SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: d.taggart who wrote (623141)9/12/2004 8:40:24 PM
From: Thomas A Watson  Read Replies (1) of 769670
 
THE CHURCH AND THE ROCK
Rev. Edward J. Hayes, Rev. Msgr. Paul J. Hayes and James J. Drummey
(Chapters of 9 and 12 of Catholicism and Reason by Rev. Edward J. Hayes, Rev. Msgr. Paul J. Hayes and James J. Drummey.)

THE CHURCH AND THE ROCK

Our Lord made Simon Peter alone the rock and key-bearer of the Church, and appointed him shepherd of the whole flock. — Vatican II, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, No. 22.

Jesus was here with revolutionary ideas. Love your enemies . .Blessed are the meek . . . Fast in secret . . . Jesus meant these teachings for everyone, not merely for those who listened to Him. Yet, He himself wrote nothing. How was He to accomplish his purpose? He established a society, an organization to carry on his work.

...............

Christ was with his followers one day in northern Palestine, near the city of Caesarea Philippi. The distinguishing feature of the area was the temple of Augustus, which sat on a majestic rock and towered over the city. They were in sight of this rock when Jesus, aware that there had been much discussion about who He was among the people of the countryside, said to the Apostles: "And you, who do you say that I am?" Peter spoke up: "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God!" Christ turned to Peter and addressed himself to him alone:

"Blest are you, Simon, son of John! No mere man has revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. I for my part declare to you, you are 'Rock,' and on this rock I will build my Church, and the jaws of death shall not prevail against it. I will entrust to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you declare bound on earth shall be bound in heaven; whatever you declare loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Mt. 16:15-20).

In this address of Christ to Peter there is no doubt that Peter was made supreme head of Christ's Church. There is, first of all, no doubt that it was Peter who was addressed. The account (by a very reliable eyewitness) says that it was. Christ leaves no doubt when He calls him Simon, son of John. Christ gives Peter's full name.

In the sentence "you are 'Rock,' and on this rock I will build my Church," strange as it may seem to us, there is a pun involved. In Aramaic, which was the language used, the word "peter" means "rock." This, incidentally, marked a change of name for Peter. Up to now he had been called Simon. In Biblical usage a change of name usually indicates a significant event; and so we might expect something of significance here. Actually that is the case.

"You are 'Rock' (Peter), and on this rock I will build my Church." Christ, standing before the foundation rock of the temple, promised to build his Church on Peter. Peter will be the foundation of his society.

Look at the next sentence: "I will entrust to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven." These words mean in our language: "I will give you supreme authority over my Church." "Kingdom of heaven" simply means Church here. We know this because often Christ referred to his Church as the "kingdom of heaven." It may seem to us like a roundabout way of saying things, but to the oriental mind there is no difficulty; it was easily understood. To give one "the keys" to a house or a city has always symbolized the granting of authority. Thus, a man is presented with the keys of a city. If a proprietor of a house, when leaving for the summer, says to a friend, "Here are the keys of my house," this would really mean, "You have full charge of my house. You may invite or exclude whom you wish. Until I come back, you take my place." In the time of Christ, particularly among the Hebrew people with whom we are dealing, keys were definitely an emblem of jurisdiction. To say that a man had received the keys of a city was equivalent to saying that he was placed in charge of the city. In the Bible, whenever the expression is used, it means just that. Therefore the meaning is: "I will give you complete authority over my Church."

What about the sentence "Whatever you declare bound on earth shall be bound in heaven . . ."? Peter is promised the supreme power to bind his subjects by laws and precepts, and to free their souls from spiritual ties such as sins or censures. True, the power of binding and loosing was given to the other Apostles, but it is here promised to Peter individually to show that Peter possesses it in a special way. Peter's precepts and prohibitions (for that is the meaning in common language of binding and loosing) are to be laws divinely sanctioned. In view of the previous two sentences we have seen, there is no doubt that Peter alone was to have the supreme authority in Christ's Church.

In light of all we have said, the address to Peter in our modern everyday language would run something like this:

"You are a rock, a foundation stone, Peter, and upon this foundation I will build my Church . . . I will give you supreme authority over my Church, and your precepts and prohibitions I myself will back up."

In reading the passage slowly and thoughtfully, there is no doubt that the supreme authority of Christ's Church is in Peter's hands. It is noteworthy that many modern Protestant theologians frankly admit the same interpretation, as do Catholic theologians.

There is another event in which we can see also that Peter is given the supreme authority in Christ's organization. To understand this incident, it will be well to glance for a moment at the background of the setting and at the kind of people involved. The event has to do with Christ, Peter, and some of the other followers of Christ. All lived in Palestine, most of which was rural territory, and sheep-raising was one of the main occupations. Much of the Middle East is the same to a great extent even today. In that land sheep can often be seen scattered over the bare hills, and at night the shepherd gathers them into enclosures, opening the door in the morning to let them out. At night he even sleeps with them in a hut or cave in the mountain. If one strays, he brings it back. Day and night the shepherd takes care of all the needs of the sheep; he feeds them and knows them all; he alone is their master. It is his duty to govern his flock, watch over it and protect it, and punish the obstinate sheep.

With all this in mind we can better appreciate this incident of Christ and Peter. It is by the Sea of Tiberias; there are seven of Christ's friends on the shore, and He comes to them, picks out Peter and asks him: "Simon, son of John, do you love Me more than these?" Peter answers that he does, and Christ says to him, "Feed my lambs." To the question again: "Simon . . . do you love Me?" Peter again replies in the affirmative, and Christ repeats, "Tend my sheep." Christ a third time asks the question of Peter (perhaps because Peter had denied Him three times): "Do you love Me?" and, after being answered by Peter, says to him: "Feed my sheep" (Jn. 21 :15-17).

To us the incident seems to be hidden in strange language, but we must remember that it was a pastoral country; the shepherd and his sheep were a common sight. Remember, too, that Christ frequently made use of his surroundings in his conversation. He used this language before when He said He was the shepherd and his followers were his flock, his sheep. He was understood, for the image was from the people's everyday lives. Today in America we should rather understand a man telling his friend, "You are to be the head of this corporation." Put yourself in the country and time of Christ, and there the most natural thing would be to speak not of a "head of my concern" but a "shepherd of my flock."

The meaning, then, is that Peter is to do everything with reference to Christ's flock that a shepherd did for his sheep. In other words, he is a complete master, watches over it, protects it, rules it.

This picturesque way of expressing the meaning "to direct," "to rule," "to govern," by the expression "to be a shepherd over" is not strange, for it is often found not only in the New Testament but in secular literature of the time.

Peter was to be all this to Christ's lambs and sheep, Christ's flock. And we know that by Christ's "flock" is meant his followers, the members of his Church, for He often refers to his Church in this way.

Christ has before called himself the Good Shepherd, and He also referred to his followers, his Church, as his sheep or his flock. Now He says to Peter: "Feed my lambs, feed my sheep."

Peter is to do all for Christ's flock that a shepherd was known to do for his sheep. Peter is to take the place of Christ with reference to his flock. He is to be the head of Christ's spiritual flock, in a word, to be the Vicar of Christ. The figurative language was understood well: "You, Peter, are to be the supreme head of my organization."

The fact that Peter was to be head of Christ's Church is borne out when we read of his place in the early Church after he was given the position. The Acts of the Apostles is a book of the New Testament relating events of the early days of the Church. As we have seen, it is thoroughly reliable history. Here we see a picture of Peter acting as supreme head of the Church. In the question of choosing a successor to Judas, Peter alone speaks (Acts 1:15-26); Peter pronounces judgment on Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-10); and Peter presides over the Council of Jerusalem. The latter incident is significant because great dissension and controversy had arisen over whether Gentile Christians should be compelled to undergo the Mosaic practice of circumcision. After much debate, Peter took the floor and said: "Brothers, you know well enough that from the early days God selected me from your number to be the one from whose lips the Gentiles would hear the message of the gospel and believe." Having reminded his fellow Christians of his supreme authority, Peter said that it was not necessary for the Gentiles to undergo circumcision, and "at that the whole assembly fell silent" (Acts 15:1-12). Thus was Peter recognized as the supreme head of the early Church by his contemporaries.

The Church which Christ organized was to last to the end of time, as He himself said, and so certainly whatever is essential to it in teaching or organization must likewise last for all time.

The supreme headship of Peter was clearly an essential part of Christ's plan. This we see from the fact that Peter alone was the "foundation" of the Church, the "key-bearer," the supreme teacher, the one shepherd of the flock. Certainly the foundation is to last as long as the building; the key-bearer must last while there is a kingdom; a supreme teacher as long as there are people to be taught; a supreme shepherd as long as there is a flock. The mission which Christ gave to Peter and his fellow Apostles was concerned with all nations and all mankind. But Peter and his associates were to die; they were destined to pass away with their generation, while their mission was to continue. The only conclusion is that this office of supreme headship was to last as long as Christ's Church.

Christ promised and actually appointed a supreme head over his Church, and that position was to last to the end of time, that is, there were to be successors to this position.

What church today fulfills this requirement? Only one — the Catholic Church.

Down through the ages no person ever claimed to be the successor in Peter's office, nor was anyone ever acknowledged as the successor in Peter's office, except the Bishop of Rome, the head of the Catholic Church. As a matter of fact, today there is only one Church in the whole world which claims to have a successor in the function of Peter. That is the Catholic Church. The Pope alone claims this position.[1] No other religions claim it, nor did their founders. Men have claimed themselves prophets; some have claimed to be God. But no one claims the function of Peter's successor except the Pope. If the Pope is not in fact the successor to Peter's office, our only conclusion must be that there is no successor in the office of Peter. No one else even claims it. But this is impossible for, as we have seen, Christ determined that there should always be one supreme head in his Church, Peter and his successors.

To a sincere inquirer one conclusion presents itself: only the Catholic Church satisfies the requirements with respect to this essential characteristic of Christ's Church.
ewtn.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext