The following should help and makes some excellent points - https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/is-jesus-a-second-moses
I was also using the Douay Rheims and both online and mine it says 'the' so not sure your source for that?
There is also more typology, such as the six days and the cloud... the typology of the shining face of Moses and Christ's transfiguration. There is so much in fact that I don't see how anyone could not see the typology of Moses and Christ after reading it all.. there is still more for myself to unpack... The next step is Aaron and St Peter, which I'm glad you brought it up because I think Exodus 4:14-17 is even better -
(The Lord being angry at Moses, said Aaron the Levite is thy brother, I know that he is eloquent: behold he cometh forth to meet thee, and seeing thee shall be glad at heart. Speak to him, and put my words in his mouth: and I will be in thy mouth, and in his mouth, and will shew you what you must do. He shall speak in thy stead to the people, and shall be thy mouth: but thou shalt be to him in those things that pertain to God. And take this rod in thy hand, wherewith thou shalt do the signs.) Exodus 3:14-17
The Vicar of Moses... later the budding of Aaron's rod.
(He returned on the following day, and found that the rod of Aaron for the house of Levi, was budded: and that the buds swelling it had bloomed blossoms, which spreading the leaves, were formed into almonds. Moses therefore brought out all the rods from before the Lord to all the children of Israel: and they saw, and every one received their rods. And the Lord said to Moses: Carry back the rod of Aaron into the tabernacle of the testimony, that it may be kept there for a token of the rebellious children of Israel, and that their complaints may cease from me lest they die.) Numbers 17:8-10
Aaron made the golden calf and St Peter denied Him three times... now with Aaron he was the beginning of a single line of succession of High Priest... now we have St Peter given not only the promise of the gates of hell not prevailing, but also charging him as the rock on which Christ will build the Church and giving him the authority to bind and loose... the keys.
(And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.) Matthew 16:18-19
So the only question is whether Bergoglio was validly elected or not... and we already had a valid successor who was given the keys... Pope Benedict XVI was validly elected and had the keys and he was deposed and usurped, there is no such thing as 2 Popes or shared Papacy... not even St Pope Celestine V tried to retain the name and garments... St Celestine V tried to return to his monastic life before he was arrested and imprisoned by his so called 'successor'... nothing says free and fair quite like that... Pope Benedict XVI had to know of this... but as he once lamented 'my authority ends at the door' surrounded on all sides there was little he could do IMO. Also at a time when the propaganda and USA Deep State were at the height of their power under the Obama Administration.
Now I do not at all think by simply correcting this grave injustice and usurpation that all would be suddenly well in the Church as I think Pope Benedict XVI and others erred and that Vatican II needs to also be addressed... but it'd be a start at least.
God Bless
There is no doubt that Jesus Christ himself is intimately tied into the "figure" of Moses because "Peter" is the Vicar of Christ. But the strongest counter-example to your position that Moses can be
figuratively identified with Jesus is found in Numbers chapter 20:
6 And Moses and Aaron leaving the multitude, went into the tabernacle of the covenant, and fell flat upon the ground, and cried to the Lord, and said: O Lord God, hear the cry of this people, and open to them thy treasure, a fountain of living water, that being satisfied, they may cease to murmur. And the glory of the Lord appeared over them. 7 And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: 8 Take the rod, and assemble the people together, thou and Aaron thy brother, and speak to the rock before them, and it shall yield waters. And when thou hast brought forth water out of the rock, all the multitude and their cattle shall drink. 9 Moses therefore took the rod, which was before the Lord, as he had commanded him, 10 And having gathered together the multitude before the rock, he said to them: Hear, ye rebellious and incredulous: Can we bring you forth water out of this rock?
11 And when Moses had lifted up his hand, and struck the rock twice with the rod, there came forth water in great abundance, so that the people and their cattle drank, 12 And the Lord said to Moses and Aaron: Because you have not believed me, to sanctify me before the children of Israel, you shall not bring these people into the land, which I will give them. 13 This is the Water of contradiction, where the children of Israel strove with words against the Lord, and he was sanctified in them. 14 In the mean time Moses sent messengers from Cades to the king of Edom, to say: Thus saith thy brother Israel: Thou knowest all the labour that hath come upon us: 15 In what manner our fathers went down into Egypt, and there we dwelt a long time, and the Egyptians afflicted us and our fathers.
[11] "The rock": This rock was a figure of Christ, and the water that issued out from the rock, of his precious blood, the source of all our good.
[12] "You have not believed": The fault of Moses and Aaron, on this occasion, was a certain diffidence and weakness of faith; not doubting of God's power or veracity; but apprehending the unworthiness of that rebellious and incredulous people, and therefore speaking with some ambiguity.
[13] "The Water of contradiction": Or strife. Hebrew, Meribah.
If Moses was
simply a figure of Jesus Christ, "the Lord" would not have said what he said to Moses above.
So, going back to what I said originally, Moses is a figure of the holder of the Petrine Ministry.
"Peter" is not a single historical person. Simon bar Jona was the first "Peter," the first rock chosen by Jesus. Simon Peter was laid on top of the "chief corner stone," Jesus Christ himself (Ephesians 2:20):
Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone:
The "figure" of Moses is representing not individual people in salvation history, but rather the "ministry" of "the rock." Each "rock" (each Peter) is laid upon the "rock" before him to build "the Church." And Jesus is "the head of the corner" (psalm 117:22):
The stone which the builders rejected; the same is become the head of the corner.
All the "rocks" (Peters) have authority because they line up with the cornerstone, Jesus. Otherwise the edifice of the Church will "fall," think the "fall of Babylon." Babylon is a figure of the counterfeit church, a false church not in line with Jesus's teachings.
Now moving to Aaron. The figure of Aaron does not represent a single person. Aaron represents the entire episcopacy. Here is part of the Old Rite Priestly Preface:
Thus in the desert you propagated the spirit of Moses through the minds of seventy wise men; with whom he used auxiliaries, and easily governed innumerable multitudes of the people. Thus you poured out the abundance of the paternal fullness of Aaron's sons, Eleazar and Ithamar; so that the service of the priest was sufficient for the saving sacrifices, and for the more frequent office of the Sacraments.
As I said, the figure of Moses represents the Petrine ministry, the Pope. The auxiliaries, the "Aarons," are the bishops who "governed innumerable multitudes of people." And "Aaron's sons" are "Eleazar and Ithamar," who represent the priests. In the priestly ordination ceremony, it is the bishop, not the Pope, who is conferring the priestly dignity on the ordinand.
And this "figure" of Aaron as representing the episcopacy (the high priesthood) is made even more clear in Old Rite Episcopal Consecration Preface:
O God, who gave your servant Moses a familiar secret, among other heavenly docuмents of culture, and also instituting the habit of priestly clothing, you ordered the chosen Aaron to be clothed in a mystical garment during the ceremonies, so that the succeeding posterity might acquire a sense of intelligence from the examples of the former, so that the learning of your doctrine would not be lacking in any age. Whereas among the ancients the very appearance of signs obtained reverence, and with us the experiments of things are more certain than the riddles of figures. For his former habit of priesthood is the adornment of our minds, and the honor of the pontifical glory is no longer commended to us by the honor of the vestments, but by the splendor of the souls. Because even those who were then blindly flattered by the carnal, sought rather to understand what was in them. And therefore to this servant of yours, whom you have chosen for the ministry of high priesthood, grant, we beseech you, Lord, this grace, so that whatever those veils signified in the glitter of gold, in the luster of gems, and in the variety of many kinds of work, this may be made clear in his manners and actions. Complete in your Priest the sum of your ministry, and equipped with the ornaments of all glorification, sanctify with the dew of heavenly ointment.
Moving on to your final topic. Bergoglio was most certainly NOT validly elected. Go to
www.antipope.com if you want to see the argument.
In a nutshell, the current law governing papal elections requires that the previous Pope die before a new papal election can even be called. Yes, the Pope can "resign" as the Bishop of Rome. And that resignation will cause the See of Rome to be legally vacant. But the Apostolic See is not the See of Rome. Those are two different legal entities.
The Apostolic See only becomes legally vacant upon the death of the Pope.
Universi Dominici Gregis deals with a "vacancy in the Apostolic See." There is no other legal way to call a conclave and elect a new Pope.
So BXVI validly resigned as Bishop of Rome, and became "emeritus" Bishop of Rome. This is all very canonical. This left the Apostolic See to the very limited government of the Curial Cardinals per the restrictions laid down in UDG. However, those Cardinals usurped their limited authority and illegally elected Bergoglio as antipope. His election, however, was totally null and void.
Topic: Is Francis still pope? (Read 13180 times)