What Protestant group was the first to *intentionally abandon Apostolic Succession?

[MichaelP3]

The bolded part greatly proves my point! And it’s even properly referenced!

 

[JonNC]

The Vatican practice? No, it is at the bishop level, of “some” who are squishy.

Your bishops are not in charge of ecumenism. That’s the PCPCU.

When Jesus gave Peter the keys, What part of the Church was Peter NOT over? Where did Jesus say to Peter, you have control over this part of the Church but not that part over there?

Jesus never said he has universal jurisdiction. In fact, He warned them against setting up a such an order. The power of the keys is for the Church, not just one bishop

Your argument is from the views of schismatics. Objectively speaking, THEY are already screwed.

Pot and kettle. They think you ( and me) are schismatic.

How?

Same issue.

All that was offered at the time. It was suggested that the office of pope today, would be viewed as it was in the 1st millenium. Guess what? No response. The Orthodox knew how much authority the pope has always had. Even going back to the 1st millenium.

BTW, this argument already took place before the “Orthodox” were even a thought.

Yeah. A thousand years argument where both sides are mutually schismatic.

 

[AugustTherese]

The Roman Pontiff claims for himself [in the first place] that by divine right he is [supreme] above all bishops and pastors [in all Christendom].

Except, he does not claim for himself anything outside of that which is given to him. Our Lord gave Saint Peter the keys; yet, every schismatic and heretic is filled with envy for those keys that they have to attempt to usurp this office that has been divinely established, protected, and maintained for the last two thousand years. If the ‘Roman Pontiff’ claimed for himself anything outside of what he has by divine right, his office would have faded and failed a long time ago.

 

[AugustTherese]

Jesus never said he has universal jurisdiction

Really? And, how do you know that he never said that?!

 

[JonNC]

Except, he does not claim for himself anything outside of that which is given to him.

Of course he does. Not in scripture or in the early councils is supremacy assumed or stated. No where is universal ordinary and immediate jurisdiction mentioned. No where is he stated as infallible ex cathedra.

Our Lord gave Saint Peter the keys;

And later to the other apostles, and the whole Church.

yet, every schismatic and heretic is filled with envy

You know, Steve and I debate and disagree on this issue all the time, and he never resorts to these kinds of accusations and statements of motives that would require mind reading. So, why involve yourself if this is all you want to do?
What is your evidence that anyone has said, “oh, I’m so envious of the pope that I’m gonna claim universal jurisdiction, too”? Give me a source.

 

[JonNC]

Really? And, how do you know that he never said that?!

Where and when did He say it?

 

[AugustTherese]

Not in scripture or in the early councils is supremacy assumed or stated. No where is universal ordinary and immediate jurisdiction mentioned. No where is he stated as infallible ex cathedra.

Peter alone received the keys from Our Lord. This is explicitly stated in Scripture and confirmed by Sacred Tradition. Just because you and others want to twist its Apostolic meaning to fit your own understanding of it does not negate the Pope’s universal jurisdiction.

And later to the other apostles, and the whole Church

This is begging the question. Can you substantiate this claim, or do you like throwing mere opinions around?

You know, Steve and I debate and disagree on this issue all the time, and he never resorts to these kinds of accusations and statements of motives that would require mind reading. So, why involve yourself if this is all you want to do?

Jon, I would never dare call you nor anyone else a schismatic or heretic…never! I was speaking in general terms to prove a point. If I have offended you, please forgive me.

 

[AugustTherese]

AugustTherese:

Really? And, how do you know that he never said that?!

Where and when did He say it?

I don’t have to prove that. The burden of proof is on you to substantiate that Our Lord never said what you are claiming. To reverse the burden of proof back to me shows that your claim does not stand.

 

[JonNC]

Peter alone received the keys from Our Lord

Followed by the others and the Church.

This is explicitly stated in Scripture and confirmed by Sacred Tradition. Just because you and others want to twist its Apostolic meaning to fit your own understanding of it does not negate the Pope’s universal jurisdiction.

No, it is not. In either.

This is begging the question. Can you substantiate this claim, or do you like throwing mere opinions around?

The disciples rejoiced therefore, having seen the Lord. 21[Jesus] said therefore again to them, Peace [be] to you: as the Father sent me forth, I also send you. 22And having said this, he breathed into [them], and says to them, Receive [the] Holy Spirit: 23whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted to them; whose soever [sins] ye retain, they are retained.

18And Jesus coming up spoke to them, saying, All power has been given me in heaven and upon earth. 19Go [therefore] and make disciples of all the nations, baptising them to the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit; 20teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have enjoined you. And behold, I am with you all the days, until the completion of the age.

Jon, I would never dare call you nor anyone else a schismatic or heretic…never! I was speaking in general terms to prove a point. If I have offended you, please forgive me.

Schismatic and heretic are terms. It was the accusation of being envious that I took umbrage over. But, regardless, the log in my eye prevents me from seeking the spec in yours. All is forgiven.

 

[steve-b]

The bolded part greatly proves my point! And it’s even properly referenced!

" founded by the Wittenberg reformer, Martin Luther" proves my point as well. Luther invented the Lutherans. As if any body would possibly disagree.

 

[GKMotley]

If the disagreement turns on whether Christ did or did not say something, and you assert that He did, Jon needn’t try to prove that He didn’t. You need to prove your assertion. Jon can just walk away. Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

The Vatican practice? No, it is at the bishop level, of “some” who are squishy.

Your bishops are not in charge of ecumenism. That’s the PCPCU.

steve-b:

Local bishops still have power in their diocese

When Jesus gave Peter the keys, What part of the Church was Peter NOT over? Where did Jesus say to Peter, you have control over this part of the Church but not that part over there?

JonNC:

Jesus never said he has universal jurisdiction. In fact, He warned them against setting up a such an order. The power of the keys is for the Church, not just one bishop

steve-b:

That argument falls flat when looking at the language used by Jesus.

When Jesus was establishing Peter’s position, Jesus used singular tense, when talking to Peter NOT plural. The keys then come to the Church through Peter. Therefore, leadership universally is Peters.

And

The warning Jesus made about setting up order, was directed towards those who seek to be great. Peter didn’t seek the role Jesus gave him. He didn’t lobby for top job. He didn’t ask to sit at Jesus right hand.

Unlike James and John. Their mom lobbied Jesus for her sons to sit at His right and left hand … just an example to make a point

Your argument is from the views of schismatics. Objectively speaking, THEY are already screwed.

JonNC:

Pot and kettle. They think you ( and me) are schismatic.

steve-b:

Their argument was squashed at the last supper by Jesus. The apostles were in an argument over who is greatest among THEM… Jesus said it is Peter. Case closed. I’ve given you that episode many times before in a link.

An important detail, Jesus also said, The one who started that argument and keeps it going is Satan .

The Orthodox know how much authority the pope has always had. Even going back to the 1st millenium…,…,

JonNC:

Yeah. A thousand years argument where both sides are mutually schismatic.

Nope. That’s NOT how it works. The Church is where PETER IS. Always was, always is. Those not on Peter’s side are on the wrong side. THEY aren’t on the side of Peter. THEY are the ones in schism.

 

[AugustTherese]

All is forgiven.

This speaks volumes upon volumes. This is what Christ has commanded us to do, and you have followed this command very well!

 

[AugustTherese]

If the disagreement turns on whether Christ did or did not say something, and you assert that He did, Jon needn’t try to prove that He didn’t. You need to prove your assertion. Jon can just walk away. Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.

Jesus never said he has universal jurisdiction

Please, read the entirety of the relevant comments before interjecting. It will save you from embarrassment.

 

[steve-b]

AugustTherese:

Peter alone received the keys from Our Lord

Followed by the others and the Church.

Jon,

Point being, Peter received the keys. The keys then come through Peter and his successors, to the Church.

Due to space limits I need to answer this in a link from a great professor. I had the chance to spend time with him in 94. This is a great article.

Keys of the Kingdom

Note:keys are mentioned 36 times. Check out the context

 

[guanophore]

Jesus never said he has universal jurisdiction. In fact, He warned them against setting up a such an order.

I think you lost me here. What “order”?

Jesus gave Peter the singular charge to feed and care for His flock, and to confirm His brethren. He did not restrict it to any certain part of the flock. This is why the successor of Peter today, is responsible for the whole flock of God. He prays for every member of the Body, and works for them daily, whether they are visibly Catholic or not.

 

[guanophore]

If the ‘Roman Pontiff’ claimed for himself anything outside of what he has by divine right, his office would have faded and failed a long time ago.

I think this is exactly the perspective of Protestants, who think that the Pope abused his office, and lost it as a result.

Of course he does. Not in scripture or in the early councils is supremacy assumed or stated. No where is universal ordinary and immediate jurisdiction mentioned. No where is he stated as infallible ex cathedra.

It seems pretty clear that he was given the care and feeding of the flock, without any restrictions.

But I do agree with you, the whole concept of “supremacy” is very bothersome to me, and seems to fly in the face of the Scriptures, in which Jesus specifically addresses issues of servant leadership rather than “lord it over”.

I think that Jesus trained Peter from the beginning to be that visible sign of unity that was needed by the Church. That responsibility was passed to his successors, and I think we still need it today as much as ever!

It is much easier to be in unity with a leader who is humble than one who is arrogant.

 

[MaryT777]

I was well aware of the origins of the Lutheran name. However, I agree with you, Steve B is that Luther could have EASILY had the named changed but he did not. I believe he loved having the denomination named after him.

I bet he would roll over in his grave today at the state of the Lutheran Church with the LCMS, ELCA, WELS etc.

 

[GKMotley]

As you know, nothing is likely to save me from embarrassment. I just learn to live with it. Only problem would be if it occurs in my special areas of expertise. Hasn’t, so far.

In this case, I did trace the conversation back. Comment was accordingly. Correct me.

 

[ltwin]

I believe he loved having the denomination named after him.

Lots of necromantic mind readers online today.