Apostolic Succession & Christ

This is a short from the larger video "Lutheran vs Catholic Confession"
▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃
☩ Support the channel on Patreon ➔ www.patreon.co...
☩ Subscribe for more theological topics ☩
☩ Share this video with a friend ☩
☩ Check out some more videos!➔ • Theological Topics
▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃▃

[@R.C.425]

Christ did not give the keys to the apostles. He gave the keys to only one apostle, Peter.

[@Hol0gr4m]

I'm curious what you believe the keys of the kingdom to be? What is their function? Are they non-transferable? Why would Christ only give the keys to Peter as well as the sealing power, then use similar language in Matthew 18:18 when referring to the rest of the Apostleship? If those keys only belonged to Peter, why would the work of the church continue after his Death? If Peter only had the keys of the kingdom, what would've been the need for the martyrdom of the other Apostles? Are the keys meant to direct the earthly affairs of Christ's church? If so, wouldn't Christ have the foresight when proclaiming the execution of Peter to Peter after His own death that the keys should continue through the other Apostles?

[@Deto4508]

@@Hol0gr4m The keys are non-transferable to any other Apostle but transferable to Peter's immediate successor. As for your similar language argument, you kind of answered it yourself, it's *similar* language and not *exact* language. We can say that the gift of Infallibility is given to the Apostles as a whole, when gathered together, in the same way the gift of Infallibility is given to all Bishops, when gathered together, at an Ecumenical Council making a statement of faith as a unit (Council of Nicaea for example). That doesn't negate the fact that Christ still solely gave Peter the same gift, with the Keys, and the privilege of having The Church built on him. These are far greater than being given something alongside everyone else. And yes the keys are meant to direct earthly affairs of The Church but your point of Christ in his foreknowledge can backfire as dogmas we both hold to dearly (if you hold to at least anywhere between the 1st and 6th Ecumenical Councils) are also not explicitly explained out of Christ's mouth. Does that mean that God didn't teach them through His Church? No. It's kind of pre supposing Sola Scriptura but even for one who holds to that, it backfires.

[@Hol0gr4m]

@@Deto4508 thanks for the response. I would love some references if you can provide some for the transfer of the keys from Peter to his Successor. I don't presuppose Sola Scriptura (it's a self-refuting doctrine in my opinion), but I do use the Bible as a strong authoritative reference in coming to any conclusion on the continuation of the church. From the other parts of the New Testament, it appears that the Apostleship would've continued as a quorum of 12 with the ordinations of Matthias & Paul if they weren't all martyred, potentially to this day rather than all power and authority resting on one lone individual. Especially with the possibility of the person holding the Keys of the Kingdom being killed or deceased before choosing a successor. From my understanding of the Catholic tradition, the Cardinals are the ones who elect a new pope, is that correct? If this is the case, do the Cardinals hold the keys temporarily until a new pope is elected?

[@Deto4508]

@@Hol0gr4m And thank you for your response. As for your first question the earliest attestation at an Ecumenical Council we have to the prerogatives Peter was given also transferring to the Pope is at the 4th one (Ephesus 431 AD) during the 3rd Session, where the papal legate Philip made a statement of faith claiming basically 2/3 things I mentioned, that The Church was built on Peter (he implies that given he calls him “the foundation of the Catholic Church”) and the power of loosing and binding being given to him. Given he’s making a clear distinction between Peter and the rest of the Apostles (and by extension the Pope and the rest of the Bishops), we should take that statement of Peter being given the authority to bind and loose as one who is “head of the Apostles” and “pillar of the faith” (as Philip notes), showing that this binding and loosing authority is of one that only one with the keys would have. He then concludes that this privilege “forever both lives and judges in his successor (Pope)”. An Ecumenical Council witnessing and not objecting to this biblical claim of what’s basically teaching papal indefectibility is very telling. And yes the cardinals do elect the Pope and have real authority in their own respects. As for your hypothetical, this isn’t something I’ve thought about much, but if I have to guess I would assume that if the Cardinals were to be in the process of electing a new Pope, that the keys wouldn’t now be theirs to hold but instead sit on the seat of Peter waiting to be held by the future Pontiff.

[@Hol0gr4m]

@@Deto4508 I really appreciate the information. I have a few questions for you and I hope you don't take any of my responses to be hostile. I have a great respect for the Catholic church and its members. However, I am very wary that the Catholic church seems to take too many liberties which appear to be in conflict with the Bible. Though I believe in the possibility of continuing revelation, I lose confidence in any new revelations when they stray too far from what has been said in the early days of the church (Circa 33-100AD). For example, it appears that in the scriptures, the pattern for ordination is done by the laying on of hands by those in authority rather than being sent down from heaven. A few references: Numbers 27:18-18-21 Acts 6:5-6 Acts 13:2-4. I'm also wary of such a statement of keys coming to the First Bishop several centuries after the deaths of the Apostles. A scripture that also comes to mind is Ephesians 2:20 Where rather than Peter being named as the foundation of the church, instead it is all of the Apostles and Prophets with Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone. In response to this and your previous comment regarding the power to seal or loose on earth and in heaven, does the Catholic faith hold that such power was only given to Peter rather than the rest of the Apostleship? This seems contradictory to Matthew 18:18-19 where Christ appears to give all of the Apostles the sealing power.

[@AngelGonzalez-ng9ve]

Nice. Good short.... 📖⛪️📿🙏🏻🙌🏻✝️🍷🍞

[@followingchristalone]

However, we must return to the actual written word. We have many churches who have a long history, oldest does not equate to the most correct. Jews for instance have a much older contiguous line going all the way back to Adam. As I read the words of Jesus I noticed many Christians were not living according to his teachings and example but some sort of... church ideology that only kinda looking like what Jesus taught. Let me be blunt. Jesus told his disciples to keep the law and to belive in him. Not one or the other, both. Read Rev 14:12 for proof of what I say.

[@wordforever117]

If you are interested in how vital the Written Word is to the Catholic Church, please google "Univeralis Today" and read the prayer services for whatever day it is when you do it. How much scripture is *prayed* each day across the world in the Catholic Church?

[@bourbonrebel5515]

Except Jesus founded only one church, so the oldest church would be the correct church.

[@followingchristalone]

The correct church will be those keeping the commandments of God and holding to the testimony of the Messiah. That's what Revelation teaches throughout its words.

[@bourbonrebel5515]

@@followingchristalone Which would be the church founded by Jesus… the oldest church. No other church would be able to do that because they are not Jesus’ church.

[@audosis]

why is sid from ice age giving a lesson in religion

[@1Nonplayablecharacter]

That’s cool and all but have you ever thought about how this a cult ?

[@Mortylicious_]

It’s a shame you talk like that about Christ’s only true church

[@1Nonplayablecharacter]

What’s a shame is giving up all those sundays to these guys lol my bishop was in a Netflix documentary about child abuse, don’t think any god would like that

[@riverasamuel911]

All organized religions are cults by definition lol. and if you believe you gave up your sundays to the bishops or whatever, you never went to mass knowing what it meant if you did, anybody inside or outside the church would be with you regarding condemning/denouncing a bishop that was an abuser. You would also separate his office as bishop and his person and still would be going to the church because that doesn't make the church invalid

[@Mortylicious_]

That’s sad hopefully you can find the truth in the church , when have you ever seen such hate for Protestants it’s directly to the Catholic Church because satan hates the people who take souls away from hell , following a stereotype is not right my brother 🙏🏿

[@thecatechumen]

I used to think Catholicism was a non-Christian cult. Then I read a book!