Apostolic succession???

  • Thread starter Thread starter k5thbeatle
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

k5thbeatle

Guest
Can someone please explain this to me? I thought only the Catholic church claims this? Then I was reading something regarding some of the Popes recent statements and this particular article (sorry, can’t remember where I saw it) stated that although other protestant religions can show apostolic succession they just don’t follow the Papacy and hence are seperated from the Catholic church.

What exactly is apostolic succession? Do most protestant religions claim apostolic succession? How so or how can they? What is their argument?
 
The Apostles laid their hands on their successors, who laid their hands on their successors… This is the ordination of the Priesthood, as well as the succession of Bishops.

Some of these bishoprics have converted, while continuing the Apostolic Succession. The Anglican Church can claim this, I believe. Of course, the Greek Orthodox Church can certainly claim this. Probably a few more. I think Peter’s first Diocese, Antioch (in Syria) is no longer in step with the Roman Catholic Church.
 
k5thbeatle said:
Can someone please explain this to me? I thought only the Catholic church claims this? Then I was reading something regarding some of the Popes recent statements and this particular article (sorry, can’t remember where I saw it) stated that although other protestant religions can show apostolic succession they just don’t follow the Papacy and hence are seperated from the Catholic church.

What exactly is apostolic succession? Do most protestant religions claim apostolic succession? How so or how can they? What is their argument?
Click to expand...
Apostolic Succession is that one validly Ordained Bishop Ordained their successors, and their successors Ordained their successors. Some Protestant communities claim what is termed “Bricks and Mortar” Apostolic succession. Meaning that because a community occupies a church building once part of the Catholic Church they somehow inherit the succession with the building. Others re-define the term “Apostolic Succession” to suit their needs. Claiming that their “church” is modeled after the Church of the Bible established by the Apostles. No one can prove Apostolic Sucession the way the Catholic Church can by it’s Ordination records.
 
Thanks for the responses. So there really are protestant churches then that claim apostolic succession even though they really can’t show it as the Catholic church can?
 
I explained to my children this way.

Apostolic Succession is like when we play tag. They each layed hands (tag) on their successor then they were “it”.

My seventeen year old told me today when ever I talk about it, it reminds her of the passing on of the torch at the Olympics.

Peter passed it on to Linus, Linus to Anacletus, Anacletus to Clement all the way down to our current pope.

God created Abram.
God changed Abram’s name to Abraham.
God promised Abraham would be a father of a great nation.

God created Jacob.
God changed Jacob’s name to Israel.
Israel was a father of 12 sons who later became the ancestors of the 12 Tribes of Israel.

God created Simon.
God changed Simon’s name to Peter.
Peter became a father. Pope=Pappa

Do you see the pattern?
God did not change all the Apostles names.
Only one.
He was not better then the others. He was just left in charge.

Like when you leave someone your keyes to your house while your gone. They don’t “own” your house. They’re just left in charge.

Jesus left the keyes to Peter.
 
I was at an ordination the other day at our Cathedral. Behind the altars, there are the 11 Apostles and Mary painted in a semi-circle. Each person is about 10 feet high, and they are holding their right hand up and out about chest high (the arm is bent so it looks like they could be touching a child’s head). There’s a little alcove within this semi-circle where the 40-50 other priests stand during the ordination and it looks like the Apostles and Mary are standing behind them, looking over their shoulder.

While the priest is laying prostrate in front of the altar, there’s a part of the ceremony where the 40-50 priests hold out their hands to the priest (who is getting ordained), as if they are spiritually ordaining the new priest. At this time, the Bishop is actually laying his hands on the new priest’s head. But when you look back at the alcove, it looks as if the Apostles, Mary, and all the priests have their hand extended to bless this new priest.

THAT’S Apostolic Succession…
 
One of the reasons I don’t follow the apostolic succession in the papacy/CC is because it is letting someone else form my beliefs instead of me. I’m the only one who can do that. I will not blindly follow someone who calls himself infallible when it comes to what I ‘should’ believe.

Also, just because they ‘succeeded’ the apostles does not mean they are infallible. Paris Hilton inhereited all of her father’s money. Her father was the real genius, but in the next generation we got Paris Hilton-the dumbest person alive. Sometimes I see the pope like this.
 
But Jesus didn’t promise Paris Hilton that He would be with her till the end of the age, not that He would send the Holy Spirit to guide her, not that the Gates of Hell would never prevail against Paris.

Jesus did tell the Apostles that, “Whoever hears you, hears Me”. To reject the Apostles teachings is to reject Jesus, right?

Peter shows that the Apostles position was an office. You’ll see this in Acts Chapter 1, where Peter declares that Judas’ bishopric (or office) must be filled. Then you see this whenever Paul or the other Apostles “lay their hands” on their successors. In Apostolic times, this act had a clear meaning to those who heard of it. If we are ignorant of the meaning of “laying on of hands”, that doesn’t make Apostolic Succession null and void.
 
blacktiger057 said:
One of the reasons I don’t follow the apostolic succession in the papacy/CC is because it is letting someone else form my beliefs instead of me. I’m the only one who can do that. I will not blindly follow someone who calls himself infallible when it comes to what I ‘should’ believe

Not even if that someone else is God?

*Mt.16:17 **And Jesus answered him, *****"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my **Father who is in heaven.
It is this statement by Jesus that forms the basis of why we can trust what the head of His Church declares bound/loosed - it will be guided and determined by the Father (vs 17); it will be in conformity with what is bound/loosed in heaven (vs 19).

It’s not as though Peter audibly heard the Father’s voice. Not even as though he had an inner locution. Just that the Father was the one in control of his thoughts and what he spoke. It’s also obvious that the Father does not exercise this control in all circumstances. (eg. Peter later denies Our Lord.) It is when Jesus wants something publicly proclaimed by his Church.

Our faith is not in the pope’s ability, but in God’s; it’s faith in Our Lord’s power to uphold his promise. ("Whatever you bind on earth, shall have been bound in heaven…)
Also, just because they ‘succeeded’ the apostles does not mean they are infallible. Paris Hilton inhereited all of her father’s money. Her father was the real genius, but in the next generation we got Paris Hilton-the dumbest person alive. Sometimes I see the pope like this.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
k5thbeatle said:
Can someone please explain this to me? I thought only the Catholic church claims this? Then I was reading something regarding some of the Popes recent statements and this particular article (sorry, can’t remember where I saw it) stated that although other protestant religions can show apostolic succession they just don’t follow the Papacy and hence are seperated from the Catholic church.

What exactly is apostolic succession? Do most protestant religions claim apostolic succession? How so or how can they? What is their argument?
Click to expand...
They were probably referring to the Lutheran churches of Sweden and Finland. They still have Apostolic Succession. And technically (I shudder to think someone would dare to label me a Protestant) you might count groups like the one I belong to, although if you were reading a secular article, the author probably isn’t aware that groups like us even exist.

Peace,
+N
 
blacktiger057 said:
One of the reasons I don’t follow the apostolic succession in the papacy/CC is because it is letting someone else form my beliefs instead of me. I’m the only one who can do that. I will not blindly follow someone who calls himself infallible when it comes to what I ‘should’ believe.

Also, just because they ‘succeeded’ the apostles does not mean they are infallible. Paris Hilton inhereited all of her father’s money. Her father was the real genius, but in the next generation we got Paris Hilton-the dumbest person alive. Sometimes I see the pope like this.
Click to expand...
Great for you, please start your own thread if you would like to discuss this but please do not hijack this one. Thank you.
 
blacktiger057 said:
… but in the next generation we got Paris Hilton-the dumbest person alive. Sometimes I see the pope like this.
Click to expand...
I certainly hope you didn’t intend this the way it came out.

Should I give you the benefit of the doubt?
 
Apostolic succession is more than just playing tag. It also involves a handing on of the apostolic Nicean Faith. I fear that the Eastern Orthodox, who continue to stray further and further away from true orthodoxy will eventually lose their Apostolic succesion.
 
blacktiger057 said:
One of the reasons I don’t follow the apostolic succession in the papacy/CC is because it is letting someone else form my beliefs instead of me. I’m the only one who can do that. I will not blindly follow someone who calls himself infallible when it comes to what I ‘should’ believe.
Click to expand...
Your right. The difference between Catholics and protestants is that we allow another person (Jesus) to form our beliefs , where as protestants prefer to “form their own opinions”.
 
East_and_West said:
Apostolic succession is more than just playing tag. It also involves a handing on of the apostolic Nicean Faith. I fear that the Eastern Orthodox, who continue to stray further and further away from true orthodoxy will eventually lose their Apostolic succesion.
Click to expand...
I can’t tell if you’re serious of joking. :confused:

Just curious.

Peace,
+N
 
k5thbeatle said:
Can someone please explain this to me? I thought only the Catholic church claims this? Then I was reading something regarding some of the Popes recent statements and this particular article (sorry, can’t remember where I saw it) stated that although other protestant religions can show apostolic succession they just don’t follow the Papacy and hence are seperated from the Catholic church.

What exactly is apostolic succession? Do most protestant religions claim apostolic succession? How so or how can they? What is their argument?
Click to expand...
here is a good explanation:

catholic.com/library/Apostolic_Succession.asp
 
East_and_West said:
Apostolic succession is more than just playing tag. It also involves a handing on of the apostolic Nicean Faith. I fear that the Eastern Orthodox, who continue to stray further and further away from true orthodoxy will eventually lose their Apostolic succesion.
Click to expand...
If someone (and I’m not casting any stones at our Eastern Orthodox brothers) strays further and further away from true orthodoxy, they will eventually lose their “Oneness” or their “Holiness”.

But they will still have Apostolic Succession.

Remember, it’s the FOUR Pillars that make the Catholic Church - not just the Apostolic Succession.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top