Apostolic Succession

wil

wil

UNeyeR1
Veteran Member
Messages
24,586
Reaction score
3,960
Points
108
Location
a figment of your imagination
It appears we have many who claim Apostolic Succession...

Is there a chart somewhere other than Papal lineage that we can see succession of apostles other than Peter?

I mean are there twelve lists...do they divide and join like family trees?
 
Short answer: No idea.
Longer question: Do you really buy this thing about apostolic succession? It makes me cringe. The implied message is that of an elite group who have some privileged relationship with the Almighty.

In CS Lewis's book, The Magician's Nephew, Uncle Andrew was always saying "Ours is a high and lonely destiny". He fancied himself a wizard but was a fool. Jesus said "He who is last shall be first".

But I ramble on. What is your take on this?
 
No I currently don't buy into it. But I often feel compelled to explore that which I disagree with based on limited knowledge and try to understand more of it. Sometimes this effort validates my previous position, other times it shines enough light on it to sway my opinion, but most of the time it allows me to understand the other perspective and 'see where they are coming from'.

Which may mean I still disagree, but accept thier position.
 
wil said:
Which may mean I still disagree, but accept thier position.
Click to expand...


By postion you mean such as to hold titles such as "pope" ? You agree that this old man.... Has a better relationship with jah, then some normal simple living devoted man? Do you agree that this old man, has a special link of communication with jah? Like the bat phone? Would a god of love who see's all as equal wish to show favour to certain men?
 
17th Angel said:
By postion you mean such as to hold titles such as "pope" ? You agree that this old man.... Has a better relationship with jah, then some normal simple living devoted man? Do you agree that this old man, has a special link of communication with jah? Like the bat phone? Would a god of love who see's all as equal wish to show favour to certain men?
Click to expand...
by position I do not mean title, but the position the understanding of those that believe in Apostolic Succession.

I have no issues with the pope or their methodology either. Much as I do not have issues with the way the US has decided to elect their leaders. From what I seen and understand of the Catholics process, they select out of a group of folks who have shown extreme dedication to their order, and pick thier new leader accordingly, what they believe in regard to his connections is not for me to decry as I am not among that order.

Wil here, still hoping to learn if their is any chart available anywhere...lineage of succession or end of succession for the 12...(I'm sort of assuming no one is claiming Judas as the top of their line)
 
Hi Wil -

A chronological list of popes:
List of popes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: List of Popes

From the establishment of the Early Church on, the line of succession is through Peter, as the head of the Church, not through the twelve, nor twelve separate lines of succession. It is the Petrine succession and the See of Rome that underlines all denominations that hold to an apostolic lineage.

Within a century we have Clement I of Rome writing to the Church or Corinth to admonish them - his authority in so doing was never questioned - even though we know with some certainty that St John at least was still alive.

Likewise no early writer, in the Greek East, in North Africa nor in Gaul, ever questioned the authority of the Bishop of Rome as 'first among equals', and moreover there were appeals to Rome (North Africa, for example) to settle internal disputes authoritatively. (The schism between the Greek East and Latin West was much later, and was not about succession but authority - motivated more by politics than theology).

Thomas
 
Virtual Cliff -

Longer question: Do you really buy this thing about apostolic succession? It makes me cringe. The implied message is that of an elite group who have some privileged relationship with the Almighty.

Were not the apostles 'an elite group'?

In every tradition, east and west, the founder passes on his work to one or more trusted followers. Do not heart surgeons form an 'elite group' - if you needed life-saving surgery, would you rather an elite dedicated specialist, or a carefree 'have-a-go' amateur... ?

17th Angel

By postion you mean such as to hold titles such as "pope" ? You agree that this old man.... Has a better relationship with jah, then some normal simple living devoted man? Do you agree that this old man, has a special link of communication with jah? Like the bat phone? Would a god of love who see's all as equal wish to show favour to certain men?

You completely misunderstand the idea and the reality of the See of Rome. Nowhere does it say or imply that the Pope has a better relationship with God than anyone else - not all saints are popes, for example, and not all popes are saints. The pope is a function within the body of the church, it is not a spiritual qualification.

Is age a disqualification?

Would a god of love who see's all as equal wish to show favour to certain men?

Well obviously yes, because He might be the God of Love but He is not a fool, and he knows what men are like. All men are called to God equally, but the service they are called to offer is not the same, and nor is their response to the call.

If God's love was absolutely equal in all aspects, we'd all be the same size, height, weight, the same in every respect ...

Thomas
 
Thomas said:
Were not the apostles 'an elite group'?

In every tradition, east and west, the founder passes on his work to one or more trusted followers. Do not heart surgeons form an 'elite group' - if you needed life-saving surgery, would you rather an elite dedicated specialist, or a carefree 'have-a-go' amateur... ?
Click to expand...

Are the people waiting at the bus stop an elite group? I think that if any of the disciples had given the impression that they were special they would have had short shrift from Jesus. And in fact they did (James and John).

The case of the surgeon is quite different. The promise of being a surgeon is not made to all people without regard to wealth or rank. The temptation to pull rank is always present, but only those unworthy of their task fall prey to it.
 
So if it is just Peter, than why is it called Apostolic Succession.

Seems it is just Popes in the line of Peter...the rest just seceded thier proxies?

Don't some other religions claim some Apostolic lineage, divine heritage?
 
Hi Virtual_Cliff

The case of the surgeon is quite different. The promise of being a surgeon is not made to all people without regard to wealth or rank.
Surely it is - surely anybody can become a surgeon if they meet the necessary requirements?

If my car breaks down I go to a mechanic.
If I feel ill I go to a doctor.

In both cases I have sought out the best that I can manage.

I do so because they belong to an elite group - those who know what they are doing in their particular field, and are good at it.
I have known very bad mechanics - and bad doctors.
My dentist is brilliant - one in a million - but he works in a grubby part of North London, not in the centre. he is an elite dentist who suffers from no pretensions.

Same with the apostles. They were trained - by natural and supernatural means - and thus were equipped to the task that lay before them.

The apostles were not drawn from any social 'elite'.

The temptation to pull rank is always present, but only those unworthy of their task fall prey to it.
Indeed ... but does not effect the principle of succession ... that's the fallibility of man.

I'm not sure if your question is with the principle of succession, or with the principle of authority.

Hi Wil
Re: Apostolic Succession
So if it is just Peter, than why is it called Apostolic Succession.
Because Peter was chief among the apostles, the first among equals. They were as one - a collective? It is sometimes called the Petrine Succession, as Rome is the Chair of Peter.

Seems it is just Popes in the line of Peter...the rest just seceded their proxies?
Peter was the first. Interestingly, I don't think Paul ever considered himself for the job, nor John, who we might assume outlived the others. The Church had no problem investing a new Bishop of Rome after Peter, with no sense of usurping the place of any of the surviving apostles.

Don't some other religions claim some Apostolic lineage, divine heritage?
An interesting point. I think every religion considers succession important, so those that cannot claim a legitimate line from the apostles come up with something else. east to say, difficult to validate. interesting that they don't consider succession as immaterial.

I think perhaps the Quakers might, but I am not sure.

Thomas
 
Thomas said:
1. not all saints are popes, for example, and not all popes are saints. The pope is a function within the body of the church, it is not a spiritual qualification.

2. If God's love was absolutely equal in all aspects, we'd all be the same size, height, weight, the same in every respect ...

Thomas
Click to expand...

1. Where does the bible mention saints?
2. Love and how we are are two complete different things.... It says god wanted people to worship him out of love and free will meaning he didn't want us to be robots.... Robots all look the same. We are human and differ in size shape tone and such.... Because one person is big and one person is small he shows favour to one of these? Because on is black and one is white he shows more favour to one of these? Of course not.....
 
1. Where does the bible mention saints?
Matthew and Acts - St Paul mentions them often. As St Paul's epistles are the earliest NT writings, and were passed among the Churches, and were read in Liturgical gatherings, the concept of 'saint' was widely known in the Church.

In fact all Christians were called 'saints' until the Fathers determined that, as some were falling into sin - eg theft, murder, etc., it seemed as nonsense for all Christians to be called saints without reservation, so the term was limited to those who demonstrated the qualities of Christian virtue.

2. Love and how we are are two complete different things.... It says god wanted people to worship him out of love and free will meaning he didn't want us to be robots.... Robots all look the same. We are human and differ in size shape tone and such.... Because one person is big and one person is small he shows favour to one of these? Because on is black and one is white he shows more favour to one of these? Of course not.....
Of course not - and as I said, all are called to God 'equally' - but that does not mean they respond equally, and that's the point.

That's why I defend the honest Christian who might not be a guru, a gnostic, and in fact might be an illiterate street sweeper - but might also be a saint ... whereas because someone might be considered a gnostic, this is no measure of sanctity.

I would say God shows favour to those who follow in His ways.

Thomas
 
That's why I defend the honest Christian who might not be a guru, a gnostic, and in fact might be an illiterate street sweeper - but might also be a saint ... whereas because someone might be considered a gnostic, this is no measure of sanctity.

I would say God shows favour to those who follow in His ways.

Thomas
Click to expand...

That I believe is the truth of life, for those who follow His ways without adding their own "spice" to the mix, to the point where the message of God becomes convoluted.

v/r

Joshua
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top