccinated them. I took care of them. I didn't watch them all the time. I couldn't. And so sometimes some of them got too sick for me to help before I noticed there was a problem.
Some Protestants get all wrapped up in cultural differences and terminology, they judge the past by the standards of the present. So let's say "respectables, leaders, notables, messengers, principles."
I know only one archbishop, and that only slightly. But my friends who know him better say he is a remarkably devout and down to earth guy who also happens to be really, really smart and well educated. So when these friends learned that he was to be ordained bishop and made an arch-bishop they already thought him notable or eminent.
The deal, or part of it, is that Protestants think in terms of a top-down, corporate or dictatorial culture and system. But the Church is actually a lot more like a very large family. For a long time, the younger brothers, the diocesan bishops, were trusted to handle the homosexuality crisis.
Only when it was clear they were going down in flames did Cardinal Ratzinger (leader Ratzinger? notable Ratzinger?) say, that these cases had to come to the Vatican. When the little brothers mess up, the older brothers step in. That's all.
And I disagree with your analysis of the I Cor 5:1-5 incident.
But before we get into the time sequence of forgiveness and repentance, how long had the incest been going on before Paul found out about it? Do you KNOW there weren't other perversions in the congregation that the locals thought they could handle themselves? Do you KNOW they handled them correctly? Do you KNOW that they guy who repented committed no further perverted acts? If tomorrow they discovered a text which conclusively showed that he fell again, would you accuse Paul of failing in his apostolic duty?
I think the forgiveness was always there, from God and from the Church. The only way the sinner could take that forgiveness to h8imslef was to repent. His repentence did not cause the forgiveness. It may even have been prompted by the forgiveness. For it is written, "There is forgiveness with you, therefore you shall be revered."
Jesus did not wait for me to repend to forgive me. He said, "I forgive you," and one day I both heard the love and knew my need. But the love was first.m Moreover, as I grow in receiving that love, I understand ever more deeply my permanent need for forgiveness.
I don't know if you drink beer. I don't much anymore. But what I know is that on a day of great thirst, when a good beer hits the back of your throat, well there are few pleasures to match it.
For me, life in Christ is to grow in thirst as I also grow in the experience of that thirst being quenched. With a beer, the next gulp won't be as good as the first. With God, for whom my soul thirsts, my greater perception of my need for Him is always met and overwhelmed by his eager response.
Glory to Him, to the God who quenches thirst, forever!
Just to clarify: NEXT Lent I am giving up verbosity, this Lent I gave up chocolate.