Loss of Rewards

[mcq72]

To which I have heard that followers are not protected from erring but leaders are.

Then you never fully understood infallibility.

oh please inform then me how the CC is not protected and can err in teaching matters of faith and morals, and therefore to be conditionally followed in such.

or perhaps i misunderstood you, and you mean "followers are also protected from following errant teachings?

I hope to never fully understand infallibility, but rather to fully apprehend the truth that is Jesus Christ, even if by fallible men graciously moved by the Holy Ghost.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

like what is everyone?

The Apostles were held in high esteem by the people. The Sanhedrin were acting out of jealousy. Even they knew, and yet they chose to oppose the Apostles.

don’t follow your use of word confirm

Jesus used it. I quote Him.

They learned from the best, theirr predecessors?

All the more reason why you can’t play the moral ground in regards to violence. I can make the same argument for those of Nicaea.

actually we see the basis for an end to it

And like I said, not every Christian has the priesy duty of ministering to God’s people. Only the leaders did. Only the Twelve were commanded to promulgate this Supper. And even before the Golden Calf, there were specific priests.

inform then me how the CC is not protected and can err in teaching matters of faith and morals,

Your lack of understanding of ex cathedra shows. And note it only refers to teachers.

I hope to never fully understand infallibility,

Oh it shows to your detriment.

 

[mcq72]

All the more reason why you can’t play the moral ground in regards to violence. I can make the same argument for those of Nicaea

Fair enough …we (CC/ Reformers) both have been guilty of violence, use of civil authorities, since Nicaea, and both very unapostolic in that regard as you suggested (of reformers).

But not every bishop was given the role of confirming his brothers.

Ok, I would agree that when all the bishops falter, as did the apostles at the cross, Peter being the worst besides Judas, that the pope should repent and confirm the others in their repentance also, as Peter did.

And like I said, not every Christian has the priesy duty of ministering to God’s people.

Well, we all certainly have a duty to minister to one another, to the body, as God so gifts some to be apostles, prophets, teachers, healers, helpers and presbyters ( no more heirus, Levitical priests)

Only the Twelve were commanded to promulgate this Supper…And even before the Golden Calf, there were specific priests.

Well, there were only twelve there soo… and like the original passover, each family, each “grouping” slew there own lamb, no need of any priest save the head of household/ gathering.

"Beginning with Adam, we have a familial priesthood which is meant to be passed on from the father to the first-born son, thus making him the father-priest of the family… plan A (head of family, first born)

Then…Therefore, if you hearken to my voice and keep [“shamar” means guard] my covenant…You shall be to me a kingdom of priests, a holy nation”…plan A+(citizens /nation)

Later in the book of Exodus, things drastically change because of sin…but The Levites come to Moses and obey…"Today you have ordained yourselves for service to the Lord…” …With this comes a change in the priesthood. The Levites are now those who are ordained to serve the Lord…plan B

Jesus restores us back to plan A+ except it is now believers within a body/church, and no more sacrifices except praise and thanksgiving, as per Peter, “But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:”

Brian Pizzalato, Catholic News Agency portions of article was pasted…couldn’t paste link

 

[mcq72]

I hope to never fully understand infallibility,

Oh it shows to your detriment

Cuts both ways, for others say to the detriment of the imposers, for it was unnecessary , for the portion of my post that you cut out is really all we need to know about infallibility from biblical view point, without being sectarian about it:

I hope to never fully understand infallibility, but rather to fully apprehend the truth that is Jesus Christ, even if by fallible men graciously moved by the Holy Ghost.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Jesus restores us back to plan A+ except it is now believers within a body/church, and no more sacrifices except praise and thanksgiving, as per Peter,

He also quotes passages supporting the ministerial priesthood. Pretty selective.

The article still shows that Jesus created a ministerial priesthood to offer the sacrifice of His Body and Blood.

for the portion of my post that you cut out is really all we need to know about infallibility from biblical view point, without being sectarian about it:

And this is the crux. You abandoned infallibility because it didn’t suit you “biblically.”

 

[mcq72]

And this is the crux. You abandoned infallibility because it didn’t suit you “biblically.”

Fair enough, but it was adapted by the CC because it suited them (the pope) exclusively, again.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Well, there were only twelve there soo… and like the original passover, each family, each “grouping” slew there own lamb, no need of any priest save the head of household

And Jesus made the Twelve the priests.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Fair enough, but it was adapted by the CC because

Jesus said so.

Only Peter has the keys.

 

[mcq72]

He also quotes passages supporting the ministerial priesthood. Pretty selective.

The article still shows that Jesus created a ministerial priesthood to offer the sacrifice of His Body and Blood.

Agree, per OT. The article does a nice job of describing Gods original plan of everyone being a priest within a nation and only because of sin was the Levitical priesthood established to the exclusion of others.

Unfortunately the article leaves you there, in OT mode.He does say “if the priesthood changes the law changes”, citing Hebrews 7:12. I suppose he infers the accepted departure from Levitical priesthood to one after eternal Melchizadek, Jesus Christ.

And you are right, he does allude to a seperate continued priesthood today I thinkhe is Catholic after all):

God sees that it is going to take much more than a one-time sacrifice to get Egyptian sinfulness out of their hearts. He is providing them the opportunity to renounce and repent of their sins day in and day out.

I mean this must allude to Calvary, a one time sacrifice, as still requiring more of repentance and cleansing day after day. On this I disagree to the method (exclusive priesthood) for it is stiil operating under old law, old priesthood , not as to what they sacrifice, but as to their exclusivity of such priesthood , as if sin has not been vanquished and restored priesthood to all by Christ himself.Seems to contradict Hebrews 7:27:

he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people

Again Peter suggests the exclusivity of such a priesthood due to sin has been eradicated and we are back to God’s original plan of a body of royal priests:

“But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light” 1Peter 1:29

“By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name.” Heb13:15

To recap, the article substantiates God’s original intent of a non exclusive priesthood in regards to sacrifice (still need leaders, prophets, presbyters etc). Scripture further indicates a continual sacrifice, not for sin, but for praise and thanksgiving for established propitiation. We offer the fruit of our lips, forever.

The law has been fulfilled. We have new covenant restoring our priesthood. An exclusive heirus, levitical priesthood for sin sacrificial purpose is OT . We do not put new wine in an old skin. Indeed this has ruptured the church, not by having idols of calfs and gods, but of idols of position and authority, of lording over in such a sacred area as sacrifice.

I am sorry to be so blunt. I love pastors and priests. Many have a heart and service unto God unmatched. Yet the truth on this delicate matter can not be compromised, as you surely agree.

 

[mcq72]

And Jesus made the Twelve the priests.

Yes and no. He made twelve apostles, even presbyters, from which can English translate the greek word into priest if we choose to , but not necesary and not derivative of greek word heirus ot priest often associated with sin sacrifice.

 

[mcq72]

Jesus said so.

Only Peter has the keys.

Or perhaps an abuse of pulling rank to win the argument? Or as you said of opposing position, because it suits the owner of said position?

 

[Julius_Caesar]

but not necesary and not derivative of greek word heirus ot priest often associated with sin sacrifice.

He instituted the Eucharist which was His Sacrifice and commanded the Apostles to promulgate it. Priests sacrifice.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Or as you said of opposing position, because it suits the owner of said position

That is the clear meaning of Jesus’ words.

 

[lanman87]

And yet God is the one who inatitued the Papacy, just as he instituted the Levitical priesthood.

This is an interesting claim that I’ve never understood. God told Moses to write down the law, including the duties of the Levitical Priesthood. (Exodus 34:27) We have a record of God’s instructions for the Priest, the tabernacle of the tent of meeting, and all the various laws, festivals, and sacrifices.

In the New Covenant we have no such instructions. The offices are elder/presbyter (which are the same office), that oversaw the administration and instruction for local churches. The written Word of God gives no hint of a new/different priesthood. Instead it makes clear that the curtain had been torn into and the Holy of Holies is no longer hidden and accessed by priest in a Temple. Now, we are the Temple of God. We no longer go somewhere else to communion with God, God is within us. We no longer have priest who offer sacrifices for us, we offer our own personal “sacrifice of praise”. We no longer need a priest to mediate for us. We are all priest and God is our high priest and the only mediator between God and Man.

I could give you all the scripture references to those things, but I’m sure you already know them.

It just seems to me that if God instituted a new priesthood in the new covenant He would have done the same thing He did with the Old Covenant. He would have had Peter or Paul or someone write down all the duties of the “new priest” and who should become “priest”. That way there would be no controversy.

We would be like the people of Israel and be able to open the book and see the Priest office clearly appointed and defined. The fact we can’t do that speaks volumes.

 

[mcq72]

He instituted the Eucharist which was His Sacrifice and commanded the Apostles to promulgate it. Priests sacrifice

Except, like the Passover, done in remembrance of the one time event propitiation. The Passover elements do not change, nor in Supper, except for representation. Yes we priests now offer up a continual praise and thanksgiving, so much so that they began calling it eucharist, translated thanksgiving.

 

[mcq72]

That is the clear meaning of Jesus’ words

If infallibilty is so clear, why did the pope need declaring it to his own sheep 18 ceturies later? Again, was it winning the argument by pulling rank and authority, after losing Papal States complete with Army and Navy?
Don’t mean to be disrespectful but feel it is a valid inquiry and will honor anything that is apostolic.

As others have stated, Vat 2 was a breath of fresh air compared to said times.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

It just seems to me that if God instituted a new priesthood in the new covenant He would have done the same thing He did with the Old Covenant. He would have had Peter or Paul or someone write down all the duties of the “new priest” and who should become “priest”.

You’ve never read the Pastoral Epistles?

 

[Julius_Caesar]

If infallibilty is so clear, why did the pope need declaring it to his own sheep 18 ceturies later?

Because of sects of dissendents like yourself.

 

[lanman87]

You’ve never read the Pastoral Epistles?

Yes, but they don’t institute a priesthood.

And I would argue we (non-Catholics) do what is taught in the Epistles. It is General instruction, not specific laws and rules of organization and practice like Exodus and Leviticus.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Except, like the Passover, done in remembrance of the one time event propitiation.

And the New Passover is represented every Mass.