Jesus: No Magisteriums!

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1086682' date='Oct 8 2006, 08:25 AM']
well?
[/quote]
It's pretty simple, the sons of Zebedee go behind the other disciples back trying to secure places of honor in the coming Kingdom (which the apostles still conceive of as an earthly dominion), the other apostles are mad and in His usual manner Christ gives them a speech indicating the radically different nature of His Kingdom and the meaning of being an apostle of Christ. Christ indicates that the rulers of the gentiles exercise dominion over their subjects (Greek: [i]katakurieuo[/i], literally 'to hold in subjection' or 'lord it over') but that in Christ's kingdom the truly great are those who serve and minister to their brethren in imitation of Christ Himself who came to serve rather than to be served.

It is not somehow a statement against any kind of hierarchical organization which would be absurd considering that the Church has had hierarchical structure from apostolic times. There were elders, priests, bishops, apostles, etc. who were leaders in their respective communities (Acts 20:17,28; 1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 4:11; Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 3:1; Titus 1:7; etc., etc.); the issue is rather that Christ did not come to rule as a worldly king and the shepherds in His Church are not to be like worldly leaders who seek their own power and status, but rather ought to be followers of Christ who live to serve the good of their flock. Thus when Christ exhorts Peter as shepherd of the Church in His stead He first asks "do you love me?" and then commands him to "feed my sheep" and "tend my lambs". The Church has always been a visible hierarchical entity, but what is unique is that the essence of the Church's function and mission is spiritual and rooted in the love of Christ. A true pastor of Christ's flock is a humble servant, not a domineering master.

When Christ says, "But it shall not be so among you", He is not prophesying that never in the history of His Church will His ministers fail to live up to the dignity of their calling, He is simply bursting the apostle's bubble in thinking that they were somehow going to have some extraordinary worldly and temporal status as the result of following Christ. Even more than this, in context it is a response to the sons of Zebedee seeking such status via intrigue and positioning. Christ is Lord and yet later He will wash their feet and submit to torture and death for His flock; this is the model and example according to which His ministers and vicars ought to conform. To take this passage as some kind of sweeping critique of the Church (historical Christianity for all intents and purposes) and as some sort of ridiculous vindication of non-denominational protestantism is beyond absurd. Christian leaders in all eras of history (including apostolic times), and in our own day of all denominations, have failed to adequately imitate Christ, this is the human condition. But one cannot forget the other side of the coin which is the early centuries of martyr popes and the countless faithful servants who have shepherded Christ's flock throughout history.

This has always been the Church's own understanding of positions of authority. Historically the beginning of a papal bull will use the title [i]Servus Servorum Dei[/i] (Servant of the Servants of God) to refer to the Pope. But this isn't really a question of how one understands the Church, it is merely a question of the reckless and irresponsible application of Scripture which tends to be the major theme of cheap anti-catholic polemics.

[Anomaly]

Enlightening.
Thanks.
(though I wouldn't typify questions as anti-catholic polemics, or even cheap)

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1086933' date='Oct 8 2006, 08:59 PM']
Enlightening.
Thanks.
(though I wouldn't typify questions as anti-catholic polemics, or even cheap)
[/quote]
np.

But as far as I can tell the anti-catholic assertions made on this thread are not exactly posed as questions. Calling them 'cheap' may be a mere matter of opinion, but I've chosen to share mine nonetheless. But I suppose my closing sentence was a bit unnecessary; point taken.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1086933' date='Oct 8 2006, 08:59 PM']
(though I wouldn't typify questions as anti-catholic polemics, or even cheap)
[/quote]
actually you're right. my last sentence was rude and unnecessary. my apologies.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1086966' date='Oct 8 2006, 09:20 PM']
actually you're right. my last sentence was rude and unnecessary. my apologies.
[/quote]Not making the point it was rude. Making the point that you took it as a good question and came up with a good answer. Thanks. Stop beating yourself up.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1087051' date='Oct 8 2006, 10:32 PM']
Not making the point it was rude. Making the point that you took it as a good question and came up with a good answer. Thanks. Stop beating yourself up.
[/quote]


Another thing I should note, which may not be obvious at a glance, is that if you really put yourself into the narrative it is clear that the snippet Budge quoted implies that the apostles have a status in Christ's Church in some way comparable to nobility (lords, princes, whatever) and this is in reality a supportive passage for the understanding of a visible hierarchical Church as opposed to an invisible egalitarian sort of denominationalism. The second thing is that the passage "but it shall not be so among you" is in some sense a statement about the nature of the Church (the fact that Christ's kingdom is not to be the worldly dominion the apostles imagined), but it also has the character of a rebuke or even command directed toward the apostles.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[Winchester]

Bump