The hierarchy of the Church

[superamazingman]

SuperAmazingMan:

Christ set it up as a hierarchy from the beginning. Who are you to disagree?

No…Christ did not envision the hierarchy and Roman Curia as it is today. However, This is a topic for another discussion. Sorry for going off topic.

Here’s a new thread where we can stay on topic with this issue.

What leads you to believe that Christ did not set up the church as a hierarchy? He set up the apostles as “above” the disciples, and St. Peter as “above” them.

I don’t see what is unclear about this arrangement.

 

[opus101]

Here’s a new thread where we can stay on topic with this issue.

What leads you to believe that Christ did not set up the church as a hierarchy? He set up the apostles as “above” the disciples, and St. Peter as “above” them.

I don’t see what is unclear about this arrangement.

 

[YoungTradCath]

The Roman Curia was most certainly not established by Jesus Christ. However, the Papacy was. And the Papacy has decided that a Roman Curia is necessary for the running of the Church. What is wrong with that? Do we expect Benedict to do everything?

 

[pnewton]

The Roman Curia was most certainly not established by Jesus Christ. However, the Papacy was. And the Papacy has decided that a Roman Curia is necessary for the running of the Church. What is wrong with that? Do we expect Benedict to do everything?

As the Church has grown, its administration simply had to grow. Yes, Jesus established an authority structure that worked well during the first years of the Church, but even in Acts we see the addition of the diaconate and the growth of the presbyter. One could even say that we can see lay apostolates operating under the authority of the Church.

The structure of the Church had to evolve to an underground Church, then a state Church, a secular power and today, a billion Catholics across the world. The principle has not change, but the specific application has.

 

[Digitonomy]

Anna Claire:

Christ did not envision the hierarchy and Roman Curia as it is today

I don’t think Anna Claire has historic mental telepathy enabling her to read Christ’s mind as to what he first envisioned. But she is correct that he didn’t set up the hierarchy and curia as it is today. Peter seems to have been more of a first among equals, rather than a supreme pontiff. In time, though, the apostles needed deacons to assist them, and as the apostles were succeeded by bishops, our current concept of the priesthood started to evolve. A massive organization like our current church simply is not possible without some structure to oversee and coordinate it.

 

[JRKH]

Just exactly how much “Hierarchy” is there in reality??

There are laymen, Deacons, Priests and Bishops. That’s basically it. Cardinals, and ultimately the Pope are simply Bishops with additional duties and responsibilities.

As to the Curia…
In the OP, Anna Claire is quoted as saying, “No…Christ did not envision the hierarchy and Roman Curia as it is today.”
hhhmmmm- - -
Just how does Anna Claire know that. It seems pretty presumptuous to declare what Christ “envisioned”.
Indeed, we really can say that Christ - did envision the curia. Why? Because the Church is guided by the Spirit. It can only develop what Christ envisions for it.

Plus we can see the beginnings of the Curia in the Bible. The council of Jerusalem, the Apostles consulting with one another. Jesus instruction to “Listen to the Church” and the authority He granted to the Church to “Bind and Loose”…All of these things speak to a single universal teacher. Many acting in concert and in the various offices, from Bishop conferences to synods, to the Curia all act as mechanisms to assure that what Christ envisions for the Church comes to pass, and also provides a forum for "telling it to the Church’, and for “listening to the Church”.

Peace
James

 

[Deo_Gratias42]

Given that Jesus is God, and God is omnipotent, I think we can assume Jesus knew the Church would develop in the hierarchy it is today. We need the hierarchy. It doesn’t work to not have one.

 

[JRKH]

Given that Jesus is God, and God is omnipotent, I think we can assume Jesus knew the Church would develop in the hierarchy it is today. We need the hierarchy. It doesn’t work to not have one.

 

[superamazingman]

Here’s another simple response, Anna Claire:

Christ did envision the hierarchy and Roman Curia as it is today.

See the problem here? How do you know what Christ envisioned? For the rest of us, it’s backed up by scripture, especially acts, but what do you have at all to backyourself up, other than your social-justicey liberalistic viewpoints?

 

[JRKH]

Here’s another simple response, Anna Claire:

Christ did envision the hierarchy and Roman Curia as it is today.

See the problem here? How do you know what Christ envisioned? For the rest of us, it’s backed up by scripture, especially acts, but what do you have at all to backyourself up, other than your social-justicey liberalistic viewpoints?

Does she know that this thread is active? It would be good if she came here and discussed directly.

Since the rest of us are unaware of all that is going on in whatever thread this came from it makes it more difficult to discuss.

Personally I see all the evidence we need right in the NT, the Gospels and Acts predominantly.

Peace
James

 

[superamazingman]

Does she know that this thread is active? It would be good if she came here and discussed directly.

I PMed her about this thread, and she’s responed before to my PMs, so she’ll see it.

It was a continuation of this post:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=9036419#post9036419

 

[Digitonomy]

Given that Jesus is God, and God is omnipotent, I think we can assume Jesus knew the Church would develop in the hierarchy it is today.

the Church is guided by the Spirit. It can only develop what Christ envisions for it.

Just because God is all-powerful, doesn’t mean he predestined the Church to develop in exactly the way it has. He might have preferred that the Church develop in a way that avoided the corrupting effect of alliances with national and regional governments, or he might have preferred that the Church not split as it has several times. These and many other developments have had an effect on the current structure of the Church; it’s a little Pollyannaish to suppose that we are living with the best of all possible structures for the Church.

 

[opus101]

Just because God is all-powerful, doesn’t mean he predestined the Church to develop in exactly the way it has. He might have preferred that the Church develop in a way that avoided the corrupting effect of alliances with national and regional governments, or he might have preferred that the Church not split as it has several times. These and many other developments have had an effect on the current structure of the Church; it’s a little Pollyannaish to suppose that we are living with the best of all possible structures for the Church.

All he’s saying is that Christ set up the Church with Peter at the Head. Even St. Paul outlnes a hierarchical structure “First their are apostles, then prophets, then teachers…”
etc. I don’t have the exact letter, chapter and verse, but it goes something like that.

 

[opus101]

Here’s another simple response, Anna Claire:

Christ did envision the hierarchy and Roman Curia as it is today.

See the problem here? How do you know what Christ envisioned? For the rest of us, it’s backed up by scripture, especially acts, but what do you have at all to backyourself up, other than your social-justicey liberalistic viewpoints?

Well, I don’t know who Anna Claire is, so I don’t know about the liberalistic viewpoints, but you have a great point here superamazingman. At least you have scripture passages, Church tradition and the writings of Saints on your side, whereas there is absolutely nothing to support the opposite claim. Nothing at all.

 

[BlindManWalking]

Hierarchy is nothing more than subsidiarity in an organization.

Jesus most certainly engaged in promoting subsidiarity, and the Jewish hierarchy before that, established by God, was a similar model.

I don’t know why people have it in their head that Jesus was intending to set up some chaotic free-for-all, democracy, etc.

Freedom through boundaries and doing the right thing.

“Freedom” without standards and hierarchy to enforce the standards is nothing but anarchy.

Satan loves anarchy, God doesn’t. Jesus is God the Son. Jesus likely hates anarchy. The only cure? Hierarchy.

 

[pnewton]

How could Jesus not know the structure of the Church today, and indeed the future of the Church? Are we so quick to forgo the omniscience of God to suit our needs?

Jesus was aware of all things throughout time, as we are told in John, He was in the beginning and nothing came into being except through Him.

 

[JRKH]

Just because God is all-powerful, doesn’t mean he predestined the Church to develop in exactly the way it has. He might have preferred that the Church develop in a way that avoided the corrupting effect of alliances with national and regional governments, or he might have preferred that the Church not split as it has several times. These and many other developments have had an effect on the current structure of the Church; it’s a little Pollyannaish to suppose that we are living with the best of all possible structures for the Church.

And maybe God knows exactly what he is doing and all of the various problems etc are precisely what need to happen in order for Christ to bring the Church to where He needs it to be.

The Bottom line for me is that Christ is my King. He is a good King and He administers His Kingdom well. Some of His administrators are maybe not so great, but His Church and it’s administration is as He wishes it.
If that Is Pollyannaish - so be it. To be Truthful - I like Pollyanna. She was far more wise than most of the adults around her.

Peace
James

 

[EasterJoy]

Remember this famous passages:

*They came to Capernaum and, once inside the house, he began to ask them, “What were you arguing about on the way?” But they remained silent. They had been discussing among themselves on the way who was the greatest. Then he sat down, called the Twelve, and said to them, “If anyone wishes to be first, he shall be the last of all and the servant of all.” Taking a child he placed it in their midst, and putting his arms around it he said to them, “Whoever receives one child such as this in my name, receives me; and whoever receives me, receives not me but the one who sent me.” * Mark 9:33-37

*But Jesus summoned them and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and the great ones make their authority over them felt. But it shall not be so among you. Rather, whoever wishes to be great among you shall be your servant; whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave. Just so, the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many.” *Matt. 20:25-28

From this it is clear that a) there were to be some who were first and b) what it looks like for a Christian leader to be first needs to look substantially different than what it looks like for a secular leader to be first.

Having said that, it is clear from the Acts of the Apostles and the epistles that the authority of the episcopate has been a real authority from the very beginning, and an authority which they handed on to their successors and co-workers (such as St. Paul and St. Barnabas, for example). When there was a question to be settled, the early bishops did not consult the laity, but rather conferred among themselves. The idea that the laity ought to have (name removed by moderator)ut into what the Church teaches and how the Church operates is an utter novelty.

 

[opus101]

How could Jesus not know the structure of the Church today, and indeed the future of the Church? Are we so quick to forgo the omniscience of God to suit our needs?

Jesus was aware of all things throughout time, as we are told in John, He was in the beginning and nothing came into being except through Him.

 

[Brendan]

Having said that, it is clear from the Acts of the Apostles and the epistles that the authority of the episcopate has been a real authority from the very beginning, and an authority which they handed on to their successors and co-workers (such as St. Paul and St. Barnabas, for example). When there was a question to be settled, the early bishops did not consult the laity, but rather conferred among themselves. The idea that the laity ought to have (name removed by moderator)ut into what the Church teaches and how the Church operates is an utter novelty.

Not only that, look at some of the documents from the early Church. Clement’s Letter to the Corinthians is a great example.

Here, the Pope, the Bishop of Rome, is writing authoritatively to a distant Church, telling them to clean up their act.

They didn’t take a vote amongst themselves, it was a command from the Pope.

Another great example is John 21:16 - The Primacy of Peter discourse.

Jesus tells Peter to ‘tend my sheep’, but the word that John recorded is poimainō, to rule. It’s the same verb used to describe the relationship between a king and his subjects, or between an officer and his troops.

It’s also the same verb that John used to describe how Christ will rule in the Second Coming ( Rev 2:27, Rev 12:5 - "He shall rule ( poimainō) them with a rod of iron).

So clearly John is showing that Peter, the first Pope was given very strong authority, much more than the English verb ‘tend’ implies.

.