A Papal Primer

Catholic Exchange ^ | May 31, 2005 | Marcellino D'Ambrosio, Ph.D.

[NYer]

There is probably no institution more uniquely Catholic than the institution of the papacy. A particularly zealous disciple is often described as “more Catholic than the pope.” Anti-Catholics of bygone years have repudiated “popery” and railed against the “papists.”

Back to the Gospels

But one thing that non-Catholics and Catholics often have in common is a great misunderstanding of this ancient institution. What is the true job description of the pope and what’s the origin and nature of his authority?

First, let’s start with what the pope is not. The Catholic Church is not a multi-national corporation with the pope as CEO. Neither is she a federal republic with the pope as king or president.

Primarily, the Church is a community of disciples. In the New Testament, Christians are most frequently referred to as the brothers and sisters. So this community is a spiritual family. No wonder, then, that her worldwide leader is called “Holy Father.” In fact the word "pope" is just an English version of “Papa.”

The best way to get a handle on the role of the pope is to go back to the Gospels. Jesus had numerous disciples, including Mary Magdalene, Lazarus, and many others. But from these He chose twelve to whom He entrusted special responsibility. He gave them power to sanctify through the sacraments which they were to administer (Jn 20:21, Lk 22:19, etc.), the authority to teach what they’d received from him (Mt 28:20), and power to govern the life of the Church (Mt 18:18).

Then from their number He chose one whose name He changed from Simon to Cephas or Peter, meaning “Rock” (Mt 16: 18). This should tip us off right away of the unique role of this Apostle, for this is the only instance recorded in the four gospels of a name-change initiated by Jesus. When God changes someone’s name in the Old Testament, its always indicative of a special role in God’s unfolding plan (e.g. Abram to Abraham).

Nearly every book of the New Testament notes the special role of this Apostle, even if the book is written by another apostolic hero. Out of respect, the “Beloved Disciple” allows Peter to enter the empty tomb first (Jn 20:5-6) making Peter the first official, apostolic witness of the Resurrection. Paul, the Apostle “born out of normal course,” feels no obligation to spend time with any of the Apostles except Peter (Gal 1:18). When it is time to proclaim the Resurrection to the people of Jerusalem, it is Peter who is the Apostles’ spokesman. Peter’s role is so preeminent that Acts even speaks of Peter and “the Eleven” (Acts 2:14).

A Charism of Truth

This does not mean that Peter was naturally stronger than the others. All four Gospels tell the story of his denial as a perpetual reminder of his inability to live up to his name by his own power. It is only after the Spirit is poured out at Pentecost (Acts 2) that we see him able to fulfill his role. The Lord actually allowed him to experience his own weakness, predicted his fall and commanded him, once he’d been converted and empowered by the Spirit, to strengthen the faith of his brother Apostles (Lk 22:32).

Peter and the other Apostles held fast to their profession of faith, in many cases witnessing to it by their blood. Though their role as eyewitnesses to the Lord’s resurrection was unrepeatable, their ministry of sanctification, teaching, and leading the community of disciples had to be carried on by others of their choosing, usually called “bishops” in the New Testament. These bishops needed a visible center, head and spokesman who would continue the role of Peter in the Church. Since Peter had given his life for Christ in Rome, the bishop of the Roman Church was seen as the successor of Peter, the “Father” not only of the Christians in the Imperial city, but everywhere.

But what about this hard-to-take Catholic doctrine that the pope is infallible? Does this mean that a man, once elected to the Chair of Peter, can never again be wrong about anything?

Hardly. Let’s go back to the day Simon got his name-change. The Lord had asked the Apostles a pointed question: Who do you say that I am? Peter answered “You are the Christ, Son of the living God.” Jesus made clear that this answer did not proceed from Simon’s own cleverness or theological acumen. No, it was revealed by Jesus's Father in heaven. Special divine assistance had enabled this Apostle to profess the truth about Jesus. Then comes the name-change and Jesus giving him the famous “keys of the kingdom of heaven” (see Is 22:22). Plus Jesus mentions that the jaws of death shall not prevail against the Church founded on this weak man called “Rock.”

If you think about it, the jaws of death would prevail over the Church if Christ’s followers could not resolve confusion over the truth about Jesus and His way of salvation. So Jesus has given a charism of truth to the successor of the Apostles in general and the successor of Peter in particular. He has done this so that the Church can always be sure of what has been revealed by God for the sake of our salvation.

A Reliable Compass

This charism of infallibilty has most often been expressed in solemn fashion by the bishops and the pope together through an ecumenical council. But ecumenical councils are few and far between, happening on average only about every 100 years. So that the Church is always able to be sure what has been revealed by God, the Holy Spirit gives the same assistance to Peter’s successor that he gave to Peter on that day at Caesarea Phillipi. So when the pope, in his capacity as the successor of Peter (ex cathedra), solemnly declares something relative to faith (what we are to believe) or morals (how we are to live) as having been revealed by God, he teaches infallibly.

Catholics are obliged to believe such teaching with divine faith, since the teaching is guaranteed to have its source in God and His revelation, not in human opinion. The pope can also make definitive judgments about matters related to faith and morals, such as what is necessary for the valid celebration of the sacraments, or whether the witness of Scripture and Tradition allow for women to be ordained to the priesthood. Once the Successor of Peter makes such a judgment, Catholics are no longer free to debate the matter. Case closed.

But it has been rare that the pope has engaged his authority so fully as to define dogmas infallibly. And his definitive judgments, though more frequent, are still few and far between. So what about the rest of his teaching? Are we free to take it or leave it?

Not at all. Peter was commanded three times by Jesus to express his love for Christ by feeding Christ’s sheep (Jn 21). So on a daily basis, the Holy Father feeds the family through teaching expressed in a variety of ways: homilies; talks to pilgrims, prelates, and heads of states; apostolic letters and constitutions; encyclicals, and other sorts of documents. Catholics must receive such ordinary papal teaching with the “religious submission of intellect and will” (Vatican II, Lumen Gentium 25). This means that we always approach his teaching with gratitude and respect, doing our best to open our minds to it and allow our views and lives to be shaped by it.

The pope’s teaching office has indeed been a reliable compass to the Bark of Peter as it makes its way through the troubled waters of history. In the course of the centuries, as prominent Christian leaders of various ancient sees succumbed to heresy under pressure of wayward emperors, kings, and scholars, the pope has never failed to continue to profess the faith handed on by the Apostles. Now that an end has come to the pontificate of one of the greatest teachers ever to occupy the Chair of Peter, let’s give thanks to God for the gift of this ministry and show our gratitude by opening this gift and making use of it in our lives.

[NYer]

So this community is a spiritual family.

Pope Benedict XVI speaks at the opening session of the Italian bishops conference at the Vatican, Monday, May 30, 2005. The pontiff endorsed efforts by Italian bishops to restrict assisted fertility treatments, contending that an Italian referendum scheduled for June 12-13 to scrap parts of a law posed threats to life and the family. (AP Photo/Domenico Stinellis)

[Aquinasfan]

In Isaiah 22, we see the existence of the historical office of the vice-regent (vice-king) of the kingdom of David. In the king's absence, the vice-regent held full plenary authority. As a sign of his authority, the vice-regent wore a pouch around his neck which contained a key --the key to the kingdom.

In the passage from Isaiah, we see this office being transferred from Shebna to Eliakim:

Isaiah 22:20-23

"In that day I will summon my servant, Eliakim son of Hilkiah. I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open. I will drive him like a peg into a firm place; he will be a seat of honor for the house of his father.

Jesus is the eternal king of the House of David who is the power behind the keys.

Revelation 3:7

These are the words of him who is holy and true [Jesus], who holds the key of David. What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.

When Jesus gives Peter the "keys to the kingdom," he is placing Peter in the office of vice-regent of the eternal House of David, Christ's Church:

Matthew 16:18-19

I tell you that you are Rock (Peter), and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

[Jaded]

Great article.

[Salvation]

[Pat79thST]

Very intelligent post. Now, wait until the folks with 1/4" foreheads start railling against the Scarlet Woman.

[Jaded]

One would practically have to excise parts of Sacred, Infallible Scripture to miss some of these things.

[GipperGal]

Great post! Thank you!

[TaxachusettsMan]

Thank you so much for this posting! I have dinner this evening with some young Mormons who were shocked when I told them, "Oh, I don't think I could ever submit myself to a teaching authority as absolute as your Prophet's!"

"WHAT DO YOU MEAN????!!!!" they exclaimed, "WHAT ABOUT THE POPE?????!!!!!"

I replied, "Oh, the Pope is nowhere near as powerful as your Prophet!" :-)

I intend to print up this article and give them each a copy tonight over veal cacciatore at one of our town's nicest little family-run Italian restaurants.

And I shall make the supreme sacrifice - for the intention of their conversion! - of having only club soda with lime instead of the excellent Chianti Riservo I would ordinarily have! :-)

[NYer]

And I shall make the supreme sacrifice - for the intention of their conversion! - of having only club soda with lime instead of the excellent Chianti Riservo I would ordinarily have! :-)

Go for the Chianti but, ask your Mormon guests whether they prefer white or red wine. The pastor at my church attended a function last year at which he met a femal protestant minister. While in line at the buffet, he asked if she preferred white or red wine. "Oh, I don't drink", she replied. He then reminded her that our Lord dined and drank with sinners, changed water into wine and later wine into His Precious Blood. He posed the question to her again at which point she replied - "I'll have a glass of red wine, thank you!"

Consider it another 'teaching' opportunity.

[Frank Sheed]

Most excellent! Expect "incoming soon."

Frank

[Frank Sheed]

---Irish arthritis - I get stiff in a different joint every night!---

Padraig, me son! 'Tis the Irish cure you'll be wanting for your arthritis. Take aspirin until your ears begin to ring and then drink wee ounces of Paddy with pints of Guinness until the ringing stops. Never fails to work for meself.

Frank Sheed

[Conservative til I die]

Anti-Catholics of bygone years have repudiated “popery” and railed against the “papists.”

Bygone years? I expect them to crawl out from under their slimy rocks any minute now!

[Conservative til I die]

Very intelligent post. Now, wait until the folks with 1/4" foreheads start railling against the Scarlet Woman.

LOL, now *that's* not very polite! You know, us Catholics are supposed to act like chumps for the Fundamentalists while they walk all over us.

[Aquinasfan]

Thanks 8-)

I got this info from a Scott Hahn tape ("Answering Common Objections") I listened to a while ago ago. I had the same reaction. And then I thought, "How come I've never heard this before?" In fact, according to Scott, Cardinal Cajetan used this argument against the Protestants hundreds of years ago. I've also found this argument in Ludwig Ott's "Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma."

It's positively criminal that this information isn't widely known among Catholics, probably because it isn't presented anymore in the seminaries. But now you know, so, spread the word!

[Pat79thST]

Ole Bob Jones is still churning out the old No Popery butter!

[Pat79thST]

May God's good Graces oil the veryskin of you, Frank! Ta breis fiuntas a Guiness!

[GipperGal]

I got this info from a Scott Hahn tape ("Answering Common Objections") I listened to a while ago

Oh that makes so much sense. It sounds just like Scott Hahn. I love that guy. I once heard him speak about the relationship of Mary to the ancient traditions of the royal house of David by making a parallel to the way Solomon treats his mother when she comes to his throne to petition him for a special favor. He treats her with extraordinary dignity -- offering her a seat besides his throne and promising to grant whatever she asks.

[Aquinasfan]

I once heard him speak about the relationship of Mary to the ancient traditions of the royal house of David by making a parallel to the way Solomon treats his mother when she comes to his throne to petition him for a special favor. He treats her with extraordinary dignity -- offering her a seat besides his throne and promising to grant whatever she asks.

Same tape series 8-). I wish I could remember and synthesize Scripture like he does. He's a one-of-a-kind.