Non Catholics, How do you understand apostolic succession?

Question

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-S6YMuFYyaa9ESBoW5DFwEjL_HhqA?tag=apostolicsuccessionmarksthechurch

Isn't it strange how Protestants speak out against apostolic succession and other practices of he Church yet they have no knowledge of it. Before I converted and became Catholic just a little over 5 years ago, at least in my anti Catholic mindset I at least knew what they believed so that I could be truthful when speaking out against them. So few people against the Church respect the truth. That is very sad.

You could not be more disingenuous. The Bible is full of the teaching of apostolic succession. One whole book, Acts, is devoted to this practice. The whole history of the Church attests to this as well as the teaching of all the Church fathers. There is no more credible or well documented practice than apostolic succession. Not only that but we can clearly see from Scriptures Jesus instituting the practice. As for the practice and those ordained in succession not being directed by the Holy Spirit, this is a preposterous claim with absolutely no evidence. If it was not for the Holy Spirit guiding those in succession from the apostles the Christian church would not even have a Canon of Scriptures today.

Daydream,

Getting back to the topic. Do you know what apostolic succession is and desire to share your beliefs with us?

Daydream,

What you posted is about the papacy. I did not ask you to explain the papacy nor did I ask for criticisms of the papacy. I asked what your understanding of apostolic succession was. Obviously you don't have a clue from what you posted. Right?

This is amazing, not one Protestant even knew what apostolic succession is. How can they criticize it all the time if they don't know what it is.

Answer 1

"Has an unbroken line of successors been traced from Peter to modern-day popes?" Actually, yes.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12272b.htm

Isn't a wonder that none of the 30,000 religious organizations invented after Martin Luther can post a simple linked list of leaders such as this one?

Apostolic succession is the line of bishops stretching back to the apostles. All Catholic bishops are part of a lineage that goes back to the time of the apostles.

The role of apostolic succession in preserving true doctrine is illustrated in the New Testament. Paul told Timothy, "And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others." (2 Tim. 2:2). Paul refers to the first three generations of apostolic succession—his own generation, Timothy’s generation, and the generation Timothy will teach.

All the Fathers of the early Church recognized this historical linchpin of authority. Irenaeus (189 A.D.): "It is possible, then, for everyone in every church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the apostles which has been made known to us throughout the whole world. And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors down to our own times, men who neither knew nor taught anything like what these heretics rave about" (Against Heresies 3:3:1).

Cheers,
Bruce

Answer 2

Some see apostolic succession as having the apostolic faith but of all the conflicting protestant versions which is the apostolic?
Some like Lutherans see Apostolic Succession of the Historic Episcopacy as nice but not necessary for valid Eucharist
Many Anglicans see Apostolic Succession of the Historic Episcopate as necessary for valid Eucharist and ordinations but many do not.
Most Protestant groups see themselves in some sort of Apostolic Succession ,at least of their own definitionfor example,Pentecostals see tongues-speaking as a apostolic gift passed down but buried or ignored until Azuza Street revival or the like.

Answer 3

This is what I think of it:

On Jan.18, 1947, a dispatch came from Vatican City which said:

"...the Vatican's new official directory has dropped six popes from its old list. It placed two others in doubt, as possible anti-popes and listed as a true pope one who had not been included until now... Information was changed on 74 popes. The changes ranged from corrections in the dates of their pontificate to the assertion that one of them, Pope Dono II, who was listed as pontiff for three months in the year 973, never really existed..."

"In one book that was presented to Pope Pius XII, the third and fifth popes, Cleto a Roman, and Anacleto, an Athenian, were combined as one and the same person. Felix II, who was listed as a saint and as a pope from 363 to 365 is removed from the list as an anti-pope...Christoforo, 903 to 904; Alexander V, who claimed to be pope from 409 to 410, and John XXIII, from 1410 to 1415, were also dropped from the list of popes, while the legitimacy of Gregory VI, 1044 to 1047, was placed in doubt...Boniface VI, who was not in the old list, is put down as the legitimate pontiff for a few days in April 896. Possibility was admitted that Dioscoro was pope for 22 days in September and October 530, and that Leo VIII was pontiff from 963 to 965. Both were omitted from the list until now." (Secrets of Romanism, Zachello, 48-49)

It is obvious with just a short study of papal history that there are serious gaps in the so-called "unbroken line". In 1409, a Council was convoked in Pisa, where they elected Alexander V to usurp the two popes, Gregory XII and Benedict XIII, (who were already reigning), on the grounds they were "heretics and schismatics". Can you imagine how the people must have felt when they woke up to the news that there was now a third pope! Can you imagine their further consternation when they were told that the Roman Catholic Church needed this third pope because the two currently reigning were frauds? This little bit of history alone should be enough to debunk the lie that the Roman Catholic Church is infallible and cannot err until the End of Time!


Don't be afraid, read the WHOLE article!
http://cuttingedge.org/articles/rc129.htm

Edit: I believe I told you what I think about it, or maybe you just didn't read between the lines to see what I meant, and that is, that I don't believe in it.
Does it bother you that I used another source other than my own words as to why I don't believe in it. The article I cited HAS done the research, I personally have NOT, but if I had, then I could have cited myself as the source.
And when you say "share with us", Most generally I am answering a question that the asker posts, and am not trying to express my views to the masses, fortunately or unfortunately, that is just the way this forum is set up.
Oh, and did you BOTHER to even read the article? And if you did, did you find any discrepancies?

Edit: You just said that apostalic succession didn't have anything to do with Papacy. And THEN you get an answer from someone who uses a CATHOLIC website, and who I assume is Catholic also, where his answer starts out with the question:
"Has an unbroken line of successors been traced from Peter to modern-day popes?"

I've seen other Catholics make the claim on Y!A that Peter was the first POPE! Many times have I seen that.

You could tell me that every priest, bishop, pope, alterboy, deacon, friar, monk and every other TITLE (for an imperfect man) the Catholic Church CLAIMS was started by them, and I wouldn't believe one second of it!

But seriously, while I've got you here, could you answer a question I have about the Catholic belief? I am curious about something, and I do truly WANT to understand your reasons. Apparently recently, on Dec.8 Catholics celebrated? prayed? whatever ritual it is you do, something called the Solemnity of The Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Is that correct? My husband said he saw a picture of the Pope waving to his people below his window at the Vatican, and that was what the caption underneath said he was doing. So, my question is, because this is an annual event, commemorated on Dec. 8 of every year, how do you or whoever makes the rules for Catholics (Vatican & the heirarchy?) figure or reconcile the IDEA or CLAIM that Mary Immaculately Conceived "Christ Jesus" on Dec. 8, but yet have proclaimed to the world for CENTURIES that Jesus was BORN on Dec. 25?
I AM honestly curious and would like to know the reasoning behind that, OR if there is something ELSE I am clueless about regarding this subject, by all means, please CLUE ME IN. Thank you in advance.

Answer 4

It does not exist. In support of their claim that Roman Catholicism is the one true church, Catholic leaders say that their bishops have “a life-giving contact with the original apostles by a current of succession which goes back to the beginning.” In truth, this claim of apostolic succession has no historical or Scriptural basis. There is no credible evidence that the church system that arose following the death of Jesus’ apostles was ever directed by God’s holy spirit. Ro. 8:9; Gal. 5:19-21.

The Catholic Encyclopedia admits that “one does not find in the New Testament any words of Christ indicating how the apostolic mandate was to be handed on.” And it also confesses that “papal primacy” was not “clearly understood or explicitly professed” in the “Western [Latin] Church” until the fifth century C.E.

Has an unbroken line of successors been traced from Peter to modern-day popes?

Jesuit John McKenzie, when professor of theology at Notre Dame, wrote: “Historical evidence does not exist for the entire chain of succession of church authority.”—The Roman Catholic Church (New York, 1969), p. 4.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia admits: “ . . . the scarcity of documents leaves much that is obscure about the early development of the episcopate . . . ”—(1967), Vol. I, p. 696.

It's too bad that regular Catholics can't see what their own books say about Apostolic Succession.

Answer 5

Apostolic succession comes through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and when God gives spiritual gifts to those in his church.
Mark 16:17 he gave power to all that believe on his name.
1 Cor 12:28 God still puts the spiritual gifts and spiritual leaders in his church.
Apostolic succession is happening all the time through the Holy Spirit and people are used for any and all of the spiritual gifts to edify the church (which is the body of Christ)

Answer 6

if they did, truely understand, they'd be catholics.

Answer 7

I like David M - he's speaks my language

Answer 8

If they did they would be Catholic