Sophia requested:
"Now this is asking a lot, and if you don't have time for it that is ok, but I would appreciate it if you made a post on why the Church should be ruled by one mortal who has supreme authority. (the pope.) That could get dangerous when you have a corrupt person in power, and in the past it has proved fatal. At least from the history of the Church it seems to have."
Thank you, Sophia, for coming to my blog and commenting. As for your request, I'll try to answer it as best I can. :-)
I like to think that God has given us little mini-versions of the Church in our own families. The family itself is called "the domestic church." The head of that domestic church is the father, just like we believe the head of the Church on earth is the pope. Now of course, the real and ultimate head of every family should be Christ! Christ is also the head of the Church on earth (Eph. 5:23). So, what roles do the pope and the father of a family really have? Are they actually the authority in their family? If Christ is supposed to be the head, where do they fit in?
This is where we get into the idea of earthly authority. The reason that I'm comparing the pope to a father is because you could ask the very same questions about them both. Sophia's question also applies: why should there be one man as the head, or "supreme authority?"
As Christians, we all represent Christ to the world through our life and actions. We are witnesses of His righteousness. But, because of the roles that fathers play, they are especial representatives of Him.
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself up for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of the water by the word, ~ Ephesians 5:25-26
God gave us fathers as earthly authorities to represent Him. They are our shepherds, and they mirror Christ our Good Shepherd.
So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep. ~ John 21:15-17
Jesus is obviously giving Peter authority in this passage - a shepherding authority.
Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. ~ Acts 20:28-29
He established authorities over us for a reason. Why has he given us fathers? Pastors? Because we need that earthly headship. The pastor of a church is like a small pope. He leads and guides his own flock. But, in Protestantism, there are thousands upon thousands of little independent popes. (*NOTE: The word pope actually means father). They're like children without an earthly father - a dysfunctional family. But, in the Catholic Church, there is a father: the pope. Peter was given the shepherding authority by Christ; and that authority hasn't died away, but has been passed down century after century.
God has given us a pope for the same reason that He has given us fathers and pastors. As for your comment, Sophia, about a corrupt person being in power - that doesn't pose a threat when you take into account Papal Infallibility, which I have written about already.
I hope that this has answered sufficiently your request and isn't too scattered to make out. I also apologize for the long delay in posting this. I look forward to having more time to update this summer. :-)
Pax Christi,
~the Catholic apologist
The Catholic Church has had an unbroken line of Papal succession, beginning with the Apostle Peter, continuing on to Linus, Anacletus, Clement, Evaristus, Alexander, Sixtus, Telesphorus...and all the way down to Benedict XVI. All in all, there have been 264 successors to Peter. (You can find a list of all the Popes here.)
Some people say that there was nothing really different about the Apostle Peter. He was simply one of Jesus' disciples. Why would Jesus give him any special authority? Let's look at what Scripture has to say about all of this.
Matthew 16:17 ~ And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my father which is in heaven.
v. 18 ~ And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
v. 19 ~ And I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
In this passage, Christ is doing three main things. 1) He renames "Simon", Peter. 2) He gives Peter the "keys of the Kingdom". 3) He gives Peter the power to "loose and bind".
Before I go any further, I need to clarify one thing. Some scholars claim that when Jesus says "upon this rock I will build my church", He is not referring to Peter, but to Himself. The Greek word for Peter is Petros which means "little rock". The Greek word used for "rock" is petra which is the more common form for the word rock. These scholars say that Jesus was essentially communicating this: Thou art "a tiny pebble", but upon this "massive rock" I will build my Church. There are two problems with this argument. First of all, petra is the feminine form for rock. Jesus wouldn't name Peter with a feminine form of a word. He simply used the masculine form which is petros. Secondly, it is very unlikely that Jesus was originally speaking in Greek to his disciples. It is held by the vast majority of Biblical scholars that Jesus used Aramaic. In Aramaic, there is only one word for rock and that is kepha. So, what Jesus basically said was, Thou art kepha and upon this kepha I will build my church. Jesus was clearly referring to Peter.
The "keys of the Kingdom" symbolize authority.
Isaiah 22:20 ~ And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah:
v. 21 ~ And I will clothe him with thy robe, and strengthen him with thy girdle, and I will commit thy government into his hand: and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah.
v. 22 ~ And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.
In this passage, four things are given to Eliakim. 1) He is clothed with a robe. 2) The government is put in his hands. 3) He shall be a father to the house of Judah. 4) He is given keys. Keys were a sign of authority. They imparted power to those who owned them -- the power to bind and loose, just as Christ gave Peter the authority to bind and loose in Matthew 16. He was also called "a father to the house of Judah". The word pope means father. The pope also wears the robe of a priest and has authority in the magisterium. Do you see a parallell here?
Matthew 16 is not the only passage that supports the idea the Peter was given authority.
John 21:15 ~ So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, LORD; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.
v. 16 ~ He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, LORD; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
v. 17 ~ He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, LORD, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
I could expound on this, but I'm going to move on...
In nearly every place in the Bible when the apostles are named, Peter is named first among them. [Matthew 10:1-4, Mark 3:16-19, Luke 6:14-16, Acts 1:13, etc.] The apostles are also referred to as a group as "Peter and his companions" [Luke 9:32, Mark 16:7]. He speaks on behalf of the apostles numerous times [Matthew 18:21, Mark 8:29, Luke 8:45, John 6:69, etc.] Peter takes clear authoritative lead in the book of Acts [1:13-26, 2:14, 2:41, 3:6-7, 5:1-11, 8:21, 10:44-46, 15:7, 15:19, etc.] and his name appears 195 times in the Scriptures -- more than all of the other Apostles combined.
One might say that Peter was given special authority while on earth, but that wouldn't mean that he would have successors. This idea is also unbiblical:
Acts 1:24 ~ And they prayed, and said, Thou LORD, which knowest the hearts of all men, show whether of these two thou hast chosen,
v. 25 ~ That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas [Iscariot] by which transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.
v. 26 ~ And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.
The Apostles, when their number was down to eleven, found someone to replace the vacancy that Judas Iscariot left. That was the natural and obvious thing to do.
In my next post I will try to explain the idea of Papal Infallibility...
Pax Christi,
~the Catholic apologist
