Succession

[Josiah]

Do we really want to go through this silly exercise (again!) in selectively picking apart an ordinary expression in order to find fault? If Pedrito wants to support the idea of a line of Popes being Christ’s intention for his church, let Pedrito just say it.

When a poster refers to some saint having died, we all know that it means his body has ceased to breathe, his heart has stopped, and he's been laid in the grave; it is not a comment on the nature of the afterlife.

Josiah agrees that Pedrito makes an absurd diversion attempt. And Josiah agrees (completely) with Albion





.

 

[Pedrito]

==============================================================================================

This is such fun!

Albion (Post #20):

Do we really want to go through this silly exercise (again!) in selectively picking apart an ordinary expression in order to find fault? If Pedrito wants to support the idea of a line of Popes being Christ’s intention for his church, let Pedrito just say it.

When a poster refers to some saint having died, we all know that it means his body has ceased to breathe, his heart has stopped, and he's been laid in the grave; it is not a comment on the nature of the afterlife.

Josiah (Post #21):

Josiah agrees that Pedrito makes an absurd diversion attempt. And Josiah agrees (completely)

The Reader will remember that Josiah’s original statement referred to (in Post #16), indicated that Peter could not have been the basis on which an officially established church organisation could have been based (the Topic), because Peter is now dead.

==============================================================================================

I suggest that Josiah’s original statement was demonstrably and unquestionably illogical, and therefore diversionary.

That is what I was pointing out (if indirectly), and also making the point (more directly) that Christendom in general is plagued with deliberate illogicality used to support personality cherished beliefs.

==============================================================================================

And because the Holy Bible gives no indication of Peter assuming an overall leadership role (quite the opposite in fact – compare Acts 15:7-11 with Acts 15:13-21), one must wonder about the following indirect accusation:

If Pedrito wants to support the idea of a line of Popes being Christ’s intention for his church, let Pedrito just say it.

One must wonder upon what basis Albion chose to make that illogical indirect accusation with respect to the Poster who has been promoting the Original Apostolic Gospel. Could it itself have been an attempted diversion to draw attention away from the highlighting of Josiah’s diversion?

As I said: This is fun!

==============================================================================================

 

[Andrew]

The fact remains, however, that no matter how we interpret the "rock", the idea that it commissions several hundred men--coming in a line after Peter--to be the rulers of Christ's church on Earth is entirely fanciful and without scriptural warrant OR, for that matter, its much ballyhooed alternative, "Tradition."

We had some naughty Popes in the past, Popes succeeding those Popes even apologised for those Popes but if Pope A and Pope B are both infallible Popes, then how could Pope B apologise for mistakes that Pope A made if no Popes can make mistakes in the Papacy?




Pope!

 

[Albion]

To be fair, the infallibility applies only to certain declarations made by the Pope in question, so none of what you refer to would be involved; but on the other hand, the idea that a Pope can be infallible under any circumstances is quite a dogma for the church to have created. And it did result in a split in the church when it was.

 

[MoreCoffee]

To be fair, the infallibility applies only to certain declarations made by the Pope in question, so none of what you refer to would be involved; but on the other hand, the idea that a Pope can be infallible under any circumstances is quite a dogma for the church to have created. And it did result in a split in the church when it was.

Succession has almost nothing to do with infallibility; not quite nothing but very close to nothing to do with succession.

Succession is more along the lines of this.

Peter is foundation, not founder, of the whole Church

• foundation but founded on another foundation, which is Christ Jesus, Our Lord ;
• foundation of the Evangelic Church alone,
• foundation subject to succession,
• foundation of the Church militant not of the Church triumphant,
• foundation by participation, ministerial not absolute foundation ;

specifically, administrator and not lord, and in no way the foundation of our faith, hope and charity, nor of the efficacy of the Sacraments,

A difference so great as this makes the one (that is Peter) unable, in comparison, to be called a foundation by the side of the other (that is the Lord Jesus Christ), whilst, however, taken by itself, it can be called a foundation, in order to pay proper regard to the Holy Scriptures.

So, although Christ is the Good Shepherd, he gives us shepherds under himself, between those shepherds and the Lord there is so great a difference that he declares himself to be the only shepherd.

 

[Albion]

Succession has almost nothing to do with infallibility; not quite nothing but very close to nothing to do with succession.

That's right. But also, I don't believe that I ever said it does. (??)

Succession is more along the lines of this.

No, Apostolic Succession provides an orderly and historic system for the administration of the church's affairs. That's worthwhile just as it is. There's no need to dress it up with a lot of superfluous adornments and claims.

 

[MoreCoffee]

That's right. But also, I don't believe that I ever said it does. (??)


No, Apostolic Succession provides an orderly and historic system for the administration of the church's affairs. That's worthwhile just as it is. There's no need to dress it up with a lot of superfluous adornments and claims.

That, Mr Albion, is one of the few polite and enjoyable posts from you that I have received. I like it. Thank you.