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

Dear Alyse

 Today, you’re 35. Or at least you would be, in this place. You probably know this, but we’re OK. Not great, but OK. We know you wouldn’t want us moping around and weeping all the time. We try not to. Actually, I guess part of the problem is that you didn’t know how much we loved you. And that you didn’t know how to love yourself. I hope you have gotten to Love by now. Not a place, but fills everything in every way. I’m not Him, but he probably said, “Dear daughter/sister, you have been terribly hard on yourself. Rest now, and be at peace.” Anyway, teaching is going well, and I tell the kids all about you. They all say you are pretty. I usually can keep the boys from saying something gross for a few seconds. Mom and I are going to the game tonight. And like 6 more times, before I go back to South Carolina. I have seen Nicky twice, but I myself haven’t seen your younger kids. Bob took pictures of the day we said goodbye, and we did a family picture at the Abbey. I literally almost a...

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

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...

My Thoughts On The Harrison Butker Commencement Speech

Update: I read the whole thing. I’m sorry, but what a weirdo. I thought you [Tom Darrow, of Denver, CO] made a trenchant case for why lockdowns are bad, and I definitely appreciated it. But a graduation speech is *not* the place for that. Secondly, this is an august event. It always is. I would never address the President of the United States in this manner. Never. Even the previous president, though he deserves it, if anyone does. Thirdly, the affirmations of Catholic identity should be more general. He has no authority to propound with specificity on all matters of great consequence. It has all the hallmarks of a culture war broadside, and again, a layman shouldn’t speak like this. The respect and reverence due the clergy is *always due,* even if they are weak, and outright wrong. We just don’t brush them aside like corrupt Mafia dons, to make a point. Fourthly, I don’t know where anyone gets the idea that the TLM is how God demands to be worshipped. The Church doesn’t teach that. ...