The Biblical Foundations of The Papacy

(Part 1)

 

Paul Newcombe

 

 

Introduction

 

The concept of the Catholic papacy is perhaps the most intensely disputed doctrine in the Christian world today.  The implications are staggering for both the supporters and the opponents of the papacy — either the papacy is the intended mode for a centralized teaching authority within Christ’s Church, or it is a counterfeit authority that has been undermining Christ’s Church for centuries.  There is not much room for a demilitarized zone in this longstanding discussion — Christ either intended the papacy or He didn’t. 

 

Kenneth J. Howell provides the common Catholic perspective regarding authority within the Christian Church:

 

"Because human shepherds carry on Christ’s ministry of teaching and care, they are endowed with an appropriate authority, not one derived from the Church but from Christ himself through the Church’s ordination.  From God’s presence in the Church and the divine authority given to her, the Church possesses a primacy of honour in the hearts and minds of the faithful.  …The Church rightfully exercises jurisdiction over the lives of the faithful, not in a dictatorial fashion, but as an expression of Christ’s pastoral care.  This explains how Paul and other scriptural authors can call for obedience to the appointed leaders of the Church.

 

If these things are true, then it suggests that the Church possesses an infallibility communicated by Christ the infallible one.  The notion of infallibility stems from belief in Christ’s divine presence in the Church.  It is interesting that nowhere does the New Testament tell us that Christ left us an infallible book, one of the facts that has made many in the more liberal wings of Protestantism give up the notion of infallibility all together.  Those Protestants who affirm biblical infallibility must do so as a theological conclusion, not as an indubitable teaching of the biblical text.  The New Testament, however, does affirm that the Church is the “pillar and foundation of the truth.” (1 Tim 3:15).  The Catholic Church affirms the Bible to be infallible but that is because the Scriptures are the writings of the Church, divinely inspired by the Holy Spirit." [1] 

 

Thus, not only is denominational choice heavily impacted by one’s view of the papacy but one’s entire understanding of the nature of the Christian Church itself.  As already noted, whosoever grapples with this subject will soon discover they are face-to-face with the entire issue of authority.  By what authority do Christian people define Christian truths?  And what system did Christ leave behind to guide His Church into all truth until the end of time?  For those who consider the papacy to be a distortion of the intentions of Christ, these “authority issues” must be accounted for and an alternate system implemented as a replacement for the papal office that has perpetually guided the Catholic Church.  As history records, the answer of the Protestant reformers was straightforward—the bible alone is our authority!  It’s a simple answer, yet, as an answer, it has produced (over time) many questions.  Those discerning this approach, as a means of casting off the centralized system of the Catholic religion, have regularly enquired:

 

(1) Where did Jesus give instructions that the Christian faith should be based exclusively on a book?

 

(2) Where in the New Testament do the apostles tell future generations that the Christian faith will be based on a book?

 

(3) Where in the Bible is God's Word restricted only to what is written down?

 

(4) Where does the Bible claim to be the exclusive authority for Christians in matters of faith and morals?  Not merely authoritative, but exclusively authoritative?  Not merely “all scripture is inspired and profitable”, but moreover, that “only” scripture is inspired and profitable?

 

(5) If the meaning of the Bible is so clear, so easily interpreted, and if the Holy Spirit leads every Christian to interpret it rightly, then why are there thousands of denominations, and millions of individual Protestants, all interpreting the Bible differently?

 

(6) Who may authoritatively arbitrate between Christians who claim to be led by the Holy Spirit into mutually contradictory interpretations of the Bible?

 

(7) How do we know, from the Bible alone, that the individual books of the New Testament are inspired, even when they make no claim to be inspired?

 

(8) Who in the Church had the authority to determine which books belonged in the New Testament canon and to make this decision binding on all Christians?[2]

 

From a Catholic perspective these questions do not have satisfying answers when one bases Christian truth upon a system of individualized discernment of the bible — as did Martin Luther, Ulrich Zwingli, John Calvin and the other early reformers.  While possession of the biblical text is essential to the Catholic mindset, it must also be accompanied by a correct interpretation to avoid erroneous conclusions.  On the one hand, it stands to reason that God would preserve the text of Scripture throughout the centuries, however, it likewise stands to reason that God would provide an authoritative interpreter of the Bible so that His people may not only possess the text but also the correct message of the text.  After all, only the text rightly interpreted can produce the true meaning of Christ’s saving gospel. 

 

With modern-day Protestantism continuing to fragment into ever-increasing denominations (due in large part to its endless debates over the meaning of Scripture) it is becoming more and more discernible that private interpretation of the Bible has failed to provide any kind of certitude in Christian truth.  Indeed, Martin Luther himself was quick to observe the fragmentation and disunity that almost immediately followed the implementation of the bible-alone theory.  In a letter to Zwingli, he laments the doctrinal anarchy that was even then widespread among Protestants:

 

“If the world lasts, it will be necessary, on account of the differing interpretations of Scripture which now exist, that to preserve the unity of the faith, we should receive the [Catholic] councils and decrees and fly to them for refuge”.[3]

 

From a Catholic perspective, what exactly is this refuge?  What do Catholics really mean when they talk about their popes and bishops and councils?  Catholic theologian, Patrick Madrid explains the differences between Catholic and Protestant authority in the following way:

 

"At certain levels, the Catholic position intersects with the Protestant formula of sola scriptura.  But the fundamental difference is this: The Catholic Church holds that in order for the meaning of Sacred Scripture to be properly understood, the Church must have recourse to its living Tradition, i.e., the infallible interpretation of the apostolic “depositum fidei” (c.f., Dei verbum, no. 10).  And this interpretation is guaranteed by an infallible Magisterium. …Protestants claim that Scripture is sufficient in se and, ultimately, does not require an infallible Tradition or Magisterium in order to be authentically interpreted.  In contrast, the Catholic model for authority is tripartite — Scripture, Tradition and the Magisterium are distinct yet mutually interdependent (Dei Verbum, nos. 9-10).  Scripture, Tradition and Magisterium may be summarized in this way: Scripture is the object of the Church’s interpretation; Tradition is the Church’s lived interpretation of Scripture; and Magisterium is the organ of the Church that does the interpreting." [4] 

 

This study aims to provide the Catholic perspective by focusing primarily upon the biblical data in support of the Catholic papacy — as the infallible office which directs the Magisterium and enables the Church to maintain a correct understanding of both Scripture and apostolic Tradition.  It is hoped that the reader will consider the above questions and predicaments associated with the “bible-alone” theory and arrive at a deeper appreciation for the essential need the Church has of a teaching office which is protected by the Holy Spirit.  That Christ did indeed leave us with a centralized authority that does not fall into error (in issues of faith and morals) and which transcends the wandering interpretations of private exegetes — who have continually managed to end up in a log-jam over the actual meaning of divine revelation.      

 

 

Common Misconceptions Regarding the Infallibility of the Pope

 

Before beginning on the path of a biblical explanation regarding the papacy, it is wise to first remove the most common misconceptions regarding papal infallibility.  Below is a brief list to clarify what the infallibility of the pope does not mean:

 

• Papal infallibility does not mean that the pope’s words are divinely inspired (as were the words written by the human authors of the Scriptures).  

 

• It does not mean that the pope always says the best thing at the best time in the most perfect way possible.  

 

• It does not mean that the pope receives new revelations from Jesus Christ.  Catholicism has consistently affirmed that the sacred deposit of faith was closed with the death of the last apostle.  The pope certainly does not have the authority to invent new doctrines.

​

• It does not mean that the pope is immune from sin.  Infallibility is often confused with impeccability (sinlessness).  The current Pope goes to confession regularly to confess his sins in the same way as regular Catholic lay people.     

 

Instead, papal infallibility means that the pope holds a specific office firmly established by Christ within the Church.  This teaching office is endowed with divine protection in order that its occupant may be securely guided by the Holy Spirit.  In this way, each successor who holds this special office is divinely protected from denying or changing the sacred deposit of faith provided once for all by Christ and the apostles.  It means the pope holds and protects the fundamental truths transmitted by God for the spiritual benefit of his people.  All of the pope’s infallible guidance lies exclusively within the restricted sphere of faith and morality.    

 

 

Objections to Infallibility?

 

Quite often opponents of the papacy will hear these Catholic claims and, understandably, react strongly against the idea of a mere human-being possessing infallibility.  Whatever the case may be — it’s not a part of human nature to possess these traits, it appears entirely unsound and even outright impossible for Catholics to assume these things about the pope.  In short, the Catholic claim to papal infallibility appears to be completely illogical.         

 

To gain insight into the Catholic perspective, we may refer to Professor Hahn (Professor of Biblical Studies at the Franciscan University, Ohio) who explains the matter in the following way:

 

"Any objection about the Pope should not be against infallibility per say, because presumably all Catholics and Protestants have historically believed that when the human authors of the Old and New Testaments sat down and wrote — they were writing infallible truth.  Therefore, there must not be an intrinsic impossibility within human nature to be used in this manner by God.  On the contrary, if the pattern of Gods’ dealings with us in the past is any indication, then, we have good reason to believe that God is capable of surmounting human weakness in order to transmit his saving truth to His people infallibly through mere human beings.

 

Thus, any objection to infallibility really amounts to nothing more than charging the Catholic Church with going beyond the boundaries.  That is, in claiming infallibility for humans beyond the twelve Apostles and those who wrote the New Testament books". [5]

 

Does infallibility extend beyond the writers of the New Testament?  Did Jesus establish an infallible teaching office to guide His Church?  To answer this, the Catholic case begins by referring to the Holy Scriptures.

 

​

Footnotes:

​

[1] Howell, Kenneth, quoted in Butler, S., Dahlgren, N., and Hess, D. Jesus, Peter & The Keys, Introduction, Queenship Publishing, Santa Barbara, 1996, p.xvi.

​

[2] Adapted from: Ray, Steve.  Questions for “Bible Christians”. Defenders of the Catholic Faith. http://www.catholic-convert.com/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=34, access date: 7th June 2005.

 

[3] Luther, Martin, Letter to Zwingly (Contra Zuingli et Oecol).

 

[4] Madrid, Patrick.  Sola Scriptura: A Blueprint For Anarchy.  Eternal Word Television Network.  http://www.ewtn.com/library/SCRIPTUR/SOLASCRI.TXT, access date: 7th June 2005.

 

[5] Hahn, Scott. Peter and the Papacy [audio], West Covina, Saint Joseph Communications, 1996.