Point 1

Forgive my simplicity. From the prophetic point of view: Weren’t there two High Priests at the time of Calvary, Annas and Caiaphas? That actually begs the question, if the Church is to follow exactly the steps of Christ: isn’t it possible that the Passion of the Church will follow the model set by the Passion of Christ?

Many of the Jews therefore, who had come with Mary and had seen what Jesus did, believed in him. But some of them went to the Pharisees and told them what he had done. So the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the council, and said, ‘What are we to do? This man is performing many signs. If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and the Romans will come and destroy both our holy place and our nation.’ But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, ‘You know nothing at all! You do not understand that it is better for you to have one man die for the people than to have the whole nation destroyed.’ He did not say this on his own, but being high priest that year [1] he prophesied that Jesus was about to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but to gather into one the dispersed children of God. So from that day on they planned to put him to death. (John 11:45-53 NRSVACE )

[1] At the time of Our Lord’s Passion there were two High Priests. Annas was the High Priest according to the Aaronic succession. Caiaphas was imposed on the Jews by the Romans who did not want a religious figure projecting the idea of a king, someone who serves for life. That was reserved to the Emperor only who was also the highest religious authority in the Roman Empire. Annas and Caiaphas were forced to rotate yearly on the High Priesthood duties. That is why St. John makes the clarification in John 11: 51-52.


Point 2

The Dogma of Papal infallibility: If true doctrine is the hallmark of a true Pope: Isn’t a patently false doctrine the hallmark of a false pope? That pistol shoots both ways!

I simply ask because again, what do I know? As a brilliant theologian once commented, “you are just a greasy Argentine” (and rightly noted, I must say, Chesterton was a greasy Britton too and very Catholic as well!)

Jesus the Good Shepherd told us how to tell one from the other. One enters through the gate, the other bypasses the gatekeeper because he comes to kill and destroy.

‘Very truly, I tell you, anyone who does not enter the sheepfold by the gate but climbs in by another way is a thief and a bandit. The one who enters by the gate is the shepherd of the sheep. The gatekeeper opens the gate for him, and the sheep hear his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow him because they know his voice. They will not follow a stranger, but they will run from him because they do not know the voice of strangers.’ Jesus used this figure of speech with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them. So again Jesus said to them, ‘Very truly, I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep. All who came before me are thieves and bandits; but the sheep did not listen to them. I am the gate. Whoever enters by me will be saved, and will come in and go out and find pasture. The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly. (John 10:1-10 NRSVACE )


Come, Lord Jesus. Please, don’t delay.