Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas on the Chair of St. Peter and the Role of the Pope

We honor Peter - the shepherd, the holder of the keys, the occupant of the chair of true doctrine. In particular, we commit ourselves to pray that the present occupant of that chair will feel himself buoyed by the prayers of the faithful, so that he always responds with courage and fidelity to the promptings of the Holy Spirit

The doctrine of infallibility, then, is derived from the principle of apostolic succession and from the fact that Jesus Christ promised His presence to His apostles when He sent them forth to teach all the nations (cf. Mt 28:20).  The Pope and the bishops in union with him are the heirs to the first teaching commission of the Lord and, on that very score, also heirs to the promise of divine assistance.  The Church has always taken her Lord at His word when He says that the Holy Spirit - will guide you into all truth (Jn 16:13) - believing that the Holy Spirit will work through fallible men to ensure that the members of the Body of Christ are taught the infallible truth of Christ.

NEW YORK, NY (Catholic Online) - ( Although the First Sunday of Lent took Liturgical priority over the Feast of the Chair of Peter, Fr Peter M. J. Stravinskas offered some insightful and helpful reflections on the Chair and the authority of the office on February 22, 2015 at Basilica of the St. Patrick's  Old Cathedral in New York City which which we offer below to our readers.)

*****   
In one of my conversations with a Fundamentalist protestant Christian some years ago, on the topic of "Catholic idolatry," the minster ended his tirade by sealing it all with the line: 

"Well, you Catholics even worship chairs!" 

Apparently, the poor man had come across today's feast on a Catholic calendar and supposed that it involved some kind of "adoration" of a relic.  Well, let's clear the air at the outset and note that today's observance is not concerned with furniture; it is, however, intimately concerned with the very heart of Catholic life.
   
In ancient times, the chair was the sign of authority to teach authoritatively.  Hence, in Matthew's Gospel we are reminded by Our Lord that "the scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses' seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you" (23:2). 

Unfortunately, Jesus has to go on to admonish His disciples not to follow the example of these official teachers within the Judaism of His day.  It was this  symbolism connected to the chair, cathedra in both Greek and Latin, which caught on in the Early Church, so much so that the bishop's church in which was found his magisterial chair gave the name to the entire edifice - cathedral. 

Today's celebration is even more specific, in that it is grounded in the teaching authority of the Prince of the Apostles, St. Peter, and invites us to reflect on the Petrine office in the Church today. 

It is fair to say that the ministry of Peter's successor is intended to be, first and foremost, a work of preserving unity and yet, ironically enough, the only issue on which all non-Catholic Christians agree is precisely their rejection of the Pope, with many of them arguing that Peter never held any venerable position within the Church of the apostolic age and thus, no would-be successor can lay claim to any special role in the Church since. 

If we examine the place of Peter in the New Testament, however, we find significant evidence which directly contradicts that assertion.  Perhaps we should observe this feast by taking a bit of a refresher course in this regard.
   
In all likelihood, the most frequently quoted passage regarding Petrine supremacy in the New Testament is the text found in Matthew 16.  In it, Jesus renames Simon (Peter) and entrusts to him the keys to the kingdom of heaven.  Why this honor?  Because Peter has just proclaimed Jesus to be the Messiah, a revelation which comes, as Our Lord tells him, from none other than His heavenly Father.
   
And so, it is upon Peter himself that Jesus will build His Church.  Some counter that the keys given to Peter merely "provide access," as do keys in the physical sense.  This simplistic view, however, overlooks two important points: 

Peter was given the keys of the kingdom singularly and was entrusted with them in conjunction with the powers of binding and loosing.  In rabbinic terms (which is the only correct way to interpret so Jewish a Gospel as Matthew's), the ability to bind and loose is equated with the authority to decide what is allowed and forbidden by Law. 

Binding and loosing also have an alternate meaning, denoting the authority to include persons in the community or to exclude or excommunicate them.  Thus, Peter was being granted a distinctive role by Christ related to the teaching and life of the community.
   
This passage of Scripture, so controverted for centuries and proudly emblazoned in the dome of St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, is not the only place in the Sacred Scriptures which shows Peter in a different light from the rest of the apostles.  In fact, several other pericopes might be even more convincing. 

The sum total of such passages is so overwhelming that one wonders how any can fail to see the case clearly.  Several years ago, an ecumenical team of scholars researched this question and came to some truly impressive conclusions about this man; their findings can be read in the work entitled, Peter in the New Testament, which I would most heartily recommend.
   
But two additional passages about this most frequently cited New Testament figure require special analysis and attention.
   
In Luke, Jesus tells Peter that Satan has asked for the disciples, that he may sift them all like wheat (cf. 22:31).  Jesus comments, however, that He has prayed that Peter's faith may never fail.  It is noteworthy that Jesus prays for Peter alone and commissions him to care for the other disciples:  " and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren" (22:32).  Luke says that Jesus accords Peter a place among, yet apart from and above, the other apostles.
   
If Luke can be said to introduce the unique position occupied by Peter among the apostles, then this introduction is refined and clarified in the Gospel of John.  In the last chapter of that work, the Risen Christ asks Peter three times if he loves Him.  Peter responds affirmatively in each instance and is given three injunctions by Christ:  "Feed my lambs;" "Tend my sheep;" "Feed my sheep" (21:15-17).

These commands provide a clear analogy between the roles of Christ and Peter with respect to the Church.  John tells us that Jesus is the Good Shepherd caring for His flock (cf. 10:11-16).  We also know from Luke's Gospel that Christ's followers are the flock cared for by the Good Shepherd (12:32).  Thus, by instructing Peter to tend and feed His sheep, Christ was designating Peter as the shepherd of His flock on earth.
   
It is also critical to notice that Peter is asked to proclaim his love for the Lord three times, clearly (and painfully) harking back to Peter's triple denial of Christ before His crucifixion.  Peter is given the opportunity to rehabilitate himself, does so to Jesus' satisfaction, and is subsequently charged to tend Christ's flock and to nurture His people.
   
For those so fond of pointing out the sinfulness of ecclesiastical leaders, past and present, it is good to underscore the fact that this mission to Peter is given to him in the very context of Christ's reminding him that he has sinned!
   
Having demonstrated the special role of Peter in the New Testament, one must now move a step further - on to the question of papal infallibility.  The charism of infallibility is that gift whereby the Holy Spirit preserves the Church in the truth of the apostolic Faith.  The Fathers of the First Vatican Council saw infallibility as the means by which "the whole flock of Christ might be kept away from the poison of error and be nourished by the food of heavenly doctrine." 

To speak of "papal infallibility," then, is to identify only one aspect of infallibility, which is a gift to the whole Church, for the sake of the whole Church.  As the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council summarized it, relying on the formulation of Vatican I, the charism of infallibility comes into play when the Pope, as head of the College of Bishops, or the entire body of bishops (in union with the Pope) speaks the faith of the Church. 

And so, the Pope is infallible when teaching on matters of faith and morals and authoritatively speaking ex cathedra (from the chair of Peter), as the vicar of Christ on earth.  Nor is this doctrine a medieval or modern accretion.  St. Irenaeus, the martyr-bishop of Lyons writing in 202 A.D., serves as an ancient witness to this truth:  "For with this Church (Rome), all other churches must bring themselves into line, on account of its superior authority."
   
The doctrine of infallibility, then, is derived from the principle of apostolic succession and from the fact that Jesus Christ promised His presence to His apostles when He sent them forth to teach all the nations (cf. Mt 28:20).  The Pope and the bishops in union with him are the heirs to the first teaching commission of the Lord and, on that very score, also heirs to the promise of divine assistance. 

The Church has always taken her Lord at His word when He says that the Holy Spirit "will guide you into all truth" (Jn 16:13), believing that the Holy Spirit will work through fallible men to ensure that the members of the Body of Christ are taught the infallible truth of Christ.
   
The doctrine behind today's feast is, I would suggest, the only reason to be a Catholic. 

One is not a Catholic today to witness beautiful liturgy; that is in regrettably short supply (although, thankfully not here at Old St. Pat's).  One is not a Catholic today to hear inspiring and insightful homilies; they are all too often in even shorter supply (although I am sure you would count this homily an exception).  One is not a Catholic today to be uplifted by splendid art and glorious music; Motel Six churches and "Glory and Praise" tunes are the common diet these days. 

One is a Catholic today for one reason and one reason alone:  The indefatigable belief that objective and absolute truth exists and is communicable - and that that truth is guarded and shared by the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, most especially through the man who occupies the Chair of Peter.
   
Not a few people within the Church and without want Catholicism on their own terms, but Christ has ordained otherwise.  He founded His Church to be "the pillar and bulwark of the truth," as First Timothy puts it (3:15), and He has placed Peter within that Church as the  mouthpiece of that truth.  In some circles, that is a rather neuralgic point, but it is the one claim by which Catholicism rises or falls.
   
Exactly a week before Pope Benedict XVI was born, Monsignor Ronald Knox preached a sermon on this same topic to a British congregation.  Reading it today proves true the French adage:  "Plus ça change, plus cest la meme chose."  In describing attitudes among would-be Catholics of his generation, the venerable convert-priest highlighted those who wanted all the comfort and security of Catholicism, all the while eschewing its very raison detre.  He says: 

"They know that a Pope is necessary to their system.  They see their own Church torn with rivalries and dissension.  They know that such rivalries and dissensions must be in a Church which replaces the principle of authority by the principle of compromise.  They see it riddled with heresies and they know there is no safeguard against the occurrence of such heresies unless the gift of infallibility [is] centered in one man."
   
He goes on to say that yet others maintain that the papacy is but an embarrassing left-over from a bygone era:  "What you see is not the real Pope, but a ghost of the Pope - he who reigns at the Vatican [is] no true prince of Christendom but a phantom of a historical institution, an anachronism, a pathetic survival of the power of the papacy - dead, dying, or, at any rate, just going to die." 

Knox responds starkly:  "If the papacy be dead, then the Catholic Church is dead, and if the Catholic Church be dead, Christ has failed.  Close down the churches.  Shut up the Bible.  Let us have no grinning death mask. . . to mock at our despair."  He rounds out his considerations with this flourish:  "But Peter is still there.  All the fury of Herod has spent itself in vain.  Peter's prison on Easter even, like his Master's on Easter morning, stands empty.  We have a Pope."       
   
What are some practical implications we can or should draw from today's celebration?

Does the election of a particular man to the papacy signal the decision of the Holy Spirit? Not at all. The cardinals in conclave - and indeed the whole Church - prays that the cardinal-electors will be guided by the Holy Spirit, but there is no guarantee that they will necessarily follow that guidance (as can be seen from not a few popes in history whose election we would be loathe to place at the door of the Holy Spirit!) - as Pope Benedict himself observed some years before his own election!
   
That said, the Petrine office provides us with the assurance of the truth. Even the most unworthy occupants of the Chair of Peter have never taught heresy. While their personal lives may have been less than stellar, their teaching charism was never compromised.
   
Which leads to the next point: While Catholics are duty-bound to render filial submission to the teaching authority of the Pope, they are not required to agree with every other decision he makes.  Faithful Catholic living does not call for a mindless "papalotry" or mimicry. We do something because it is the right thing to do, not because the Pope does it (or the reverse).

And if the Pope performs an action we find problematic, our first obligation is to attempt to understand the rationale for that action, always giving him the "edge" in such areas (as we would our own fathers). If, however, careful study and reflection leads a person (and perhaps many persons) to conclude that his decision lacked prudence or a reflection of the fullness of theological precision, we have another obligation - to pray that he will correct such behavior and that those in a position to influence his judgment will do so.
   
Monsignor Knox ends his lovely sermon with these thoughts:  "So [Peter] knocks still, while souls that profess to hold him in all reverence shut their ears and invent comfortable theories; because they cannot or will not come out to seek him in the darkness and the storm.  He knocks patiently, for the fisherman has learnt patience.  He knocks gently, for his shepherd heart knows that bullying will do no good.  But don't mistake his errand.  He has keys on his shoulder.  It is the doorkeeper who knocks."               
   
Today, my dear friends, we honor Peter - the shepherd, the holder of the keys, the occupant of the chair of true doctrine.  In particular, we commit ourselves to pray that the present occupant of that chair will feel himself buoyed by the prayers of the faithful, so that he always responds with courage and fidelity to the promptings of the Holy Spirit, remembering that the Lord's promise to Peter the Apostle is renewed daily to him as Peter's successor:  Tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram,  aedificabo ecclesiam meam.

------
Rev. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Ph.D., S.T.D. is the Executive Director of the Catholic Education Foundation. The mission of  The Catholic Education Foundation is to serve as a forum through which teachers, administrators and all others interested in Catholic education can share ideas and practices, as well as to highlight successful programs and initiatives to bring about a recovery of Catholic education in our times.The Catholic Education Foundation, Inc. is a 501(c)3 national non-profit organization formed to ensure a brighter future for Catholic education in the United States.

---

'Help Give every Student and Teacher FREE resources for a world-class Moral Catholic Education'

Copyright 2021 - Distributed by Catholic Online