Polaris said:
Well, there are scriptures that prophecy of an apostasy though you would probably interpret them differently.
Probably.
Seventies cannot call and ordain Apostles -- Apostles are of higher authority. The only ones who can call and ordain Apostles are Apostles or a Prophet called by God to do so.
Fair enough, I was simply conjecturing in the hypothetical situation that there were no Apostles or Prophets around to ordain anyone...in which case I assumed that the job would fall on the next highest authority. If this is not the case however, then yes, I guess the Mormon church would be invalidated if all its Apostles were killed.
The evidence is that in the early Christian church (post 1st or 2nd century)there was no official office of Apostle -- there were just a group of Bishops.
The reason for this is due to the fact that the term Apostle refers only to the first generation of Church authority (i.e. Peter, Paul, etc). After the Apostles died, we see in Church history, as you duly note, that the leaders of the Church were a group of Bishops. Each town had its own presiding bishop, which together formed the Magisterium. When we look at the authority and power of these bishops, we see that their authority was identical to their predecessors, the Apostles. While Apostolic AUTHORITY was certainly maintained by these appointed decendants of the Church leadership, the title "Apostle" was only ascribed to those first-century Church leaders.
Where is Peter referred to as Bishop of Rome?
Eusebius (260-339),
The History of the Church, Book 3, 324 AD After the martyrdom of Paul and Peter, the first man to be appointed Bishop of Rome was Linus. ... Linus, who is mentioned in the Second Epistle to Timothy as being with Paul in Rome, as stated above was the first after Peter to be appointed Bishop of Rome. Clement again, who became the third Bishop of Rome ... to Miltiades. Augustine (354-430),
Letters, No. 53, 400 AD For, to Peter succeeded Linus, to Linus, Clement, to Clement Anacletus, to Anacletus Evaristus, ... to Siricius Anastasius.
That's right. Peter was an Apostle which is a higher authority than a Bishop. Apostle and Bishop are not the same office of authority -- Apostle is a higher global authority while Bishop is a local authority. Apostles call, ordain, and oversee Bishops.
In the first century, you would be right. However, with the death of the Apostles, their succession and authority was simply passed on to the Magisterium, with the Bishop of Rome, aka the Papacy, as its head.
Where is it stated that Rome was the center of the Christian church during the time of the Apostles? In the NT it sounds like Jerusalem was still regarded as the center. Everything you've showed me indicates Linus may very well have been ordained as Bishop over Rome, but that is not the same as Apostle of the church. Even the center of the church could have its own Bishop (under the Apostles) so that the Apostles could concentrate on the more global church issues
As I hope you'll see if you do some historical research on Rome and the authority of the Bishop of Rome, Rome's Bishop is in fact the Head of the Church, due to the fact that Peter and Paul came to Rome, established the church, Peter stayed there as its Bishop, and then died there, giving to St. Linus his authority as Head of the Church.
"Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome,and laying the foundations of the Church."
Irenaeus,Against Heresies,3:1:1(c.A.D. 180),in ANF,I:414
St. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons,
Against Heresies 3:3:1, 3:3:2, and 3:3:3, AD 189
"But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as
this the succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by
pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition.
"[W]hat utterance also the Romans give, so very near(to the apostles), to whom Peter and Paul conjointly bequeathed the gospel even sealed with their own blood."
Tertullian, Against Marcion,4:5(inter A.D. 207-212),in ANF,III:350
The Poem Against the Marcionites, AD 267, "In this chair in which he himself had sat, Peter in mighty Romecommanded Linus, the first elected, to sit down."
"[W]e have considered that it ought be announced that although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by conciliar decisions of other churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: "You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it..."...The first see, therefore, is that of Peter the Apostle, that of the Roman Church, which has neither the stain nor blemish nor anything like it"
Damasus Pope, Decree of Damasus,3(A.D. 382), in JUR,I:406
"For these are the men, through whom the light of Christ's gospel shone on thee, O Rome, and through whom thou, who wast the teacher of error, wast made the disciple of Truth. These are thy holy Fathers and true shepherds, who gave thee claims to be numbered among the heavenly kingdoms, and built thee under much better and happier auspices than they, by whose zeal the first foundations of thy walls were laid: and of whom the one that gave thee thy name defiled thee with his brother's blood."
Pope Leo the Great(regn. A.D. 440-461),Sermon LXXXII(ante A.D. 461),in NPNF2,XII:194
FerventGodSeeker
