This remark and those following are peculiar. What are you driving at? Our original discussion was about the RCC holding onto elements of the Law after it was done away with. Those elements, papalism (chief priest), sacerdotalism (priesthood), sacraments (sacrifices), cathedrals (temples) were all shadows of the real thing, Jesus, but have been wrongly continued. You accused Protestantism of the same thing. Does this mean that you concur that the Law is gone, but certain groups (including Rome) are holding onto a Christian/Jewish hybridism?
The thread is about the KJV tipping its hat to the Apocrypha, thereby authenticating the Catholic version of the Bible. I simply said they don't even follow the Bible they claim to have delivered. That claim still stands in spite of the obscure remarks you have made.
I reject your contentions because of one very strong Catholic contention, which is that there is no absolute break between Judaism and Christianity. Indeed, we think that so much in the Torah, both ceremonial and in doctrine , is a foreshadowing of the Gospel. The priesthood, which you reject, is the continuation of a tradition that goes back to Abraham, foreshadowed in the priest-king of Salem Mechezidak, whose offering of bread and wine, are, so we think, a foreshadowing of the Eucharist, and the todah—thanks-giving offering institutioned by David, who is the figure of the Christ. We have always rejected the notion of a hereditary class,, like the Levites, and the need for a temple. But we don’t reject the broader notion of the priesthood of the people of God, and the narrower one of the sacrerdotal priesthood or the re-presentation of the Lord’s sacrifice on Calvary in the mass.