So wrote St. Bernard … so believed by St. Francis de Sales. St. Francis also calls him … High Priest of the NEW LAW, & Sovereign Pontiff.
Have ye a question, friend?
No, but an opinion. The New Moses would seem extreme … except they wear the robe and carry the staff.
Perhaps the New Joshua …
Thanks for the info. I make that same point to Protestants. But the point is Joshua sat in the Seat of Moses, just as the Popes sit in the Seat of Peter. So you’re right, we could say that Peter was the New Moses whom God - “I AM” - spoke “face to face” with, while his successors are more like Joshua.
Was everyone who sat in the seat of Moses a Joshua?
No, not quite, Our Holy Father is the living person of Jesus among us and His bride is the Church. Jesus came to us for many reasons, one was to give meaning/correct Moses.
No, Moses wasn’t the pre-pontiff the question intermates. These great saints weren’t pontiffs either… perhaps why we are very selective on our Holy Father:):):):):):)
No, but they still had the same authority:
"Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.” (Matthew 23:2-3)
For clarity is the antecedent of his in the first sentence Jesus? (I’m pretty sure it is because of your capitalization but I’m just not 100%.)
Are you implying that the Pope does not practice what he preaches?
No, but he still has the same authority of Peter.
But, Jesus was saying that many people, simultaneously, sat in the seat of Moses. So, for this comparison wouldn’t it also hold that many people, simultaneously, sit in the seat of Peter?
Yes, Jesus speaks to us though the Holy Father in faith and morals. The 200 or so Popes spoke to us in the same voice and the beauty and confidence it gives us is eternal.
Jesus appears to us in many forms, the sick, hungry, the unemployed, etc., but only one place do we hear the voice of the Lord, through the Pontiff.
Wasn’t one of the things Jesus did was to clean up some of the stuff Moses did?
You know like divorse.:):):):):)
yea, that’s what the protestants think too, but we have the word straight from our Holy Father.
Our Jewish brothers would agree, but Jesus changed all of that for me, I can’t go back:):):):):)
Jesus said that He would never leave us, yes, He gave himself in the Eucharist, but He is still with us in the apostlistic line of Pontiffs of the Catholic Church. Jesus is the second person of the blessed trinity and the Son of God. Moses never had any of this union with the Father, Moses was a very humble and holy man but not anyway compared to anyone or any thing in the Roman Catholic Church. If you want to rise him to the status of Saint, okay, I:):):):): I’ll go for that, but not compared to Jesus nor Benedict XVI…
Are you saying that our Lord forgot that there was a High Priest? Methinks you are misinterpreting Him.
I didn’t say anything, I asked a question is all.
this seems accurate …
Heres the rub ---- Peter got his command from the Lord … good til death, and beyond.
Peter annointed the honor to Clement, before his death, when he knew Nero was coming for him. But, history records Clement wouldn’t accept it [perhaps scared of death too, as Peter had once been before the cock crowed thrice].
So, honor went to Linus first, then later to Cletus … finally Clement. Were they invalid Popes, and Clement just the real 'Pope in waiting" ?
Moses PICKED his successor … BEFORE his death. I wonder if Clement and the subsequent Popes ALSO picked their next replacements ? We don’t do it this way today. Shouldn’t we let it be Pope to Pope transferral of power ?
Perhaps we say Peter is still involved in "influencing’ the decision/vote today … from his position on high.
Where did you get your information regarding Peter anointing Clement?
We know that the Holy Spirit works through the Magisterium infallibly. Apostolic successors were elected by ballet in biblical times.
Acts 1:21 Wherefore of these men who have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus came in and went out among us, 22 Beginning from the baptism of John, until the day wherein he was taken up from us, one of these must be made a witness with us of his resurrection. 23 And they appointed two, Joseph, called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. 24 And praying, they said: Thou, Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen, 25 To take the place of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas hath by transgression fallen, that he might go to his own place.
26 And they gave them lots, and the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.
Such would not be the implication. Rather Christ is clearly stating that, the authority of the teaching is not compromised by the failings of the legitimate teacher.
We all know that there have been in history Popes who have not lived up to the high expectations of the office. So it can easily be shown that there have been Popes who acted like the old Pharisees that Jesus referenced and Christ has, and will, judge those men accoringly.
So the upshot of this is that, as Jesus taught, just because an Old Covenent Pharisee didn’t practice what he preached, such practice did not negate the authority of his teaching office (The Chair of Moses). So in the New covenent, a sinful Pope would not negate the Authority of his teaching office (The chair of Peter).