One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church?

[GKC]

Yeah, me too.

Insert blushing smiley here.

GKC

 

[Tobias65]

I think most protestants have problems with the “holy” part. They simply do not believe that the institution of the Roman Catholic church is holy. That was, after all, the entire issue with the Reformation, was it not?

To try to tell us that there is some God ordained “apostolic succession” that your organization has maintained through the Great Schism and numbers of extremely unholy popes, just sounds crazy to my protestant mind.

Not to be disrespectful or anything, just answering the question.

Apostles being called by God in each generation to watch over His Church… I can’t understand how or why they would need the recognition of some organization to carry out the Father’s business? Apostolic succession would be according to God’s calling, and whether Man recognizes these individuals or not wouldn’t change a thing. Except of course when you “receive a prophet in the name of a prophet, you will reap a prophet’s reward.”

 

[Reuben_J]

God’s Church is holy despite the unholiness of her people.

 

[aidanbradypop]

Alright I’ll bite.

The way I think of it is like this:

Think of a piece of paper with something written on it, lets say for our purposes its the Nicean Creed. This is your undivided church. If you cut that piece of paper into two you have two smaller pieces of paper but those two pieces of paper are still bound together by the text written upon it. If you cut those two pieces up into even smaller pieces you now have lots of little bits of paper that is still paper and is still bound by the words written upon in. Maybe you don’t have all the words but through Tradition and tradition the text is kept alive in some part of each of those pieces.

Not saying that’s doctrinal or at all theologically serious, its just how I think of our point of view.

Thanks for the post. Sorry it took me so long to reply.

If we break the piece of paper into many…many…many pieces as mankind has, we will not be able to read what is on the piece of paper. Sure you may have a “piece” of the paper, but you do not have the full sheet, but rather a broken piece. Christ created ONE Church with ONE Gospel. It was not meant to be broken into piece so that a man’s view could be expressed. By breaking the paper, you break the bond. Make sense?

Insert blushing smiley here.

GKC

You should start your own fan club lol

I think most protestants have problems with the “holy” part. They simply do not believe that the institution of the Roman Catholic church is holy. That was, after all, the entire issue with the Reformation, was it not?

To try to tell us that there is some God ordained “apostolic succession” that your organization has maintained through the Great Schism and numbers of extremely unholy popes, just sounds crazy to my protestant mind.

Not to be disrespectful or anything, just answering the question.

Apostles being called by God in each generation to watch over His Church… I can’t understand how or why they would need the recognition of some organization to carry out the Father’s business? Apostolic succession would be according to God’s calling, and whether Man recognizes these individuals or not wouldn’t change a thing. Except of course when you “receive a prophet in the name of a prophet, you will reap a prophet’s reward.”

Why would they ever have a problem with a Church being Holy? Man is often unholy and thanks to the Church, we can correct our lives. If a Baptist preacher is “unholy” does that make the Baptist faith unholy?

Read this please so that you may understand scripturecatholic.com/apostolic_succession.html

 

[grannymh]

I think most protestants have problems with the “holy” part. They simply do not believe that the institution of the Roman Catholic church is holy. That was, after all, the entire issue with the Reformation, was it not?

This is why the Catholic Church is Holy.

The Catholic Church is seen as Holy because it witnesses with fidelity to the Gospel of Jesus, Whose Holy Presence continues within the Church. (Matthew 28: 16-20)

The source and summit of the Catholic Faith is the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is holy because it is an unbloody, re-presentation of Our Savior’s holy sacrifice on the cross. The Seven Sacraments lead us to holiness.

Christ calls all to a holy life. Nonetheless, members of His Church acknowledge their sinfulness and through grace follow the path of conversion, penance, and renewal. United with Christ, their holiness on earth is real, though imperfect.

In canonization, the Church proclaims that an individual practiced heroic virtue and faithfully followed God’s will. Saints are public examples of the holiness within the Church.

 

[GKC]

Thanks for the post. Sorry it took me so long to reply.

If we break the piece of paper into many…many…many pieces as mankind has, we will not be able to read what is on the piece of paper. Sure you may have a “piece” of the paper, but you do not have the full sheet, but rather a broken piece. Christ created ONE Church with ONE Gospel. It was not meant to be broken into piece so that a man’s view could be expressed. By breaking the paper, you break the bond. Make sense?

You should start your own fan club lol

Why would they ever have a problem with a Church being Holy? Man is often unholy and thanks to the Church, we can correct our lives. If a Baptist preacher is “unholy” does that make the Baptist faith unholy?

Read this please so that you may understand scripturecatholic.com/apostolic_succession.html

I plan on a membership card, with “decree of nullity”, “history is complicated”, and “motley crew” on it. Maybe a signed photo. It’s a work in progress.

GKC

 

[aidanbradypop]

I plan on a membership card, with “decree of nullity”, “history is complicated”, and “motley crew” on it. Maybe a signed photo. It’s a work in progress.

GKC

Lol

 

[Tomster]

I think most protestants have problems with the “holy” part. They simply do not believe that the institution of the Roman Catholic church is holy. That was, after all, the entire issue with the Reformation, was it not?

To try to tell us that there is some God ordained “apostolic succession” that your organization has maintained through the Great Schism and numbers of extremely unholy popes, just sounds crazy to my protestant mind.

Not to be disrespectful or anything, just answering the question.

Apostles being called by God in each generation to watch over His Church… I can’t understand how or why they would need the recognition of some organization to carry out the Father’s business? Apostolic succession would be according to God’s calling, and whether Man recognizes these individuals or not wouldn’t change a thing. Except of course when you “receive a prophet in the name of a prophet, you will reap a prophet’s reward.”

Well Tobias, this is what Martin Luther said:

“That the Roman Church is more honored by God than all others is not to be doubted. St. Peter and St. Paul, forty-six popes, some hundreds and thousands of martyrs, have laid down their lives in its communion, having overcome hell and the world; so that the eyes of God rest on the Roman Church with special favor. Though nowadays everything is in a wretched state, it is no ground for separating from the Church. On the contrary, the worse things are going, the more should we hold close to her, for it is not by separating from the Church that we can make her better. We must not separate from God on account of any work of the devil, nor cease to have fellowship with the children of God who are still abiding in the pale of Rome on account of the multitude of the ungodly. There is no sin, no amount of evil, which should be permitted to disolve the bond of charity or break the bond of unity of the body. For love can do all things, and nothing is difficult to those who are united.” - Martin Luther in a letter to Pope Leo 1519 A.D.

 

[Offdoodykcrn]

Your witness is very kind and welcome indeed. Remember however what Christ did: he founded a Church. And the apostles said: there is one bread, one body, one Church, of which we are all members and which is the mystical body of Christ, who is Head of the Church. The fact is that each and every validly baptized Christian is a member in partial communion of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, which currently subsists in the “Catholic Church” governed by the successor of Peter and the bishops in communion with him…

…I pray that God may keep you and all always in His Sacred Heart, tight between it and the thorns that surround it, where none may touch you…but how much simpler would the Via Crucis be if you walked closer to the Church…!

Thank you for the kind welcome. This type of interaction and debate is what keeps me coming back to the CAF.

I agree Christ founded a new church, but there is nothing simple about Catholicism. In my view, Peter and the apostles were sent out to spread the word. Did Jesus intend the creation of the position we call Pope and the complex hierarchy of cardinals, bishops, monsignors, priests and brothers? I don’t know, but I look forward to finding out. I suspect that the nature of God is amazingly powerful, but also very simple. I believe that God is love. The love between parents and child, the love between a husband and wife, siblings and best friends. It is all around us, and as described in 1 Corintheans 13:4-8

Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never ends.

I suspect that what people attribute to God’s will is really a result of the combination of our individual free will colliding with others and random circumstances. They want to make sense out of stories like that of Job. He was a good man and he had a great life. Then a bunch of truly horrible things happened to him, but he didn’t lose his faith in God and he rebuilt his life. Did God really make all of those horrible things happen just to test Job? I don’t think so. I think people assign blame of horrible circumstances to God in an effort to control their lives. To this way of thinking, it is hoped that God will bless us with good fortune if we pray the right way, tithe to the right church, eat only certain types of food and don’t cuss. Why do bad people sometimes seem to get the best luck? Is it that God works in mysterious ways - or did those people use their free will to steal their wealth from others - or maybe they worked really hard, sacrificed the time they could have had with their families in order to get rich?

I don’t pretend to have all the answers, but I do look forward to finding out the truth at the end of this life.

 

[grannymh]

Thank you for the kind welcome. This type of interaction and debate is what keeps me coming back to the CAF.

I agree Christ founded a new church, but there is nothing simple about Catholicism. In my view, Peter and the apostles were sent out to spread the word. Did Jesus intend the creation of the position we call Pope and the complex hierarchy of cardinals, bishops, monsignors, priests and brothers? I don’t know, but I look forward to finding out. I suspect that the nature of God is amazingly powerful, but also very simple. I believe that God is love. The love between parents and child, the love between a husband and wife, siblings and best friends. It is all around us, and as described in 1 Corintheans 13:4-8

I suspect that what people attribute to God’s will is really a result of the combination of our individual free will colliding with others and random circumstances. They want to make sense out of stories like that of Job. He was a good man and he had a great life. Then a bunch of truly horrible things happened to him, but he didn’t lose his faith in God and he rebuilt his life. Did God really make all of those horrible things happen just to test Job? I don’t think so. I think people assign blame of horrible circumstances to God in an effort to control their lives. To this way of thinking, it is hoped that God will bless us with good fortune if we pray the right way, tithe to the right church, eat only certain types of food and don’t cuss. Why do bad people sometimes seem to get the best luck? Is it that God works in mysterious ways - or did those people use their free will to steal their wealth from others - or maybe they worked really hard, sacrificed the time they could have had with their families in order to get rich?

I don’t pretend to have all the answers, but I do look forward to finding out the truth at the end of this life.

“At present, we see indistinctly, as in a mirror, but then face to face. At present I know partially; then I shall know fully as I am fully known.” 1 Corinthians 13: 12

 

[R_C]

I think most protestants have problems with the “holy” part. They simply do not believe that the institution of the Roman Catholic church is holy. That was, after all, the entire issue with the Reformation, was it not?

Well, that’s because they do not know what is meant by holy. If they learned a bit more about Church history and theology, they would know that holy does not mean impeccable.

To try to tell us that there is some God ordained “apostolic succession” that your organization has maintained through the Great Schism and numbers of extremely unholy popes, just sounds crazy to my protestant mind.

Maybe so. But we did not come up with that. It is in Scripture, it is in the apostolic teachings, it is in the writings of the Church Fathers. That’s how the Church came to be. The only ones who ever disagreed were heretic groups in the first centuries and protestants today.

Apostles being called by God in each generation to watch over His Church… I can’t understand how or why they would need the recognition of some organization to carry out the Father’s business?

Why did the Son take flesh? He did not need to make Himself visible, right? After all, God is God, and He is omnipotent. Yet He did take flesh. And why would he then pick the 12 apostles and the 72 disciples? Why would he give them special graces? The power to expel impure spirits? The power to forgive sins? The power to heal? The power to consecrate the Bread of Life and the Chalice of Salvation? Why would He tell them: “the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven are revealed to you, but they are not revealed to them; so that seeing they may not see”? And why when Judas was to be replaced they didn’t just pick anyone, but rather the Holy Spirit marked a man to replace him and a special rite of ordination followed? Why even Paul, despite His extraordinary conversion, was marked in this way by the Holy Spirit and was ordained with the same rite, along with Barnabas?

Christ, God made man, established a Church. The Church, as we read in Scripture, was composed of the lay faithful and of a body of shepherd: deacons, priests, bishops. Some of the earliest of the Church Fathers, like Ignatius of Antioch (disciple of John the evangelist, who lived from approx. 35 AD to approx. 98 AD), would so write:

See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.

And Church Father Iraeneus, disciple of Polycarp, disciple of John the evangelist, would write in the II Century:

*t is incumbent to obey the presbyters who are in the Church—those who, as I have shown, possess the succession from the apostles; those who, together with the succession of the episcopate, have received the infallible charism of truth, according to the good pleasure of the Father. But [it is also incumbent] to hold in suspicion others who depart from the primitive succession, and assemble themselves together in any place whatsoever, either as heretics … or as schismatics … [f]or all these have fallen from the truth.

The true knowledge is the doctrine of the apostles, and the ancient organization of the Church throughout the whole world, and the manifestation of the body of Christ according to the succession of bishops, by which succession the bishops have handed down the Church which is found everywhere.*

If you want to read more of what the Early Church taught on apostolic succession, this article may be of some help. All quotes are verifiable. But there is no doubt that, whether or not we understand it, Christ established that a visible, perpetual Church with authority was to be established.

 

[grannymh]

Well, that’s because they do not know what is meant by holy. If they learned a bit more about Church history and theology, they would know that holy does not mean impeccable.

Being hung up on impeccable is why Catholics should study the four marks of One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic.

The four marks point to the Real Presence of Jesus Christ within the Catholic Church. The source and summit of the Catholic Faith is the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist.

The Catholic Church is Holy because it witnesses with fidelity to the Gospel of Jesus, Whose Holy Presence continues within the Church. (Matthew 28: 16-20)

The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is holy because it is an unbloody, re-presentation of Our Savior’s sacrifice on the cross.

Christ, as head of the Mystical Body, calls all to a holy life through His Seven Sacraments. Nonetheless, members of His Church acknowledge their sinfulness and through grace follow the path of conversion, penance, and renewal. United with Christ, their holiness on earth is real, though imperfect.

In canonization, the Church proclaims that an individual practiced heroic virtue and faithfully followed God’s will. Saints are public examples of the holiness within the Church.

 

[stewstew03]

Thank you for the kind welcome. This type of interaction and debate is what keeps me coming back to the CAF.

I agree Christ founded a new church, but there is nothing simple about Catholicism. In my view, Peter and the apostles were sent out to spread the word. Did Jesus intend the creation of the position we call Pope and the complex hierarchy of cardinals, bishops, monsignors, priests and brothers?

On one hand, you claim Catholicism is too complex; but on the other hand, you appear to judge it as if it is quite simple.

I don’t know, but I look forward to finding out.

This is an interesting position for a Christian to take. Are you saying that God has not revealed Truth, and you’re just waiting to find out what Truth is when you pass from this earth?

I suspect that what people attribute to God’s will is really a result of the combination of our individual free will colliding with others and random circumstances. They want to make sense out of stories like that of Job. He was a good man and he had a great life. Then a bunch of truly horrible things happened to him, but he didn’t lose his faith in God and he rebuilt his life. Did God really make all of those horrible things happen just to test Job? I don’t think so.

God didn’t “make” anything happen. But He allowed Job to be tested. Again, you don’t have to float through life phantasmagorically questioning God’s nature and character… Truth has been revealed through Scripture (and Tradition).

.

 

[R_C]

Did Jesus intend the creation of the position we call Pope and the complex hierarchy of cardinals, bishops, monsignors, priests and brothers? I don’t know, but I look forward to finding out. I suspect that the nature of God is amazingly powerful, but also very simple. I believe that God is love. The love between parents and child, the love between a husband and wife, siblings and best friends. It is all around us, and as described in 1 Corintheans 13:4-8

That is wonderfully expressed! But a hierarchy is nothing complex…the heavenly hosts are divided in a hierarchy of love…families down here have a hierarchy of love…and the Blessed Trinity itself has a hierarchy of love! Christ is God from God, true God from true God, consubstantial with the Father…and yet, Christ did say: “the Father is greater than I”! And in Scripture we do read about the division in lay faithful, deacons, presbyters, and bishops. All the Church Fathers speak about it.

Now there’s a bit of confusion here: brothers as in religious (friars) are simply people subject to a religious “rule of life” and to vows (promises) of poverty, chastity, and obedience. Not all of them are ordained. St. Francis of Assisi, founder of the minor friars, was a deacon. Some are priests. Some even become bishops. Pope Francis is a religious himself, with professed vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience!

The titles Pope, Cardinal, Monsignor are simply honorific titles to distinguish their function.

The Pope is the Bishop of Rome, meaning he sits on the Chair of Peter, which the Church Fathers affirm to be the “Apostolic See” or “Holy See” that “presides in charity over all the Churches”.

The Cardinal is a deacon, priest, or bishop who has been chosen as a member of the College that will elect the new Bishop of Rome. The term used to refer to the senior priest of an important church. For many centuries, the Bishop of Rome was either chosen by his predecessor (as Peter did) or by the clergy and the people of the diocese of Rome. As Roman nobility gained influence and emperors had a hand in choosing the pontiff, the Holy See aimed to drastically cut the temporal influence by establishing that only cardinals could elect the Bishop of Rome. This also allowed - in time - for cardinals from all over the world to gather and be potentially elected (as we witnessed with John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Francis, respectively Polish, German, and Argentinian).

A Monsignor is a priest granted an ecclesiastic award at the request of the local bishop:

• protonotary apostolic (member of the highest non-episcopal college of prelates, deriving from the Early Church, when seven regional notaries, on the further development of the papal administration and the accompanying increase of the notaries, remained the supreme palace notaries of the papal chancery)
• honorary prelate of the Holy Father
• chaplain of the Holy Father (once known as “secret Waiter of the Holy Father”)

They are meant to distinguish priests that are particularly meritorious, and thus chosen for somewhat greater responsibilities than a priest would usually be given.

Since we have about 5000 bishops, a half million priests, and some 30,000 deacons, spread all over the world in 630 archdioceses and 2167 dioceses overseeing 1.2 billion faithful, it makes sense that to maintain order and organization and to preserve unity, one would have not just a hierarchy of shepherds (bishops that oversee, priests that help the bishops, deacons that help the priests) but “special” titles to distinguish those bishops, priests, and deacons who have special responsibilities on them…just like, for instance, in a family we have parents, spouses, relatives, friends…but we may consider one to be our advisor on family issues, another to be our confident in moments of distress, another to be the one in charge of the finance of the house…

 

[Offdoodykcrn]

On one hand, you claim Catholicism is too complex; but on the other hand, you appear to judge it as if it is quite simple.

No, you were a bit haphazard with placement of HTML code. Look at my original post.

This is an interesting position for a Christian to take. Are you saying that God has not revealed Truth, and you’re just waiting to find out what Truth is when you pass from this earth?

I believe God revealed Truth through his son. Jesus told people this Truth and charged his disciples with the responsibility to spread the word to everyone they came across after His resurrection. What happened after that is up to interpretation.

God didn’t “make” anything happen. But He allowed Job to be tested. Again, you don’t have to float through life phantasmagorically questioning God’s nature and character… Truth has been revealed through Scripture (and Tradition)…

I really don’t like the book of Job, I’m fairly sure it’s mostly fiction - but it is a part of the Old Testament, so let’s at least get the story straight. Job 1:16

While he was still speaking, another came and said, “The fire of God fell from heaven and burned up the sheep and the servants, and consumed them; I alone have escaped to tell you.

So, according to the book of Job (but not me), God did make the bad things happen to Job - to which I refer back to my original post.

It’s not that I disagree with Church hierarchy, or think it’s not necessary for the Catholic Church to manage their people. It’s just that type of structure is a man made concept. As far as a hierarchy in heaven, we have what whoever wrote various parts of the Old and New Testament - and the truth. Maybe it’s the same, maybe not. I look forward to finding out.

 

[Tobias65]

Why would they ever have a problem with a Church being Holy? Man is often unholy and thanks to the Church, we can correct our lives. If a Baptist preacher is “unholy” does that make the Baptist faith unholy?

Read this please so that you may understand scripturecatholic.com/apostolic_succession.html

Thank you for the link. I will have to study it further.

I think that most protestants who accept Catholics (as I do) see the Church as corrupt, but a good portion of the people as holy. Or at least, the people are sanctified and set apart by Christ, just like the rest of us.

Here’s a quote from the link:

*Acts 1:15-26 - the first thing Peter does after Jesus ascends into heaven is implement apostolic succession. Matthias is ordained with full apostolic authority. Only the Catholic Church can demonstrate an unbroken apostolic lineage to the apostles in union with Peter through the sacrament of ordination and thereby claim to teach with Christ’s own authority.

Acts 1:20 - a successor of Judas is chosen. The authority of his office (his “bishopric”) is respected notwithstanding his egregious sin. The necessity to have apostolic succession in order for the Church to survive was understood by all. God never said, “I’ll give you leaders with authority for about 400 years, but after the Bible is compiled, you are all on your own.” *

Successors to the original apostles were ordained by the laying on of hands. Yet I believe the ordination comes from God, rather than the person. Judas for example was one of the original twelve. Did he pass on his position to someone of his own choosing? Or did his unrighteousness cause him to loose his “right” to pass on his position?

What if Judas had chosen his own successor? Someone who was just as unholy and corrupt as himself?

I would tend to think that God must be the one to choose those worthy of receiving the apostolic succession. Had Judas chosen his own successor, and established a worldwide cult of the devil that continued unbroken till today, he still would not have the power to tie up the hands of God from appointing godly men to run the Church.

And while you might argue that Judas was not Peter, there have been popes who have sat in the seat of Peter that were no more godly than Judas.

 

[aidanbradypop]

I think that most protestants who accept Catholics (as I do) see the Church as corrupt, but a good portion of the people as holy. Or at least, the people are sanctified and set apart by Christ, just like the rest of us.

The Church was not in the past, nor will it be in the future corrupt or unholy. Many people within the Church may be corrupt or unholy, but the Church remains the same for eternity. The wonderful part of the Church Christ established is that it allows our corrupt and sinful hearts to become holy and pure. The first Pope, Peter, denied Christ three times and yet he still went on to become the Vicar of Christ on Earth. Beautiful is it not?

Successors to the original apostles were ordained by the laying on of hands. Yet I believe the ordination comes from God, rather than the person.

How very Catholic of you to say. Those who are ordained are called by God.

Judas for example was one of the original twelve. Did he pass on his position to someone of his own choosing?

Nope. He killed himself

What if Judas had chosen his own successor? Someone who was just as unholy and corrupt as himself?

We can play the what if game all day. What if Martin Luther never broke from the Catholic Church? What if John Calvin became a Catholic priest instead of breaking off and making his own doctrine? See what I mean? Judas did not pick a successor because Judas was not alive to do so. What if a comet slams into New York City tomorrow?

I would tend to think that God must be the one to choose those worthy of receiving the apostolic succession. Had Judas chosen his own successor, and established a worldwide cult of the devil that continued unbroken till today, he still would not have the power to tie up the hands of God from appointing godly men to run the Church.

God is the one who calls men into Holy Orders.

I believe we can set aside the “what if Judas” questions now because it really does not matter.

And while you might argue that Judas was not Peter, there have been popes who have sat in the seat of Peter that were no more godly than Judas.

Shall we only place that on Catholic Popes or can we place that also on other Christians as well? When we start pointing the finger, it often tends to get stuck in our eye. Agree?

There have been many Holy and Godly popes as well as those who lived in the flesh, but how on earth does that reflect the Church?

Example

Adam is a boy
Boys are mean
Adam is mean

Is that fair?

 

[Tobias65]

Well perhaps I’m making straw man arguments, because I really don’t fully understand the doctrine of apostolic succession. But I thought the Catholic position was something like “Only we have an unbroken line of succession from Peter, who was appointed head of the Church by Christ.”

I think it is very relevant to consider whether or not evil men have the God-given authority to appoint their successors. I would take it a step further, and question whether godly men have the right to pick a successor of their choosing, or are they simply obligated to identify the person God has chosen? What happens if/when they fail?

IMO the line is broken, and God’s chosen vessel is left to try to fulfill his calling without the backing of the church organization.

According to my theory there is no reason the organization cannot once again get back on track, by appointing godly leaders for the next generation. But the arguments that the Catholic Church is the “One True Church” depends upon you believing that apostolic succession is carried on through ungodly men, and unlike Judas who lost his apostleship, these men never did lose theirs and even were used by God to name their successors.

 

[aidanbradypop]

Well perhaps I’m making straw man arguments, because I really don’t fully understand the doctrine of apostolic succession. But I thought the Catholic position was something like “Only we have an unbroken line of succession from Peter, who was appointed head of the Church by Christ.”

I think it is very relevant to consider whether or not evil men have the God-given authority to appoint their successors. I would take it a step further, and question whether godly men have the right to pick a successor of their choosing, or are they simply obligated to identify the person God has chosen? What happens if/when they fail?

IMO the line is broken, and God’s chosen vessel is left to try to fulfill his calling without the backing of the church organization.

According to my theory there is no reason the organization cannot once again get back on track, by appointing godly leaders for the next generation. But the arguments that the Catholic Church is the “One True Church” depends upon you believing that apostolic succession is carried on through ungodly men, and unlike Judas who lost his apostleship, these men never did and even were used by God to name their successors.

Please go study that link and then we can converse.

 

[jmcrae]

Apostles being called by God in each generation to watch over His Church… I can’t understand how or why they would need the recognition of some organization to carry out the Father’s business?

Today we call them Bishops.

The Father’s business has always been to gather His people together to worship Him and to follow His law. Tell me how we do that without knowing who or where His shepherds are?

Apostolic succession would be according to God’s calling, and whether Man recognizes these individuals or not wouldn’t change a thing. Except of course when you “receive a prophet in the name of a prophet, you will reap a prophet’s reward.”

It already is. God calls men to the priesthood, and through the Sacrament of Holy Orders, He ordains and anoints Bishops to carry on the teaching of the Apostles.