Skip to main content
Because I don't feel like linking to it, (oh, fine) I'd offer just a couple sentences of critique/constructive thought on why it won't wash against the Catholic claims re: apostolic succession. First, we are essentially agreed on the priesthood of all believers in a baptismal sense. This cannot satisfy, in itself, the objection. We make the distinction between a baptismal priesthood and a ministerial 'priesthood' (I beg pardon, Reformed Protestant brethren!) all the time. I invite you to try celebrating the Eucharist in your own house (then consulting the PCA's BCO) if you doubt me! Weak sauce, Doug, weak sauce. It was our rank inability to be consistent in our priestly egalitarianism that got me thinking about this in the first place! Paging Jeff Meyers! Why ordination, if Doug is correct? And if not, are we sure our dudes are validly sent by Christ? What would prove it? Better yet, what would disprove it? If correct doctrine is the true measure, then 'correct' according to whom?

Comments

I disagree with Wilson on this, as I do other stuff.

It is clear there is a certain set of people set apart as presbyters/elders (1 Tim 3, etc.). It is also clear that not everyone should to be a teacher (Jas. 3.1). Moreover, we should recognize that people have different roles (Rom. 13-14) and that services should not be a chaotic free for all, but done decently and in order (1 Cor 14).

Moral of the story: everyone is equal in value, but everyone has different gifts. The big point being the priesthood of all believers means we do not need a mediator (e.g. a priest or saint) to intercede for us before Christ. It means when the Church violates Scripture or conscience, we can appeal over their heads, as Jerram would put it. It means nothing of the sort that anyone should do everything in the church.

Popular posts from this blog

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con

A Friend I Once Had, And The Dogmatic Principle

 I once had a friend, a dear friend, who helped me with personal care needs in college. Reformed Presbyterian to the core. When I was a Reformed Presbyterian, I visited their church many times. We were close. I still consider his siblings my friends. (And siblings in the Lord.) Nevertheless, when I began to consider the claims of the Catholic Church to be the Church Christ founded, he took me out to breakfast. He implied--but never quite stated--that we would not be brothers, if I sought full communion with the Catholic Church. That came true; a couple years later, I called him on his birthday, as I'd done every year for close to ten of them. He didn't recognize my number, and it was the most strained, awkward phone call I have ever had. We haven't spoken since. We were close enough that I attended the rehearsal dinner for his wedding. His wife's uncle is a Catholic priest. I remember reading a blog post of theirs, that early in their relationship, she told him of the p
My wheelchair was nearly destroyed by a car last night. That's a bit melodramatic, I suppose, because it is intact and undamaged. But we'd left my power chair ("Red Sam" in the official designation) in-between the maze of cars parked out front of Chris Yee's house for Bible Study. [Isn't that a Protestant Bible study?--ed.] They are good friends, and it is not under any official auspices. [Not BSF?--ed.] They're BSF guys, but it's not a BSF study. Anyway, I wasn't worried; I made a joke about calling the vendor the next day: "What seems to be the problem, sir?" 'Well, it was destroyed by a car.' As it happened, a guy bumped into it at slow speed. His car got the worst of it. And this only reinforces what I've said for a solid 13 years [Quickie commercial coming] If you want a power wheelchair that lasts, get a Quickie. They're fast, obviously, and they're tanks. Heck, my old one still would work, but the batteries ar