Why do you have a Pope, bishops, priests, fancy hats, and all the other extraneous malarkey?
Is there any Biblical (or at least canon) justification for it?
Pope, bishops, and priests come from different sources. We'll examine them one by one, if that's okay.
We'll start with the bishops.
Each of the bishops today is a successor to one of the Apostles. The ordination of a bishop is a big thing, and that gets tracked. Each of them is a successor in their role, as well - to be a shepherd of the flock. Most, if not all, of the Apostles had churches that they were the local heads of. St Peter is one of the most well known - head of the Church in Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch. The one in Rome is the reason for the Pope, which we'll get to later. St John the Evangelist appears to have seven, whom he wrote to (see the book of the Apocalypse, in the first two chapters he writes to the seven churches he would have administered). So the idea of bishops is one that has come from the apostles, in most of its facets.
The priest is the hard one. See, priests aren't mentioned in the Church of the New Testament (see St Paul's letters if you want to see what I mean), although Deacons and Bishops are. I don't have the sources to really answer that properly at the moment, though I will endeavour to do so soon.
The Pope is a follow-on from the Bishops. As the successor of St Peter, there is the follow-on from the Petrine Confession (basically, if this is unfamiliar to you, it's where Peter says 'You're the messiah' and Jesus says 'Finally, one of you got it.'). It happens to be in Rome because that was /the/ big city of the time. Basically, Peter went to the centre of the Empire to preach, and that's where he died. If Peter had never gotten to Rome, it wouldn't be the Pope in Rome.
As for the fancy hats and extraneous malarkey, that's mostly just the traditional clothing of the priest, which follows from the Roman clothing of the time. Symbolic meaning was attached to it (for example, 'clericals', or the soutane, have thirty three buttons, one for each year of Jesus' life).
I hope that answers your questions, though if it doesn't, tell me!
Do we REALLY REALLY need a third "Lets make fun of Religion" thread? We don't even have as many active "make fun of terrorist" threads.
Well, I wouldn't call it a 'make fun of religion' thread. And I think it's reasonably necessary. Christianity is a broad church (haha), and looking at one specific part of it is a better topic for a thread rather than a general discussion of all of it.
Anyway, here's one: what justification is there for praying to anyone but God (I'm combining Jesus with God here)? Around these parts that's considered pretty bizarre and heretical.
Well, there's a difference between praying and worshiping. Here's a brief explanation.
It's a similar sort of thing to what happens on Earth. "I've got cancer, can you pray for me?" However, we believe that, because the Saints are in heaven, with God, if we ask them to pray for us, it'll be better! Mary, as the Mother of God and without sin, is even better.
We don't pray to the Saints or Mary as a divinity. That would be pretty bizarre and heretical. However, we ask the saints and Mary to pray for us.
Take the one that everyone's thinking "Hey Dsarker, what about this?" about. The Hail Mary.
Hail Mary, full of Grace
The Lord is with you
Blessed are you among women
And blessed is the fruit of your womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary, Mother of God
Pray for us sinners
Now and at the hour of our death,
Amen.
I've separated them into two paragraphs. The first paragraph is completely Biblical. It's an amalgamation of the angel's greeting to Mary and Elizabeth's greeting to Mary. Jesus is added because we know who 'the fruit of your womb' is.
The second paragraph is not Biblical, in that it doesn't come straight from the Bible. All it is, however, is us asking Mary to pray to God for us.
We do not worship saints or Mary. We honour them for what they have done on Earth, and through that, honour God. We only worship God.
